| BingoBoingo: | going to sleep on the current draft for what's next. Dumping anything that smells of faith or belief in the Impossible Republic, what's left to move forward with as journalism... the name will have to start with an uncommon letter, but it probably won't be Q. | [03:34] |
| BingoBoingo: | hopes he has broken the developing news clearly enough to the followers in #agriculturalsupremacy that productive feedback rather than wailing and gnashing followshttp://logs.ossasepia.com/log/agriculturalsupremacy/2020-03-15#1001521 | [03:50] |
| ossabot: | (agriculturalsupremacy) 2020-03-15 BingoBoingo: going to sleep on the draft he has, but warns http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-15-Mar-2020#1021502 | [03:50] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-14-Mar-2020#1021276 - have you looked at what that "market" is worth, first of all? sure, it might look like anything and "escort ads pay" but looks are easy to make say anything. | [05:25] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 17:37:57 BingoBoingo: diana_coman: As I was out and about today, I pondered ways to bring Qntra into the economic loop. Every single one seems to better fit an idea, that I'd been bouncing around as a hobby, but as a refugee from an impossible Republic, the idea I though the hobby seems like the better business. I'm inclined to go forward with a new project doing Uruguay news in English. It's a smaller target, but it is a defensible one. Running escort ads | [05:25] |
| BingoBoingo: | diana_coman: It's small and poor, I haven't yet taken a good measurement. The two major directions for growth I'm seeing as I sketch this out are 1. Expand into regional news and end up targeting the "International Living" real estate racket selling to wanna be retirees looking abroad 2. Add publishing in Spanish or pivot to Spanish and slug it out for the local title of "Paper of Record" | [11:40] |
| BingoBoingo: | The major short term upsides I'm seeing are forced social insertion, and building credibility and contacts outside the remains of the most impossible Republic. | [11:42] |
| BingoBoingo: | If I go with the fresh project as the priority I've also got to immediately unload the accumulated brainworms that have historically taken the form of "I know what Qntra is" | [11:45] |
| BingoBoingo: | If I unload everything that has the faintest whiff of sentiment or faith in weighing JournalismTBD versus Qntra, the history that I'd been weighing as an asset starts to look a lot like a burden. | [11:50] |
| BingoBoingo: | In terms of coverage, I'm having trouble thinking of anything I'd publish on Qntra that wouldn't be a fit for the International or Economy sections of a new project. | [12:17] |
| BingoBoingo: | Maybe I've been over correcting since the sketching out started yesterday afternoon, but I'm not at the moment seeing a case for Qntra over a blank slate that aren't tainted by toxic sentiment. | [12:35] |
| diana_coman: | BingoBoingo: the question is the very same whether qntra or not-qntra ie is that a viable and well thought-out *business* plan or not; a rebranding may be a lot in your head but in practical terms is just a sweep of names on top of a website so it does ~0 practically in and by itself. | [12:59] |
| diana_coman: | and tbh it all sounds to me dangerously in your head and mostly there at this stage; this being said I have no real idea re journalism and its market as such, as I already said several times. | [13:01] |
| BingoBoingo: | Thank you. At this stage I'm still in the process of taking it out of the head and putting it into writing and organizing what at this point is essentially a thought dump into something plan shaped. | [13:06] |
| diana_coman: | BingoBoingo: the point is to make sure your plan has solid foundation in actual facts that are relevant; building stuff in the real world based on what is there and not in the head, not sure how better to convey this. | [13:10] |
| BingoBoingo: | diana_coman: Thank you. I'll circle back to measure the post-holes and piers. | [13:12] |
| lobbes: | diana_coman: I didn't have too much for our standing meeting. Looked through my log dump this morning and strangely saw posts that were out of order. Gonna be spending time reordering the thing. | [16:05] |
| lobbes: | I did want to ask you if you would like this mp-wp bot for #ossasepia? It would be nice to see the thing live somewhere | [16:05] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: My time has been occupied being with a woman from Catalonia I met while my friends were visiting. I'm meeting with billymg for lunch in about an hour and then will write my review/plan for the week. I don't expect any feedback until I have accomplished work on TheFleet. | [16:09] |
| diana_coman: | lobbes: yes, I would rather have the logs as posts on the blog *if the process is reliable*, ok? we can work through it so it gets there but get there it must. | [16:18] |
| diana_coman: | lobbes: I think your logbot missed some lines, you might need to resync with mine perhaps | [16:19] |
| lobbes: | diana_coman: ack on the resync. I do think it is missing some indeed | [16:20] |
| lobbes: | and ack on the reliable process. I can definitely have a test server going for a while as well but yeah one thing at a time | [16:21] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: lolz, is it *that* time occupying that nothing else fits or what? anyways, set something concrete you'll deliver by next Sunday and do it. | [16:21] |
| diana_coman: | whaack: also, was your time occupied by the woman or did you occupy your time with her? depending on which of those you go for, it might make some difference re availability for anything else too. | [16:23] |
| diana_coman: | jfw, did you figure out why is MP saying you don't have a wallet service to offer, basically? | [16:25] |
| dorion: | has mircoblog incoming | [16:25] |
| dorion: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-13-Mar-2020#1020947 - I don't know how much different this is, but here's where I'm at : | [16:25] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-13 16:32:37 diana_coman: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-13-Mar-2020#1020902 - I would add that operations should continue *in a different way*; not just the passive "things will be different"; and I'd be quite interested in hearing what each of you thinks on this "different how" , too | [16:25] |
| dorion: | My path of waking up started with realizing the us dollar and fiat currencies generally are fucked. First that meant run to precious metals and eventually lead to me move to an island to work for a guy talking about that at a bank he owned. Then I realized Bitcoin is better, dropped the bank and worked for a start up backed by fiat investors run by engineers that thought bitcoin was about helping | [16:25] |
