80100+ entries in 0.039s
lobbes: and
then does
the command handling
lobbes: just listens
to
the notification channel in postgres
lobbes: still need
to
test
the hell out of it, so I'm aiming for maybe a week (which, still gives me 2 months for auctionbot ETL. eh. will see)
lobbes: I've
tried
to design it
to be 'modular' so
that
the operator can easily add
their own custom commands, and
to be 'vpatch friendly' in
that folx can release 'whateverbot' as a vpatch
that just extends it (in fact,
this is my plan for
the auctionbot)
a111: Logged on 2016-08-29 13:54
trinque: right. in
this case I challenge anyone
to find a need for a second patch on
those modules
themselves, rather
than creating a genesis vpatch for
their own module which
talks
to
the db in postgres.
lobbes: in fact, was going
to announce: I'm getting closer
to finishing what will be a genesis for a 'logbot-command-router' in python
that does
the
talking and listening with postgres (an older but relevant
thread for context:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-08-29#1531123) ☝︎☟︎ mod6: !Q later
tell jurov We're getting 504 &
timeouts from
the ML
mod6: !~later
tell jurov We're getting 504 &
timeouts from
the ML
mircea_popescu: trinque> mod6: seems like a valuable
thing
to have, local corp << a recurrent observation.
BingoBoingo: asciilifeform: I don't have
the complete list of assigned ip's, but from .204
through .246 should be unallocated
BingoBoingo: Right. For a comsumer VAT and sales
tax look
the same, but...
ther is a substantial difference
trinque: (which seems pretty damned sane
to me, actually)
trinque: yeah, seems like
they're income-tax light and sales-tax heavy, eh?
BingoBoingo: trinque:
THe substantial VAT here makes
things complicated
trinque: dunno what
the "home office" rules are
there either, but maybe some rent gets
thrown in
too
trinque: a quick google suggests
the rate for distribution of profit is lower
than
the rate for regular income, which is what I'd have expected, so conceivably BingoBoingo could be compensated in part
through his stake in
the local corp as profit
mod6: Is
the 'unipersonal' like a sole-propritorship ?
BingoBoingo: <trinque> doesn't fit with my experience of running businesses,
typically
the
thing doesn't post any substantial income in
the startup phase <<
THe big
tax incurred would be VAT
BingoBoingo: <mod6> So we might need
to incorporate first. *might* << Or I can apply as a unipersonal
trinque: (it could be
that already
tax is not a significant slice of your costs, dunno how it works, but would read)
trinque: doesn't fit with my experience of running businesses,
typically
the
thing doesn't post any substantial income in
the startup phase
mod6: We
think
that we would probably have a higher base
tax liability -- right BingoBoingo ?
mod6: Well, it's ~$4500
to buy a pre-built corp.
Then alf & myself would have
to fly down and sign
the articles of organization.
trinque: I hear only
the states audit people
too, so all
the more reason :P
trinque: I dunno
the
tax laws down
there, but might be beneficial in regards
to deducting expenses?
trinque: mod6: seems like a valuable
thing
to have, local corp
trinque: "hurr
they are for xen
tenements"
mod6: So we might need
to incorporate first. *might*
mod6: It sounds like, "Be legally established within
the region and use
the resources in LACNIC's coverage area."
ben_vulpes: if it's
that simple,
that'd be spiffy indeed
ben_vulpes: iirc lacnic wants
to see
the existing block more heavily used
than it is right now before allocating more, BingoBoingo was
there something else incorporation
that LACNIC wanted
to see?
mod6: BingoBoingo: whatever you don't spend, just hang on
to it, and we'll
tally it up at EOM for
the books.
mod6: oh, I'll have
to
talk
to ben_vulpes and read
the logs on
that.
thanks for
the nudge.
mircea_popescu: yeah. you can sell all your shit
that's out of amortization at half price, become huge. well, "huge", south america huge.
mod6: I haven't even considered IP registration.. was
there a inititive
to get a block of our own from ICANN?
mod6: Was kinda
thinking
that myself mircea_popescu... at least, in concept.
mircea_popescu: mod6 conceivably (besides ip registration
thing, which how's it going ?) might also get vendor status ? open a little shop of actual stuff in uruguay ?
mod6: we do what we can. i was pretty impressed with
the speed at which
they arrived.
mod6: asciilifeform: Good
to go for us
to buy another round of SSDs? (apparently
this
time we can only get 3 at a
time)
mircea_popescu: considering how much lisp i read... possibly not even
then!
mircea_popescu shall proceed
to coffee with diana_coman in a few, but
thereafter will be back, so no worries.
mircea_popescu: specifically, how do i pick among alternatives 1. "all stacks with odd index, left, all stacks with even index, right" and 2. "all stacks under 75 or over 125 left, all stacks within 75
to 125, right" ?
