79100+ entries in 0.644s

a111: Logged on 2016-09-28 08:17 Framedragger: aha,
i wonder if the sending irc client encoded msg in some strange charset, and ACTION was *not* technically the first set of characters in that message, from point of view of znc.
mircea_popescu: oh it's for them.
i thought they had one for the luser lol. aaanyway, "The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or advances" << epic shit;
i hope this spreads.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 20:05 trinque:
I am still waiting to hear why
I shouldn't just rely on freenode's auth system to process ratings
mircea_popescu: no,
i actually searched for "turbulent flow" as opposed to "turbulence"
mircea_popescu: o look phf,
i can't link to the story of turbulent flow BECAUSE ITS NOT IN YOUR LOGS!11
mircea_popescu: the problem of interpreting structures of meaning without survivors is not trivial. which is why
i said inept historian - the monumental tasks more often attract the idiots who don't comprehend scale than actually talented people who can take bites of reality the size of the moon.
hanbot: mircea_popescu depends on what exactly you mean by "read". it's not the case that
i can't extract any value from them. it's certainly the case
i wouldn't wager
i wholly comprehend. and whatever's in between
i'm not sure
i'd call "meaningless"
hanbot: <mircea_popescu> asciilifeform the ratings of dead people are meaningless in the marketplace ; and only interesting to the inept historian. <<
i have a hard time agreeing with this; even should death prevent a rating reflective of the current state of things, a past rating from a ghost could still be "meaningful" in its distance from w/e the current status -is-, no?
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576558 << well as it turns out, ratings are a lot closer to sexual intercourse than previously realised ; but in any sense what
i meant was the point of reference (ie,
i will fuck this curvaceous lady as the body presents itself and do business with fa9fblabla, which are the two presentations of the supposed same but otherwise uncapturable spirit).
i didn't mean business BY the keys when
i s
☝︎ mircea_popescu: trinque that's the consideration here. if you have the signatures, evidently people can trust you with larger sums, but how much larger
i can not say ; but evidently you will need the management in place to be able to produce the materials on challenge.
mircea_popescu:
i don't have a very strong opinion on the signing of payment orders.
i suppose it's a tradeoff of convenience vs corectness.
trinque:
I certainly would want to be able to show that
I moved even latte money in accordance with someone's agreement.
trinque: right, so then
I've cleaved the nature of the two systems in my own mind.
mircea_popescu: whether they also should is
i suppose in discussion here ?
mircea_popescu: and re the facts/fiction discussion : a very good rule of thumb to distinguish fact from fiction is right here - can it be opposed to anyone ? for instance, trump's election is a fact, and here it is a fact because
i have opposed it to alf to force him to reconsider his political evaluator.
trinque: this
I can see, much better than earlier protests that "it's not necessary", meaning no ill towards danielpbarron
mircea_popescu: anyway. merchant law, which incidentally
i advise all curious minds to review, not only long predates civil law or the british mandaciousa attempts to enact a systematized "common law" as older than it was - but actually informed all legal work of the states. they basically stole the merchant's code much like the french stole the templar's wealth.
trinque:
I can see that
I'm opposing massive precedent behind what signing means.
mircea_popescu: "you owe me 5 guilders" "this writ says
i don't". "
i never meant for my daughter to be chained to the post naked for all comers" "then why does this offer her ?" etc.
mircea_popescu: all
i want to know from you if such a situation is discovered is if you did it or not.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:56 trinque: how do
I currently know by looking at my database that no item in it was altered by somebody spraying bits into my server via network card -> dma
trinque: that
I hold signed material does not say something about the state of the world
trinque: maybe you signed contract A at one point, then signed B which brought about termination of A, and
I don't have B
mircea_popescu:
i'm not about to give the wolf a falx on top of everything.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:52 danielpbarron:
i thought this was already done in the log : suppose
i give +5 one day and -10 the next? without the latter it would appear
i trust the guy -- WITH SIGNATURE!!!
mircea_popescu: trinque
i don't think you did, but we ended up with a whole front here and since we're discussing it let's discuss altogether.
mircea_popescu: to A
i shall say "and he doesn't snore" and to B
i shall say "he's a patient sort"
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:50 asciilifeform:
i dun see the 'win' from encouraging people to byzantiate and twofaced lie and give different answer to X and to Y regarding how they rate Z.
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576528 << they have to. there is no "one" answer. suppose the case where
i rate someone X as a 3 because
i dunno, we go fishing. suppose A asks me about X because he's contemplating going hunting, and B asks me about X because he's contemplating playing chess.
