85600+ entries in 0.052s
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 09:53 spyked: banned, with all
that comes from
that.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 03:19 mod6: I'm saying in
the instance of inquisition. I don't
think
there is any way
to separate a willful liar from someone who lost control of
their key.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 03:24 Mocky: if shortwave repeater was in l1 confidence and one day i became l1, i wouldn't see having
to keep
that secret as a burden.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 03:47 mod6: Maybe a "developer license" isn't a bad idea either. Could raise some capital, and constrain
the source code
to
those who promise not
to share it and who want/need it.
a111: Logged on 2016-04-22 01:10 asciilifeform: ida is a particularly interesting case because it is a
TOTAL monopoly
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 03:00 asciilifeform: Mocky: i grasp
the argument, but must point out
that all attempts
to date
to cudgel people into paying for software, have ended in
tears ( usually for
the cudgel-wielder )
spyked: banned, with all
that comes from
that.
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-07-16 16:28 asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: releasing binaries does not create
this guarantee. even static elf, when put on a box where linus et al (or his successor) see it fit
to subtly change
the abi, will bomb, and not necessarily immediately. and i'ma still 'be idiot'
a111: Logged on 2018-07-17 02:13 asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: i
thought of 1 far-conveyor item where i actually had it in my notes 'to be for l1 encyclical only' --
the shortwave repeater
a111: Logged on 2018-07-16 15:44 mircea_popescu:
the evident disadvantage is
that
this only works if we can rely on l1
to keep a secret ; which means
things (such as,
that it can't be as big, for instance).
a111: Logged on 2018-07-16 15:44 mircea_popescu: as we're contemplating an eulora client rewrite, i am contemplating
the following code release paradigm : client author a) releases code encrypted
to l1, signed and deeded (so basically, gpg -aer asciilifeform -r ave1 -r etc) ; b) releases precompiled binaries for allcomers.
spyked:
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-07-16#1834921 <-- I'm sold on
the idea i. in particular for eulora, and ii. otherwise for it
to be established on a case-by-case basis. for (i), I see nothing wrong with e.g. challenging users
to reverse-engineer
the client (or maybe I'm just nostalgic about game cracking/trainers).
☝︎☟︎ ave1: And
the whole
thing affirms
the power/status of
the Lords. I.E. when an author goes against a Lords wishes or AWOL it is
then in
the power of
that Lord
to contact another author and give him
the source etc.
☟︎ ave1: I like it (I
thinks it's paramount)
that
the republic is exclusive and not inclusive . (It
then means something if you are included)
ave1: I find
the 'if it can happen, it will happen' a strange argument. Let's say you let a friend stay in your house while you are away for a couple of months? Yes, he could destroy
the house and steal
the contents, still
this arrangement works and has worked for many friends.
☟︎ ave1: Third, it is not about who leaked it (I do not care about
that much). It's about
trust and if L1 does not
trust each other,
then what?
a111: Logged on 2018-07-16 15:44 mircea_popescu: as we're contemplating an eulora client rewrite, i am contemplating
the following code release paradigm : client author a) releases code encrypted
to l1, signed and deeded (so basically, gpg -aer asciilifeform -r ave1 -r etc) ; b) releases precompiled binaries for allcomers.
ave1:
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-07-16#1834921, ack. I
think it's a brilliant idea. Especially, points (2) and (3) and I'm not worried about
the "keeping a secret" parts. First, I've worked for companies with an extensive secret code base (and
this code is and has been secret for a long
time > 30 years) . Second, all leaked sources are "illegal" anyway (as in
this source was not sanctioned, so it's worthless).
☝︎ mod6: Maybe a "developer license" isn't a bad idea either. Could raise some capital, and constrain
the source code
to
those who promise not
to share it and who want/need it.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: and i
tend
to play games from 20 years ago
today still. which...
Mocky: or maybe not. i still have software from
the 90's
that I use on a daily basis, install straight from orig 90's cd
Mocky: if
there
turns out competition between clients, maybe i want
to do something
to get more market share
mircea_popescu: and are already lining up for
the 9th version of vin diesel being retarded from profile.
mircea_popescu: or i dunno, maybe you're
the one guy who
thinks need for speed only finally nailed
the plot on installment 8.
Mocky: seems
theres a general level of good enough,
that's rarely hit first release
Mocky: if shortwave repeater was in l1 confidence and one day i became l1, i wouldn't see having
to keep
that secret as a burden.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: anyway, it's altogether doubtful
that
this naive model of imperial "progress" ever applied
to software. i don't expect lcients
to become ever better over
time.
mircea_popescu: otherwise, biologically, "never meet again" is
the winning strategy.
mircea_popescu: people fuck more girls
they find in
their bed spread eagled
than girls
they have
to say hello
to.
mircea_popescu: Mocky well in
thsi case, because
the barrier
to entry is a major destroyer of interest. maybe if he can read at cost 0 he reads and if he can read at cost epsilon, he doesn't.
mircea_popescu: yeah but i mean... i dunno, sometimes i feel like i'm
the only one who was ever 12. so you're at camp, and someone spread
toothpaste on
the
teacher's moustache while he slept. so ?
