00:00:06 <sp3tt> because the factorial is based on multiplication which is based on addition
00:00:46 <sp3tt> No, mine is nicer.
00:01:21 <ehird`> HOW TO PROVE ANYTHING:
00:01:32 <ihope> You don't have x |- x as an axiom!
00:01:44 <ihope> Yay, modus ponens!
00:02:13 <sp3tt> I think, therefore I think!
00:02:27 <ihope> I win, therefore I win.
00:02:48 <sp3tt> No, i Always win... because... eh... LOOOK IT'S SUPERMAN
00:02:54 <ehird`> my lungs are gasping for air, and telling you people to keep the funny down
00:03:09 <ehird`> I think, therefore I think!
00:03:17 <ehird`> i shouldn't find that hilarious
00:03:18 <sp3tt> I am, therefore I win.
00:03:32 <sp3tt> I think, therefore you unexist.
00:03:50 <ihope> Hmm, something I find hilarious...
00:03:53 <ihope> Captain Shakespeare?
00:04:05 <ehird`> Captain shakespeare will rescue thou.
00:04:20 <ehird`> Enforced is another law.
00:04:49 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
00:05:15 <sp3tt> Obey Newton's laws or face elongation!
00:08:28 -!- calamari has joined.
00:09:35 <ihope> OPEN! NO, YOUR MOUTH!
00:09:39 -!- oerjan has joined.
00:09:55 <oklokok> oerjan: i had a question for you
00:09:58 <sp3tt> Kung Pow: Enter the Fist<3
00:10:01 <oklokok> just thought you might wanna know.
00:13:11 <ihope> This? http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kung_pow_enter_the_fisthot_shots/
00:13:40 <ihope> And will it be as good as this?
00:13:43 <ihope> Er, this: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kung_pow/
00:14:24 <ihope> Just like Daddy Day Camp isn't as good as this: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/daddy_day_care/
00:17:40 <oerjan> i cannot see you mentioning my name in the logs since i was last on
00:18:23 <oerjan> that base with equal digits thing?
00:18:32 <oklokok> for any n, is there a base in which pi's first n digits are the same
00:18:55 <oerjan> including the initial 3?
00:19:02 -!- immibis has joined.
00:19:05 <ihope> The first digit is the same as itself.
00:19:19 <oklokok> ihope: that's not what i mean
00:19:25 <oklokok> is there such a base for any n.
00:20:23 <oklokok> any means either of those i guess
00:20:33 <oerjan> any is one of english's subtle points
00:21:23 <ihope> Is there a case where it definitely doesn't mean "some"?
00:21:44 <ihope> (Help) I need anybody...
00:21:58 <oerjan> well, it is clearly impossible to include the 3, because 3.333... must approach 3 as the base gets large
00:22:27 <oklokok> so i just mean the decimals
00:22:35 <oklokok> hmm... is that the correct term
00:23:01 <oerjan> so let's look at 3.xxxxx... in base b
00:23:11 <ihope> Just the fractional part?
00:23:15 <ihope> Or possibly the decimal part?
00:26:21 <oerjan> fortunately that's what we want
00:26:55 <oerjan> since pi can be approximated as close as we want by a rational number, we can get that as close to pi as we want
00:28:28 <oklokok> i actually thought you either couldn't tell me the answer or couldn't explain it to me, but that's actually pretty obvious
00:28:57 <oklokok> so thanks, though i was actually telling you i had a question to you even though i didn't remember it just for the heck of it.
00:28:59 <oerjan> however there is a problem in that the closeness may still be too big compared to b
00:29:56 <oerjan> i.e. we could risk that 3.x is really close to pi, but still x is not the correct _next_ digit
00:31:23 <oerjan> because the approximation is still less precise than 1/b^2
00:31:43 <oklokok> for a while everything seemed so clear
00:31:55 <oklokok> and then you had to make me realize i hadn't gotten it.
