phf: mrottenkolber: unfortunately there seems to be no way to enforce security in git, no way to enable some always_gnupg flag, nor is there a mechanism to add default arguments to some builtin commands.
phf: nor is there an easy way to answer "what was signed" question, short of reading source. you just have to assume that right bits go in, and that nobody's going to change what bits go in in future releases, etc.
☟︎ ben_vulpes: pretty good example of the "promise" end of the spectrum.
phf: there's commit.gpgsign, but i don't see anything for --verify-signatures
phf: suggested solutions include writing update hooks, that in turn involve plenty of goo' ol' foo=$(bar|sed|awk)
assbot: [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 4131 @ 0.00042201 = 1.7433 BTC [+] {2}
gernika: I have a friend who may have found a valid use for 3d printers: he's built 4 of them in his garage and uses them to prototype electronic toy parts.
☟︎ gernika: aparently also uses random items such as various tupperware containers.
ben_vulpes: why would you put food in that plastic
gernika: so you can forget about it while it rots in the refrigerator?
mircea_popescu: it's actually a pretty serious health risk. the plasticisers / other treatments that make the 3d feedstock behave sufficiently like ink are all items of concern in food chain.
☟︎ ben_vulpes: in other news, i finally put a tv in the conference room and it is now apparently the dedicated "5 hours of rocket explosions on a loop" device
mircea_popescu: incidentally : the ancient myths of "person-in-construction" have a practical backing in the roman practice of using fat and sometimes blood as a plasticizer in concrete.
mircea_popescu: strength of concrete is inverse to the added water, up to a point, but that makes it hard to work.
mrottenkolber: why does assbot echo bit.ly links? seems redundant
mircea_popescu: so you don't leak your ip by visiting links ; so you archive their contents if you want to.
mod6: thanks for the link alf
phf: basically some equivalent of "tree 182073587b70313f13678c6e1389cb6c94dd3c69\nauthor foo <foo> 1458691972 -0400\ncommitter foo <foo> 1458691972 -0400\n commit message ... "
mrottenkolber: So I learned today that git does't use sha1 as I thought, but its own git-hash-object
mrottenkolber: Which is probably less cryptographically “secure” as sha1 (wild guess)
mrottenkolber: oh its late, it uses sha1 obviously but not on plain files >.>
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 00:23:16; gernika: I have a friend who may have found a valid use for 3d printers: he's built 4 of them in his garage and uses them to prototype electronic toy parts.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 00:31:03; mircea_popescu: it's actually a pretty serious health risk. the plasticisers / other treatments that make the 3d feedstock behave sufficiently like ink are all items of concern in food chain.
mircea_popescu: keyboard is already set ; and chock-full of phtalates when new.
mod6: boy oh boy. looks like all you can hope for with Ada and issuing system commands is to redirect the output to a file, and the read the file.
mod6: gpg libs give me ulcers
mod6: well, i guess i can appreciate that. i was simply going to write a V in Ada as a way to learn Ada.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 00:04:06; phf: nor is there an easy way to answer "what was signed" question, short of reading source. you just have to assume that right bits go in, and that nobody's going to change what bits go in in future releases, etc.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform iirc abs is the more expensive sort of ink.
mrottenkolber: I can recommend “Git from the bottom up”, git at its core is actually quite... minimalistic.
mrottenkolber: and it was kind of obvious that it signs the commit object, I mean what else?
trinque: mrottenkolber: behind the words one knows there can be an expanse of rusty gears and dirty secrets
mrottenkolber: asciilifeform: I hash of some metadata and a hash of tons of hashes of tns of hashes lol
trinque: mrottenkolber: consider that as specified the total source code involved in a vtron can *decrease* drastically from here.
mircea_popescu: anyway. apparently all sorts of thing OTHER than polycarbonate are #7 now.
phf: mrottenkolber: things are always obvious until someone does the work discovery and then it's "who could've predicted"
diametric: asciilifeform: most people use pla. it's a lot easier to deal with. abs requires higher temps and a heated bed. but recently there are a lot of people printing with petg, and various composites. i just saw some "ironfill", a blend of iron powder and pla.
mircea_popescu: diametric so what's the toxicity profile like, for the activity broadly speaking ?
diametric: about the same as walking around a major city i imagine.
diametric: but not a lot of peer reviewed evidence of any real danger
diametric: mircea_popescu: i'll let you know if i develop popcorn lung
mircea_popescu: twas in my head closer to "you know, printer in 1930" than "you know, starbux barrista"
diametric: asciilifeform: its funny you bring up 3d printing, i just returned from the midwest reprap festival
diametric: some interesting vat related stuff on the sla side
diametric: basically the vat for curing the SLA layers on is flexible, so when the print moves up a layer, the whole vat deforms in order to overcome the van der waals effect
diametric: nah the vat is made out of a thin layer of FEP, so its like a clear rubber
diametric: my buddy at seemecnc gave me one for free
diametric: its the clear thing held down by the frame
diametric: thats actually not the one i got, hangon.
mircea_popescu: good buttplugs are surgical steel ; good gags cured leather etc.
diametric: my favorite is still the giant thermochromatic cock
mircea_popescu: speaking of van der waals forces, apparently they've finally managed to make the spiderman suit.
gribble: Current Blocks: {"blockcount":403880} | Current Difficulty: 1.6549683511822635E11 | Next Difficulty At Block: None | Next Difficulty In: None blocks | Next Difficulty In About: None | Next Difficulty Estimate: None | Estimated Percent Change: None
gribble: About as likely as pigs flying.
BingoBoingo: It's nice to be able to cover good news in the republic, its been a rough month for that.
assbot: BitBet - AlphaGo will defeat Lee Sedol overall in March 2016 match :: 80.22 B (54%) on Yes, 68.59 B (46%) on No | closed 2 weeks 9 hours ago ... (
http://bit.ly/22vqNHi )
davout: basically is saying that one of the addresses included in the double payout got paid twice ~11 btc and has over 50 btc in pending bet payouts
☟︎ davout: more generally, it seems an important thing to me that bettor claims should be adjusted by the existence of a a previous double-payout, if any
☟︎☟︎ punkman: are you gonna look for older double-payouts too?
davout: if bitbet made it until now without this problem, it's probably a good indicator that such a thing never happened before
punkman: pretty sure it did, or maybe I'm remembering double-dividends
davout: I'm going to check that everything that was paid against currently unpaid/unresolved/open bets matches the cash mp sent me, and if so there won't really be a point in checking that
davout: double-dividends is something that's much easier to fix :)
davout: it's not a bug, it's a feature: Dividends-In-Advance(tm)(r)!!1
davout: some address 1foo got double-paid by X btc
davout: same address has unpaid winnings for Y btc
davout: actual payable claim would be Y - (X/2)
danielpbarron: i get it, but if 1foo had never used that address for payout again, you'd never know which address to withhold from
BingoBoingo: Aha, I knew it would happen, but I didn't know it would happen this early. The reciever is now burdened with CHOICE.
☟︎ davout: oic what you mean, i misunderstood
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 09:32:38; davout: basically is saying that one of the addresses included in the double payout got paid twice ~11 btc and has over 50 btc in pending bet payouts
danielpbarron: why should anyone send coin back? as far as they should be concerned the extra payment had nothing to do with bitbet
punkman: /me bids 1 bitcoin for bitbet.us
danielpbarron: it was a matter of principle, not so much a lack of money
BingoBoingo: Way to repay bitbet was crystal clear too. Propose 1+1=2 and bet on no.
