| whaack: | diana_coman: EOD Report: I worked on TheFleet and more of setting up my dev environment today. For TheFleet I calculated how many IPs i'm going to need for each of the 138 networks I have channels for http://paste.deedbot.org/?id=K3SX. Most networks only require a couple of IPs. Freenode is the main beast, to log all its channels concurrently I need 109 bots spread across 36 IPs. | [01:41] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: I should have published an article for my blog today as well, but my schedule has been shifted back. Tomorrow I will be busy for a chunk of the day looking at cars. | [01:49] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017717 - d41r, the automation of everything that you seem bent on is going to get you to grief only; the WoT is well and truly in use and at the moment you are outside of it and trying with all you have to stay outside. | [04:49] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 16:38:48 d41r: what is the purpose of the WOT if you can't use it? | [04:49] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017722 - myeah, he answers selectively, protects what is keeping him back and expects that it will wash indefinetely. | [04:52] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 16:47:08 jfw: d41r, again with not answering the question. What do you suppose automation would achieve there? Why would I care about the set of all alleged identities that've been announced somewhere, except perhaps for research projects? | [04:52] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017738 - billymg, maybe ask Hannah since she surely has experience with this in CR? iirc the best bet was anyway some redundancy at the very least. | [04:53] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 16:55:38 billymg: but i think best option might be one of those cellular hotspots and a data plan, provided i can find one that has LTE coverage where i am (which i know exists because some people visiting the property were getting it on their phones) | [04:53] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017740 - d41r what "we"? | [04:54] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 16:56:16 d41r: in the case of mitm or any other attack on wot.deedbot.org we're basically... fucked | [04:54] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017769 - gah; d41r listen here, first you confuse the WoT's representation with the WoT; then you keep wasting space pushing your idiotic "let's hide under the bed because being a real person is so very hard" and on top of that you think you are now part of some "we", keybase is some solution and some pile of new code and assorted tech will solve "humanity's" problems because ... | [04:58] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 17:10:03 d41r: BingoBoingo: great, that you need to manually verify and manually replicate on your own personal WoT | [04:58] |
| diana_coman: | ... clearly you already solved *all* your own problems now so you are seeing uninvited to other people's problems too | [04:59] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017786 - you will not "work" on anything around here until and unless you get out of your autistic bubble and actually start having some relationships with people; that's what matters before any "work on this" bullshit coding, is that clear enough for you? | [05:01] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 19:16:53 d41r: I think I'll work on solving that. | [05:01] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017799 - works. | [05:03] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 21:34:18 dorion: diana_coman my review was a bit on the heavy side and I have some potential clients to meet up with for an hour or two. my plan is to be back in relative early tonight, sleep at a decent hour and make the plan tomorrow am. I hope that doesn't throw off your plan for tomorrow. | [05:03] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017802 - I haven't fully followed the vpatches here so correct me if I don't get something but my understanding is that it's a choice between branching the tree vs program flag, is this correct? | [05:04] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-07 22:31:54 trinque: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-02-Feb-2020#1016795 << ok, I won't sign a patch that removes functionality I use. no biggie either way, but I question this "PROGRAM MAY NOT HAVE FLAGS" undercurrent implicit. | [05:04] |
| diana_coman: | menalone and their saving the world from under the bed, I really just have enough of it. | [05:10] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017809 - you know, esp given the rather sad experience with the previous pilot test, I'd say focus first on making sure your setup works fine from 1 IP and as much as that covers; getting more IPs is the *easy* part, so sort out properly the rest first. | [05:39] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 01:41:54 whaack: diana_coman: EOD Report: I worked on TheFleet and more of setting up my dev environment today. For TheFleet I calculated how many IPs i'm going to need for each of the 138 networks I have channels for http://paste.deedbot.org/?id=K3SX. Most networks only require a couple of IPs. Freenode is the main beast, to log all its channels concurrently I need 109 bots spread across 36 IPs. | [05:39] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017810 - you'll have a cars article to write then. | [05:39] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 01:49:13 whaack: diana_coman: I should have published an article for my blog today as well, but my schedule has been shifted back. Tomorrow I will be busy for a chunk of the day looking at cars. | [05:39] |
