asciilifeform: and i will say, ftr, that invocation of ANY ffa components on ANY overlapping segments, is an abuse. and there is not in fact any way to guarantee correctness , if such a thing is permissible.
asciilifeform: hence why i sign the whole, and not 'routine'
asciilifeform: as i said to apeloyee, in NO case can it be guaranteed that the parts cannot be cut up and re-sewn into a subtly broken shape.
asciilifeform: nobody in my lifetime will make a 'concepts v.'
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: observe that i did not ask for a v that deals in ~concepts~, only mechanisms.
asciilifeform: the relationship that exists between the kalash and its drawing, is not an 'is'.
asciilifeform: neither 'is' the other. just as drawing of kalash is not a kalash, you cannot fire it. and conversely, physical, firable kalash is not the drawing, the parts are wherever they are in the tolerance range, to make more from the 1 example you will have to redraw the drawing and determine the tolerances.
asciilifeform: i do not understand why histories ever must be flattened.
asciilifeform: what i want is more modest thing -- to know who made a particular change. in all cases.
asciilifeform: obviously can't distinguish. not unless all 3 are in the room, hanging upside down and plugged into the mains. and perhaps not even then.
asciilifeform: if you even have them within smelling distance, your system is broken.
asciilifeform: the idea is to expunge anyone who so much as shows a hint of 'i merely work here', as an unreliable element.
asciilifeform: because any given item can have 'simply appeared'
asciilifeform: without attribution , it is impossible to determine who even ~is~ the mole.
asciilifeform: learning 'on whose orders' mole worked, is not valueless
asciilifeform: the desire to abolish cutandpasteism.
asciilifeform: i'd like to revisit upstack , http://btcbase.org/log/2018-01-18#1772421 << this is somewhat of a misconception. asciilifeform did not salivate over a 'programmer's paradise' when wrote v. on the contrary. v , as he pictured it, is a weapon of rodenticidal war. specifically to ferret out and neutralize not only the compromised people, but the politically unreliable and the dubious of whatever type. hence the focus on attribution, and☝︎
asciilifeform: at the same time i dun think that i actually disagree with mircea_popescu re the granularity. we don't have the tech to make granularity 'at procedure level' work.
asciilifeform: the only thing it's got, is the deltas. and i can't see why they shouldn't 'go back to moses' if this is physically possible.
asciilifeform: i'ma approach from different angle : mircea_popescu , what do you think is the advantage of v over mere pile of signed tars ?
asciilifeform: the 'bitcoin by lone idiot' model cannot be ruled out , but nothing requires us to eat it by default.
asciilifeform: ( the 1 item d00d actually came up with, phonograph, was made by hired hands. the man could not machine to save his life )
asciilifeform: trinque: entirely conceivable that it was an edison-like production
asciilifeform: afaik the 'idiot comes up with worthwhile item by accident' is a wholly imaginary problem. never seems to actually happen.
asciilifeform: and nomoar 'subtle'-anythings at the edges.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: nope. you find the subtle-manipulators and string'em up.
asciilifeform: if 2 strings are bitwise-identical -- they are the same. if mircea_popescu in his own house insists that trained gurlz with magnifying glasses compare them, before he will consider them to be same, that is his biznis
asciilifeform: can proclaim 'there is not' all you like. my copy of diff still works.
asciilifeform: and therefore ought to be resolvable mechanically as part of ordinary v operation.
asciilifeform: re earlier item -- if i want to demonstrate that 'alf's exceptional exsudator' consists of diana_coman's magic prime number maker, all 100,000 ln of it verbatim, plus 5 ln of asciilifeform's , this is now a proposition that has to be proven manually. whereas theoretically it is a mechanically resolvable q.