BingoBoingo: asciilifeform: But the 0-conf bet would have been wrong before approval. 0-conf Bets made the BitBet mixer go around
assbot: BitBet - AlphaGo will defeat Lee Sedol overall in March 2016 match :: 80.22 B (54%) on Yes, 68.59 B (46%) on No | closed 2 weeks 12 hours ago ... (
http://bit.ly/1Rg7ydD )
punkman: davout, what's gonna happen with bbet shares?
davout: punkman: the idea of a receivership is that you sell assets, use the cash to pay outstanding claims, the rest, if any, goes to shareholder
davout: and regarding S.BBET specifically there's 3.2 (a) reading "The representatives of BitBet have elected to divide BitBet into 10`000`000 (ten million) equal non-voting shares with a total equity value of 100 BTC (0.00001 BTC each). In the event of liquidation or breach of this Agreement they solemnly promise and warrant to repay all investors holding shares at this minimum value."
punkman: what happens to "minimum value" if the liquidation nets less than 100 btc though?
nubbins`: hmm davout are you really going to withhold bet payouts to bettors who were unlucky enough to receive free money from mp's personal funds
nubbins`: also, a thousand lels at the guy who suggested the double-paid bettors just return the funds
nubbins`: <+asciilifeform>punkman: they pay from own pockets? << that's my understanding too
nubbins`: last sentence of quoted text says exactly this
nubbins`: "GPG signed contracts are no good if they can't be enforced." actually they've fulfilled their purpose precisely as intended here
solrodar: nubbins`: it's logical to reduce payments to those addresses if and only if if davout decides MP's double payment can be charged to the company
nubbins`: will be interesting to see what decision is made
PeterL: <nubbins`> hmm davout are you really going to withhold bet payouts to bettors who were unlucky enough to receive free money from mp's personal funds << so if person A used separate addresses for bets and person B used the same address on multiple bets, A gets more money and B gets less?
solrodar: both bettors have a moral obligation to return the money, it's just that one of them is identifiable and the other one isn't
nubbins`: solrodar i don't think any such moral obligation exists.
nubbins`: tl;dr adults are responsible for the consequences of their actions
nubbins`: whether their name is snackman or mircea_popescu
solrodar: I doubt you'd believe that if you had lost a large sum of money by sending it to the wrong person by mistake
nubbins`: my belief in the matter doesn't change the logic tho, hey?
shinohai: danielpbarron got to admit things were simpler in times when decisions involved swords.
danielpbarron: 1 Kings 3:16 Now two women who were harlots came to the king, and stood before him. 17 And one woman said, "O my lord, this woman and I dwell in the same house; and I gave birth while she was in the house. 18 Then it happened, the third day after I had given birth, that this woman also gave birth. And we were together; no one was with us in the house, except the two of us in the house. 19 And this woman's son died in the nig
danielpbarron: 22 Then the other woman said, "No! But the living one is my son, and the dead one is your son."
danielpbarron: And the first woman said, "No! But the dead one is your son, and the living one is my son."
danielpbarron: Thus they spoke before the king. 23 And the king said, "The one says, 'This is my son, who lives, and your son is the dead one'; and the other says, 'No! But your son is the dead one, and my son is the living one.'" 24 Then the king said, "Bring me a sword." So they brought a sword before the king. 25 And the king said, "Divide the living child in two, and give half to one, and half to the other."
danielpbarron: 26 Then the woman whose son was living spoke to the king, for she yearned with compassion for her son; and she said, "O my lord, give her the living child, and by no means kill him!" But the other said, "Let him be neither mine nor yours, but divide him." 27 So the king answered and said, "Give the first woman the living child, and by no means kill him; she is his mother." 28 And all Israel heard of the judgment which the ki
PeterL: It does not matter who the true mother was, the one who wanted him to live was deemed a better mother
PeterL: but what does this have to do with returning mistakenly gifted coins?
solrodar: I was wondering the same thing
solrodar: I'm sure I could find some law about unjust enrichment in the bible if I looked hard enough
solrodar: no, because nobody here except you gives a crap what the bible says
danielpbarron: you still haven't explained what's moral about returning the money
solrodar: you try to pay your rent, but make a typo and send the money to me instead
solrodar: should I send it back, minus a small fee for my inconvenience?
PeterL: I would call it charitable to return the money
danielpbarron: if it's charitable to return then it isn't immoral to keep
danielpbarron: you who doesn't believe the Bible are going to say what someone who beileves in the Bible should do?
solrodar: seriously, I think you should return it whether you believe in the bible or not
danielpbarron: I was not the recipient of the double funds, but if I had been I would surely keep it
PeterL: has mp asked people to return it?
solrodar: my argument is that a mistaken payment may have changed possession of the money, but not ownership of it
solrodar: since the sender never intended to transfer ownership to that person
solrodar: but I know some people say this doesn't apply to bitcoin
davout: pretty much everyone with a few neurons left actually
danielpbarron: there is no ownership in bitcoin, except that satoshi owns all of it
danielpbarron: you know a private key, someone else might know that private key. neither owns it
assbot: BitBet - AlphaGo will defeat Lee Sedol overall in March 2016 match :: 80.22 B (54%) on Yes, 68.59 B (46%) on No | closed 2 weeks 13 hours ago ... (
http://bit.ly/22vqNHi )
mircea_popescu: seal top off a bottle of Maltova and attach it to a piece of fabric with the loose sewing of a preschooler.
mircea_popescu: so yes, i can appreciate the sentiment, infantile such as it is. guy means well, i'm sure. but in point of fact he is so far removed from relevancy in any conceivable approach to the issues, that there's really very little to be said.
mircea_popescu: and speaking of this, most everyone involved^H^H^H^H^H^H inloved with bitcoin should insistently watch and rewatch malena, because it is EXACTLY the situation.
mircea_popescu: yes, the prepubescent boy is in love ; but what's he going to do for the adult woman ? have her WAIT ?
solrodar: danielpbarron: But you evidently apply the same principle to fiat bank accounts as well. Anything else? Your dog has just jumped in my window, is it my dog now?
danielpbarron: i guess you don't own your fiats either; the fed does or something
PeterL: solrodar if you sign a statement "I give my dog to danielpbarron", then yes it is his dog, and if you later say oops, I meant to give it to bob, then it is up to DPB to give the dog up, but he does not have to
solrodar: and a bitcoin transaction is equivalent to such a signed statement?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 09:34:25; davout: more generally, it seems an important thing to me that bettor claims should be adjusted by the existence of a a previous double-payout, if any
PeterL: the bitcoin did not just move accidentally, bitcoin moves when somebody signs a statement "I own this bitcoin, I am sending it to address X"
mircea_popescu: solrodar no, because while the dog might be your dog, bitcoin may not actually be your bitcoin.
PeterL: that is the whole point of bitcoin, to definitively establish who owns it at all times!
PeterL: well, own, controll, whatever you want to call it
mircea_popescu: but other than that - nobody has any title over any bitcoin nor could anyone acquire any title over any bitcoin.
mircea_popescu: PeterL the difference happens to be rather important from a legal perspective.
mircea_popescu: "you know, react, dissolve, whatever you wanna call it" sorta thing.
solrodar: so we say mircea_popescu controlled a large quantity of bitcoin, and had agreed to consider a certain quantity of it the property of bitbet, but that concept of property does not go beyond any agreement which may have existed between him and bitbet?
davout: the moment you sell a private key it ceases to be private, and therefore ceases to be a private key
mircea_popescu: davout i am not proposing anything. you are proposing to introduce some assumptions, which seem ridiculous on the face, and are invited to support them.
mircea_popescu: fine, if you absolutely must : suppose owner made an agreement with a third party that the nth txn goes to x and the nth+1 goes to y. are they now bound to revise their agreements on the basis of how you may wish to liberally reinterpret the protocol ?
