485200+ entries in 0.314s
mircea_popescu: ok, so
the sad story of my wasted day : first, instlaled varnish in 10 minutes, but
then spent 4 hours
trying
to get ip forwarding.
williamdunne: jurov: "Because potentially it could make money, its an excuse
to learn more
tech, and
there is little risk in
terms of what I could lose by doing it"
trinque: on
the other side sure, if you've got goons (read: massive govt)
to beat payment out of people, loan sharking is great
jurov: trinque: ikr. but want
to see
the
thought process why it supposedly beats other alternatives
trinque: aside from
the foolishness of
this from an investment perspective, it's not helping
the guy any
jurov: williamdunne:
that's not answer
to "why"
trinque: not
to be handed more money
to waste
trinque: the recourse for
that person is
to go find someone for whom
to
tape boxes shut
williamdunne: jurov: Did quite well on
the other platforms until
the SEC stepped in, not particularly large
time investment needs
to be made.
jurov: williamdunne: so why do you want
to undergo
this, when most everyone hates it?
williamdunne: I mean
the platform, not
the general idea of selling future income
jurov: like, parents invest into you nd
then expect
to get a "reasonable" part of your income
jurov: oh it has been done many millions of
times
williamdunne: Its not really a unique idea
though, been done
twice as far as I can
tell. Both started in US but had obvious legal issues come up
williamdunne: The entire point is its meant
to be risky as shit
williamdunne: Indeed, I'm not
talking bout some sort of service where 100 people deposit money and
then a "money manager" decides who
to invest in
trinque: no
that's it;
the more you're willing
to sell your future
the higher risk "investment" you are
mircea_popescu: EVERY human looking
to sell his future is into smoking dope.
mircea_popescu: im not sure you understand
the difference between natural and constructive persons
trinque: eh
that's just shitty businesses
williamdunne: trinque: Because people live on a different
timeperiod
to
the company in many cases
trinque: why invest in workers when you can invest in
the businesses
that own
them?
williamdunne: The operator, its not like
they're selling 40% of £40,000/year,
they're selling 40% of whatever
they make, with no guarantees of said figure
williamdunne: Yeah, don't let
them sell 500% of
their income
williamdunne: That exact problem could exist with regular stocks. Whats
the incentive for Exxon
to keep generating revenue? Start up, sell out, cash out, bro down
mircea_popescu: this was kinda popular with "artists"
thinking
themsleves above prostitution on myfreecams and etsy.
assbot: Logged on 28-04-2015 16:33:22; williamdunne: i.e I sell 40% of all my future income for xx btc
today
cazalla:
http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=28-04-2015#1113823 <<< but
the grocer isn't engaged in
things similar
to
the mafioso such as robbing other businesses, so i don't see how
the analogy fits.. if ya gonna
throw rocks, steal beauty products and impede mr fireman's ability
to put out fires by cutting hoses, why not open up on
them
too?
☝︎ jurov: adding moar exploits
to apache
BingoBoingo: cazalla: Qntra was up for me until you said
that, Wonder what MP is coding or building nao...
cazalla: so Warrick County got back
to me regarding
the ransomware (in comic sans no less)
ascii_field: i'd be open
to a purely gnumake-based
thing instead of
the sh
☟︎ trinque: just
thinking
through it; I have no need
to change nor authority
to change a process
that works for
them
jurov: if you can propose some format for
this accepted by stakeholder like alf, you're welcome
trinque: so where's
the
tree of hashes
that
tells me what builds
towards
the release
jurov: no, btc-dev mailinglist it even renames
the recognized signed attachemnts so
trinque: to synthesize one point from
that pile, I want
the computer
to strongly enforce relationships for me, not
to mindlessly build because I'm
too lazy
trinque: so
then just a
tree of IDs
trinque: the mailing list is a shitty version of
this
trinque: this is how I build out
to current release
trinque: ok,
this is how I get
to
the point where I can work on feature X
BingoBoingo: <ascii_field> and
the only solution, at
this point, is neutron bomb << Better make sure your z-weighted sheilding is completely cobalt free...