00:32:37 <oerjan> this might be related to a pretty weird theorem i (vaguely ;)) recall about pi - let me look it up
00:36:32 <oklokok> actually, what i'd like to know even more is whether that is true for *any* irrational number
00:37:51 <oklokok> because that's *a* irrational number, and it's one of the most researched ones prolly
00:39:36 <oerjan> it is not however among the ones that are most easy to find digit properties for
00:39:59 <oklokok> for sqrt n you have a formula to get one digit at a time right?
00:40:09 <oklokok> i vaguely recall something like that
00:40:40 <oerjan> there is an algorithm for calculating square roots, it's not a formula i think
00:41:31 <oklokok> well yeah, algorithm, but anyway, a simple way to get digit by digit
00:42:05 <ihope> I know how to approximate it arbitrarily well.
00:42:08 <oklokok> err like get the digits one by one
00:48:35 <oerjan> i cannot seem to find the theorem but it _might_ imply you cannot get better than 17 digits for pi
00:52:28 <sp3tt> there is a digit extraction algorithm for sqrt(n)...
00:53:03 <sp3tt> very tedious though, I've tried it with pen and paper and after 5 digits or so it starts to get messy
00:56:21 * oerjan gives up trying to find it.
00:56:57 <oerjan> it's _something_ like: |pi - p/q| cannot be less than 1/q^17, but how the heck do you google for that?
00:57:45 * oerjan suddenly gets the brilliant idea of googling for pi-p/q :)
01:00:25 <oerjan> ah, that found http://www.math.niu.edu/~rusin/known-math/01_incoming/approximable
01:01:22 <oerjan> > I know that for irrational a there are infinitely many integer p and q such
01:01:22 <oerjan> > that |a - p/q| < q^-2
01:01:22 <oerjan> > and that in general you cannot do better than the exponent -2.
01:01:55 <oerjan> (and mentioned later, the golden ratio is the worst)
01:03:52 <oklokok> okay... so the answer to my question is "no"
01:04:12 <oklokok> ehird`'s intuition beat mine then.
01:04:35 <oerjan> for pi, http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/69162.html says q^-42 is the best known bound
01:08:15 <oerjan> but the first link implies it may really be around 8
01:14:35 <sp3tt> wouldn't be the worst approximation ever =)
01:17:05 <sp3tt> that is probably graham's number
01:20:24 * oerjan looks it up instead of blathering yet another vague recall
01:20:26 <oerjan> "Ramsey-theory experts believe the actual Ramsey number for this problem is probably 6, making Graham's number perhaps the worst smallest-upper-bound ever discovered."
01:20:46 <oerjan> (although my vague recall _was_ right)
01:21:48 <oerjan> oh. "More recently Geoff Exoo of Indiana State University has shown (in 2003) that it must be at least 11 and provided evidence that it is larger."
01:22:45 <oerjan> it would be ironic if someone proved the actual answer _is_ of the order of Graham's number
01:23:34 <SimonRC> I am creating an imaginary character for online use...
01:24:01 <SimonRC> I am not sure whether it should give any hint that it is imaginary.
01:25:13 <SimonRC> Since I have my real self in the same online group (though no connection has been suggested) I think I will keep it completely in-character.
01:25:38 <oerjan> darn, i thought you were talking about unicode characters :D
01:25:38 * SimonRC goes, but his client is still listening and logging.
01:41:39 <lament> a variation of the tree-in-a-forest problem:
01:41:51 <lament> if we keek SimonRC, does it matter that his client is "listening and logging"?
01:47:41 <oklokok> blargh why can't msn messenger record webcam... god i hate that program
01:49:43 <lament> my msn can't do webcam at all (not supported on mac)
01:50:19 <oklokok> are there programs that use the messenger protocol and can record webcam?
01:50:39 <oklokok> i can't exactly tell ppl i wanna record to change to scype...
01:50:49 <oklokok> (recording my gf, don't worry)
01:52:15 <oklokok> i guess it doesn't matter who i'm gonna record, why the fuck doesn't this thing support recording
01:53:13 <oklokok> i don't know anything about scype
01:53:34 <oklokok> i assume it allows recording but no one i know uses it
01:54:44 -!- ihope__ has joined.
01:56:54 -!- ihope has quit (Nick collision from services.).