| dorion: | the poor. | [16:25] |
| dorion: | Whatever, it got me off windows and onto african linux and showed me the command line and I used it to find qntra and the logs and trilema and tmsr. Since then, it has been my impression that without MP coming into the picture in 2011, Bitcoin would've failed a long time ago, death by pretending Bitcoin could be for the poor and unbanked and engineers that just want to open sores. | [16:26] |
| dorion: | MP is who motivated TRB. Would mod6 and ben_vulpes and asciilifeform have produced the vpatches without MP ? Slim to none chance to my eye since alf's pessimism on Bitcoin is what seems to have been how MP heard of him in the first place. | [16:26] |
| dorion: | TMSR and TRB was what caused jfw and I to talk a lot and eventually create what is now JWRD. He was hooked on the blocksize increase which I got him off of by motivating him to read the forum. | [16:26] |
| dorion: | I knew it was important, but I didn't know wtf was being said in terms of technology and the parts not related to technology had previously dissuaded him to read it seriously. It turns out the development approach taken here is aligned with his underlying preferences, but he likely wouldn't have known that without me. | [16:26] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: what I could think of was that it's not something I've done consistently (or at all) before, as a service like that; not sure that's it though. | [16:27] |
| dorion: | Our business is in large part based on the premise that people need to learn about security because Bitcoin is the best hedge against the fiat devaluations that've only increased this quarter and by will only accelerate moving forward as no, there will not be any return to "normalcy" of fiat interest rate. | [16:27] |
| dorion: | The USians look like they're about to print and cry for a wealth tax. Devaluation coupled with supply chain shock from the virus panic is a good recipe for stagflation not since in north america since the 1970s. | [16:27] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: sounded more like it's his conclusion based on what he's observed of me rather than anything to do with wallet itself | [16:27] |
| dorion: | However, if MP/TMSR/TRB is what was holding Bitcoin together, is Bitcoin actually better than gold ? | [16:27] |
| dorion: | Does MP's closure on TMSR signify he's done with Bitcoin ? Well, MPEx isn't closing and neither is S.MG. By my read, he's done with the charity of spending any more of his time to try and grow more MPs and turning to private life like Cincinnatus before him, which will still include | [16:28] |
| dorion: | Bitcoin. | [16:28] |
| dorion: | MP's closure on TMSR looks to me like a continuation from S.MPOE going private. He was very open to sharing and helping and poured 9 years of his life into doing it and as the evidence accumulated he has acted according to the | [16:28] |
| dorion: | evidence. Which tells him it's no longer worth his time. | [16:28] |
| dorion: | diana_coman is a mighty wall and the choices and chances before each and every one of us is what each and every one of makes of them. | [16:29] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-12 05:15:47 diana_coman: and in that, there is no "don't stand a chance" that matters really | [16:29] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-12 05:14:56 diana_coman: dorion jfw the situation is what it is; what you make of it though, going further is your choice entirely | [16:29] |
| dorion: | On the one hand, apart from diana_coman, everyone here failed to answer the call at varying levels. Perhaps that means we have no business with computers moving forward. But what if instead of the current situation, MP was no longer available to us on account of the | [16:29] |
| dorion: | worst case. | [16:29] |
| dorion: | Would TMSR be dead ? Or would *someone* have to step up and try to fill his shoes ? If there was in fact a republic, the later would have to be the case. | [16:29] |
| dorion: | Venice went through 120 Doges in 1100 years. I'm not going to say any of them sucked, because how could they, they were all better than the version of me that's typing to you now. But it's evident some were better than others, some generations were better than others, some had good luck, some had bad, that tmsr went through its ups and downs. | [16:30] |
| dorion: | I'm not going to pretend I can step in and replicate MP's performance today or tomorrow or a year or decade from now. Nevertheless, he honored me with a salutem and plenty of you have said you like what we've put together with JWRD and diana_coman is here for as long as we make effective use of her. | [16:30] |
| dorion: | I'm usian orphan set in front of the TV and more interested in sportsball than anything else for my first two decades who needs JWRD to cash flow sooner rather than later, not a rich prince polymath who made himself the central banker of btc. With that being said, if you all want me to, I'm willing to see if I can be good enough in leading things forward. | [16:30] |
| dorion: | It's true that I'll rely on his writings and it's going to be slower and more error prone than if he was sitting here. | [16:30] |
| dorion: | Maybe I'm completely off my rocker and full of hubris, but if that's the case I'm ready for sense to be slapped into me. | [16:30] |
| dorion: | fin. | [16:31] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: I'll give people time to read, digest, ask you questions and say their mind otherwise generally. | [16:32] |
| dorion: | diana_coman yeah, for sure. no rush at all. | [16:33] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-15-Mar-2020#1021540 - this has nothing to do with it, no. | [16:35] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 16:27:36 jfw: diana_coman: sounded more like it's his conclusion based on what he's observed of me rather than anything to do with wallet itself | [16:35] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-15-Mar-2020#1021536 - that "knew it was important" is key and surprisingly rare quality to be found otherwise, btw; that being said, it's *not enough* by itself. | [16:51] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 16:26:46 dorion: I knew it was important, but I didn't know wtf was being said in terms of technology and the parts not related to technology had previously dissuaded him to read it seriously. It turns out the development approach taken here is aligned with his underlying preferences, but he likely wouldn't have known that without me. | [16:51] |