Mocky: i don't see it as a problem for
the client writer.
to
the contrary i would expect clients
to get regular updates and older versions less useful relatively over
time. but maybe asciilifeform doesn't care about eulora at all, why involve when only possible involvement 'suspected of leak'?
mod6: I'm saying in
the instance of inquisition. I don't
think
there is any way
to separate a willful liar from someone who lost control of
their key.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: if your lunch were gone from your brown paper bag you wouldn't suspect me, you'd suspect someone who worked
there. and ?
mircea_popescu: mod6 why would
they have
to ask anyone anything ? Mocky so you'd suspect. and ?
Mocky: there's no way
toknow, obviously. but if i wrote a client under
this l1 confidence model, and it leaked not by me, i would suspect someone in l1... who else?
mod6: well, any defendant of such an accusation would have
to ask Lordship
to /believe/
they didn't do it; not sure how
they would ask Lordship
to /verify/
they are
telling
the
truth.
Mocky: if in
the case of a confirmed leak, pointed questions could be asked even of
those who never so much as looked at it. and i'm not saying answering questions is a big burden, but alternately not being suspected in
the first place could be considered a benefit
mircea_popescu: i suppose.
though honestly, what is it, don't decrypt
the deed, it'll sit
there.
Mocky: this makes sense
to me.
the only
thing i have against it is asciilifeform and mod6 argument about
the burden of keeping secrets. while I don't see
the proposed method as actually burdensome, i see
the argument in
the general case
Mocky: asciilifeform, i dont' even see it as an issue of paying for software:
the paying or not doesn't need
to differ from
the case where minigame writes
the official client
mod6: I figured, can't really help it with
the old client. Was
thinking maybe
there is a new one in
the works with some stuff
that need not be open sores.
mircea_popescu: well,
there's obviously a published server protocol, as well as
the old client...
these don't constitute ?
mod6: What if, you gave out
the S.MG binary client, and along with it, an example client. Void of code
that you would consider "trade secrets".
This way people can use
the example
to get
their own off
the ground with
the most minimal information required
to do so?
mircea_popescu: lobbes consider
the obvious example -- people will pay (but ~a few ecu~ sorta
thing)
to merely ~use~ an auction bot.
they could just do
that by fucking hand, what's
to keep
them.
mircea_popescu: notice
that ~even
today~
there's solid market in "music cds". if you want i can photograph
the people outside
trying
to sell
their shiny "extrenos"
mircea_popescu: it is however not
the customer's problem
that
the fair price point for borland whatever is 0.0006 except borland can';t chage
that because must be 9.95 or else visa monopoly
throws a fit.
☟︎ lobbes: I could see someone creating a 'ecu casino' for
the 'masses' indeed
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
this is deeply not so. attempts
to make people pay insane amounts always failed, and
this has no relation
to software whatsoever.
lobbes: imo,
the bar
to actually 'playing eulora' is above
that of monkey anyway (at least -right now- unless someone figures out
the 'monetize
the fetlife girls angle for eulora)
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform note i'm not forbidding anyone from ~publishing~
their client.
Mocky: my understanding is minigame wants
there
to be 3rd party clients, but would want access
to
the src and be assured binary matches src. but if src fully available
then good client gets forked so what incentive
to write client?
mod6: it does work
this way ^, must have key registered with
the server
to even log in.
mircea_popescu: however, at
the most basic level, literature must remain enjoyable for
the barely literate.
mircea_popescu: that's
the whole fucking point. not just of writing games, but of storytelling altogether, as a whole discipline reaching all
the way
to
the core of substance. people's enjoyment of reading say
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-07-16#1835256 might be ~enhanced~ by a secure mastery of
the writer's craft
☝︎ mircea_popescu: asciilifeform not at all. people should be able
to play a fucking game without necessarily understanding how
the actual code works.
a111: Logged on 2018-07-16 17:43 diana_coman:
there's
the golden goose
too! and for
that matter
there was
that "pay
the oracle
to give you answers" event for all
the good it did
mod6: Anyway Gentlemen, I
think
that currently
this comes down
to: 1) "How much do I
trust
the man standing next
to me?" and 2) What are
the consequences should others betray and leak my valuable assets?
mircea_popescu: because
they're fucked in
the head, and literally can not distinguish anything from anythning else.
mircea_popescu: and
think in
terms of confusable ~by whom~. as far as 50% or so of fetlife female moron population is concerned,
they have "a master" or whatever in
that vein.
mircea_popescu: yes, well, ideally
this should be kept at a minimum. both
the kloinking and
the sharding.
mircea_popescu: wait for someone
to sink in
the (not insiginificant) cost of fixing
the code, "fork" it, market it, and essentially cash in on
the op's work.
mircea_popescu: seems human civilisation managed
to mostly keep rifles out of
the hands of children, potash out of
the mouths of babes and so on.