trinque: ascii_field: if
there were even something which made
the relationships between patches data, I would be satisfied.
mod6: <+ascii_field> ... it is run by ben_vulpes and mod6. who appear
to agree with my position here. << yup.
mircea_popescu: "expose a box
to
the net just
to fetch changes" << what, you want it
to divine
the changes ?
ascii_field: davout: i
took an 'aerolinas argentinas' bag home
trinque: I promise
to barf myself if XML creeps in
ascii_field: when i suddenly am expected
to care what's in some xml
turd, or expose a box
to
the net just
to fetch changes, or similar atrocities - i reach for barf bag
davout: ascii_field:
that's what's being said, it's a good
tool if ascii_field doesn't know about it :D
ascii_field: but would never expect other folks
to
take
that kind of radiation damage
ascii_field: for
the record, i use all kinds of odd
tools internally
davout: trinque: "to
the extent
that we do it right ascii_field should not have
to care" <<<
that should be
the criteria
ascii_field: trinque: and if any of you produce a 100kB patch, and i barf on general principle and refuse
to have anything more
to do with project, don't say i didn't warn
that vcs is harmful.
mircea_popescu: in other news, noiw im getting shit like Host: H\x92_\x02 in
the logs.
trinque: to
the extent
that we do it right ascii_field should not have
to care
ascii_field: use it, so long as i don't have
to know anything about it
davout: if darcs is able
to output clearsigned unix patches i really don't see a reason not
to use it, we can still review small individual units of work, and ascii_field's patches integrate gracefully
ascii_field: i can't pipe a branched repo
to a line printer
trinque: explain
to me what is hidden
trinque: git solves
this problem, and I can even email you a patch directly out of git
ascii_field: and
then comes
the use of central server, and of ssl
trinque: this is sensible, sometimes work begins on a feature
that's later abandoned
ascii_field: and more importantly, wtf should i have
to care
trinque: but
then I've been all
through
the internals of it
trinque: I don't agree with "hidden" re:
the state of git
ascii_field: trinque: no, it does not. because
there is no hidden state.
trinque: doesn't make me feel smart
to pluck a patch from an email attachment
trinque: I
think hackers here would just like
to collaborate via something other
than email
trinque: I agree 100%
that "canonical" as
the outside world is made
to see it should not be a git repo
ascii_field: trinque: my opposition
to git et al as canonical representations is because
they have -any- 'behind
the scenes' components.
ascii_field: (diff does not offer a simple way
to say 'deleted whole file')
trinque: pile of hashes and blobs
they refer
to
trinque: williamdunne:
this is what
the
tree in git already is
williamdunne: trinque: some sort of record of
the files and shasums
then
ascii_field: the ultimate product is
to be a series of -human-auditable- diffs, each small and extremely narrowly focused, starting from classical bitcoind 0.5.3.
williamdunne: Maybe
there is a good reason why
this would not work, but could you not just generate an XML file
that contains
the names of all
the files, a hash of each file, and
then sign
the XML? Could be automated fairly easily and would work on
top of existing solutions
☟︎ ascii_field: it is worth repeating precisely -why- i specified 'unix patches'
to be
the canonical representations
trinque: or if not
that some other dvcs
trinque: ben_vulpes uses git in his day
to day work, and I'm sure for a reason
ascii_field: incidentally, for readers unfamiliar with
the overall
thread,
the project under discussion -
therealbitcoin - does not belong
to me. it is run by ben_vulpes and mod6. who appear
to agree with my position here.
trinque: sure, I see room for collaborating on feature branches
though
ascii_field: i mean, when you write own contributions, you can generate
them however you like
trinque: and
think you're on
the money re: how
that should operate
trinque: ascii_field: I would be pleased with a process
that allowed for
that, but
that
there is only one route
to "released"
ascii_field: but even so, anyone who wants - davout,
trinque, et al - can use favourite versioncontrolsystem at home
ascii_field: i don't have
the neutron bomb yet. so we're stuck with flamethrowers
ascii_field: and
the only solution, at
this point, is neutron bomb