| adlai: | happens to have an 'otr' plugin lying around; wonders whether to wrap the wotpaste-gpg amulet with otr, for that triple-condom security | [09:05] |
| d41r2: | who pissed in your cheerios this morning, diana_coman ? why so much aggressivity? | [09:58] |
| d41r2: | what I did of so terrible to be banned? | [09:59] |
| diana_coman: | d41r2: read and re-read the logs, it's all in there; and if you want to hang around, learn from it rather than persisting with the stupid. | [10:10] |
| d41r2: | you're not answering the question, diana_coman | [10:14] |
| diana_coman: | d41r2: you *are* persisting with the stupid that got you banned and will get you ignored too. | [10:15] |
| d41r2: | what? I mean, is that reason why I was banned? "you're not answering the question" | [10:16] |
| diana_coman: | for that matter, *you* have a load of questions you never answered. | [10:16] |
| diana_coman: | d41r2: read the logs! the reason is given in there in ample detail and I won't say it again. | [10:16] |
| d41r2: | she charged her gun | [10:17] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: any eta on that proposed voice model for chans? | [10:59] |
| diana_coman: | d41r2: to make it perfectly clear: you have the choice to go through all the log, collect those questions you ignored or refused to answer so far and then answer them in here one by one; only after you do that, you may ask for further clarification and/or talk in here; alternatively, you can of course either register a new key and restart this in a saner way and without all the stupid or otherwise get back to whatever you were doing ... | [11:11] |
| diana_coman: | ... and forget about this place as it's not for you. | [11:11] |
| d41r2: | wow, you are a violent person, did you know that? | [11:13] |
| diana_coman: | with idiocy I'm violent, yes; it's a requirement for sane living; just like being "violent" with pests is. | [11:13] |
| d41r2: | diana_coman: cool down, when you're in a more calm mood, we can resume our chat | [11:15] |
| diana_coman: | when d41r* will finally aim to get rid of his stupidity instead of increasing it, then and only then we can resume chat. | [11:19] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: ack re focusing on having 1 VM/IP running smoothly before connecting all of them. | [11:22] |
| whaack: | and I will write a car article | [11:22] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: sounds good. | [11:22] |
| whaack: | maybe it's because i'm an aegist but I don't think that d41r* has been around the sun 30 times yet | [11:31] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-06 16:43:32 diana_coman: d41r: are you 30+ by any chance? | [11:31] |
| diana_coman: | who cares really. | [11:33] |
| BingoBoingo: | I suppose giving it something more to read before the seemingly inevitable return is prudent, but I have doubts it'll be read with intent The basics and some discussion of actual attacks | [11:53] |
| diana_coman: | not that I didn't link the ref for him to start with but by all means, if only he starts actually reading for figuring things out instead of going on about what he imagines, sure. | [11:57] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-05 15:01:48 diana_coman: c0ncord: specifically re what the WoT is | [11:57] |
| BingoBoingo: | diana_coman: He's committed to shyness which offers a grim prognosis. Especially with his feelings doing him in. In the best probable case he spins over the second link a while before noising it up again. | [12:01] |
| diana_coman: | BingoBoingo: shyness you think? to me it looks more like he's fully soaked in ~all the stupid he could find, from "muh anonymity" to "decentralised but not with PEOPLE in it because oh, the horror, PEOPLE??" | [12:03] |
| diana_coman: | I guess the "violence is bad at all times" was predictable in there too. | [12:04] |
| BingoBoingo: | Seems like a terminal case, yes. Other people are characters he may or may not be fond of, but he's special enough to be a star anonymously under the bed. | [12:05] |
| diana_coman: | myeah; it's ok, the under-bed is a fully non-violent place. | [12:08] |
| BingoBoingo: | It only looks that way until other folks bust in to make loving violence on top of the bed. | [12:09] |
| diana_coman: | ahahah, true; there might also be some who still do cleaning properly; it's a tough life! | [12:10] |
| BingoBoingo: | Anyways, if he comes back with an open mind and his own blog, I'm open to seeing if he can be put to work for Qntra's benefit in a way that forces him to challenge the shyness. | [12:19] |
