620900+ entries in 0.338s
MolokoDesk: just getting set up
to read
that .db file could
take all day
RagnarDanneskjol: might be worth finding out exactly how nano uses
the db
to inform gribbl
MolokoDesk: scaling
to bitcoin-otc
though it would make sense.
MolokoDesk: yeah, writing all
the SQLishness
to query
that database for a few people seems overkill.
MolokoDesk: i shouldhave known
that from celestial navigation. each hour is 15 degrees of arc.
punkman: I don't
think you need
to worry about vandalism or urgency
MolokoDesk: heh.
the database is smaller
than most image files.
MolokoDesk: if
there's confidence
that
the bitcoin-otc website /WoT site is not insecure I can just use my old code
to get
trust metrics over
the web. It's
the same database.
MolokoDesk: if
there's an
http interface
to gribble's database
that would work
too. some SQL-ish RPC-ish
thing.
MolokoDesk: it's like a 20 line program if even
that.
MolokoDesk: the webserver only has
to open sockets and fork() a process occasionally.
MolokoDesk: make a
tiny webserver combined with a very limited IRC bot.
MolokoDesk: making a resident agent
that sit's in IRC and relays requests coming in over HTTP
to gribble would work.
MolokoDesk: so right now I'm looking up
the
trust metric for each batch of incoming contracts. it's not
that much overhead.
MolokoDesk: the other scenario is someone urgently needs
to register contracts
to
they're up-rated
to +2
to access
the bot, but it won't recognize
their new rating because it "already has"
that info.
MolokoDesk: ok. one scenario I was
talking about a few minutes ago was someone vandalizes
the bot and has
their rating lowered below access
threshold, but
they're still
trusted by deedBot and deedBot keeps getting vandalized.
RagnarDanneskjol: opengpg java is 'just' as secure as anything else assuming its
totally isolated
MolokoDesk: apparently
that's not "trusted" here. not sure why. I know gribble is
the software agent
that maintains
the bitcoin-otc WoT data structure.
MolokoDesk: I was initially scraping bitcoin-otc's web of
trust search
tools
to get
the
trust metrics.
MolokoDesk: anyway, ragnar suggests it's feasible
to poll or access gribble via an
http interface of some sort without going
through IRC/freenode.
MolokoDesk: stuff currently outside
the envelope of "understandabilty" or "logical resolution".
MolokoDesk: heh. I was reading about Alain Badiou last few days. He counterposes ontologies with "events"
that break
the ontology. His stuff is peculiar. Philosophers seem
to be looking for/looking at
things like unfalsifiable hypotheses, and areas where logic breaks down,
the nature of paradoxes and at various limiting cases of systematized
thought.
MolokoDesk: Cyc was/is supposed
to be somewhat like
that. I
think it doesn't handle what linguists call scripts or scenarios, but Lenat and OpenCYC are aware of
the issues.
deedBot: deed keyID: 35D2E1A0457E6498
trust: 3 nick: RagnarDanneskjol (valid and scheduled for next bundle)
deedBot: deed keyID: B98228A001ABFFC7
trust: 12 nick: asciilifeform (valid and scheduled for next bundle)
assbot: deedbot
test 9.26.14 - Pastebin.com
jurov: interesting
that zsh does nothing like bash with env vars, just passes
them around
jurov: everyone
took
the environment variables at face value for 15 years...
that's beyone assinging
the blame
bounce: maybe
the writer
thinks
there's great value into
twisting logic like
this, but he surely does not have much appreciation for
the cost.
bounce: "nobody
told
them
the input
they passed wouldn't be
taken as data but as code, yet it's
their fault anyhow"
jurov is looking forward
to
the fateful day when someone suceeds in feeding of all humanitites
to a computer and creating an ontology
bounce: but
that doesn't change
the basic fact
that if you actually do say exactly what you mean you still
typically have a better chance of getting
the point across
bounce: sure it's a lot of reading and sure
there are a lot of people saying confused
things, perhaps even deliberately confusing issues.
bounce: law is a good case in point for what xmj was saying; you need
to be very precise in what you say. a misplaced comma can easily cost millions of dollars.
xmj: happens all
the
time.