☟︎ mircea_popescu: it is also very visibly, and very risibly, reaction to bitcoin, which is to say a transparent attempt to exactly prevent specifically what bitcoin does,
mircea_popescu: which is, seal things in the past in such a way they aren't revisable in the future.
solrodar: mircea_popescu: aren't you the one that always argues that there are no people, only keys? In which case there's nothing wrong with recovering money from keys. If the key is controlled by multiple people, that's their problem.
davout: mircea_popescu: you haven't provided any support for the notion of "a fellow" that you introduced, or did i miss it?
mircea_popescu: you introduced it, really. but i restated the issue more formally and without reference to it.
solrodar: if any obligation exists between bitbet and a bettor, the bettor is identified by his key and nothing more
☟︎ davout: mircea_popescu: i guess i did when i said 'bettor'
mircea_popescu: if you are going to make other determinations than who won a bet, might as well put a 50% tax on the richest 10% or w/e the french fashion is these days.
davout: bettor's an address though, and claims are bound to addresses, not people, are they?
mircea_popescu: this is an eery rehash of the earlier thing re "bitcoin is addresses / no it's txn" where jurov massacred me.
mircea_popescu: funny how everything is in the fucking log. dja recall it davout ?
davout: !s bitcoin is addresses
assbot: Logged on 07-01-2016 00:00:47; jurov: input is a reference to an output from a previous transaction. output is: a hash of a previous transaction + Index of the specific output in the referenced transaction.
mircea_popescu: anyway, take it from a software design perspective. you are proposing to change the stateless parser (bet accepted) -> (bet resolved) -> (bet paid out) into a stateful and undefined (bet accepted) -> (bet resolved) -> (???) -> (some thing paid according to some rules you can't know)
☟︎ mircea_popescu: and for that matter, are you going to pay out of pocket for the costs anyone and everyone incurs to adapt to this model, like nsa via gavin paid (to their own people) for their 2013 debacle ?
solrodar: mircea_popescu: the bettors entered a contract with bitbet, then you, acting on bitbet's behalf, paid them too much by mistake. Even if there's no property in bitcoin, doesn't the existence of that contract allow you to introduce an argument of unjust enrichment?
davout: mircea_popescu: epic convo :D
nubbins`: <+solrodar>since the sender never intended to transfer ownership to that person <<< mp didn't intend to transfer ownership of the coins involved in a tx that he sent?
mircea_popescu: solrodar there's no bitcoin precedent of "unjust enrichment", and if it is introduced it applies first of all to all miners.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: much like the tmsr license, bitcoin is deliberately constructed a certain way to destroy fiat notions of this world, not to maintain them nor to permit their maintenance.
PeterL: block reward is payment for work of processing block of transactions, seems justified to me
mircea_popescu: that it seems justified to you may make a difference when you're king of the world and can promise me to appoint all judges forevermore to comply with your notions.
mircea_popescu: promise here being a term of art standing in opposition with protocol.
solrodar: if you reject all notions of justice then this entire liquidation thing becomes meaningless
mircea_popescu: it is perfectly meaningful in its own proper terms, which is why tmsr prevails over any pretend fiat sovereign :
PeterL: If block reward is unjust, what is a just way of distributing coin? Or is that even possible?
mircea_popescu: they're meaningful to us, if risible ; we're not meaningful nor can be rendered meaningful for them.
mircea_popescu: PeterL what is the correct way of cheering your mother up with a tin of maltova and and a chunk of cloth ?
davout: mircea_popescu: that way does sound like a good way!
mircea_popescu: davout it worked, that time, but i wouldn't rely on it!
mircea_popescu: PeterL do you find people are often able to help you when your problem is "wtf?" ?
PeterL: not expecting help, just completely lost as to where your question connects to mine?
mircea_popescu: fine, if you must : your question is not even a question in that it doesn't make any sense.
davout: maltova and chunks of cloth not so much... desire to cheer others up, i'd say why not
PeterL: more of an "I have no words" than a problem
mircea_popescu: davout hey, i can appreciate the sentiment. the equations, however, stay cold.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 14:20:36; mircea_popescu: solrodar there's no bitcoin precedent of "unjust enrichment", and if it is introduced it applies first of all to all miners.
mircea_popescu: it is the actual threshold of maturity, when the agent comprehends that some things must be done because of themselves and irrespective of their will. usually this discovery came to young people who were in love - but society has meanwhile "progressed" past that.
solrodar: didn't those ideas come from your sense of justice, equity or whatever you call it?
mircea_popescu: lol k. what you're doing is roughly equivalent to coming into my house, attempting to give a name to one of my women and then proposing to exchange her for your own of the same name. ty but...
solrodar: you know, a lot of your metaphors are stupid but that one almost reaches the level of a zen koan
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 12:03:12; BingoBoingo: Aha, I knew it would happen, but I didn't know it would happen this early. The reciever is now burdened with CHOICE.
davout: the receiver was already burdened with choice, since he has to certify, or not, claims
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform not the issue. the issue is, can you assume or can't you assume. and the result is you can't assume.
mircea_popescu: will there be judgement day, when all there is is dark, or will there be "communism" aka "christianity" aka a hunchback god tries to create a world just like he's seen in his sane, healthy brother's hands ?
mircea_popescu: (and if anyone's unfamiliar with the hunchback god, plox to take a break and read up on teh gnosis. it'll be good for you.)
nubbins`: asciilifeform the 13.37 haircut is baked into the deal, i don't think any other haircuts are?
mircea_popescu: and in the interest of not fucking up everyhing in one fell swoop of well meaning idiocy, "deserve"'d better not enter into it.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 13:56:37; mircea_popescu: fine, if you absolutely must : suppose owner made an agreement with a third party that the nth txn goes to x and the nth+1 goes to y. are they now bound to revise their agreements on the basis of how you may wish to liberally reinterpret the protocol ?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 14:01:40; solrodar: if any obligation exists between bitbet and a bettor, the bettor is identified by his key and nothing more
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform see, this is how professional life goes. you are paid well to sit in silence in a room and pick the right thread under a microscope ; i am paid even better to sit in the din of the market and pick the right thread with bare eyes.
mircea_popescu: if this were the case one'd get one key issued with the ssn.
mircea_popescu: bitcoin addresses aren't acceptable proof of identity (such as for instance through that "signing" kludge) specifically for this reason.
mircea_popescu: man and woman also suck equally, one has the children the other doesn't.
mircea_popescu: no, your "from my perch, they suck ~equally" is no argument, just color.
mircea_popescu: things may suck equally, so what of it. MERIT STILL DUN ENTER INTO IT!
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 14:06:24; mircea_popescu: anyway, take it from a software design perspective. you are proposing to change the stateless parser (bet accepted) -> (bet resolved) -> (bet paid out) into a stateful and undefined (bet accepted) -> (bet resolved) -> (???) -> (some thing paid according to some rules you can't know)
mircea_popescu: well, it is also possible bitbet sells well and makes the issue moot.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 15:03:51; mircea_popescu: "the simplest"
mircea_popescu: can you elaborate on this communism identification, cuz i dun see it ?
mircea_popescu: let's maybe start with, what is your definition of communism ?
mircea_popescu: so really equalitarianism ? not, "from each according to his wallet, to each according to his needs" sorta thing ?