| jfw: | dorion: minor point perhaps but I'm not sure what you mean "hooked on the blocksize increase"; I don't recall having a strong position / feelings on the subject, basically didn't see it as a big deal and trusted Gavin at the time. But yes, I don't think I'd have paid attention here without your urging. | [16:56] |
| dorion: | diana_coman, right. I hallucinted freedom and stayed in the shadows far too long. | [16:57] |
| jfw: | dorion: how well do you think you understood the non-technical parts? | [16:57] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: which has nothing to do with it - the "what he's observed", "wallet itself", both? | [16:58] |
| dorion: | jfw I agree it wasn't too strong and you quickly changed the position. I meant it as if I didn't help unhook you/get you off it, you may have well stayed there. | [16:59] |
| jfw: | dorion: right, and moreover listening to the same non-signals. | [17:00] |
| dorion: | jfw I'd have to review, but iirc the first point was about who Bitcoin's good for. I this came back to a turning point with euro pacific where at first I thought everyone I talked to should have an account. then later realized "offshore" banking isn't for everyone and I should focus on figuring out if who I'm talking to is the right fit. | [17:01] |
| dorion: | technical parts such as increasing blocksize reducing security by increasing the cost to run a node made sense pretty quick once I heard the case. | [17:03] |
| dorion: | I recall telling my best friend at the time, "I'd rather live in a world were I can't afford to send Bitcoin, but Bitcoin exists than where Bitcoin as it is doesn't exist because some misguided people wanted to cheapen it for me. At least in the former I can try strengthening myself and rise up." | [17:06] |
| diana_coman: | http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-15-Mar-2020#1021551 - while a name /label may stay conveniently (or even inconveniently at times) the same, the reality is that, to the extent that we are talking of leadership as opposed to bureaucracy, there's no full continuation of the "same thing" either possible or desirable really. | [17:06] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 16:29:46 dorion: Would TMSR be dead ? Or would *someone* have to step up and try to fill his shoes ? If there was in fact a republic, the later would have to be the case. | [17:06] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2019-09-26 14:38:37 diana_coman: ie "continuity" is to some extent an illusion: sure, it's named the same and it follows even perhaps similar principles but to the extent that it is what the King makes it, it can't be said to be "the same" | [17:06] |
| jfw: | dorion: most of MP's technical arguments are philosophical at the root. I guess what I'm questioning is to what extent you "got it except for the technical parts". If you did, why weren't you writing your own contravex rather than reading to try to help decipher trilema (as I did too)? | [17:09] |
| jfw: | you did see parts of it better than I based on your econ/finance background, as you say, yes. | [17:10] |
| jfw: | Not sure what I'm going to make of it yet but I take I do not expect either problem will change without the republic pretty seriously as a caution against trying to carry on a similar thing. | [17:12] |
| jfw: | The job here would not be "fill MP's shoes" but "do BETTER than he concluded he could". | [17:13] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: what would you say was "MP's job"? | [17:15] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: fixing people's heads | [17:15] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: not really, no. | [17:16] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: because it's focusing on the obstacles rather than the goal? | [17:17] |
| diana_coman: | in addition to my remark above re impossibility and undesirability of "same thing" when talking of anything that rests on an individual as a leader, I'll reiterate that a review of the failed TMSR exercise and what came and what didn't come out of it, is absolutely mandatory first step to go *anywhere* further for real; lacking that, all that can come out of attempts no ... | [17:18] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 17:51:58 diana_coman: trinque: I can fully believe the aws and the likes indeed; there's also the significant part that republic failed to exist and so the whole context is changed and so far it hasn't even been reviewed as such; which is pre-requisite for *any* thinking of any related work, whether os or anything else anyways; I'll probably end up doing the review too since apparently nobody even considers it needed or something but that's besides the point. | [17:18] |
| diana_coman: | ... matter how well intended will be in the best case a repeat of the same failure (probably worse because time never stops for anyone) | [17:18] |
| dorion: | jfw as far as the latency, for one it took a long time for me to let go of the non-agression principle, which itself took me a long way, to the point of telling my parents off, which I did at 24 in 2014. that had me disoriented, lets say, for a long while. another part was cowardice and fear of my past. the latter fell away as soon as I | [17:18] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2019-10-29 16:52:22 diana_coman: dorion: you see, that's the thing, when you say "my past" you forget that it includes not only coinapult and assorted similars but also all your own growth and following your own mind and finding your feet from what I gathered from those outlines | [17:18] |
| dorion: | actually talked about it in public, which revealed how stupid it was. | [17:18] |
| dorion: | diana_coman ack on the bureaucracy and need for review. | [17:22] |
| trinque: | heh, dorion did you really just propose yourself to be next doge of tmsr? | [17:23] |
| trinque: | really didn't read a word of what I said re: hubris, did you | [17:23] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: well, for starters fixing people's heads is something that only the people in question can actually do for themselves; it links back to my point yesterday re this younghands project itself - it's not *I* who fixes anything even to the extent that or when it gets fixed in the slightest around here; it's always the person in question - all I can do is to provide the ... | [17:24] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 18:06:26 diana_coman: trinque: dunno if you are aware at all re this younghands project's history so far because possibly it gives already some practical examples | [17:24] |
| diana_coman: | ... tools/wall indeed, that's all. | [17:24] |
| trinque: | believe me when I say it's this streak that keeps me from wanting to work with you. | [17:25] |
| dorion: | trinque I read it, and want it checked. I'm asking because it seems like the question to asked based on what I've read. I'll accept if I'm wrong. | [17:25] |
