log
231 entries in 0.565s
a111: Logged on 2018-08-21 18:28 asciilifeform: all i particularly care for in re scripting is to obtain a replacement for perl/python/bash where the interpreter is simple (i.e. readable, fits-in-head, auditable, correct)
asciilifeform: all i particularly care for in re scripting is to obtain a replacement for perl/python/bash where the interpreter is simple (i.e. readable, fits-in-head, auditable, correct)
asciilifeform: 1 well-understood system 'to rule'em all', fits in head and demonstrably bug-free , and babel -- ends.
asciilifeform: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-06-22#1828567 << ideally would be the smallest working 'fits in head' lisp, no frills ( no gc, etc )☝︎
asciilifeform: Mocky: not merely this. there is also a set of human-enforced conventions re: 'fits-in-head' of any proposed change.
phf: i can obviously fix btcbase to be more useful (i.e. continue to aid the patch exploration) in cases where a patch is big, but in general a 9mb patch seems to go against the whole fits in head
a111: Logged on 2018-05-01 14:59 trinque: and in service to fits-in-head
trinque: and in service to fits-in-head
asciilifeform: spyked: i dun have anything against mechanical proof per se; but it is NOT a substitute for fits-in-head, because there is nor cannot be any such substitute. and the mass of the theorem-verifier is to be included with the mass of the program, for the purpose of 'is this head-fittable'. but possibly i repeat old thread.
asciilifeform: in any case fits-in-head MUST come ahead of 'proofiness'.
a111: 219 results for "fits in head", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=fits%20in%20head
asciilifeform: !#s fits in head
asciilifeform: but i have a somewhat different approach, which i call 'fits in head'
asciilifeform: i do not have anything against mechanized proof per se. but in practice it is in ~100% of published cases used as an attempted 'i can't believe it's not self-evident correctness!' margarinesque substitute for fits-in-head.
mod6: one file, != fits in head
caaddr: I wonder how early in such a stack you would add the kind of compile time protections that ada guarantees. compile time protections seem to be the hardest thing to keep a programming language at "fits in head" size
mircea_popescu: the strong statement here is that the ~only~ possible identity bits of code have is based on ~personal memory~. to revisit the oft used bubblesort example -- any particular implementation of bubblesort IS bubblesort because ~you~ recognize it as such and for ~no other reason~, factual ~or possible~. consequently fits in head as the basis of code identity.
asciilifeform: thing is, a sparkism is not a substitute for a 'fits-in-head'-correct routine.
asciilifeform: or for that matter, usable maxwell. ( modern electronic design uses a narrowly restricted, i.e. sorta-fits-in-head special form of maxwell )
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: one of asciilifeform's persistent crackpotteries, is to reforge this sword. i.e. make comp that fits in kid head .
mod6: I had started a new V in Ada, had to stick it in the drawer for a while. Not getting to exactly where I wanted to go (easy to read, fits in head, no perl/perlisms) with it at this time.
phf: right, i think perhaps the problem of this particular turn of phrase, is that he can't actually name what makes him a better than average programmer (like ascii's fits in head, or Principles, or), so he's reduced to a shortcut that is insufficient
phf: apparently he also argues for fits in head as the only proper measure elsewhere, but i can't find the source of quote (possibly person who implied it is a log reader, and just reused the variety speak)
asciilifeform: but there are already plenty of haskellists writing nonsense. asciilifeform wanted an actually usable fits-in-head item.
asciilifeform: and if i were a haskellist and writing with an eye toward ~machine~ proof, rather than fits-in-head, i probably would have written one.
mircea_popescu: "fits in head".
a111: 132 results for "fits in head", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=fits%20in%20head
asciilifeform: !#s fits in head
asciilifeform: it however is a gangrene that will grow ANYWHERE where fits-in-head is not an iron principle.
asciilifeform: i'm concerned with 1) timing leak 2) fits-in head --- strictly.
asciilifeform: it does not fit in my head, and i am not convinced that the folx who claim that it fits into theirs, ain't lying
mircea_popescu: so then if joe claims the "Streamlined" rsa fits in his head, what do you do ?
asciilifeform: a proper fits-in-head item fits in the literate man's head.