PeterL: connected only if you assume needs are equal, right?
mircea_popescu: i think this angle is interesting and should be pursued. so asciilifeform : do you suppose that the harem is intrinsically communist, if and in that the women are equals ?
mircea_popescu: if you go eating together, is it communism if you go wherever you all agree to go ?
mircea_popescu: in short, yes, i suspect your take on communism may actually require alienation outright.
mircea_popescu: a flattering view, in its innocent purity, but not how practice ever works that i've seen
mircea_popescu: so then how do you discern when another's crossed the pole, which practically speaking is an event horizon ?
mircea_popescu: but the problem remains, i have nfi how to dispose of the communism charge in that place.
mircea_popescu: no, that's how you dispose of the MATTER once you disposed of the communism charge on the side of "yep, s oit is"
mircea_popescu: atm i can't see that it is and dunno how to completely argue it isn't.
mircea_popescu: seems to me that if you have nine girls and one penis, fucking each ~weekly is not in any sense communism, but just as you say, good ol' agreement & conjugal peace.
mircea_popescu: is it communism if you have two hammers with slightly different utilities that you use indiferently ?
mircea_popescu: to put the matter bluntly : is it communism to round ?
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform again - attempting to interpose yourself between the perceptibles and sophia is a very expensive and ultimately self destructive desire.
mircea_popescu: not that i know anyone not guilty of it, heck, it's my cardinal sin i'm discovering.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform would you say a man is a communist who goes to the casino every weekend and plays either blackjack or roulette as he feels like it that day, because really, the house edge is not the same ?
mircea_popescu: is the man who doesn't drive across town to buy milk a dime a gallon cheaper a communist ?
trinque: I think this apt building is communist for having shut off my water today to fix some pipes elsewhere in the building.
mircea_popescu: remarkably, i had found this in the states, you know, people from the generation that "anti american activities", ie, still had a fighting bone in their body, WOULD engage in this patently insane behaviour.
mircea_popescu: which is how solrodar's slavegirl exchange ended up rebuffed. da fuck do i care to import some group bs.
mircea_popescu: if you're going to drop the bitcoin scalar in favour of a bitcoin-justice vector, there is really no fucking point to even bother, just visa.
mircea_popescu: his scalpel is to cut in the corporation, not in the fucking world.
mircea_popescu: what if i come to the kitchen one morning and discover girl cooking burned... the color blue.
mircea_popescu: the cold truth of the matter being, of course, that bitcoin's an imponerable that obviously can't be cut. but when you, the sleeping butterfly that dreams himself lao tzi, in your dream believe to have cut into it,
mircea_popescu: the result is that your dream diverges from reality by that much, and it's not clear breaches OF THAT NATURE can ever be healed.
☟︎ assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 15:37:30; mircea_popescu: the result is that your dream diverges from reality by that much, and it's not clear breaches OF THAT NATURE can ever be healed.
mircea_popescu: that wasn't a wound, it was on the contrary, the closing of a gap
mircea_popescu: mp is out of money and now running a lemonade stand. you take a menu one day strolling by, and on this menu it says : lemonade, 10 bitcents, address 1lemonade ; fucking with a hammer, 12 bitcents, adress 1fuckinghammer.
mircea_popescu: you pistolaccident 60 bitcents to 1fuckinghammer, show up at lemonade stand "i would like a lemonade"
mircea_popescu: power is not given you to finally get even with those you fucking hate.
mircea_popescu: i recommend blindness, because i fucking well aren't going to be supplying all the candles now required or in the future needed to look in all possible or conceivable dark crevices ; nor do i see who ever could.
mircea_popescu: and no - it moterfucking IS NOT "our obligation to try anyway, mp, try, try".
mircea_popescu: fuck or get off the bitch, this trying is giving me hypertension.
mircea_popescu: bum of the town falls asleep drunk on railroad. steam engine comes and thrashes him thoroughly.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: sometime later, bleeding heart rich old lady invites bum over for tea
mircea_popescu: samovar is brought in steaming in all its samovarish glory.
mircea_popescu: bum jumps up, throws the thing to the ground, stomps it into a flat sheet
davout: btw, is mircea_popescu in a position to transfer the bitbet.us domain?
davout: because as far as the whois is concerned, the domain contact is... chetty
mircea_popescu: cup a cunt in the left, pick some ~actual numbers~ in the right, watch your eyebrows spin.
davout: mircea_popescu: i can make one
davout: so it won't be an issue will it?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 12:29:04; asciilifeform: and yes, they had no obligation to send it back, etc. but if they had, there would be no reactor fire, and a still-operating bbet. that isn't about to be auctioned off to spammerz.
mircea_popescu: i thought the consensus was this reactor should have fired a year ago or w/e.
mircea_popescu: or at least while the very earnest eastern whores of the 50s
BingoBoingo: <asciilifeform> in other lulz, i was looking at 'google map' near $rupturefarm, and found a 'metaphysical chapel.' << I'll have you know I took 500 level metaphysical classes in University
BingoBoingo: To discover what the usual is you have to go to the logs, but not before the end of October, because around that time the usual changed
BingoBoingo: mircea_popescu: Well the stop drinking thing was a rather substantive change in the usual. I think reduced the N in my SNR, but I'm not entirely sure.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 09:34:25; davout: more generally, it seems an important thing to me that bettor claims should be adjusted by the existence of a a previous double-payout, if any
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 14:58:19; asciilifeform: if meatbags were abusing bitcoin by sharing a private key, they earned their hell.
davout: ben_vulpes: do elaborate
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: a broker'd not have to share keys with anyone.
kakobrekla: from the first paragraph of the bb faq: The beneficiary address is never changed under any circumstances. Please make sure you own it!
☟︎ ben_vulpes: kakobrekla: nowhere in there does it say "if we overpay and can identify the people to whom we overpaid, we'll clawback funds from those addresses."
ben_vulpes: eerily reminiscient of the commerce clause. "in addition to these explicit terms in our favor, we may decide in the future to do other things."
ben_vulpes: mircea_popescu issued a receipt and all
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: now credits the howling monkeys outside of the wot with accomplishing things?
kakobrekla: if mp would rm -rf private keys, his linux distro would be the murderer?
ben_vulpes: moreover how does one know that any commenter on bitbet is a bettor? are they 'signing' things with the appropriate privkeys now?
kakobrekla: i havent noticed anything that would point to that
kakobrekla: anyway, care to poke a hole in the rm -rf case?
kakobrekla: the fuck up is in the forgetting it on the bench.
PeterL: <asciilifeform> but if any of them had seen it fit to return so much as one satoshi of the doublesend - i assume mircea_popescu, kakobrekla, or davout would have mentioned. << If I did want to return part of doublespend, where would I send it and be sure MP does not just pocket it?
kakobrekla: the originator would not necessarily show up in donations and not sure if anyone would notice.
nubbins`: bbet and mp are separate parties
nubbins`: despite mp's insistence to the contrary.
nubbins`: this is the crux of why alf's wrong here
PeterL: but if I return this doublespend, is it still going to be taken out of my other bets the site is holding?
nubbins`: asciilifeform please indicate where i contended such
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 18:13:33; asciilifeform: these are supposed to be ~people~
nubbins`: asciilifeform not impossible, no. the windfall recipients know who owned each parcel of funds
nubbins`: asciilifeform let's say i'm owed 10 btc by you.
nubbins`: kako gives me 10 btc and says "alf's debt is settled"
kakobrekla: asciilifeform but that also makes it clear who is to blame for bbet shutdown. and not its not the bettors who got two payments.
nubbins`: i'm not responsible for de-spaghettifying things external to my transactions
nubbins`: hence why in all the stock warrants it says specifically that the entity will not administer blah blah between third parties
nubbins`: asciilifeform so now you're saying that bbet=mp?
nubbins`: back to my example: you owe me $10, kako pays me $10, and now he claims you owe HIM $10.
nubbins`: you claim to see from the perspective of others now?
nubbins`: you can't analogize what happened to what didn't happen
kakobrekla: i find the distinction quite irrelevant
nubbins`: asciilifeform if bbet = mp, why'd you put 'from bbet' in quotes?
nubbins`: this is not how idempotence works
nubbins`: i'm not gonna argue basic logic. i give up
jurov: "assign credit/debt to addresses" is kinda slippery slope, why not go beyond it and try to analyze and put together addresses in wallets and assign credit/debt to these?
nubbins`: what you're to do is stop willfully being illogical
nubbins`: but apparently that's off the table
nubbins`: this is obivously not a place where reason and logic have any place
PeterL: nubbins` what if MP was travelling when bet resolves, pays somebody to send txn to bet winners, do those payments not count because they don't come directly from bbet wallet?