☝︎ mats: asciilifeform:
i wonder how many people actually thought entitlements like SS, Medicare, would live forever...
mircea_popescu: no whatever infrastructure development fund,
i have nfi, the whole thing's vague as fake hair.
mircea_popescu: trinque
i believe the correct pill to this would be to keep the moving sums small, rather than fucking the mechanism.
trinque: hm. you know what. if
I stockpile encrypted OTP material which is also encrypted to my own key,
I suppose it does the same.
trinque: this model is also applicable using OTP,
I'm aware, but while it proves something to *me*, it doesn't prove it to anyone else.
trinque: in the case of the wallet,
I have something
I can verify before and every time
I move coin
trinque:
i.e.
I immediately spray all signed material to a box whose only function is to back up the pile of signed incoming statements, and over a serial diode.
trinque: only defense against this
I can see is warehousing what was said and being able to verify that it was said out of band
trinque:
I have here a machine with levers on it which can be pulled via proven control of a given key
trinque: it is a fact that
I have spoken this opinion at this time
trinque: in the case of both WoT and wallet, from an engineers perspective
I have a database which changes state when outside parties tell it.
mircea_popescu: trinque what do you mean by fucking up the db in that context as something else was being contemplated when
i said it ?
trinque:
I am for example not willing to do the wallet if fucking up the db is possible.
trinque:
I address my counterposition to this in thread.
mircea_popescu: there's absolutely no valuable information that would be lost if you fucked up the db today and we had to re-do it. just inconvenience to a lot of live people, but it's of the nature of "tee hee
i garbled everyone's shopping lists as found on the fridge" not of the "tee hee
i burned all extant aramaic manuscripts".
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:42 trinque: but at any rate, making the WoT something that can be rebuilt from public information when
I am dead is a good thing
mircea_popescu: yes
i had the keys out. but to pee not to make johnny little brothers.
mircea_popescu: this theoretical problem is evinced in practice by the expiration problem - what do you do about all the ratings
i may have signed ? so you have rating for x at time t, what's this say ? is it correct or isn't it correct ?
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-12-02#1576521 << they are ?! why ?
i have no intention for my rating of X to be opposable to me. it is information
i provide free of charge and on an as-is basis, literally saying "if you're trying to eval X
i may be able to help". it would be the height of impudence for y to demand something on the basis of "
i have this here signed thing".
☝︎ ben_vulpes: a lifetime of communist-repressed masculinity leaking out
i suppose
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:39 trinque: if ratings were this kind of material
I could chatter them to anyone interested as they are received, and conceivably "only chatter me things about the L2 of <key>"
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:24 trinque:
I lean towards flipping the model to "decrypt and sign this command + OTP" vs "decrypt and send in the clear this OTP"
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 19:13 mats: this will sound naive, but humans in outer space represents an ideal of social cooperation and unity of purpose - against the environment trying to kill us - that
i feel we've long since lost
mircea_popescu: not that it's bad for kids, though it does promote some tilt towards the tomboyish look in girls that
i don't find welcome.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-02 18:48 asciilifeform:
i thought that all children played like this...
mircea_popescu waves.
i shall write this short
i woke up with and read all this!
trinque: it is my history with the person eval'd to what
I deem the present state
trinque:
I meant "
I used to be peered with / do business with / talk to X, but may no longer"
trinque: whereas
I see them as distinct; wot is the history of my past and present gossipd connections, and indications of what
I thought of them
trinque:
I could see an argument that the WoT evolves into the gossipd graph.
phf: for me wot is a partial externalization of a hawala network and as far as -1,0,1 is concerned ~perhaps~ indicates prevalent opinions among the people whose opinion
i value, but by convention only. in this sense the wot follows the lords and not the other way around. it has some practical use like serving as a door bouncer and ostensibly letting newbs know who to talk to.
phf: well, dpb dropped out of this conversation, and
i apparently have isolated understanding of wot.
phf: asciilifeform: ok, my point was that
i don't see how that's a more fundamental than "no rating outside of rater"
trinque: asciilifeform: release gossipd already so
I can write a DHT for it !1!!1 solves WoT, solves "DNS", solves ...
phf: but what am
i going to do with that knowledge?
i'd still have to ask somebody (presumably you) to both proove overwnship of phuctor bot and to explain to me what those ratings mean. or else you have a document that you prepared that explains the logic, etc.
phf:
i'm not going to go asking a111 what he meant by it, and
i would laugh to anyone who'd try
phf: if
i were to give a pubkey to a111 and it starts rating people based on how many btcbase references they make a day (there's a quota!)
phf:
i don't know if we disagree there, but
i don't see how that makes a difference
trinque: what was said being distinct from how
I evaluate it