| diana_coman: | if. | [12:23] |
| BingoBoingo: | Right, the conditional is important. I'm not interested in this one in particular beyond it showing up in engagement range. These things are the largest export of the Anglophone space these past few decades. | [12:25] |
| diana_coman: | eh, he clearly thinks in French (though most probably quebecois, to be precise). | [12:27] |
| diana_coman: | come to think of it, ain't that the funniest part about "muh anonymity", that his very words betray him. | [12:29] |
| BingoBoingo: | lol, fingerprinting is a thing. | [12:29] |
| hanbot_abroad: | diana_coman that's a violent observation!!1 | [12:29] |
| diana_coman: | hanbot_abroad: ahahaha, indeed it is!!1 | [12:29] |
| feedbot: | http://younghands.club/2020/02/08/rmd-plan-feb-8-14th-2020/ << Young Hands Club -- RMD plan, Feb 8-14th, 2020 | [13:06] |
| jfw: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017861 - what stood out to me from the latest round was the conflation of "words that make me uncomfortable" with violence, and violence per se with aggression. But the reason I bring it up is to ask, does an emphasis on those distinctions reflect an unhelpful remnant of non-aggression-ism on my part? Trilema for example seems to routinely walk | [13:33] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 12:04:47 diana_coman: I guess the "violence is bad at all times" was predictable in there too. | [13:33] |
| jfw: | all over them. | [13:33] |
| billymg: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017815 << of course, this should have been my first step | [13:48] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 04:53:53 diana_coman: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-07-Feb-2020#1017738 - billymg, maybe ask Hannah since she surely has experience with this in CR? iirc the best bet was anyway some redundancy at the very least. | [13:48] |
| billymg: | asking over in trilema-hanbot | [13:48] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017875 - well, to the extent that you are careful about using the exact word at all times, it doesn't have to mean anything else beyond that but I can't say just like that; so what are the exact distinctions that you make? | [15:21] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 13:33:51 jfw: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017861 - what stood out to me from the latest round was the conflation of "words that make me uncomfortable" with violence, and violence per se with aggression. But the reason I bring it up is to ask, does an emphasis on those distinctions reflect an unhelpful remnant of non-aggression-ism on my part? Trilema for example seems to routinely walk | [15:21] |
| diana_coman: | for that matter, I can actually see d41r*'s point: he followed all the rules that he's accustomed to (while conveniently ignoring everything that didn't fit the rules because yeah, easier that way) and then surprise, I ban him outright!!! And so yeah, "no answer" that he could see because what is there doesn't fit what his rules says is *permitted* to be there, hence... it must be that this diana_coman is just crazy/moody etc; and if ... | [15:27] |
| diana_coman: | ... she outright and explicitly breaks the politeness rules then she's the bad too, aka "violent". | [15:27] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: what/how much experience do you have with presentations ? | [15:31] |
| dorion: | diana_coman I've made and delivered a half dozen or so last year. Prior to that it had been a while. | [15:39] |
| dorion: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-05-Feb-2020#1017537 - cool, I expect to be here, looking forward to it! | [15:39] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-05 23:36:38 whaack: jfw and dorion: i'm booking flights to Panama for April 2nd - April 9th, i hope you two around around then :) | [15:39] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: so is it something you are at ease with then? or still working on figuring out or what? | [15:39] |
| dorion: | diana_coman I'm at relative ease with it. On the making the presentation, I'm using latex beamer, which I'm comfortable with. On the delivering the presentation, I'm comfortable with the content, aim to keep it simple, engage the audience as much as possible and practice the delivery on a timer. | [15:45] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: sounds good then; anyway, simply speak up if you want feedback on the draft, for whatever that's worth. | [15:47] |
| dorion: | thanks, will do. | [15:49] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: let's see, one distinction that I actually don't see involved here but I seem to have referenced above is between feeling upset/hurt/offended by words, which may just reflect one's internal state, and whether the words are indeed strong, violent, forceful, vehement or similar. ... | [15:54] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: how do you tell if one set of words is strong/violent/forceful/vehement or ..not? they are just words after all, aren't they? | [15:55] |