PeterL: just hypothetical trying to understand your position
nubbins`: no longer interested in explaining it
jurov: asciilifeform: really, since bitcoin makes whole wallets analyzable, why not apply the blame to whole wallet? moar justice!!!
PeterL: bitcoin is fungible, it does not matter to the recipient where it came from
nubbins`: it was promised to be paid and it was paid
nubbins`: if kako then drops another 100btc down my chimney
nubbins`: which brings us back to your assertion that bbet=mp and my assertion that bbet!=mp
nubbins`: which is why we're talking past each other
nubbins`: you believe the two entities to be one
nubbins`: you don't get to claim a third party handing me cash as your own payment.
nubbins`: "buying debt" is fiat bullshit
PeterL: has anybody added up how much the doublepsent addresses have left deposited in bbet?
kakobrekla: im not even sure what is being argued here but i feel it might relevant that proof of payment on bbet was always ambiguous - there was no explicit thing showing the payment - the most explicit was the lack of complaints
trinque: corporate personhood is also fiat bullshit
PeterL: I think the delay by bitcoin network was assumed to be okay
kakobrekla: asciilifeform yes, after the last fuck up i have added a way to specify the resulting tx when bet is resolved and payment is done so we wouldnt be doing two payments for one bet any more (because this obviously doesnt work!!)
nubbins`: asciilifeform so why didn't bbet monitor payout addresses, and cancel any payments to wallets which received funds from any source after bet resolution?
nubbins`: seems like a major lost opportunity.
nubbins`: then you're back to straight-up incompetence, releasing two separate-input tx's into the wild for the same bill.
davout: jurov: X is a slippery slope isn't a valid argument for anything
trinque: this conversation is well downstream from the much more important question of *whose decision it about what a business they own does*
trinque: if an owner of a business decides that address Y is now the payout address for something instead of X, fuck you, it is.
nubbins`: trinque one of the owners decided this, yeah...
trinque: and if that causes a dispute among the board of said company, well, here we are.
trinque: nubbins`: and you're not one of them
trinque: the fuck is this committee action
nubbins`: trinque your argument is: the public doesn't get to lambast those who do poor business?
trinque: lets make a congress to pass some laws so this never happens again
nubbins`: i'm only flapping my jaw here.
nubbins`: you guys are the ones taking me seriously or not
nubbins`: i'm under no illusions that what i say is binding on anyone
nubbins`: i'm juuuuuust offering opinion.
nubbins`: i've never seen such vehement opposition to simple discussion of factual events as i've seen in here the past few weeks
nubbins`: no, i have a terrible memory, it borders on pathology
trinque: all of it smacks of us being a part of some aggregate whose opinion matters in the private dealings of those present.
nubbins`: fwiw all the dealings are public
PeterL: this "vehement opposition" is weak sauce when compared to partisan politic disciples
nubbins`: agreed, which is why idgaf about it beyond marvelling at its irony
davout: asciilifeform: i think the matter becomes mucho clearer if you ask yourself "did bbet pay twice or did bbet pay once with mp coming along later for a gracious donation to the same recipients"
nubbins`: there's precedent for the latter
trinque: if he acts as the business and declares it as so how can it be otherwise?
jurov: davout id did misresolve a bet
davout: in other words, if mp's claim on bbet is approved, it means he was acting on behalf of bbet, which means bbet can consider the same claim settled twice and deduct the amount from further payouts
nubbins`: if i act as an elephant and declare it so...?
jurov: and it did not use that to settle later claims
trinque: nubbins`: you own a business and decide what it does, yes?
nubbins`: trinque indeed, i own a majority of shares
davout: if mp's claim is rejected because he did not in fact act on behalf of bbet, he simply made a gracious donation to random folks of his own volition
trinque: nubbins`: can you invest your own money in your business which is then use to pay liabilites of said business?
PeterL: so either way, the recipients should not send back funds
trinque: now if kakobrekla and mircea_popescu disagree on this point... here we are!
davout: PeterL: there is no "should"
PeterL: thank you for clearing that up for me , davout
nubbins`: as a privately-owned corporation, i can do pretty much whatever the fuck i want
nubbins`: but if i buy a race car for personal use and charge it to the company
trinque: you are thinking as someone in the fiat world
nubbins`: the public will mock me and call me a fraud
nubbins`: so many failed analogies in here
trinque: in point of fact you can buy a race car with company funds, wtf is that
jurov: just some precedent
trinque: there's some ridiculous hotdog chain here in TX that owns one iirc with their absurd logo painted on
nubbins`: sure, and if it's only used by the owner to go ATVing up at his cottage
davout: jurov: there's also precedent of dividends being paid twice for a month, and then retained from further divs payments
nubbins`: it's not a business expense anymore
nubbins`: why am i engaging in this ridiculous broken analogy
trinque: this idea that there will be some social aggregate before which one can cry for justice...
davout: asciilifeform: do you agree that, if the 17 btc mp sent a second time aren't billed to bbet, it follows that this second transaction can't come in deduction of bbet liabilities to bettors/addresses?
☟︎ nubbins`: there's no body to appeal to for justice
nubbins`: i'm just pointing a finger and calling a thing by name.
PeterL: either mp sent his own coin, and recipients get to keep it, or mp sent bbet coin, and davout would be justified in withholding futher payment from those addresses
PeterL: when does Davout make this big decision?
nubbins`: two weeks from receipt of all goods, iirc
davout: PeterL: yeah, that's pertty much the conclusion i came to so far
davout: asciilifeform: i'd argue communism would actually be the opposite
trinque: if mp declared he had loaned that coin to his business, who can say otherwise, and why?
davout: let's not go down this road :D
nubbins`: because it's in the listing agreement
nubbins`: that any weird bullshit has to get approved by both
☟︎ nubbins`: and this is some weird bullshit
davout: "(d) All decisions with regards to any aspect of BitBet, measures taken in regards to any aspect of BitBet operation, any actions, activities or agreements involving BitBet will require unanimous agreement of all the representatives of BitBet. Any such decision, measure, action, activity or agreement which fails to obtain unanimous agreement of all BitBet representatives is void and unenforceable. "
nubbins`: just as well to call bbet a thieving swine for keeping that poor asshole's 10 btc that showed up late.
nubbins`: asciilifeform this is taking this piss even for you.
nubbins`: you clearly failed to grasp my statement
nubbins`: it is described in the manual of common sense what will happen if a fool pays a debt twice
nubbins`: if you send BTC to an address i own, i'm not a thieving swine regardless of whether you meant to send it.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 19:06:41; nubbins`: that any weird bullshit has to get approved by both
trinque: davout: yes that does seem to cover it clearly, though it could be argued that this fell under existing agreed division of responsibility
davout: asciilifeform: if claims are against addresses you can't assign intentions to them!
