log☇︎
476 entries in 0.64s
jfw: hm, so the genesis would just be a placeholder manifest basically?
mp_en_viaje: this guy (who was in spain, and who was in many other early soups back when all these players were still kids or unheard of) said it about hitler something like good gracious, he won't do, he's a vegetarian teetotalitarian. chesterton and the crowd picked it up.
feedbot: http://trilema.com/2020/thou-lector-or-the-manifest-of-modernity/ << Trilema -- Thou lector (or, the Manifest of Modernity),
diana_coman: and sure, one can still branch (effectively on the manifest file), but again, I don't see the situation where the leaves are not obvious even in a huge tree.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-06 14:31:55 jfw: bvt: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-03-06#1958964 - with a manifest, multiple leaves would happen when there are different branches building on a common ancestor and not reground into linearity, no?
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-03-06#1959017 - if you mean the branches from before the manifest was introduced in that specific tree, it's not that much "with a manifest" really; but in any case, regardless of how many leaves there are, they are still obvious enough in a tree text dump so that I don't think it's needed separately as such.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-06 03:55:25 bvt: diana_coman: i have a question about leafs command: can you explain how you use it? i gave it some thought, and honestly i fail to see how it is useful: after adding the manifest which linearizes the vpatches, "leafs" reports only one leaf, without showing the split vtree branches before it.
jfw: bvt: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-03-06#1958964 - with a manifest, multiple leaves would happen when there are different branches building on a common ancestor and not reground into linearity, no?
bvt: diana_coman: i have a question about leafs command: can you explain how you use it? i gave it some thought, and honestly i fail to see how it is useful: after adding the manifest which linearizes the vpatches, "leafs" reports only one leaf, without showing the split vtree branches before it.
mp_en_viaje: in any case, this is the fundamental defect of all utopian "thinking", of the reformation ("the testament i read, and the testament that is, are the same testament!!!") in general, and of pretty much all usian attempts, from "believe women" to "manifest destiny" or w/e. this hope to one thing.
mircea_popescu: it's just one of those lulzy ustardian tropes, like "manifest destiny" or "ourdemocracy" or whatever first pass ambergris in that vein.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-02-17 09:37:40 diana_coman: maybe I'm not fully getting the idea of the manifest file here but my current understanding is that it's a record of the history and as such I really don't see any case where something gets deleted from it - at most it gets branched from a previous version but that's still an added line to (a previous version of) the manifest file.
mircea_popescu: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-02-17#1958136 << i'd say you got the right idea here, manifest.txt is an add-only buffer, attempts to modify it ~= pirate patch.
bvt: diana_coman: ty for spotting this. i will regring vpatches p.1 and p.2; i wanted to make the vpatch p.1 name the same in manifest and file system, but did the wrong thing there just editing the line from previous vpatch in vpatch p.2.
diana_coman: maybe I'm not fully getting the idea of the manifest file here but my current understanding is that it's a record of the history and as such I really don't see any case where something gets deleted from it - at most it gets branched from a previous version but that's still an added line to (a previous version of) the manifest file.
diana_coman: bvt: why does your vpatch cancel a line from the manifest? To my mind this doesn't quite make sense - if you want to revert to a previous point, that means simply branching the tree from a previous node so using *that* manifest, doesn't it?
mod6: mircea_popescu: Ok, I have published my trb keccak regrind on the bitcoin.foundation site. It comes with the following: 1. Update to original genesis.vpatch - removes the UTF charater. 2. Added mod6_privkey_tools.vpatch (unchanged fro the original ML posting by myself.) 3. A manifest file. 4. I've also updated the howto document on thebitcoin.foundation.
mp_en_viaje: they'd like to be ready, see. they just... aren't. and because people are perverse, this tends to manifest rather as exam taking than actual improvement. they don't become any ready-er, they just become adept at pretending they are.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-12-10 18:40:37 trinque: and this retort that real men manifest food with sheer will, great. there's nothing actionable in that comment.
trinque: and this retort that real men manifest food with sheer will, great. there's nothing actionable in that comment.
mp_en_viaje: man's impact on the world surroundant's a lot less manifest than that.
ossabot: Logged on 2019-11-30 13:30:48 diana_coman: at any rate, the hour was spent: ~10 minutes figuring out the change and making it directly on my blog so that the results were clear; ~30 minutes for full vpatch process: retrieve+press current v-tree to head; make code + manifest file changes; test press of result & check + final sign; ~20 minutes for write-up + upload + overall final check.