asciilifeform: i can state with confidence that kochiana fits in NO head
mircea_popescu: how do you judge what fits in another's head ?
asciilifeform: i'd like it not to be lost upstack, so will restate ftr : a 'optimized' rsa that no longer fits in head and is no longer demonstrably-correct , ( and worse yet, no longer operates branch-free ) is NOT RSA and is simply a turd being fraudulently passed off as the genuine article
asciilifeform: the process is 'must fit in head'. for so long as item fits in head, it is demonstrably solving the stated problem ( which, unsurprisingly, must also fit in head as a statement )
a111: 123 results for "fits in head", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=fits%20in%20head
asciilifeform: !#s fits in head
a111: 121 results for "fits in head", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=fits%20in%20head
asciilifeform: !#s fits in head
asciilifeform: #!s fits in head
shinohai: This is why we have asciilifeform 's "fits in head" (tm) (r) (tmsr)
spyked: valentinbuza, maybe not, but then if you have everything loaded in head, the most you can do is rip the useless parts apart and leave *only* what fits into the problem at hand. which turns "framework" into "item that solves particular problem". it is essential to not leave *anything else* there.
mircea_popescu: re http://thetarpit.org/posts/y03/04e-the-myth-of-software-engineering-iii.html << hjere's the thing, let's posit that an object larger than what fits in head can not exist. this may seem counterintuitive, but it happens to also be correct. now, the direct solution to the problems of "exponential dependencies" and "clarity of purpose" and so on is that these have to be defined by domain boundaries. once you have this implemen
asciilifeform: spyked: ever heard of 'fits in head' concept ?
mircea_popescu: what fits in head depends also on the structuring of the head.
a111: Logged on 2017-07-15 05:13 erlehmann: i use GNU unifont wherever i can. fits in head.
mod6: <+asciilifeform> which, btw, imho is intrinsically unsuitable for a fits-in-head rsatron, it is extremely gnarly and uses float approximations that get magically unfudged back to int, etc << ugh. right.
asciilifeform: which, btw, imho is intrinsically unsuitable for a fits-in-head rsatron, it is extremely gnarly and uses float approximations that get magically unfudged back to int, etc
erlehmann: i use GNU unifont wherever i can. fits in head.
asciilifeform: aka fits-in-head.
asciilifeform: FIRST you write the fits-in-head minimal ffa-like thing. THEN you spark.
mod6: head-fits-in-ass
asciilifeform: ( and -- fits-in-head !! )
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: except that the monster lang never fits in any head.
mircea_popescu: FITS IN HEAD MOTHERFUCKER
phf: that's a tricky request, but the tenets are around shitlangs differentiation, "fits in head", v as a way of releasing code, what it means to own a piece of technology. there's a handful of threads that had definitive conclusions, that i consider tenets (i think the word should be in quotes to indicate that while not true tenets, violating them will require reopening large threads)
asciilifeform: because it is a ludicrous proposition -- massive ball of shit, that makes gcc look compact and fits-in-head.
mircea_popescu: fits in head has bene-fits
erlehmann: asciilifeform what do you use as shell? i use rc shell, because grammar fits in head (actually, grammar is written on man page).
asciilifeform: but they are not a replacement for Fits In Head
asciilifeform: but married to x86, and certainly not fits-in-head.
mircea_popescu: but this phenomenon exists whereby girl ends up in trouble for reasons which, upon later examination, turn out to not actually exist. that the whole thing was actually a misunderstanding is proof positive the entire system fits in no one's head : not in mine, who misunderstood what was going on, not in the girl;s herself, who, confronted with the misunderstanding, failed to identify what to say to dispel it.
asciilifeform: in this case, correctness & fits-in-head.
asciilifeform: thing is optimized for -- strictly -- constant (always-worst-case) time and space usage; and fits-in-head (in that order)
lobbes: But re: fits in head. Isn't phf's/alfs argument that you cannot really even audit said generalized glue?
trinque: http://btcbase.org/log/2017-04-10#1641431 << that this is wrong, and letting data access patterns ~between distinct algorithmic components of your system~ be built in ad-hoc manner destroys fits-in-head for the entire system☝︎
trinque: I'll close with the observation that asciilifeform's "fits in head" serves "build to iterate and throw away" very well.