nubbins`: davout asciilifeform is mixing metaphors like a vitamix today
davout: trinque: see previous comment, approval was usually expressed after the fact, until it didn't
nubbins`: pretty seat-of-the-pants in retrospect, huh.
trinque: part of the lesson here is just how explicitly the parts of the agreement involving moving coin *must* be
nubbins`: imo that's one of mp's biggest problems
nubbins`: doesn't put enough forethought / planning into things
☟︎ trinque: it was a contract between two parties.
nubbins`: rota mega-loophole comes to mind
nubbins`: sending 20yearplan all those posters to give away to tenants too poor to own computers, in the hope of luring them here (????)
nubbins`: otherwise it's just noise vs noise
gribble: I have not seen eskimociu.
jurov: asciilifeform: this souds like "should reimplement bitbet with ether, referees just click a button, gas gets released algoritmically, no possibility of human error"
jurov: (i surely misread you, but which part here should have been algoritmized?)
davout: jurov: aren't gas and ether two different things?
jurov: that was just malapropismetaphor, i'm interested what would alf algoritmize here
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 19:12:27; nubbins`: doesn't put enough forethought / planning into things
nubbins`: "if i knew everyone'd be so mad about these payouts, i would have kept company funds in a separate address"
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 18:59:09; davout: asciilifeform: do you agree that, if the 17 btc mp sent a second time aren't billed to bbet, it follows that this second transaction can't come in deduction of bbet liabilities to bettors/addresses?
jurov: such as, bitbet to generate "yes" "no" and "refund" transactions in advance and merely publishes one when time comes?
kakobrekla: in other words: say if i accidental rm -rf the code and db, who is on the line here?
jurov: prolly impossible under current calculation rules
jurov: alternative mechanic brainstorm with current btc: all bets would be scooped to one address per proposition and winners would pe paid from there exclusively
☟︎ PeterL: jurov, wouldn't it be easier, rather than doing two transactions (sweep, then distribute) to just do a single? (bets are used to pay winnings, the 1%fee to a bbet company address)
jurov: PeterL: these tx would be BIG
☟︎ jurov: and 1% fees spammy
PeterL: is it really that much bigger than the current version? don't they already do all payout in one txn?
PeterL: what do you mean 1% fee spammy, that is what they take as commision
kakobrekla: asciilifeform there was 1 tx per 1 resolved bet that included all the winners with respective sums - i guess this was deemed sufficient proof
kakobrekla: asciilifeform but it was not written in an explicit way on site
kakobrekla: if one was interested on which tx that was - would need to look for that tx in the winners addresses history and establish it from there
kakobrekla: im aware of that one i just dont see it here
kakobrekla: the thing is, i was in charge of x, he was in charge of y. a part of y was 'delivery of bitcoin to winning addresses' which, by mp claims, was done wrongfully (hence the charge)
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 15:43:19; asciilifeform: tomorrow i trip over a cable, fall on a button, accidentally fire pistol, the bullet hits another button, sends him 90 btc.
kakobrekla: the question is wrong. you owe him 100, you send 200 and blame the inanimate fucking object.
kakobrekla: im not sure we are talking about the same thing here
nubbins`: <+asciilifeform>how does creditor know he was paid by debtor? how does debtor know he paid creditor ? <<< obvious answer is when the input funds are used for payout
nubbins`: kakobrekla asciilifeform seems to be arguing mostly alternate-universe theories
nubbins`: elbows hitting buttons, bullets hitting buttons, etc
nubbins`: maybe next a dirigible fleet will hit a button?
nubbins`: i think she had a quote somewhere about 0-fee tx expectations too
jurov: nubbins`: no, he proposes strictly determined flow of bitcoins through bitbet
jurov: this can maybe even be abstracted to whole double or triple point accounting
nubbins`: send funds to bet addr. funds remain there. winners and house grab are paid from same.
jurov: that every account in the accounting should have its own btc address
nubbins`: jurov if you'll recall, mp is strictly not doing this
nubbins`: and the division of funds exists on paper only
hanbot: <jurov> and it did not use that to settle later claims << so when actual operator error occurred, mircea_popescu ate it, and your reaction is basically "hey, if he can pay for that, he should pay for this unrelated problem too! let's him pay for everything!", and this amidst weeks of bitching about "bad faith"?
☟︎ hanbot: the fucking gall seriously.
jurov: yes, fucking gall seriously, sending zerofee tx for ANY reason :)
kakobrekla: and if i delete the bitbet code is mp going to do half the coding?
kakobrekla: and im not saying his job was easy - hence did not want to handle deposits from day 1
kakobrekla: but if you can go around losing bitcoins as you please without consequences the whole thing is, how do you say, moot
jurov: kakobrekla hanbot is trying to explain to everyone that mp, by covering operator error and covering other expenses, earned the moral right to sometimes shift the bill to the shareholders as he deems fit
☟︎ jurov: and how and whys of this is not to be discussed in any shape or form, to avoid upsetting things
kakobrekla: and im trying to explain that i should be paying for everything im liable for and he should be paying for everything he is liable for.
kakobrekla: but this clearly no longer is the case in #b-a
jurov: well, if you made coding error resulting in 18BTC loss, pushing it to shareholders as "cost of doing business with C machines" would be perfectly fine
kakobrekla: too bad i realize this only now, otherwise would have made such error more often.
jurov: we learn every day.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 19:26:54; jurov: alternative mechanic brainstorm with current btc: all bets would be scooped to one address per proposition and winners would pe paid from there exclusively
PeterL: ddoes bitbet need to be a mixer?
danielpbarron: no reason it shouldn't be. the above proposition fixes a non-problem
BingoBoingo: <PeterL> ddoes bitbet need to be a mixer? << It was a cool side effect
hanbot: jurov> kakobrekla hanbot is trying to explain to everyone << no dude. i'm trying to point out to YOU that YOU are abusing established good faith.
jurov: well, then i utterly don't get it
assbot: [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 4131 @ 0.00044447 = 1.8361 BTC [+]
hanbot: jurov if i got plastered and proceeded to crash my car into your house last week and paid for the damages without question, and this week i'm carjacked and hit your house again, you may not use the fact that i happily paid for the former incident as proof that i should pay for the latter, and you may *especially* not attempt to use it as proof while complaining about my "bad faith"
PeterL: BingoBoingo latest qntra s/experience/experienced
jurov: hanbot i want first and foremost to clarify the point that mp, by mucking with zerofee tx, left the car unlocked overnight in dark alley
jurov: which fact he vehementhly denies and bullshits around, straining MY good will in the process
jurov: so, what is he going to test next time? and how would i know hw wont decide do to bill it against me?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 19:31:01; jurov: PeterL: these tx would be BIG
PeterL: asciilifeform mpb apparently calculated his transaction did not need one, it was wrong
PeterL: if mp would share mpb txn-fee setting algorithm, then you could say why
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 20:14:39; asciilifeform: if we're subscribing to the 'all coin is fungible' religion, then mixers are a heresy.
danielpbarron: look at the bet page for a resolved bet. You'll see that BitBet claims how much it has sent and to which address it has been sent. This is sufficient for agreement.
danielpbarron: sure it doesn't fit in with your retro-actively claiming the double payment was actually a partial early payment of other bets..
danielpbarron: the pages for those other bets do not display the correct amounts... no?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 18:03:06; asciilifeform: they were PAID.
mircea_popescu: yes but you can't simply be argued out of a position then come back with it two hours later.
mircea_popescu: you realise this sort of argument is actually a very highly skilled, expensive sort of job.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 17:59:46; kakobrekla: from the first paragraph of the bb faq: The beneficiary address is never changed under any circumstances. Please make sure you own it!