| trinque: | the wot has no "doge" | [17:25] |
| trinque: | the wot is built upon people's relationships, not institutions, and not titles. | [17:26] |
| trinque: | if you were anything like mp, you would not need anyone to tell you what you are. | [17:26] |
| dorion: | trinque, put me aside for a sec. how do you score your keepings up with your wot relations ? | [17:27] |
| trinque: | none of this matters. | [17:27] |
| trinque: | if you want a relationship with me, take that childish ego of yours and drown it in the nearest puddle | [17:27] |
| trinque: | if you don't, what does it matter | [17:27] |
| diana_coman: | heh, except if you do that jsut for a relationship, it's also fail-by-means-of-giving-a-damn | [17:28] |
| diana_coman: | basically when people start talking of own + others' egos, there's no win possible and it's moot from the start | [17:29] |
| dorion: | I want relationships with people who want to build relationships. | [17:29] |
| trinque: | you've got slogans, posturing, and other horse shit, far as I can tell. | [17:30] |
| dorion: | I don't think that can be done without first asking eachother questions and second have them answered honestly. | [17:30] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: can you give him some space so that he *shows* who and what he is rather than judging his words (inexperienced, granted) based on your *own* full history of what others did and how? | [17:30] |
| trinque: | sure, I am definitley judging him as "next posturing moron who wants to put on mp's hat" | [17:30] |
| trinque: | *definitely | [17:30] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: ah, of course. "Being a tool by which people might fix their heads", then? | [17:30] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: well, if you already judged then what space? and you judged what - words? ok. | [17:31] |
| trinque: | dorion: let me answer your question | [17:32] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: do you take MP for a humanist now? | [17:32] |
| trinque: | for years, kept up with them. | [17:32] |
| trinque: | and then intentionally trashed said relationships because I deemed them worthless to me. | [17:32] |
| trinque: | not only worthless, but harmful. | [17:33] |
| trinque: | as I percieve things, when I try to convey to you why they were harmful, you recoil with defense mechanisms. | [17:34] |
| trinque: | it'd be up to you to say why that is, or to explain how I'm wrong. | [17:34] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: I'm uncertain of the meaning of the term, but he didn't say "come work with me so I can break your necks" did he? | [17:34] |
| trinque: | when I say these relationships were worthless, I mean that their net effect on my life was <=0 | [17:34] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: are you talking above of tmsr-wot-relationships? (it just occured now that ...that might be what you are talking about, huh) | [17:34] |
| trinque: | meanwhile relationships in meatspace were >=0 | [17:34] |
| trinque: | I am. | [17:35] |
| dorion: | trinque I can see it. why keeps you checking in if it's harming you ? | [17:35] |
| dorion: | what* | [17:35] |
| trinque: | it was not always doing so. | [17:35] |
| trinque: | for a time mod6 was not cataloging his daily shits on something called The Bitcoin Foundation, as an example. | [17:35] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: hmmm, now I wouldn't put words in anyone's mouth but I can at least say what was *not* said and that is "come work with me and I'll fix your heads", lol (unless by fix you mean perhaps as in the final fix) | [17:37] |
| dorion: | trinque why/how do you think the positive turned to a negative ? | [17:38] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: I now recall it more as "come work with me so you stand a chance at relevance in the future" | [17:38] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: he built and maintained a whole infrastructure (and that is *more* than ever met the eye, especially the naive eye) | [17:39] |
| trinque: | I think everyone spent what winter-fat they had, and started dipping into muscle, at some point. | [17:39] |
| trinque: | if you don't understand the metaphor, ask | [17:39] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: well yes, that is part of it. | [17:39] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: he built it for people able to make use of it; there's plenty said re "place to defect to" for instance, surely you met that before. | [17:40] |
| dorion: | trinque http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-05-17#1914461 ? | [17:40] |
| ossabot: | (trilema) 2019-05-17 trinque: republic is scant of profit centers | [17:40] |
| trinque: | yes. | [17:40] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: yes I met it | [17:41] |
| diana_coman: | jfw: in short, the conclusion after all those years is simply that such people do not exist anymore. | [17:41] |
| dorion: | why don't you think more business was developed within the republic. e.g. what did you try to monetize and grow deedbot wallet ? | [17:41] |
| trinque: | I don't think a "deedbot wallet" is monetizable. | [17:41] |
| dorion: | why not ? | [17:42] |
| trinque: | because there are not enough people on earth who have the problem it solves. | [17:42] |
| dorion: | what problem does it solve ? | [17:43] |
| diana_coman: | so on one hand that fact is not going away tomorrow; and on the other hand, that infrastructure is also not a matter of "just set to rebuild it". | [17:43] |
| dorion: | is the number problem fixable by quality ? | [17:43] |
| trinque: | arguably it didn't solve a problem, but rather patched around the cumbersomeness of transacting in bitcoin given the shitty state of trb | [17:45] |
| trinque: | it smeared over a problem | [17:45] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: do you recall the conversation with MP on the wallet-as-a-business? I can't seem to be able to find now the log-line. | [17:46] |
| dorion: | diana_coman http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-10-21#1947266 ? | [17:47] |
| ossabot: | (trilema) 2019-10-21 mp_en_viaje: your self-interest one is the perfecting of in-channel payments, such that deedbot can be used not merely as the processor of republican record, but also as the everyday support of commerce. | [17:47] |
| trinque: | what everyday commerce was it? | [17:48] |
| trinque: | payment processors can hope to charge about 1-3\% | [17:50] |
| trinque: | anyhow, this is backwards. | [17:52] |
| trinque: | first you have to identify who the clients will be | [17:52] |
| trinque: | you don't just haul off and build something, and hope | [17:52] |