| jfw: | The second does seem to be some bad programming in my head where 'violence' means infliction of physical harm specifically. The dictionary and reflecting on obvious usage doesn't sustain this. | [15:56] |
| jfw: | The third (just to finish setting these down) is violence versus aggression, wherein aggression is violence with no cause in the actions of the subject. I can see how d41r would perceive the words as aggressive if he thought he followed all the (convenient) rules as you mention | [15:58] |
| jfw: | er, s/subject/object/ I think: recipient of the violence | [15:58] |
| jfw: | how do I tell? hm, possibly one can't tell objectively from the words alone, without knowing the state of mind of the speaker | [16:00] |
| diana_coman: | well, it's dubious if anyone/everyone fully knows their own state of mind at any time, let alone that of someone else so that's not all that much to rely on really. | [16:02] |
| jfw: | knowing one's own might be harder than another's even | [16:04] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: in principle there is threat and then there is violence so strictly speaking it would be as you say - either it's physical so violence or otherwise it's *at most* a threat. | [16:05] |
| diana_coman: | common usage is relaxed to the point that one prefixes "physical violence" and so on, sure; the thing is that if you want to be able to talk about things, you need to first define them so taking the "common usage" when it's so muddled up is not going to help much. | [16:07] |
| jfw: | well from Webster's 1913 via gutenberg, violence is "1. The quality or state of being violent [gee, thanks]; highly excited action, whether physical or moral; vehemence; impetuosity; force. That seal You ask with such a violence, the king, Mine and your master, with his own hand gave me. Shak." | [16:09] |
| diana_coman: | ahaha, such definitions | [16:10] |
| diana_coman: | we'll get to that basic of questions: jfw, what's a definition supposed to do exactly so it qualifies as a definition? | [16:11] |
| diana_coman: | (the 1st one there is circular as you noticed and the rest are at best ~synonyms + example; I feel all of a sudden like at one of those "caminul cultural" aka ~village's cultural "institution") | [16:12] |
| jfw: | this seems a bit too shallow but: a definition is supposed to inform you of what a word means, in terms of simpler constructs | [16:14] |
| diana_coman: | (come to think of it, since I kicked the guy out of chan, does the virtual kick qualifies as virtual/cyber violence - since a real kick would, presumably, qualify?) | [16:14] |
| jfw: | violation of his packet sending rights! | [16:15] |
| diana_coman: | hm, as in taking apart the word to express it out of ...subwords of sorts? | [16:15] |
| diana_coman: | the violation (is that rape?) of rights is already yet another layer on the soup of nonsense, yeah. | [16:17] |
| jfw: | that doesn't sound like it could do the job really, not sure what would a sub-word be | [16:17] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: what's the role of a definition of a concept? (perhaps that gives you a clue) | [16:18] |
| jfw: | to delineate what is or isn't covered by the concept | [16:19] |
| diana_coman: | aha; and given that knowledge is structured, that means something very specific. | [16:21] |
| diana_coman: | (on the violation of rights, it strikes me in the background that it could very well be that I violated his wrongs!) | [16:22] |
| jfw: | I'd seen that "proximate genus and specific difference" thing somewhere or other but not quite grasped it. And now I know where that "flat-nailed featherless bipeds" thing qntra's been using comes from, heh | [16:24] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: do you grasp it now or is it still unclear | [16:25] |
| jfw: | hm, one thing that still gets me about it is, does that definition conform to itself? "A definition is that sort of ??? which includes the proximate genus and specific difference" | [16:28] |
| jfw: | perhaps this is trivial though. maybe ??? could be... "declaration"? | [16:29] |
| jfw: | to the example of "violence", the "highly excited action" part would be a suitable definition as I understand it then the rest is sorta there to point out some aspects of the concept and connections | [16:31] |
| diana_coman: | ah, you mean that it's not set there as a definition of a definition, heh; so set it then: what's the proximate genus for definition and what makes it different from the rest in that genus | [16:31] |
| jfw: | genus: declarative sentence concerning a concept; difference: that it states the proximate genus and specific difference | [16:35] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: not bad, is it? | [16:36] |
| jfw: | I think not. | [16:37] |
| diana_coman: | so a definition is a declarative sentence that states the proximate genus and specific difference for a given concept. | [16:38] |
| jfw: | Although I'm not certain we can exclude incomplete sentences | [16:39] |