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform your notion that anything but "religious matters" exists is quaint and endearing, i guess, but of no practical value or import.
mircea_popescu: that doesn't result in better security, but does result in more complex rabinic arguments down the road.
mircea_popescu: it's fascinating that in one field you'd make EXACTLY the choices you unerstand to be wrong in the other.
mircea_popescu: as if you'd have decided where to eat and where to shit or somesuch.
mircea_popescu: that is a peculiarly convenient place. not all places are like that.
mircea_popescu: places like that are few and far between for good reason.
mircea_popescu: they're boring, for one, and actually unlivable, which is the same thing.
hanbot: jurov what you've got is neither a point nor a fact but a contention, and while it may inform your opinion on what your own or other people's actions should be, that is ALL IT CAN DO; it does not in any way grant you the ability to use established good faith thusly.
jurov: how do i "use established good faith thusly", again?
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 18:20:49; asciilifeform: note that i am not arguing that this is a moral obligation
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 19:51:30; hanbot: <jurov> and it did not use that to settle later claims << so when actual operator error occurred, mircea_popescu ate it, and your reaction is basically "hey, if he can pay for that, he should pay for this unrelated problem too! let's him pay for everything!", and this amidst weeks of bitching about "bad faith"?
mircea_popescu: jesus fuck look at that crap. i'm done reading this log, wtf, still with the idiots talking ?
mircea_popescu: i'm not going to read further logs, at all, for as long as nubbins` can speak into them.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform get lost with the bs. i'm going to do your job ? not fucking interested. you wanna talk to him, do, enjoy, who am i to get in the way of idiocy.
mircea_popescu: i'm not however your motherfather, to support you no matter where your head goes.
hanbot: this "lord" shit is pretty ridiculous by now eh.
mircea_popescu: it is nice and good to wish to turn some kids into some men. but the wishing does not do the turning, and they all got toys to play with so - there it goes.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform it is the priviledge of the great to try and raise the crowd ; it is the priviledge of the crowd to prove that this can not be done. very well specified, and working as intended.
jurov: hanbot actually, i was NOT writing it in that context, it was in context of whether mispayments were ever considered against future bet winnings. so you did yourself disservice by connecting these things, and it's actually interesting you keep doing it
jurov: yes keep assuring us
trinque: this pissing in the face of people who try to create worlds gives me zero cause for optimism about the future.
mircea_popescu: jurov i want you to explain your notion of "some precedent". use clear language and be sure you can stick with its meaning.
jurov: precedent of whether mispayments were ever considered against future bet winnings
mircea_popescu: let me point out to you that bitbet came down over my realisation that this is how you lot think. stop fucking thinking like this before i have to cut more heads.
jurov: and i actually mentioned the "good faith" question like 3 times in two days. and i don't like to repeat myself. were not for hanbot, it would be well safely buried in the logs by now.
jurov: if that's what you want?
jurov: for me not to "use established good faith thusly" or some such
hanbot: jesus fuck jurov, were you bitching about bad faith or not? were you using the fact mp ate a loss before as a justification for why he should do it again or not?
jurov: re:2 i was being IRONIC. and waited whether you take the bait
hanbot: aha. well, 1's abuse, 2's...oh ffs.
assbot: Logged on 23-03-2016 20:04:38; jurov: kakobrekla hanbot is trying to explain to everyone that mp, by covering operator error and covering other expenses, earned the moral right to sometimes shift the bill to the shareholders as he deems fit
nubbins`: <+asciilifeform>apparently all of us but mircea_popescu are idiots ? << you just now realizing?
nubbins`: <+hanbot>this "lord" shit is pretty ridiculous by now eh. << actually fucking ridiculous from the start, but with occasional convenient side effects
jurov: asciilifeform: you know, hanbot is trained to see such angles :D
trinque: the petulance in here lately is revolting.
trinque: why? everyone got to satisfy his emotional needs, feel a part of the process, get his voice heard.
trinque: I couldn't agree more with that.
jurov: well, i feel i'd lose face either way
trinque: to invoke my upbringing... y'all ever heard of another man's business?
trinque: maybe time to let the case be handled by davout and move on to better things
trinque: lest we continue to look like emotionally crippled morons
trinque: that amounts to "I just want to" and saying the world is somebody else's problem
trinque: and this world fucking sucks
trinque: I can see your perspective there
trinque: I reject the notion of having no face entirely
nubbins`: <+mircea_popescu>let me point out to you that bitbet came down over my realisation that this is how you lot think. stop fucking thinking like this before i have to cut more heads. <<< or, put another way, "stfu talking dangerous talk, alf, or s.nsa is next"
trinque: ^ see, this is fucking emotional nonsense
trinque: and serves merely to satisfy something within nubbins`
trinque: given he has no business with any of these companies, he's what? serving the public?
trinque: the way one forgets and falls back into the patterns of his youth.. it almost makes one believe in danielpbarron's demons :p
trinque goes to cleanse the vile spirits elsewhere
nubbins`: man, if there's one person i stopped reading earlier today, it's trinque
nubbins`: "stahp fighting you guys!!!!!!" x 1000
jurov: trinque you aren't at least rubbed the wrong way by mp's approach?
nubbins`: trinque is too much a fanboi to be rubbed
nubbins`: everybody should be turbo polite & proper, except of course mp, in trinque's mind
jurov: just to complete the picture, i had to privately calm down several people who were utterly freaked out :(
nubbins`: nevermind that mp and his gurlfriend are the biggest toilet mouths in bitcoin
nubbins`: capable of literally nothing. but hyperbole
nubbins`: asciilifeform not in this world!~
nubbins`: <+asciilifeform>nubbins`: what am i then. in what box do i live in, in your cosmos ? << the box where deference trumps cold reason
nubbins`: so, how does everyone feel about there no longer being a lordship?
trinque: nubbins`: you're thoroughly dishonest.
nubbins`: you're also thoroughly welcome to tell someone who cares
trinque: !rate -3 nubbins` treats the forum like reddit, behaves like a fool
assbot: -3 is not registered in WoT.
trinque: !rate nubbins` -3 treats the forum like reddit, behaves like a fool
trinque: !v assbot:trinque.rate.nubbins`.-3:5140039d607c3f6511a9c76ed0a7086f0aa4bf6ff7012dfc451f209d543b97aa
assbot: Successfully added a rating of -3 for nubbins` with note: treats the forum like reddit, behaves like a fool
nubbins`: if we took all the bees out of danielpbarron's and trinque's panties, we could make honey.
trinque: look at the way this guy plays to the crowd, like it's there, and it matters
nubbins`: people who do things on one side. mp, dpb, trinque, hanbot on other. alf in middle
jurov: we're not splitting,for most people here this discussion isn't enough to get nuclear
nubbins`: so far it's only mp and trinque unable to work it out
danielpbarron: those of you allowing nubbins` to rile you up are in the wrong, and it does nobody but "the enemy" to persist in pretending like there's still something to argue about
nubbins`: thanks daniel for reminding us how to think
nubbins`: i actually didn't realize mp owned assbot
trinque: because he's fine leaving things in the state they are now
trinque wonders at walking asciilifeform through the mechanics of a troll
nubbins`: asciilifeform i stuck around here for the interesting convos, verbal diarrhoea from mp aside.