phf: well, presumably all this only applies when you have fits in head. otherwise you have to fallback to counterparty
phf: we were comming from the direction of debian on 10 cds though, so restating my original point: i think bootstrapping can be solved with counterparty as an alternative to fits in head, i.e. i don't mind an approach where in order to bootstrap i get a binary from l1, that i use as a rich subtrate from which i can bootstrap.
phf: i think i see why we got on this thread. i was saying that bootstrapping is always a counterparty problem. i missed that that's not the case for fits in head (i think ascii might've tried pointing that out to me).
asciilifeform: not quite 'fits in head' machine, but 'fits in book'
asciilifeform: trinque: there is no tangle properly speaking ~in~ their skull. when proggy no longer fits in head, programming turns into a brute physical, rather than intellectual activity
a111: Logged on 2017-02-11 00:27 asciilifeform: ROP is why you want not only 'fits-in-head' source of proggy, but the smallest binary physically possible.
asciilifeform: ROP is why you want not only 'fits-in-head' source of proggy, but the smallest binary physically possible.
asciilifeform: and the only countermeasure is to keep the changes to grandfather's pistol, minimal, reviewable, 'fits in head.' and to retain old mechanisms when practical.
asciilifeform: is in no real 1980s sense 'fits in head'
ben_vulpes: the situation's a good example of the tension between writing code that does one thing really specifically well, and fits-in-head, vs a larger program that handles eg conditions and the concomittant complexity
phf: metafont fits in head
asciilifeform: it isn't even about 'attack surfaces', but for getting maximally compact description. i.e. fits-in-head.
a111: Logged on 2016-09-17 04:18 adlai has been reviewing math towards next month's semester start. just encountered a beautiful "fits in head" derivation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AngleAdditionDiagramSine.svg
adlai has been reviewing math towards next month's semester start. just encountered a beautiful "fits in head" derivation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AngleAdditionDiagramSine.svg
asciilifeform: the sleep of fits-in-head breeds monsters.
mircea_popescu: check him out, adept of fits in head, worried about not being able to find the broken code HE SHOULDNT HAVE HAD. pshhh
asciilifeform: let's revisit thread - what part of 'fits in head, and speccable, or doesn't-fit-in-head, unspeccable, t. non d.' does mircea_popescu disagree with ?
scriba: Logged on 2016-09-13: [17:51:53] <asciilifeform> the reason why we ~have~ spec-by-program is because it is the only actual alternative to fits-in-head.
asciilifeform: the reason why we ~have~ spec-by-program is because it is the only actual alternative to fits-in-head.
asciilifeform: and not fits-in-head.
asciilifeform: but 'fits in head, except for this massive part that presently fits in no head' is not same as 'fits in head'
asciilifeform: g_l: really now, fits in head, incl. the font engine crap etc. ?
g_l: http://btcbase.org/log/2016-08-30#1531840 < CLIM fits-in-head, and the final showstopping error (X11 related crap) has been reduced to a simple test case, and is in the process of being solved.☝︎
asciilifeform: (for which the toolkit includes, e.g., 'fits-in-head')
phf: it doesn't satisfy our own requirements of fits in head, it goes through a rube goldberg machine in order to produce a specific build for a specific system. "mac os x? fuck you. openbsd? fuck you". it doesn't succeed at own goal of producing bit identical builds.
ben_vulpes: but the notion of a "fits in head" ethereum contract boggles the mind, so.
asciilifeform: the correct answer, from the twin standpoints of reliability and fits-in-head - is bitcoinfs.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: fits-in-head means that i get to huffmanize TO THE MAX
mircea_popescu: omfg what the fuck do you think "fits in head" means.
asciilifeform: which is a fallacy because... correct-c still is not conducive to fits-in-head; is not readily distinguishable by naked eye from underhanded-c; cannot provide rational guarantees of handling error conditions mid-way; and 10,001 other defects that don't look like defects to folks who grew up with crippled systems
a111: 80 results for "fits in head", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=fits%20in%20head