xmj: some people have
their precision removed and
think
they don't
moriarty: there is no simple equation
that governs most scenarios
moriarty: when i was involved in finance, my amount of reading went up hundred-fold, sure,
there was a lot of overlap, but
they cover different situations, and it's a bit like chess, you read all
the possible moves and what you can do from
there
bounce: see? you're using
terms of art and when called upon
them go like "lol what?"
bounce: so what's
the exponent?
moriarty: but
the classic distinction with
the liberal arts is
that
they
tend
to require an exponential effort in reading material
moriarty: the problem with autistic people or my understanding of
the crowd you're referring
to, is
that
they are used
to neat and concise models
that exist inscience
bounce: yes, but you're using
that as a load of rationalising crap for your own shoddy use of language. call it somewhat self-serving.
xmj: No
time for wishy-washy blabla.
moriarty: the whole of philosophy is a continuous conversation dating back
to Aristotle
moriarty: lol you
think Heidegger exists in isolation?
moriarty: and
to drill down what
those concepts are about precisely is
to have a conversation extending
to years
moriarty: because every concept representable by a phrase or
term in philosophy has books written supporting it
xmj: at least
they're FUCKING PRECISE about
things.
xmj: see, and
this is why i like
talking
to people on
the autistic spectrum when it comes
to philosophy.
bounce: even so, you're making a right hash of
things
xmj: moriarty: maybe
thinking is not your best activity.
moriarty: and simplifying statements would not make it easier
to understand
them
moriarty: when you
transcend one discipline with a concept, and apply it in another discipline,
that's creativity in a nutshell
xmj: do you realize how inconsistent you
think?
moriarty: the intersection of factoids in our minds is
the hallway of creativity
xmj: sex is nothing more
than a
theory, and
then people fuck
moriarty: xmj, and generally
the optimal solutions lie at
the intersections, which ironically if you
think about it is
the
textbook definition of creativity
moriarty: xmj, but in short, philosophies are nothing more
than gedanken experiments designed
to hypothesize what would happen in a given closed loop system, and
then society
tests
them
moriarty: the double,
triple, quadruple entendres
bounce: therefore, you are
the joke
moriarty: and if you don't get
the joke, well, explaining it would kill
the joke
moriarty: it's
the imprecision
that captivates, makes you giggle
moriarty: when you make a joke, you don't want
to explain
the entire innuendo and corresponding nuances associated
to be precise about your joke
xmj: be precise from
the beginning
xmj: "I
tend
to assume people are well-read"
moriarty: but hey if you need me
to espouse further i'm always happy
to oblige
moriarty: well, i
tend
to assume people are well-read
xmj: you really really suck in
terms of language preciseness, did you realize
that yet?
xmj: lies in
the intersection of WHAT?
moriarty: sorry i
tend
to assume people know what i'm
talking about
moriarty: xmj, does
that clarify
things better now?
moriarty: xmj, let's
try a little credo, i see ideologies as part of a continuum, many of
the questions i am interested in lies in
the intersection, i
tend
to
think in
terms of probability distributions rather
than dichotomous epistemic categories
xmj: please don't do
this.
xmj: moriarty: if you want, i can spam you with vague statements
that are
technically correct and don't mean shit.
moriarty: xmj, and sure you can, it's not
too dissimilar from
the film Divergent :)
moriarty: xmj, lol
the world is not dichotomous and neither should individuals be :)
xmj: moriarty: devil's advocate requires
taking someone else's ideology, putting it into a jail/sandbox, examining it
moriarty: xmj, playing devil's advocate has never been funner :) it exercises your otherwise bored mind and allows you
to
travel from one ideology
to another and have fun with
them
moriarty: xmj, because
the mind is a playground
moriarty: ask any
TA-er what
they understand
moriarty: in one, you do lots of application, in
the other you do applications
too, but you understand
the fundamentals driving your model
moriarty: that's how it is with
technical analysis vis-a-vis ##econometrics :-) heh
moriarty: with fundamentals, it becomes glaringly obvious how
to apply and optimise a fit-for-purpose invention
moriarty: BingoBoingo, fact is, without fundamentals, you cannot achieve any sort of meaningful application, you're as good as monkeys with
typewriters
moriarty: BingoBoingo,
the fundamentals elucidate
the applications