diana_coman: at any rate, the hour was spent: ~10 minutes figuring out the change and making it directly on my blog so that the results were clear; ~30 minutes for full vpatch process: retrieve+press current v-tree to head; make code + manifest file changes; test press of result & check + final sign; ~20 minutes for write-up + upload + overall final check.
hanbot: i don't know what's wrong with conceiving an os from the known universe at the time of its conception. you have a manifest of ideals and ideas in there, as you necessarily do in your head, and when it changes you're stuck patching. the os should be for a cause, then, but i don't know why the cause(s) can't be explicitly stated, and structured, so you have a tree of reason and not just results. there's no such thing as general purpose, but there i
billymg: i'm also optimistic about the additional attention mp-wp seems to be getting over at #ossasepia - jfw has several patches in his queue already http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/manifest
asciilifeform: mp_en_viaje: i dun have kilometre of buffer, maybe half dozen moar. ( atm waiting for walletron refill tx to get mined so i can settle invoice , and BingoBoingo to post photos for final manifest. )
mp_en_viaje: but it's quite manifest, their principal fear/problem/goal is to AVOID investment.
mp_en_viaje: yes, on the basis of the pompous bullshit you keep spitting into the logs i had formed the impression that you're sitting on a large stash of assorted hardware, which is a major factor of your manifest refusal to leave the washington swamp.
asciilifeform: a press that stops on 'MANIFEST' is dead giveaway tho.
asciilifeform: meanwhile, diana_coman , lobbes , i'ma have to regrind the latest patch, it is defective (and not simply on acct of the double quotes thing) , apparently in 'a' of diff had wrong copy of MANIFEST .
snsabot: Logged on 2019-10-02 20:35:30 lobbes: wonders if it is worth it in next patch to have bot.py simply parse the MANIFEST.txt for version number emitting
asciilifeform: lobbes: it aint a replacement for the manifest knob. specifically wanted mechanism where can ask bot whichthefuck bot it is.
lobbes wonders if it is worth it in next patch to have bot.py simply parse the MANIFEST.txt for version number emitting
mircea_popescu: notwithstanding its manifest popularity among the most perdurant and pervasive type of hostis humani generis, it's still impracticable insanity.
mircea_popescu: byantines, successful, us about to become unsuccessful (ie, its fundamental unsuccessfulability preparing to become manifest)
spyked: diana_coman, yeah, well I suppose that's another reason why the manifest mechanism is useful: if I signed a patch P at t1, and later I found out that it does something stupid or subtly malicious or whatever; then at t2 I can sign the "inverse" to P and give context to that signature in the manifest (whoever tries to press that has to know why particularly I made some change)
lobbes: asciilifeform: with phf's uniturd fix in place, would you like me to repatch the following (with updated MANIFEST.TXT): http://blog.lobbesblog.com/2019/08/znc2tmsr-vpatch/ ?
snsabot: Logged on 2019-08-11 17:09:12 diana_coman: ah, ah; if you want it there, I can add it (tomorrow though), sure; meant to ask: why no author field in your manifest?
diana_coman: I patched it on top of asciilifeform's tree as promised yesterday http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/trilema/2019-08-11#1927521 (+ added the author field in manifest file) + mirrored the full logotron tree on my page
diana_coman: ah, ah; if you want it there, I can add it (tomorrow though), sure; meant to ask: why no author field in your manifest?
asciilifeform: diana_coman: np. don't hesitate to add the eater as vpatch (can put in a e.g. 'contrib' subdir, update manifest) .
mod6: With everything in the right place... (I even needed a '/var/db/repos/mod6/metadata' directory with one file in it, 'layout.conf', that contains one single line: masters = cuntoo) then I was able to run a `ebuild ave1_musltronic_tools_x86_64-20180924.ebuild clean manifest install merge` and end up with the extracted contents in '/ave1_musltronic_tools_x86_64-20180924'.
mp_en_viaje: suppose instead the fellow only knew K. he'd have pressed t1#t1, resulting in a gns a0->b0 ; a1 -> b2 ; a2 -> b5 and a manifest #t3.
mp_en_viaje: At t3, a fellow looks to add a2 -> b5 to the gns. suppose this fellow whose name is R knows only Q. Thus therefore he presses t2#t1, and so gns becomes a1->b1, a2->b5 while manifest becomes #t3.
mp_en_viaje: At t2, there is a patch upon t0#t0, transforming gns to a1->b1 ; manifest becomes #t1. this is signed by A, Q, G, B, N, I.