| jfw: | I'm also not certain whether an incomplete sentence is considered a type of sentence, heh | [16:40] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: what do you mean? | [16:40] |
| diana_coman: | incomplete sentence as in ...part of a sentence? | [16:41] |
| jfw: | right, lacking a verb for instance. I suppose it's a technicality since one can readily furnish the verb for a given definition | [16:42] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: if it's "lacking" a verb in the sense that it's ...implicit, then yeah, you're just being pedantic there for no good reason; if it's missing a verb in the sense that the result is nonsensical then...it's not a sentence so what are you on about, lol. | [16:44] |
| jfw: | so "Violence is that kind of action that is highly excited in its nature" could be the full expansion for that sense | [16:44] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: heh, that's how they got to the "violent passions, overruling the weaker sex", see? | [16:45] |
| jfw: | I suppose I'm used to defining things for compilers which can be quite pedantic indeed. /me looks up that ref | [16:46] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: funnily enough though you don't - happily! - speak like for compilers too! | [16:47] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: ah, the ref is possibly quite obscure, Lloyd's "Observations on the Fall of Sir Thomas Lake"; but the idea was more prevalent anyway, if not expressed exactly in those words otherwise/in other places. | [16:52] |
| dorion: | tends to look up etymology as a first step towards understanding. | [17:00] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: as a first step it surely helps; as long as it's clear it's just a step though, not the full travel. | [17:01] |
| dorion: | I primarily use duckduckgo as browser default search because redirects to https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=violence | [17:01] |
| diana_coman: | this is btw why I was saying last time: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-02-Feb-2020#1016856 | [17:01] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-02 16:37:22 diana_coman: well, that risks the trouble with not seeing the woods for the trees among other things. | [17:01] |
| dorion: | diana_coman aha. yeah, there's room for me to improve there. | [17:03] |
| jfw: | yeah but then do I need an all-Latin dictionary to get any further than "comes from violentia"?! | [17:03] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: heh, the more you know, the more you realise there's... more to know! | [17:04] |
| diana_coman: | is that surprising? | [17:04] |
| jfw: | not especially. | [17:04] |
| diana_coman: | you mean perhaps "not violently surprising" | [17:04] |
| jfw: | but there is that, what was it called - memory hole effect, where the brain fails to generalize | [17:05] |
| diana_coman: | well, the brain fails all the time really, it's basically expert at dealing with failures mostly. | [17:05] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: and you'll never get to know *everything* anyway so if you want absolutely to despair, there's your opportunity right there. | [17:06] |
| jfw: | sure; I'd quite like to "at least" know what the words I use mean! But I'm getting the sense this is quite comparable to "knowing what a program means" requiring knowing the whole compiler and machine to really get there | [17:10] |
| jfw: | anyway I turned up a footnote in a "Memoirs of the Peers of England during the Reign of James the First", p. 473, "After Sir Robert Cecil's time the place of Secretary was divided into two; and not long after Sir Thomas was appointed one; and so continued with honourable esteem of all men, until malice and revenge, two violent passions overruling the weaker sex, concerning his wife and daughter, | [17:14] |
| jfw: | involved him in their quarrel, the chief and only cause of his ruin." | [17:14] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: heh, it's possibly worse in that if you aim for "fully know what the words mean" like that, generically, then I'd say it's an unbounded thing really - sure, you can get away with "knowing the definition as proximate genus + specific difference!" but note that the quality of your definitions depends inevitably on the wealth of detail in your tree of knowledge, heh; and add to it the ... | [17:14] |
| diana_coman: | ... conceits and you're done for. | [17:14] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: aha, that Sir Thomas indeed. | [17:15] |
| jfw: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-08-Feb-2020#1017887 - somehow thought I'd replied here but seems not; I expect to be here too. | [17:40] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-02-08 15:39:23 dorion: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-05-Feb-2020#1017537 - cool, I expect to be here, looking forward to it! | [17:40] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: EOD Report: I spent the day looking at cars and purchased one in the end, details to follow in an article. I have no completed work to report, after I returned I went to a local bbq | [23:22] |
Comments feed: RSS 2.0