| diana_coman: | shrysr: is your idea that I make now an account on your platform so that I further also give you feedback or what? | [04:31] |
| diana_coman: | if you don't want to muck around, there is younghands.club, post it all there and be done with it | [04:32] |
| diana_coman: | you have tags there too, use them | [04:32] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: also, what's with the text-in-paste approach? it's text, write it here, I can read several paragraphs, you know? | [04:36] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: ftr, as far as I remember, the selection thing was simply a matter of a few changes in the *theme* you are using so no idea what is going on in there (and the original post explained it quite step by step iirc) | [05:15] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: re text-in-paste - ok. re idea: using the github like 'issues' as a comment system would solve the issue of line selection, comments, enable project tracking and add a bunch of other conveniences, at the cost of making an account, and it would not be on github. I did follow the steps in the original article... on 2 themes... it would not work. | [09:26] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: yes, posting on younghands.club would be the easiest way out. however, i was thinking that instead of a wp / static blog - if we used the git based approach - it would enhance our discussions, while keeping things simple and text based. I'd just have to push a bunch of files - and you'd see them. search would be more functional. | [09:32] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: understand that you may *not* "gain" whatever it is you think you gain (enhanced! optimised! faster!) at the expense of someone else; in plain terms: ofc you can "gain" heat by burning your motel's furniture but that's no gain | [10:46] |
| diana_coman: | what is a "static blog" ? | [10:48] |
| diana_coman: | and why are you all of a sudden falling in love with git anyway? | [10:50] |
| diana_coman: | "oh, wp is made for this task and it would be easiest..BUT here's this shiny thing that sounds cool and I'm itching to try it " or what? | [10:51] |
| diana_coman: | re the selection thing not working, it might very well be that it's some limitation of your setup or indeed whatever "improvement" in all sorts of versions of anything and everything | [10:56] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: stop over-optimising upfront essentially; if you muck about much more with the website, I'll just banish it entirely and comment/read strictly from younghands.club and that's that. | [11:04] |
| shrysr: | yes. I see what you mean. i've been obsessed with this since yesterday and its pissed me off as I just want to work and post and not worry about that stuff. Not in love with Git >> just a working system to post and analyse .... I have kept in mind that you guys have been at it a LOT longer and know better than me..... ANYWAY.. I just 'found' that the files have to specifically be Text files for git to | [11:05] |
| shrysr: | parse line by line and enable that selection thing. This is beacuse markdown and org files are parsed into html. .... i.e It wont work the way i thought it would. | [11:05] |
| shrysr: | so - I give up on this selection thingy, and will stop bothering with optimisation. I will continue as i have: post on my website - and summaries with links on younghands.club . | [11:08] |
| diana_coman: | k. | [11:12] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: what is 'e' representing ? > http://trilema.com/2016/what-lasts-forever/#selection-263.1-263.138 | [15:42] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: it says right there in the sentence you highlighted. | [16:10] |
| diana_coman: | "for an arbitrary e" | [16:10] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: are you familiar with mathematical notation + reasoning? | [16:12] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: yes. not as much as i'd like though. | [16:15] |
| diana_coman: | that part of the sentence says that there is no reliable way to choose your action so that *all* its evaluations by all the different nodes are above some threshold (e), no matter what that threshold is (e.g. 0) | [16:16] |
| shrysr: | ah | [16:17] |
| shrysr: | ok | [16:17] |
| diana_coman: | in more pedestrian expression: whatever you choose to do, there WILL be some to think you're great and some to think you're an idiot | [16:17] |
| shrysr: | okay - in that example - N1's value V1 != N2's V1 (though both N1 and N2 are using action a1 to reach V) right? | [16:23] |
| diana_coman: | there is no such *condition*; V1 and V2 are different evaluations of the same action (different because they are done by different agents but the results may be or may be not the same) | [16:25] |
| shrysr: | right. | [16:25] |
| shrysr: | ok | [16:25] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: and what exactly is meant by 'herps derps' legit things > http://trilema.com/2014/advanced-wot-course-how-the-wot-is-attacked-and-how-it-defends-itself/#selection-121.21-121.45 | [16:29] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: "herp derp" as a verb or noun is a ...term of art; a log search can help perhaps http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=herp+derp | [16:32] |
| shrysr: | lol i thought i got it as i started reading, but as I went down I... did not. | [16:37] |
| diana_coman: | the original urban dictionary def goes along the lines of "doing something very stupid/dopey" but I'd say meanwhile in TMSR it gathered much more specifics, hence "term of art" | [16:40] |
| diana_coman: | shrysr: anyway, re article (with the caveat that kakobrekla turned out rogue and I can't say I ever quite figured out his mind in any case): the point there is simply that there are 2 groups s1 and s2, each of them talking self-importantly their own brand of nonsense | [16:44] |
| diana_coman: | and pretty much living under the impression that *their* nonsense is of course the *real thing*, as that's how those things always go | [16:45] |
| diana_coman: | aha | [16:45] |
| diana_coman: | human languages have this fuzziness and the more expressive they are (i.e. the more the words are actively used in various contexts and by various people who actually know all sorts of things), the ..fuzzier they get basically because they gain more and more shades of meanings | [16:47] |
| diana_coman: | but this is a whole *other* branch of that tree for your study so make a note but leave it for laters | [16:48] |
| shrysr: | Ok! | [16:49] |
| diana_coman: | I should clarify there: the fuzzier words get for someone new/coming from outside mainly (i.e. lacking all those accumulated contexts) | [16:49] |
| shrysr: | yes. I know.. its especially difficult for new/outsiders. I often hear a lot of 'slang' at work... lol, not as much as the logs though. well they are all kindda pretty much the same, and I'm from another country and 'educated' .... | [16:51] |
| shrysr: | i meant they as in the other people | [16:51] |
| diana_coman: | the depth of "slang" as you call it is pretty much an indication of how deep the activity in that space goes i.e. ultimately whether it's a little club (I think most kids even go through some stage when they feel cool just for making their own words) or an established if rather stable activity or innovating and with how deep an impact | [16:54] |
| diana_coman: | the depth however is not about "new words" but really about the depth of meaning of known words and/or the fitness of new words as in truly mapping onto something that was previously missing | [16:56] |
| diana_coman: | shall bbl | [16:56] |
| shrysr: | I see what you mean. | [16:59] |
| shrysr: | diana_coman: so you and the guys in trilema could hack / crack into any computer if you wanted to? | [17:01] |
Comments feed: RSS 2.0