mp_en_viaje: At t1, there is a patch upon t0#t0, transforming gns to a0 -> b0 ; a1 -> b2 ; manifest becomes #t1. this is signed by A, W, F, G, U, K.
mp_en_viaje: At t0, there is a genesis, consisting of a gns file, containing a0 -> b0 ; and a manifest file, containing #t0.
mp_en_viaje: in any case i'd say just about any single implication you propose doesn't follow. elementarily different people having differing views of a patchset on the basis of their seals works just fine with manifest files as without. and so on.
diana_coman: and the contents of the manifest file itself are obtained from pressing a tree so it's not like you get mismatch tree <-> manifest and a tangle or I don't see it
mp_en_viaje: but yes in this case the manifest is possibly spurious, as you're always changing the same one file anyway
diana_coman: i.e. manifest is a history with dates but not some prescription re patching
diana_coman: fwiw I don't get what the issue is there and what does the manifest have to do with anything
Mocky: the idea seems go be that different people have their own view of hosts file updates based on own view of wot, however, it only works a) without the manifest file and b) pressing to all heads, not just one
a111: Logged on 2019-05-03 03:18 Mocky: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-11-24#1874402 << this suggests that each key holder can only host $key/gns at one ip address. And what about vpatch ordering and the v manifest file? If i have an entry for archive.is and want to change that entry, I can't just make and sign a patch of my own, i have to patch on top of the 'consensus' press, otherwise manifest won't match and can't press multiple heads. Am I wrong about how that works?
Mocky: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-11-24#1874402 << this suggests that each key holder can only host $key/gns at one ip address. And what about vpatch ordering and the v manifest file? If i have an entry for archive.is and want to change that entry, I can't just make and sign a patch of my own, i have to patch on top of the 'consensus' press, otherwise manifest won't match and can't press multiple heads. Am I wrong about how that works? ☝︎☟︎
a111: Logged on 2019-04-27 01:58 feedbot: http://blog.lobbesblog.com/2019/04/auctionbot-vpatch-and-manifest/ << lobbesblog -- Auctionbot: vpatch and manifest
feedbot: http://blog.lobbesblog.com/2019/04/auctionbot-vpatch-and-manifest/ << lobbesblog -- Auctionbot: vpatch and manifest ☟︎
phf: bvt: do you mind signing http://btcbase.org/patches/vtools_tempfile_standalone_notmp the version at http://btcbase.org/data/vtools/vtools_tempfile_standalone_notmp.vpatch i reground it for keccak and new manifest
asciilifeform: phf: i found & removed the last uniturd ( was in the manifest.txt , from the day i made it ) . this however means that there in fact lies a uniturd in the 18 patch ( the removal line , naturally . ) after this i expect no moar .
asciilifeform: interesting ! i gotta find which, and add to .gpr ( still dun cure utfism in manifest/docs tho )
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: the most recent case i found was a 'minus' sign pasted in from ~own article~ . prior to that -- doublequotes in 'manifest', ditto
asciilifeform: i'ma put whole thing in a signed manifest
asciilifeform: meanwhile as of ch16a: libffa : 5142 loc ; ffacalc : 1279; for total 6421 (incl. readme, manifest, comments.)
asciilifeform: incidentally manifest actually includes 2 FG units ( pizarro-owned ) . i had to fly'em back in april , if anyone recalls, cuz of ben_vulpes's misadventure where they were pawed by orcs for whole night
asciilifeform: it is on the cargo manifest for 2nd.
bvt: i.e. in hanbot genesis, there is a/mp-wp/manifest, while in your vpatch a/manifest
billymg: the signature verifies, and i believe i have the diff and manifest syntax correct, but i'm getting the "not found in flow" error
asciilifeform: in other noose, phf , mircea_popescu , et al, the bolix is here. dks packs a++ , princely, all parts on manifest , and kilometre of bubbles. will post photos as soon as i wrap up my albatross of this week, ch14
danielpbarron: Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and
spyked: anyway, this is no excuse for my long silence, so: I'ma bring rss bot here in the following hour (it's been under heavy testing for the last month, so it should at least be a decent replacement for current deedbot rss functionality) and keccak+manifest ircbot tree should be out by the 1st of december
mircea_popescu: is # acceptable comment inline ? should there be a manifest also ?
a111: Logged on 2018-11-19 21:44 bvt: alternatively, i could add new functions at common tree part if i don't touch any files included in later vpatches (so adding entries to manifest would be not possible). seems like some quite unnatural acrobatics to me.
