| whaack: | diana_coman: I am lost on the meaning of http://trilema.com/2016/the-v-manual-genesis/#selection-79.1-83.14 I do not understand what MP means when he links to his line http://btcbase.org/log/2015-11-11#1322055 because I know nothing about Galois. Why is it a good thing that identity is inaccessible to the subject? | [12:41] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: heh; do you know what the rest of refs in the logs right before that cited line are? | [12:53] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: I am not sure how far I need to scroll up, but I am trying to find a good starting point now. My first response is it would be a shame if I didn't know where the Sirens reference in the Kafka quote originated from lol. | [12:59] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: don't get lost in the logs now, lol | [13:06] |
| whaack: | "hm i guess i gotta start from 2013 to make sure i have all the context!" | [13:07] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: and then some more! but yes, kind of why "don't get lost " in there | [13:08] |
| whaack: | starts from the beginning of the day as per btcbase.org's clock | [13:08] |
| diana_coman: | now I'm curious though: jfw do you know about Galois? | [13:08] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: here's a more direct discussion of identity (but again: do not get lost in the context of *that*): http://trilema.com/2014/its-not-the-sauce-its-the-poultry-and-other-metamathematical-considerations/#footnote_0_52317 | [13:10] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: the log-lines references in fact earlier discussion at about http://btcbase.org/log/2015-11-10#1321513 | [13:21] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: From my understanding the footnote contradicts principle 0x01. MP seems to imply that in the (rare) case where one has sovereignty, one can in fact construct their own identity. "Any attempt at a subjective construction of identity outside of outright control of the environment - which necessarily means sovereignity, in its invariant form from Antiquity to present times - is not much unlike an attempt to write software | [13:21] |
| whaack: | out of the contents of pointers" | [13:21] |
| diana_coman: | funnily enough for the exact thing it's not even about Galois himself really. | [13:22] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: heh, how exactly do you imagine one fully ever controls the full environment? | [13:25] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: lol okay i see, control over your own identity is a sliding scale that can't hit 100\%, and many overestimate their control | [13:31] |
| whaack: | is putting to rest trying to figure out how mp's linked line is evidence that it is beneficial to not be able to recognize one's own idea of himself. | [14:53] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: the previous discussion there holds the key to that but yes, it's a side road atm and a bit to travel down it too so file it under "to revisit" and come back to it another time. | [15:08] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: ok. I am going to start writing my post on my understanding of what V is and why it is important. Perhaps I can still deepen my understanding, but afaik that can go on forever. I am not confident I fully comprehend MP's point about people running different linuxen vs. a unified linux. My understanding is that he is saying that it is impossible for two different systems to have the same context, so any process running o | [15:23] |
| whaack: | n one machine cannot be the same process that is running on a different machine, even if they have the same source. | [15:23] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: knowing when you have understood *enough* to move further is part of practice too, yes; indeed, there is no limit to "deeper understanding" and precisely because of that + finite resource time, you *have to* practice figuring this out too (+ the other part of this: making the *most* of what you know at any given time) | [15:28] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: so I gather your original outlines on which you based the estimate "5 articles by Sunday" was that list there? | [15:29] |
| diana_coman: | the list | [15:30] |
| dorion: | diana_coman "there", as in, had I written it ? | [15:32] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: is there more to those fabled outlines than the list of topics you published in this last post? | [15:33] |
| dorion: | not that I can immediately produce, I hand wrote them and not very well. as I got into the 2nd post, I realized there was more I wanted to say. | [15:36] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: can you type them in and publish them in a single post by Sunday ? | [15:38] |
| dorion: | diana_coman that I can do. | [15:38] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: then do that and we talk on Tuesday evening. | [15:39] |
| dorion: | diana_coman: thank you. | [15:40] |
| diana_coman: | yw | [15:40] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: I'd heard of Galois, most recently through cryptography, but don't know much about him. | [15:41] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: aha; you'll probably end up hearing more of him anyway but yes, I got curious mainly because of survey of algebra since I can't quite see what sort of survey of algebra would leave him out. | [15:43] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2019-10-22 16:38:16 jfw: 'Survey of Modern Algebra' I did OK at, upon putting in the effort. That was things like group theory and possibly the first "you actually gotta prove things now, not just replay formula" | [15:43] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: how's your writing going? | [15:43] |
| dorion: | diana_coman fwiw, towards the end of the taking lumps, it occured to me that writting the article itself may be a further continuation of the original coyness, but went ahead with publishing. was it better for you that I wrote it there rather than coming to the channel first ? | [15:44] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: yes, it was better as I could see what you had and where you were; and take heart, you do at least make it quite hard for people to *not* want to work with you. | [15:45] |
| dorion: | heart taken, sincerely, thank you. | [15:46] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: not bad I think, got much of an outline down from memory, need to compare against notes then draft. I'm hoping to finish that by tonight and have tomorrow to review. | [15:47] |
| dorion: | (not that my other comments haven't been sincerely) | [15:49] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: all right then | [15:49] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: yw; and don't worry, I got what you meant there. | [15:49] |
| dorion: | :) | [15:50] |
| asciilifeform: | diana_coman: update re my article ( 2nd draft of machine park prospectus ) : still set for 27 oct, may finish earlier. | [15:51] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: shall I assume I'm also on the weekly review & planning post cycle now? | [15:51] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: yes. | [15:51] |
| jfw: | alrighty, and I gather the format is up to me but I'll review others for inspiration. | [15:53] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: yes, the format is entirely up to you; where are you with that time-consuming curriculum-dev otherwise? | [15:54] |
| diana_coman: | asciilifeform: I'll read it whenever it's finished. | [15:58] |
| asciilifeform: | ty diana_coman . | [15:59] |
| jfw: | 13 sessions down out of 25 now planned - developing it as we go. Estimated completion end of November. | [15:59] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: all right; are you fine re plan for next week? | [16:01] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: hmm, well I'd like to at least sustain the blogging pace but maybe push for two articles next week | [16:04] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: well, finish this one, review how it went & what time it ate, plan the next and see if 2nd fits; what sort of time do you have available this coming week anyway? (ie for work that I get to see) | [16:06] |
| jfw: | 20-25 hours I think | [16:09] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: works; hopefully you *will* just ask in here if/when stuck and without me prodding why-you-so-silent, yes/ | [16:11] |
| jfw: | reminder noted! | [16:11] |
| diana_coman: | is seriously considering making 15 minutes daily chat part of jfw's weekly plan otherwise | [16:12] |
| jfw: | I will if you ask it; otherwise I'll try to make the formality unnecessary. | [16:17] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: good then; so far it's not necessary and I hope it stays this way. | [16:23] |
| diana_coman: | will bbl | [16:24] |
Comments feed: RSS 2.0