01:56:56 -!- ihope__ has changed nick to ihope.
02:04:59 <pikhq> Nothing, although I can add something to miss.
02:05:00 <ihope> You missed it! It was the most amazing thing ever!
02:05:17 * pikhq proves the stupidity of argument ad Hitler. . .
02:05:42 <pikhq> Hitler thought that eating meat was terrible. Since Hitler was evil, vegitarianism is evil. QED.
02:06:19 * pikhq tries to find a citation for that
02:06:22 <oklokok> he couldn't eat meat, a medical thing
02:06:40 <oklokok> and that thinking eating meat is terrible thing is just propaganda
02:06:42 <ihope> I guess that's a form of thinking it terrible.
02:06:57 <oklokok> (i'm just repeating stuff i heard when i heard this conversation last...)
02:07:01 * ihope holds up a sign that says {{fact}}
02:07:20 <ihope> Now to bring it to some political speech.
02:07:24 * pikhq holds up a sign saying {{fact}}{{fact}}
02:07:41 <pikhq> Prove that you need a citation!
02:08:00 <oerjan> (or something like that)
02:09:20 <pikhq> Hmm. Apparently he ranged from "Meat is evil" to "Kill that cow, damn it, I'm hungry!"
02:09:48 <oerjan> that's how the deranged range
02:10:37 <pikhq> (citation: [[Vegitarianism of Adolf Hitler]])
02:11:23 <oerjan> fix link (Vegitarianism -> Vegetarianism)
02:17:33 -!- cherez has joined.
03:31:09 -!- Svenstaro has joined.
03:46:02 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
04:13:09 -!- ihope has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
04:17:55 -!- wellons has quit (Remote closed the connection).
04:33:46 -!- Sgeo has joined.
04:45:10 <RodgerTheGreat> some of you guys might like this: http://rodger.nonlogic.org/images/watchers.png
04:47:02 <oklokok> a bit too hard to see the texts at this hour :P
04:48:02 <oklokok> (they're reeeeeeeeeally small)
05:06:41 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit.
05:38:34 <pikhq> The rational numbers are a *subset* of the reals. . .
05:38:59 <pikhq> One would assume that a real would succeed at the same things that rationals do.
05:39:17 * pikhq just wants to be able to work with the set of *numbers* in his code. ;p
05:40:06 <Svenstaro> Why not just use improbable numbers?
05:40:45 <pikhq> You're right. sqrt(2) is ugly. :p
05:41:35 <bsmntbombdood> you don't need to be sqrt(2), just arbitrarily close to it
05:43:33 <pikhq> You want to know why I want to be able to do reals?
05:43:47 <pikhq> I want infinite storage, dammit.
05:44:06 <immibis> infinite storage is impossible
05:44:13 <pikhq> immibis: A real can store every number between -oo and oo.
05:44:18 <pikhq> Let me dream, at least.
05:44:40 <immibis> do you know anyone capable of making an infinitely big hard drive
05:44:44 <bsmntbombdood> no, a real can store every _real_ number between -oo and oo
05:44:48 <immibis> is it possible to get an infinite amount of iron
05:44:58 <immibis> and turn it into an infinite amount of bit
05:44:59 <immibis> and turn it into an infinite amount of bits
05:45:07 <immibis> which can store infinite data?
05:45:18 <pikhq> Is when I'm dreaming.
05:45:20 <bsmntbombdood> immibis: do you know anyone who has written an algorithm to solve an NP complete problem in P time?
05:46:42 <immibis> pikhq: you can spend your whole life gathering iron and silicon to make a hard drive and never get an infinite amount.
05:46:44 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit.
05:47:11 <immibis> every living thing in the universe could spend their whole lives gathering iron and silicon for you and never get an infinite amount.
05:47:23 <oklokok> bsmntbombdood: are you sure that's a valid proof?