| diana_coman: | dorion: that is one of them but not the one I had in mind; and it was precisely re "there's no market" "you MAKE the market" ; trinque , do you recall it? | [17:52] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: indeed, you don't just hope, no. | [17:53] |
| dorion: | trinque are you saying it you made a mistake by building it in the first place ? that you should've talked to more outsiders and got their buy in first ? | [17:55] |
| trinque: | yes indeed. expending your time is still expense. | [17:56] |
| diana_coman: | the point re talked to more outsiders is a good one and I think it was repeated to death in #t anyway; pretty much one of the huge fails of the dead-tmsr was exactly the lack of outreach. | [18:00] |
| dorion: | trinque, when did the deedbot wallet go into production ? | [18:01] |
| trinque: | it must've been 2-3 years ago by now | [18:05] |
| diana_coman: | to try and summarise so that we can perhaps move on for now: | [18:06] |
| diana_coman: | the way I see it, dorion said his words and so now he'll have to go and do what backs them up (or not); then and only then, there will be anything to talk about anyway. | [18:08] |
| diana_coman: | and I'll add *again* that no, I don't think there's any tmsr moving further | [18:08] |
| diana_coman: | tmsr is dead and that's it; what may be moving further will be -if anything -something else. | [18:08] |
| dorion: | thanks diana_coman | [18:09] |
| diana_coman: | the way I see it, trinque made his point clear that a. he is allergic to any not-plain words b. he doesn't consider MP was right re making markets rather than using existing markets c. so far he doesn't like what he hears from dorion | [18:10] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: is the above wrong ? | [18:10] |
| trinque: | correct on all. | [18:10] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: all right; would you care to continue yesterday's discussion and get it to some conclusion? | [18:13] |
| trinque: | sure, give me five minutes, compiling a shopping list. | [18:14] |
| diana_coman: | sure | [18:14] |
| dorion: | takes a break for a while, but will be back later to read the continuation of the diana_coman / trinque thread and any other comments/questions about what I wrote. | [18:16] |
| trinque: | diana_coman: ok, I'd be interested in your thoughts re: the tooldom of a computer | [18:22] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: I've been actually re-reading the convo yesterday and there was for starters this bit that kept pinging at me - for one thing I think the "more efficient" is too narrowly taken there | [18:25] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 18:33:36 trinque: for all I know, there's a much smarter hammer than the hand tool that's more complex but also more efficient, i.e. less lossy of energy input to energy output | [18:25] |
| trinque: | yeah, I left out the energy required to build the thing. | [18:26] |
| trinque: | so there'd be a tradeoff between the efficiency of use of the hammer, vs expense of producing it | [18:26] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: that is there too but it's not what I mean; the point is "efficiency at use time" does not involve only the movement energy; basically if the tool is complex beyond a point or rather on a certain dimension/in a certain way, then it *also* requires as input complexity and that should be part of the equation | [18:27] |
| diana_coman: | pretty much the reason why I won't ever bother banging on a plain nail with the most efficient hammer ever, despite it being most efficient - it ends up asking of me more than the job is worth. | [18:28] |
| trinque: | absolutely. | [18:29] |
| trinque: | operating cost of the tool is a limiting factor. | [18:29] |
| trinque: | recalling my cuntoo project, the operating cost was quite high. | [18:30] |
| diana_coman: | yes, but the operating cost of the tool includes some less than visible/more difficult to measure costs, with some improvements of the tool | [18:30] |
| trinque: | endless surface area on gentoo, a million knobs that one has to twiddle just so | [18:30] |
| diana_coman: | yes, in a word what happens there as far as I can tell is that the tool ends up packing both manufacturing complexity (ie the factory and full industrial chain) AND operational complexity that is often worse and esp so when it's the sort of implicit knowledge rather than explicit. | [18:31] |
| trinque: | I think we're both satisfied that there are costs associated with tool-production and tool-use, both of which escalate with complexity, and not necessarily linearly, eh? | [18:32] |
| diana_coman: | "you need 10 years to master this hammer and then you'll be 1000 times more productive with it; until then, you'll hammer your fingers with it ~every 10th blow" sort of thing | [18:32] |
| trinque: | indeed | [18:32] |
| diana_coman: | all right, let's leave it at that; re capacity for language - what do you mean there by capacity? | [18:33] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 18:57:04 trinque: to my mind, a computer is a tool that astonishingly multiplies our capacity for language | [18:33] |
| diana_coman: | initially I took it ~effectiveness of language use but on re-read I don't quite know if it fits. | [18:34] |
| trinque: | yep, I didn't mean effectively, just that it amplifies. | [18:35] |
| trinque: | a tool could perhaps build in some of the experience of those that produced it, and thereby make the user more effective without them having to have had the same level of expertise. | [18:35] |
| trinque: | whether or not we stick on the point of a computer being a tool, or some kind of meta-tool generalization, it would appear to fit both of the above cases. | [18:35] |
| diana_coman: | well, I kept thinking of what I could even find as "use of computer" and the closest I could come would be indeed a sort of "amplifier and discretizer" | [18:35] |
| trinque: | that complexity ramps cost of production and of use. | [18:36] |
| diana_coman: | and I think the second part is quite important too | [18:36] |
| trinque: | yeah, I had an old boss who was heavy into databases and RDF. | [18:37] |
| trinque: | he emphasized that they were for "classification and distinction" | [18:37] |
| trinque: | at any rate, whether the computer is a tool, or some kind of metamachine that configures itself into a variety of tools, interesting but a side point. | [18:38] |
| diana_coman: | heh, I didn't even mean that; I meant that it breaks continuity of ~any domain that it touches and (because of the power of amplification) it's a break that can't be reversed | [18:38] |
| trinque: | could I get an example? | [18:38] |
| diana_coman: | is thinking, trying to extract something concrete | [18:39] |