bvt: alternatively, i could add new functions at common tree part if i don't touch any files included in later vpatches (so adding entries to manifest would be not possible). seems like some quite unnatural acrobatics to me. ☟︎
a111: Logged on 2018-11-19 07:54 bvt: mircea_popescu: i understand that empty genesis (well, it's not precisely empty, there is a manifest file) is suboptimal, however:
bvt: mircea_popescu: i understand that empty genesis (well, it's not precisely empty, there is a manifest file) is suboptimal, however: ☟︎
mircea_popescu: this now begs the questrion whether if i send my valkiries they would somehow manifest liquidity. god knows i had no problem dealing as much as i wanted in buenos aires. nor here. nor apparently anywhere (except when it comes to wiring to bb, which is becoming the lulz of all time, somehow)
a111: Logged on 2018-10-06 14:31 diana_coman: I'll soon do the regrind of eucrypt to move it on to keccak hashes; my plan is to keep the patches precisely as they are otherwise (i.e. including NO manifest until I actually added it at the end); the way I see it, it's just a swap-in-place of one hash for another; if anyone sees this sort of thing differently - since I'm hmmm,first to regrind a big project? - yell now !
asciilifeform: right. but i'm regrinding ch1-11 into keccak. ought manifest only to live in ch12 ( 11 technically had one, but it was adhoc, and not conformant to current formulation ) ? or in all ch1-11
mircea_popescu: "This manifest created on x to comply with prevailing standards ; original had no such thing." fir instance ?
asciilifeform: imho also. the q is what's the most accurate , given that orig had no manifest
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform imo manifest ~should~ be historically accurate.
asciilifeform: originally i was gonna simply regrind ( by running through new vdiff ) ch1-11, and invite reader to hand-diff if he likes and see that only hashes have changed. but then noticed that the new vdiff also processes files in different order, so this won't give clean 'only hashes' diff. so thinking, may as well retrofit manifest to each of ch1-11
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: quite unrelatedly, what's your recommended formula for 'manifest' in keccak regrinds ? ( i.e. to retrofit manifest to ancient stuff, or only to latest v cut of it ? and with current blockheight, or to somehow estimate the one at the time of original publication ? )
asciilifeform: meanwhile, in vintage lulz, http://dan.corlan.net/wish/2014_01_7forever_operating_system_support_manifest.html
mircea_popescu: no such fucking thing, it's exactly like genetics -- genetically present traits may or may not phenotypically manifest. but if they do not -- THEY WERE NEVER THERE.
mircea_popescu: so -- looking back to the crc32 situation, suppose that for whatever reason the consensus wasn't "yeah, should definitely have both" but "division is stupid, only tables are needed". at that juncture, ave1 could have made an alternate patch to the crc32-lookup consisting of merely a changed manifest, saying "Hey, for so and so reasons I think this should be a crc32-division, I intend to do it later."
mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-10-15#1862676 << speaking of this, might as well take the time to discuss the "stub manifest" point. ☝︎
ave1: with the manifest as we have now and no way to automatically merge an alternative (i.e. having more than one possible ancestor)
diana_coman: well yes, I can't quite see the point of blanking the manifest without regenesis since that's basically what it means
asciilifeform: if yer nuking the manifest, good form would be to regenesis then imho. but yes
mircea_popescu: note that it's not even illegal to blank the manifest or w/e. impolite, yes, but the spec allows.
asciilifeform: manifest is a piece of handy docs, not a straightjacket, lol
diana_coman: ah, alternative line in manifest too, I see it
asciilifeform: diana_coman: no? you can branch on manifest like on anyffing else
diana_coman: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-10-12#1860960 -> hm, doesn't the manifest impose a single line rather than a tree? ☝︎
diana_coman: typo in manifest "emplementation" -> implementation ; but one can live with that
diana_coman: I'll soon do the regrind of eucrypt to move it on to keccak hashes; my plan is to keep the patches precisely as they are otherwise (i.e. including NO manifest until I actually added it at the end); the way I see it, it's just a swap-in-place of one hash for another; if anyone sees this sort of thing differently - since I'm hmmm,first to regrind a big project? - yell now ! ☟︎
a111: Logged on 2018-10-03 16:28 asciilifeform adds ' asciilifeform-recipe switch ' to next cargo manifest
asciilifeform adds ' asciilifeform-recipe switch ' to next cargo manifest ☟︎
diana_coman: ave1, you forgot to change manifest file for your zfp_4_assert.vpatch? (i.e. it's missing from the list in manifest)