05:47:42 <bsmntbombdood> oklokok: of course it's not, i was demonstrating immibis wrongness
05:47:44 <pikhq> immibis: I *want* reals, I'm not saying that it's at all possible. ;)
05:48:05 <oklokok> bsmntbombdood: sorry, i misunderstood what your point was
05:48:08 <oerjan> anyone who doesn't know the definition of P and NP is not qualified to speak about impossibility, period. >:)
05:48:35 <Svenstaro> Nothing is impossible, just improbable :P
05:48:53 <immibis> P and NP = probable and not probable?
05:49:03 <Sgeo> Solving the halting problem for turing machines with a turing machines...
05:49:09 <oklokok> omg that's like the basicest basics
05:49:18 <Sgeo> "<Svenstaro> Nothing is impossible, just improbable :P"
05:49:55 <oklokok> immibis: you gotta learn some basics, it hurts me if you don't know what those are :P
05:50:03 <oerjan> (deterministic) polynomial and non-deterministic polynomial
05:50:10 <pikhq> It hurts this high-schooler as well.
05:51:47 -!- immibis has left (?).
05:52:21 <pikhq> Maybe he left to learn?
05:52:36 * pikhq thought it was polynomial and non-polynomial. . . XD
05:52:49 * oklokok too, but let's not tell oerjan
05:53:12 <pikhq> Of course, I kinda assume 'deterministic' for both.
05:53:31 * oerjan crosses pikhq and oklokok off his list of people qualified to speak of impossibility >:)
05:53:45 <pikhq> oerjan: I'm 17, and willing to admit mistakes.
05:54:20 <pikhq> And, apparently, I'm wrong.
05:54:21 <oklokok> pikhq: i guess he'll be waiting for your enlightenment with an eraser in his hand
05:54:57 <pikhq> When 18, I also plan to be willing to admit mistakes.
05:55:23 <pikhq> Although I'll probably still be doing stupid stuff like quines.
05:55:36 <oklokok> i've been watching so much friends this week i can't really think at all right now.
05:55:54 * pikhq doesn't really *watch* TV
05:56:31 <pikhq> http://pikhq.nonlogic.org/quine.c My first quine in C, btw.
05:56:41 <oklokok> me neither, i just dl'd all friends and decided to watch them all.
05:58:42 <oklokok> i like the last episodes most
05:58:53 <pikhq> Thoughts on my stupid bit of Quinery?
05:59:35 <oklokok> like un-firstish episodes.
06:01:39 <oklokok> pikhq: that's a pretty normal quine :P
06:02:11 <oklokok> because i'd've'd to do it like that... and it seemed boring
06:02:40 <pikhq> It's also my first quine not taking advantage of Tcl's introspection. . .
06:04:04 <pikhq> Hmm, never mind. . .
06:04:40 <pikhq> My quine actually just rewrites the proc command in Tcl to store the "code" argument. . .
06:04:53 <oerjan> bsmntbombdood: you miss a ' i think
06:06:39 <oerjan> also, i think it should be ',x
06:06:45 <pikhq> [lambda x {$x $x}] [lambda x {$x $x}]
06:40:13 -!- Sgeo has quit ("Ex-Chat").
07:22:19 -!- Svenstaro has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
07:27:28 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving").
07:33:42 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving").
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:17:48 <lament> very bad quality music video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=A4cFYmsuZ60
08:28:27 -!- jix has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
08:38:45 -!- sebbu has quit ("reboot").
08:51:53 -!- jix has joined.
09:26:09 -!- sebbu has joined.
09:41:56 -!- RedDak has joined.
10:30:45 -!- jix has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
10:31:09 -!- jix has joined.
11:29:44 -!- ehird` has joined.
11:33:35 -!- jix has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep").
11:51:14 -!- Svenstaro has joined.
12:06:02 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection).
12:35:58 -!- jix has joined.
13:23:30 <SimonRC> pikhq: your quine is like the Thompson quine but ugly
13:27:29 -!- jix has quit ("CommandQ").
13:39:42 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
13:41:29 -!- ehird` has joined.
13:57:56 <SimonRC> "<pikhq> http://pikhq.nonlogic.org/quine.c My first quine in C, btw."
14:48:56 <SimonRC> sp3tt: being such good sci-fi, the Scifi Channel aren;t showing it.