| diana_coman: | I'm still not happy with it but in the interest of time: look at computer graphics since I reviewed it to barf-level recently; there isn't a continuous field of ~everything from maths-driven to hand-drawn | [18:41] |
| diana_coman: | there are clearly distinct categories instead with *huge gaps* in between them | [18:41] |
| diana_coman: | (and some pretty much missing entirely/lost on the way because of additional discretization of people too, similarly - there isn't anymore the case that you get in a group an wide range of approaches covering a whole interval and a meaningful average; what you get instead is a few points and so no possible average) | [18:42] |
| diana_coman: | so re graphics, you either get "realistic rendering" on huge resources, meant for films/animations ie rendered once in huge detail and then screened whatever times; or you get the rasterized "here's the colour of every pixel because it's cheap" | [18:43] |
| trinque: | has a few glimmers of the point, just thinking | [18:43] |
| diana_coman: | yeah, I'm not happy with its clarity yet, it's still too fresh in my head to fully come together. | [18:44] |
| trinque: | going to have to ponder this part a while longer, but I think we can get back to something directly relevant to the OS thread from here, actually. | [18:47] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: at any rate, I agree that tool/set-of-tools distinction is not needed here as such. | [18:47] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: sure, I'm listening. | [18:47] |
| trinque: | something in what made you hesitate about calling a computer a tool is what makes computers more economically dangerous than other... products of industry | [18:48] |
| trinque: | the complexities we discussed earlier explode within computers, in a way that they do not explode in the hammers we discussed. | [18:48] |
| trinque: | turing completeness means they can model literally as much complexity as you've got time for | [18:49] |
| trinque: | they're like black-holes for work. | [18:49] |
| trinque: | ahahah yeah, this is what makes them the worst possible machines! | [18:49] |
| diana_coman: | well yes, why I'm more inclined to view them as the anti-tool than tool. | [18:50] |
| trinque: | I see it. | [18:50] |
| trinque: | but this is great, because they're still a tool, in that they're used as tools to translate input into magnified output, *and* they're the worst possible tools because they'll happily eat as much work as you can throw at them, if you aren't careful. | [18:50] |
| trinque: | or at least I'll claim they're still a tool, even if they're bad ones. | [18:51] |
| trinque: | I think this black hole point brings me back to the economic discussion. | [18:51] |
| diana_coman: | my point re amplifiers is that they are *indiscriminate* amplifiers if you will - ie they will amplify not only w | [18:51] |
| diana_coman: | "what you want" but quite literally "what you did" | [18:52] |
| trinque: | this is precisely what I mean by black-hole-for-work | [18:52] |
| diana_coman: | do the stupid, they'll amplify that too. | [18:52] |
| trinque: | I mean work in the physics sense as well as the common sense. | [18:52] |
| diana_coman: | ah, I see. | [18:52] |
| trinque: | the stupid may very well mean the thing never comes back with output, of course. | [18:52] |
| trinque: | recall what I said on my blog re: the feeling of an expanse opening to swallow one | [18:53] |
| diana_coman: | sure, not a difference as such from machine's point of view anyway | [18:53] |
| trinque: | yep | [18:53] |
| trinque: | k, so we've got this monstrous lovecraftian horror of a machine. | [18:53] |
| diana_coman: | I don't know re expanse opening up to swallow anyone - that's why I like those shutdown buttons to work :P | [18:54] |
| trinque: | I'm a visual thinker to the point of quasi-hallucination | [18:54] |
| trinque: | so I lean on imagery a lot | [18:54] |
| diana_coman: | eh, don't use non-plain words, or I'll call trinque to tell you off for hubris, ok? | [18:54] |
| trinque: | d'oh | [18:54] |
| trinque: | *k, so we've got this machine that'll happily eat as much work as you can throw at it, and potentially give you zilch back, depending entirely on you. | [18:55] |
| diana_coman: | imagery is perfectly fine though, don't worry. | [18:55] |
| diana_coman: | yes. | [18:56] |
| trinque: | this seems a very dangerous place to have an enterprise. | [18:56] |
| trinque: | plenty of interesting enterprises to be had in dangerous places, but we should consider it as such. | [18:56] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: I thought that's pretty much the only sort of place where one can ever have enterprises. | [18:57] |
| trinque: | there are degrees. | [18:57] |
| diana_coman: | as in everything, sure. | [18:57] |
| trinque: | I'd claim this one ranks up there with "launching multistage rockets" | [18:57] |
| trinque: | the curious thing is that we have pieces of multistage rocket which we can copy for free. | [18:58] |
| diana_coman: | ahaha, that "for free" reminds me that crystalspace we "copied for free", yes? | [18:58] |
| trinque: | exactly right | [18:58] |
| trinque: | free to the extent that these found objects do exactly what we'd hoped. | [19:00] |
| trinque: | which is to say that our predecessors wanted exactly what we want | [19:00] |
| diana_coman: | it's not exactly out of nowhere I said already that premade computer "tools" are more of a drain than a gain, considered plainly as a category. | [19:00] |
| trinque: | or wanted compatible things | [19:00] |
| trinque: | given our violent disagreement with our predecessors, this seems unlikely. | [19:01] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: it's not free even then; it's less costly, or perhaps in the best case it turns out overall in the green but the chances are slim | [19:01] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: mhm, yes and no; ie the violent disagreement is with most recent predecessors (or perhaps several layers but NOT all the way to the root, no) | [19:02] |
| trinque: | we could certainly draw a pragmatic line, but we'd still have to evaluate all the found items as to which side of the line they're on. | [19:02] |
| diana_coman: | and banging on still re eulora (because well, that's what I work on indeed), I have recently unearthed something definitely useful | [19:03] |
| ossabot: | (eulora) 2020-03-11 diana_coman: having looked at a mountain of ~everything (and most of it not at all appealing), in the end it seems I have unearthed what I'd call just about the simplest thing possible (some ~1990 vintage if I got that straight, possibly earlier) and I have just tested this morning a polygonization of an implicit surface | [19:03] |