nubbins`: mp is just a guy who plays MMORPGs and wanks on irc all day, to me
☟︎ jurov: trinque, danielpbarron: i am not fine with things, what do you think i can do?
nubbins`: whether he comes, goes, ignores me, shuts down his companies, erases his little lords list, w/e. don't care.
nubbins`: asciilifeform there's plenty of folk i like talking to here besides you :D
nubbins`: glad trinque ignored me, it was annoying having him bleat at me all the time
fluffypony: nubbins`: I've added you to my Official 2016 T-shirt Printer List
nubbins`: don't get me wrong, holding mp's feet to the fire is a good lel
nubbins`: but really all i'm doing here is filling in the time between layers of ink
jurov: danielpbarron: do you have any idea how many times i heard that in my life? surely you must have did too, did you likewise obey them?
jurov: when they did word it right, you have obeyed?
nubbins`: danielpbarron is pretty much hanbot-level muppet
jurov: i wish i got some sound reasoning here, too
jurov: it goes back long time to things like the wences lawsuit, i likened the situation to mpex having a sinkhole in the foyer
jurov: with label "whatever falls in, is donation to shareholders"
punkman: nubbins`: i actually didn't realize mp owned assbot << I thought kakobrekla owned assbot
jurov: wences sending rounded amoutn and the suing over fiduciary responisibility
jurov: sorry: *wences sending rounded amount and then suing over fiduciary responsibility
nubbins`: punkman oh my god, you're right.
danielpbarron: what's the issue? MPEx says send X. Guy sends Y instead.
jurov: this was made deliberate by design and easy to avoid
jurov: i just can't run business that way
punkman: considering everyone is using private addresses these days, I wonder if donations are still a thing
jurov: no actually i did what you're asking "maybe i'm wrong, get fine with it"
jurov: but this happened again and again, bitbet being last case
nubbins`: like i said before, popescu is basically a better-read karpeles
danielpbarron: punkman, indeed that might be why private addresses became a thing. account holders signing agreement that anything sent to that address gets credited to account. Since we know that there are side-contracts for the less-than-50-btc renewal of keys, this should be possible
danielpbarron: jurov, what happened again and again? people not following the rules? How is the a strike against the rule maker?
jurov: no, the very rules going against my values
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 13:32:31; danielpbarron: i'm not interested in bitcoin if he's not interested in it
jurov: and that not even for a good discernible reason
danielpbarron: so what then, you need to oust the current rule maker and then this place will be worth inhabiting? I think not.
jurov: you're under impression i'm trying to oust him? just by reminding him he may have done an error?
nubbins`: "you need to get the rats out of the kitchen and then later you'll want to make a meal there? i think not"
danielpbarron: you just said the rules go against your values, jurov ; not that he made an error
jurov: the rules apparently is that if he claims that was not a mistake but mining cartel, that is beyond discussion.
danielpbarron: the only one who can violate an MPEx listing agreement is the non-MPEx party signing it
danielpbarron: which I think is made clear enough by the line about how it's the sole discression of MPEx to decide how to resolve issues
pete_dushenski: it addresses exactly the "can i pick it up if it's dropped?" question
pete_dushenski: BingoBoingo: two bucks says that the miata owner is not the least bit displeased that two honies romped around in his ride. he's surely sorry he missed it! jealous wife, on the other hand...
nubbins` goes to print layer 7 of new btc posters
BingoBoingo: pete_dushenski: The miata's just one of those vehicles that looks worse than it should because of poor aesthetic direction on other motor vehicles
pete_dushenski: when all the world's an obeast, the skinny girl looks like a freak, aha
BingoBoingo: pete_dushenski: It's just a shame they've stopped making new Miatas
pete_dushenski: nubbins`: you must be on mp's "nobutter4u" slavegirl diet
BingoBoingo: pete_dushenski: No. The most recent thing They've attached the name to in the US is clearly not actually a Miata. I'm not invested enough in the question though to make a hard determination on when the newer vehicles stopped becoming miatas
nubbins`: pete_dushenski funny enough, no diet
nubbins`: i just started keeping track of what i ate
nubbins`: not restricting, just observing
pete_dushenski: BingoBoingo: purist would argue that NA (1st ge) was the only true miata, but that ND (4th gen, MY2016) is a strong return to form.
mrottenkolber: Should be enough to produce vdiffs and signatures from git repos, for whoever might want that, and god forbid, press “v signed” branches from Git (ducks).
assbot: Logged on 18-01-2016 16:15:45; ascii_butugychag: btw i hope everybody understands that life with 'v' is always going to resemble dark age blood sports like cvs, etc. far more than modern greased poles (e.g., 'git')
jurov: mrottenkolber: it's fine, as long as this won't cause V to take up complexity from git
assbot: Logged on 08-03-2016 18:12:51; asciilifeform: nubbins`: dead pilots in the '30s-'40s were sometimes found with the control joystick literally torn from its moorings. they pulled against jammed flight surfaces and physically destroyed the stick. it did not help.
mircea_popescu: mk, so upon consideration, the issue here is that me nulling the logs is at best a stopgap, and no sort of long term or tenable solution. there's certainly no sense in me continuing to pour words into a bag i won't read the logs of, wtf.
mircea_popescu: while it is incontrivable that the lordship has failed utterly, and is in no sense the guarantor of keeping spammers and idiots away from the forum as intended (youhadonejob.png!!!), that is a distinct and separate problem from what to do with #b-a.
mircea_popescu: reviewing that, i can either 1) log as mod and ban the schmuck or else 2) ask kakobrekla to alter the l1.
mircea_popescu: 1 has the manifest disadvantage that it is an exact replay of the bitbet drama. it may be argued that it is "clean" and "elegant" and "all i wanted was to protect you, son", which is so much idiotic patriarchical nonsense it makes my skin crawl - and thus let's extend kakobrekla in public the same sympathies extended in private ;
mircea_popescu: 2 requires the man who just saw the product of his not-inconsequential efforts die over "not doing what mp says, with money" have to choose whether to do what mp says... but with people, this time. we did in fact start this channel together, just like bitbet, and he did do a lot of infrastructure work here, just as there. so... what do ?
☟︎☟︎ mircea_popescu: i dunno, but the fact remains this nonsense can't continue, if for no reason then because i won't be any part of the most recent attempt of fiat world to reclaim the republic. so for the sake of variety, let's go with : kakobrekla, you willing to take nubbins off the l1 ?
☟︎ danielpbarron: only 3 more clicks. That's two changing their mind, or 3 making theirs up
pete_dushenski: after skipping half of today's lengthy logs myself, i'm all too happy to do my part
danielpbarron: aw that's only a single click, but better than nothing
pete_dushenski: !v assbot:pete_dushenski.unrate.nubbins`:184255cc92498ebb12d4e0df4b5f9aa78e0552304d9cbfd8fb95dc8a5ea07d61
assbot: Successfully unrated nubbins`
pete_dushenski: anyways, my rating him made no goddam sense to begin with
danielpbarron: if just one more switches from positive to negative we can see once and for all if a lord can be !down'd
mircea_popescu: and to be perfectly clear - it ~was~ my stupid fucking idea of seeding the lordship off the stats page on roughly the basis of activity that got us in this mess.
☟︎ pete_dushenski: lol more than a few of us probably also thought we'd be riding the btc-waves to being deca+millionaires by 2016. this bitcoin thing is taking far longer than i, at least, had anticipated.
trinque: better to learn to be a man first than suddenly have so much gunpowder
pete_dushenski: but ya, being as rich as i thought i ~wanted~ to be by this point would not doubt cause as many problems as i imagined it'd solve. besides, what fucking problems ??