14:49:13 <sp3tt> too bad it was cancelled :)
14:49:33 <sp3tt> I only have 10 episodes left
14:50:20 <SimonRC> wait, are you following it on SkyOne/Two?
14:50:38 <sp3tt> no, I'm downloading
15:34:55 -!- sebbu2 has joined.
15:53:46 -!- sebbu has quit (Connection timed out).
15:57:07 <ehird`> pikhq: that quine sucks
15:58:10 <ehird`> int main(){char *s="int main(){char *s=%c%s%c;}printf(s,37,s,37,10);return 0;}%c";printf(s,37,s,37,10);return 0;}
16:02:01 -!- SimonRC has changed nick to Outlook_Express_.
16:02:11 -!- Outlook_Express_ has changed nick to Sick_bastard.
16:02:33 -!- Sick_bastard has changed nick to SimonRC.
16:05:21 -!- ihope__ has joined.
16:05:39 -!- ihope__ has changed nick to ihope.
16:24:34 <ihope> Wait, did pikhq cite another wiki article 14 hours and 14 minutes ago?
16:34:47 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined.
16:38:30 <oklokok> RodgerTheGreat: i'm definately not going to 'hi' everyone, i have *some* decency
16:38:43 <oklokok> that'd be like an unbelievable flood
16:42:09 <ehird`> you did not use the macro!
16:52:10 <ehird`> someone give me an interesting fact about... base 21!
16:58:21 <ehird`> sam hughes says that a good plot for a first-contact story would be "hello, we are working in base 10 today. what about you?" and i agree.
16:58:42 <ehird`> aliens: "what do you mean pi starts 3, 1, 4? you are evidently fools! goodbye!"
17:00:56 <RodgerTheGreat> the example my math teacher always gave was that a group of aliens come to earth, claiming peaceful intentions. To confirm that the aliens are telling the truth, they ask the aliens how many of them there are on the ship
17:01:18 <RodgerTheGreat> the aliens respond 103, but when the humans count them, they find 67.
17:01:32 <RodgerTheGreat> knowing the aliens must be liars, the humans proceed to destroy the aliens
17:01:56 <RodgerTheGreat> but then, as a doctor is examining one of the corpses, he starts to look very worried
17:02:12 <RodgerTheGreat> "Sir," he says, "The aliens only have four fingers on each hand!"
17:03:06 <RodgerTheGreat> "And that's why a proper understanding of base notation is vital to the future of humanity"
17:05:14 <ehird`> there is at least a googol atoms in the universe right
17:05:18 <ehird`> its googolplex that overflows it?
17:05:47 <ehird`> i was thinking "base googol"
17:06:03 <ehird`> "g_64 is only 384729834723942394 digits!"
17:09:20 <ehird`> you know, i've just realised how much i hate idioms
17:10:41 <ehird`> well i hate everything that isn't logical in language!
17:11:11 <RodgerTheGreat> dogma isn't logical, and dead metaphors degrade the beauty and cleverness of language
17:12:54 <ehird`> the odd thing about lojban is how unalike it is to other languages
17:13:01 <ehird`> it isn't based in a SVO/VSO, etc. structure, for one
17:13:10 <ehird`> "selbri" is a pretty unique idea when it comes to languages
17:13:22 <oklokok> lojban is a lot like most languages imo
17:13:35 <oklokok> only place structure is different
17:14:03 <oklokok> i mean, argument place matters in lojban, whereas it rarely does in normal alngaueg
17:14:53 <ehird`> does quaternary have many interesting properties
17:15:33 <ehird`> the numeral system. that is
17:16:45 <ehird`> ON THE SUBJECT OF MATHEMATICS:
17:17:03 <ehird`> here is a stupid and crazy New Age-esque page on pi: http://www.spiritart.org/Numbers/Pi/
17:17:07 <ehird`> "Pi can be considered a very mystic number, as it bridges the linear world with the curved or circular world. Pi itself may be an incredible relevant value for the physical universe, and therefore this page is dedicated for it. "
17:17:33 <ehird`> "I cannot write about this yet, but I feel Prime-Numbers are living beings, not as we imagine them as deceased beings for a form and ideas of being human, but they, as all numbers, are conscious beings; and there is a way to address Prime-Numbers in an affirmation and discover their hidden nature which has not been yet discover or cover by the solely mathematical approach. As soon I find reference material or by my own experience I will
17:17:33 <ehird`> include this here on this page. "
17:20:14 <ehird`> "Especially the fibonacci-numbers with their strong connection to nature you can look at them as a prayer build by the names (invocation) of the names of the numbers making up the sequence. As we address human with their names, the fibonacci- numbers already manifested themselves in so many ways, that when we invoke them we honor and acknowledge their presence in all their manifestations.