| diana_coman: | and the *cost* there came mostly from filtering the mountain of shit that obscured and burried it, not from the thing itself. | [19:03] |
| trinque: | if cs was 10 times larger, would it have been 10 times harder to find the useful item inside? | [19:05] |
| trinque: | more? less? | [19:05] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: the evaluation's cost can be reduced if one remembers that software is not apolitical pretty much - the approaches/cockroaches embedded as a result are way easier to spot than technical issues as such. | [19:05] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: ah, this was not from inside crystalspace, no | [19:06] |
| trinque: | ah, so this is a much simpler item that might keep you from having to use some more complex thing from cs? | [19:06] |
| trinque: | I lack context, will read the linked thread shortly | [19:06] |
| diana_coman: | this was from the computer graphics domain at large ie I read research papers and looked at tools and everything else until I got to the point I can almost tell the year a paper/work was produced on just from a quick scan | [19:06] |
| trinque: | right, so does this replace some hairier, nastier thing you were going to do instead? | [19:07] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: cs lacked a crucial link in the chain that we need for what we want to do | [19:07] |
| diana_coman: | there was no alternative there than "find something or think of something" | [19:07] |
| diana_coman: | because it's also a mathematical problem on top of everything else, I went first for "make sure there isn't already some solution that actually works" | [19:07] |
| diana_coman: | theoretically there are *plenty*; in practice, that plenty is more akin to "plenty of ~same thing that doesn't *work* unless you mean by work some very narrow case and shit" | [19:08] |
| diana_coman: | finally, in a paper from back in 1990 or thereabouts, I found something which both *does the sort of thing I want* and *actually works* ie it's made to work, not to "work" | [19:09] |
| trinque: | you know, if dorion had said to me "my init is simpler" without also saying "I want this shell because we made it" I'd have stopped right there, and nodded vigorously. | [19:09] |
| trinque: | because that's exactly how I want to reason about this. | [19:09] |
| trinque: | or not made, found already and put in our thing, w/e | [19:09] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: honestly, you are both piling there at one another your own baggages that come head to head and neither of them helps | [19:09] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: yes, but I wouldn't have been able to even articulate that indeed that was what you were looking for as such, before you just said it above | [19:10] |
| trinque: | it was in what I've already written | [19:10] |
| diana_coman: | I'll believe that I just missed it among the rest then. | [19:11] |
| trinque: | and I hope this thread serves as an example of a perfectly rational conversation. | [19:11] |
| trinque: | but at any rate, production of an OS is explosively expensive. | [19:11] |
| trinque: | and unpredictably | [19:12] |
| trinque: | anyone undertaking it needs to have a credible strategy for minimizing the costs. | [19:12] |
| trinque: | better stated, for having budget for the costs. | [19:13] |
| diana_coman: | well, re perfectly rational, I can only hope that at some point you two stop triggering one another's antibodies or something; but anyways, this is aside the conversation at hand. | [19:14] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: from the conversation above, it seems that production of ~any software is explosively expensive by its very nature | [19:15] |
| trinque: | certainly | [19:15] |
| trinque: | to take an extreme case, microsoft has well enough resources to extrude a monstrously complex pile. | [19:16] |
| diana_coman: | an OS might be more obviously so perhaps because possibly even the lowest cost is already quite big in itself but other than that, the dangers are the same. | [19:16] |
| trinque: | on the other end, that TempleOS guy built one himself, with only his own time, and his mother's cooking | [19:16] |
| trinque: | yep, CS is probably bigger than the kernel, for example, right? | [19:17] |
| diana_coman: | cs + ps surely; I don't recall the numbers by heart re cs. | [19:17] |
| trinque: | in either case on the same order | [19:17] |
| diana_coman: | (and I actually cut it away from server and on the client it wasn't supposed to be on my back) | [19:18] |
| diana_coman: | myeah | [19:18] |
| trinque: | do you recall MP's "how to get rich" article? | [19:18] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: I think re dangers and costs we are quite clear and for that matter experience-informed enough; do realise though that dorion doesn't have that experience (nor the same temperament for that matter, heh) | [19:19] |
| trinque: | http://trilema.com/2013/how-to-live-to-be-rich/ | [19:19] |
| diana_coman: | ah, I recall that now; (a different one came to mind earlier on your prompt) | [19:20] |
| trinque: | sure, for all I know he thought he was doing the dutiful thing above. | [19:20] |
| trinque: | I'll work on the temper, am working on, etc | [19:20] |
| trinque: | but the advice there on budgeting applies here. | [19:20] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: there are a few questions I asked you and never got an answer on; can I get an answer of *some* sort - even if it's "that's an idiotic thing to ask because x"? | [19:21] |
| trinque: | if you're net-negative, declare bankruptcy now, which means dispose of your debts. | [19:21] |
| trinque: | sure, go ahead. | [19:21] |
| diana_coman: | the more baffling was re the OS series that you stopped abruptly ; here's part 1 and part 2 of the same | [19:23] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 06:56:44 diana_coman: ... description], I was expecting a *discussion of how V enters the picture*, followed by a summary and a spec. It's clear that something's not clearly expressed or at least not clearly enough for me - why does a discussion of how V enters the picture require an agreement of position re only-busybox-or-not? and furthermore, why would a discussion of V-in-OS depend on such a choice? | [19:23] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-14 17:52:48 diana_coman: trinque: what I don't understand is why wouldn't you finish that series since you started it and since you know what you want to say anyway? I don't see it chained to some choice (which I don't even think it's clear or possible to clarify *right now*) | [19:23] |