☟︎ mircea_popescu: suppose i have stacks of 10k each with qualities from 50
to 150. average q is 100. now, how do i split
these 100 stacks into
two subsets ?
mircea_popescu: 2. you split
the starting set into
two sub sets by
the criteria ? and without splitting stacks ?
mircea_popescu: so 1. calculate q so
that n q + m (q+1) = S (the sum of
the count-quality products for
the entire starting set)
mircea_popescu: collective personage best personage, nobody has authority
top say "this wasn't said".
BingoBoingo: But all comments are being attributed
to "the family" suggesting he is already very close
to Potato if not already
there
BingoBoingo: mircea_popescu:
The latest round appears
to already have started
mircea_popescu: BingoBoingo good god, are
they now gonna do a bunchga herp derp about how important
the moron is and how irreplaceable
the scrapping ?
a111: Logged on 2018-08-24 04:04 mircea_popescu:
the ~other~ good approach is 1. calculate average quality as a real ; 2. calculate
the integer piles of consecutive qualities
this reduces
to (you'll never get an irrational value
through 1, which in itself is a very itneresting lemma) ; 3.
try all pile pairs in some (random ?) order for producing either of
the
two expected qualities.
mircea_popescu: (holy shit
think about it, state information ~for projects~)
mircea_popescu: "Solution (.Sln) File - msdn.microsoft.com
The new home for Visual Studio documentation is Visual Studio 2017 Documentation on docs.microsoft.com.
The latest version of
this
topic can be found at Solution (.Sln) File. A solution is a structure for organizing projects in Visual Studio.
The solution maintains
the state information for projects ..."
deedbot: Invoiced BingoBoingo 0.01341464 << One month rental of rockchip:
Through September 2018
mod6: !!invoice BingoBoingo 0.01341464 One month rental of rockchip:
Through September 2018
a111: Logged on 2018-05-22 21:47 mircea_popescu: so far
that's even
the reason empire crossed
the
threshold into oblivion ( i'm
too lazy
to dig up ye olde
trilema where i say "state may exist for as long as it so closely mimmicks my will i can't discern it's
there, and not one second past
that" ) and now must be destroyed. had it had
the sense (rather,
the capacity)
to maintain both forms, i'd nwever have even noticed it, and it could have continued
to exist
therefore.
mircea_popescu: anyway, i expect
the "hard" case would revolve around powers of
two, so i'm guessing checkermark pairings probably deliver
the hardest case (for current pairwise mixing). say in 8 bit : 85 items q170, 146 items q 73, 219 items q109 and so on.
mircea_popescu: the ~other~ good approach is 1. calculate average quality as a real ; 2. calculate
the integer piles of consecutive qualities
this reduces
to (you'll never get an irrational value
through 1, which in itself is a very itneresting lemma) ; 3.
try all pile pairs in some (random ?) order for producing either of
the
two expected qualities.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: so far,
the correct approach seems
to be : 1. select
the outlier piles (highest q, lowest q). 2. mix
the smaller of
the
two with such a fraction of
the larger of
the
two as can be done. 3. repeat. if 2 fails, move inwardly on
the pair list.
Mocky: i'm going
to
take a minute and verify
that. but i expect you
to be right, and
then im gonna come back and say "ah, but i chose a bad example"
mircea_popescu: next you split
the 100 into
the 991 and 992 groups and you're done.
mircea_popescu: next you split
the 100 into
the 991 and 992 groups and you're done.
mircea_popescu: Mocky : mix 1q1 with 99q 1001. new set is now 100q1k, 100q991, 1q 1001.
then mix 1q1001 with 9q991. new set is 100q1k, 91q991, 10q992.
Mocky: the 1xq1 item has a
tiny mass compared
to
the 200 ~q1000 items, and will resolve into
the q1000 pile.
theres no way
to mix a q1 up
to q1000 using only ~q1000 items in 10 or less moves. it's just got a long way
to go
a111: Logged on 2018-08-24 02:02 Mocky: but looky, maybe not 20 steps exactly, but more
than 2, *no question*