17:20:14 <ehird`> One, One, Two, Three, Five, Eight, Thirteen, Twenty-One, . . . "
17:20:45 <ehird`> just absolute crazy stuff
17:31:35 <sp3tt> Hmm, lojban seems fun. Anyone got a textbook?
17:32:50 <ehird`> google lojban for beginners
17:34:30 <oklokok> http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/lojbanbrochure/lessons/book1.html
17:44:39 <ihope> "Pi also is considered a transcendental number (a mathematical term), it means it cannot be expressed by a ratio of two integers." No it doesn't.
17:45:03 <sp3tt> Well, it does imply that.
17:45:12 <sp3tt> But it's not what the word itself means.
17:48:20 <ihope> sqrt(2) isn't transcendental, but it cannot be expressed by a ratio of two integers.
17:49:46 <sp3tt> Transcendental \subset J \subset R \subset C \subset H
17:54:16 <ihope> J irrational, H quaternion, O octonion?
17:55:16 <ihope> You know, really, the number 7 is only needed for things like calculus and 1/7.
17:55:40 <ihope> Elsewhere, you only need 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
17:56:18 <ihope> And the occasional extension.
17:56:51 <ihope> Like x such that x^7 + x + 1 = 0.
17:57:00 <ihope> (And by x^7, I mean x*x*x*x*x*x*x.)
17:57:19 <ihope> Er, no. Not plus but minus x.
18:26:34 <sp3tt> I think the largest number used in the proof of fermat's theorem ins 12
18:27:12 <sp3tt> It should have been graham's number :(
18:31:10 <ihope> Yes, x^7 - x + 1 = 0.
18:32:21 <ihope> Though perhaps the nimbers are nicer.
18:32:47 <ihope> There's a nimber called 7, but it's not the same as the number 7.
18:33:08 <ihope> *7 removes some ambiguity and then adds some.
18:33:26 <ihope> But 7 is what it's called.
18:33:51 <ihope> I mean, 7 is what you call it when... um, actually, by that last sentence I didn't mean anything at all.
19:16:08 <ihope> Now, back to esoteric programming languages!
19:16:38 <ihope> Is there one that's elegant, fast and small?
19:18:43 <ihope> Oh, right, MiniMAX.
19:19:16 <ihope> Not elegant enough.
19:19:27 <ihope> The program counter is location 0!
19:20:23 <ihope> Something like BCT is nice if your computer has ADD.
19:20:52 <RodgerTheGreat> maybe something based a wrapping add to a specified location, a GOTO and self-modification?
19:20:56 <lament> man, non-open source programming culture is so weird.
19:21:05 <lament> like, efnet programming channels
19:22:00 <lament> different approach, different priorities
19:22:08 <lament> have you seen the dolphin smalltalk death announcement?
19:23:10 <lament> http://www.object-arts.com/content/blog/2007Aug10.html
19:23:23 <lament> read the next-to-last paragraph
19:24:02 <ihope> So MiniMAX x,y,z puts the current x in the previous z then adds 3 to the current y to determine the offset in words?
19:24:19 <RodgerTheGreat> http://rodger.nonlogic.org/images/watchersi.png <- on an unrelated note, here's an inked version of the comic I posted last night- somewhat better contrast on this one
19:27:03 <lament> "It simply will not happen! Both Blair and I dislike the Open Source movement intensely and we would rather see Dolphin gradually disappear into the sands of time than instantly lose all commercial value in one fell swoop."