| diana_coman: | I still don't see a. why does discussion of V-in-OS stall on busybox-or-not or even anything else b. why not finish the series if you worked on it anyway | [19:24] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: and what do/did you make of MP's "make the market" (that was my q in here) | [19:26] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 17:52:58 diana_coman: dorion: that is one of them but not the one I had in mind; and it was precisely re "there's no market" "you MAKE the market" ; trinque , do you recall it? | [19:26] |
| diana_coman: | finally found at least part of the discussion thread though I recall it was more plainly put somewhere, hm. | [19:29] |
| ossabot: | (trilema) 2019-10-18 diana_coman: trinque: but if you make a business out of it then part and parcel is precisely bringing people in to use it ie create the market, no? | [19:29] |
| trinque: | must be obvious that I've been considering whether to leave tmsr for a long time. | [19:29] |
| trinque: | *had been, moot now. | [19:29] |
| trinque: | I stole some time from more important things to work on that OS series. | [19:29] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: the trouble with "obvious" is that it depends on people's assumptions; and I'd much rather not make more assumptions than I absolutely must - they are quite an expensive (and explosively expensive too, quite like OS work!) thing. | [19:30] |
| trinque: | it'd seem more worthwhile if there appeared to be hope of making it work. | [19:30] |
| trinque: | sure, totally reasonable. | [19:30] |
| trinque: | in regards to "make the market", if he'd said what that looked like, I would've gone after it. | [19:31] |
| trinque: | obviously I did not know. | [19:31] |
| trinque: | but it does smack of the kind of condescending shit I heard every time I asked stan for a picture of his bookcase | [19:31] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: heh, that's the second "obvious"... | [19:31] |
| trinque: | second d'oh too then! | [19:31] |
| diana_coman: | hm, do you equal mp's words with stan's? | [19:32] |
| trinque: | in that case, yes. | [19:32] |
| trinque: | or maybe he was also telling me it was "obvious" | [19:32] |
| trinque: | at any rate I don't think stan or mp owe me anything. | [19:32] |
| diana_coman: | that's pretty much it indeed; his obvious and your obvious. | [19:32] |
| trinque: | but it doesn't resolve the practicability for me that somebody else knows. | [19:33] |
| trinque: | and there, that's my actual reaction to the end of the republic | [19:33] |
| trinque: | and I can 100\% see how now I turn to dorion and piss upon him in the same manner. | [19:33] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: re the OS series, do I take it then that the work remaining for the 1/2 last parts is in fact not yet done and so ofc, whether they get written or not depends on whether you see a concrete use to spending that time or not? | [19:33] |
| trinque: | yeah, I'm not holding them like an asshole. they don't exist, except as various notes | [19:34] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: yes on all the above indeed; all right, from my pov, I think those conversations have done a lot to clarify where things are; fwiw I do *not* intend to either pies in the sky or daydreaming; I do however allow for people's inexperience and learning because I don't see what other option there is anyway, tbh. | [19:36] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: I can't say there's anything concrete/precise I can promise at this point re future developments; I'd ask you though to speak up at any time and doubly so if there's something that makes you think you're wasting your time here - because then either it turns out it is indeed that so you know quicker and waste less time or it turns out it's not that and so either way, it's a win. | [19:38] |
| trinque: | happy to keep these conversations going. | [19:39] |
| diana_coman: | cool; I'll be around as usual from 7pm UTC and hopefully once the dust settles, there can be some clearheaded looking around, taking stock and deciding on concrete next step forward. | [19:40] |
| diana_coman: | trinque: ah, can I have deedbot in there, indeed? | [19:41] |
| diana_coman: | in here* | [19:41] |
| diana_coman: | will go and get some sleep, will be back tomorrow. | [19:42] |
| trinque: | yep, I am working on this, which is why I joined several folks' channels | [19:42] |
| trinque: | need to just unwind a few more places where it's assumed there's only one chan | [19:43] |
| trinque: | goodnight | [19:44] |
| jfw: | I observe that the 15th has passed, at least by some yardsticks, and a transactions either from mp's 1334rdsG6UuzEXUep6wU3kj87U2U8FPA4M or to mike_c's 14C8P7sdcahZsV3oq1zmF9dj19ctv51ZNS (I don't know mod6's or other payees' addresses) exists about as much as my own weekly review. | [21:33] |
| ossabot: | (trilema) 2020-03-13 mp_en_viaje: what i'll do is, come the 15th ima sweep the address into one of the web wallets and pay the fellows from there (at their own risk). | [21:33] |
| ossabot: | (trilema) 2020-03-07 mp_en_viaje: jfw, my intention is to use https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/address/1334rdsG6UuzEXUep6wU3kj87U2U8FPA4M/ through your http://fixpoint.welshcomputing.com/2020/bitcoin-transactions-and-their-signing-1/?b=nears&e=completion#select to pay off http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-03-02#1958780 an' http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2020-03-02#1958773 ; do you want to schedule a time this coming week to work together on it, make the p | [21:33] |
| jfw: | diana_coman: I am no closer than this morning to enlightenment on - nevermind *why* he says it - how it could be that web wallets physically exist while the thing I offered does not. | [21:42] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 16:25:02 diana_coman: jfw, did you figure out why is MP saying you don't have a wallet service to offer, basically? | [21:42] |
| jfw: | Why or how would you say? | [21:42] |
| jfw: | and ftr, I wouldn't have expected him to trust a wot-newbie with 3 figures BTC, because of http://trilema.com/2016/the-mathematics-of-scamming/ at the very least; but I swept expectations aside once usg.mozooglechain was brought into it. | [21:48] |
| whaack: | diana_coman: http://ossasepia.com/2020/04/21/ossasepia-logs-for-15-Mar-2020#1021525 lol, I will forgoe the detailed time sheet for the week. I think I choose to occupy my time with her, but I know I may have walked into her web. She doesn't seem like a dependopotamus, at the very least she has her own | [22:57] |
| ossabot: | Logged on 2020-03-15 16:21:30 diana_coman: whaack: lolz, is it *that* time occupying that nothing else fits or what? anyways, set something concrete you'll deliver by next Sunday and do it. | [22:57] |
| whaack: | place, a job, and a shotgun. | [22:57] |
Comments feed: RSS 2.0