19:30:31 <ihope> "Dislike the Open Source movement intensely"?
19:30:46 <ihope> What does he mean by "Open Source movement", exactly?
19:31:35 <RodgerTheGreat> I think he's talking less about the practice of open-source and more about the religion.
19:31:47 <lament> i think he's talking about the practice.
19:33:51 <ihope> The practice of making stuff open source?
19:35:57 <RodgerTheGreat> well, the practice of making things "open source" is just to release the source, period. You don't even have to license things for them to be open-source. The religion is the belief that developers are "morally obligated" (or similar) to make things both open-source and licensed under a free software license.
19:36:33 <RodgerTheGreat> there's significantly more to disagree with about the religion
19:36:42 <ihope> Yeah, the religion thing is silly, in my opinion.
19:36:53 <RodgerTheGreat> I can't see how you could intensely dislike the practice.
19:37:29 <ihope> As is anything that contradicts economic stuff in certain ways :-P
19:39:00 <RodgerTheGreat> it just occurred to me how amusing the statement "Never deal in absolutes" is.
19:40:16 <ihope> Never deal in whats?
19:41:21 <RodgerTheGreat> absolutes. like the linguistic equivalent of the mathematical "For All" symbol.
19:42:04 <RodgerTheGreat> http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/4/d/d4d49bead125261b226eaa867bd016ce.png
19:42:18 <ihope> Never deal in upside-down A?
19:42:29 <ihope> Never deal in anything?
19:42:31 <lament> RodgerTheGreat: no, just releasing the source doesn't make it open-source.
19:42:45 <lament> "open source" has a specific meaning and implies a free license
19:42:51 <lament> this isn't religion, this is what "open source" _means_
19:45:45 <ihope> Sort of like "never say never"?
19:45:54 <ihope> (Rather, "never say 'never'".)
19:46:04 <RodgerTheGreat> ihope: alright, let me try to explain this again. An absolute is a statement that makes a sweeping logical statement, like "Everyone that plays baseball uses steroids", or "Nobody in poland knows how to tie a square knot".
19:52:39 <ehird`> ihope: Except "never deal in absolutes" is an absolute, obviously
19:56:43 <ehird`> random sorta-esoteric-idea i've had going on in my head for ages:
19:57:01 <ehird`> a game (well - a toy. there's no objectives) called Lucid. You get a randomly generated character and setting, then have complete control over it
19:57:23 <ehird`> You could, for example, give a building legs (If the legs that you wanted were avaliable in the "catalog")
19:57:35 <RodgerTheGreat> ok. What variables in particular would you be able to control?
19:57:46 <ehird`> If something you want to give to something or similar isn't in the catalog, you can draw it, and some sort of simple-animation tool like a flash-for-dummies
19:58:02 <ehird`> then, you could even give it custom actions beyond a set of default ones by coding it in some sort of scripting language designed to be good for it
19:58:06 <ihope> Would the interface be intuitive as that for lucid dreaming?
19:58:17 <ehird`> RodgerTheGreat: most things
19:58:43 <ehird`> RodgerTheGreat: Gravity. Colour. Size. You could even change the script for a particular object
19:59:49 <ehird`> You could, for instance, if you have enough keyboard shortcuts, jump in the air very high, materialize a random dummy, make it explode into confetti with a confetti-producing-machine-gun, get out a pneumatic drill, go down quickly to land, get rid of the pneumatic drill, and hop on to a worm, which would go faster than the speed of sound./
19:59:56 <ehird`> Providing, of course, you set up some of that beforehand
20:00:14 <ehird`> I'm thinking of a multi-mode thing: you have keyboard shortcuts and some other fast ways of accessing the common options as-you-play
20:00:24 <ehird`> but you can also pause and get a rich interface where you can take all the time you want
20:00:48 <ehird`> basically it's a god game but you control more than the creatures - you control absolutely everything, and can create things the game designers didn't
20:01:49 <ehird`> ... it would, of course, be horribly complex to create
20:02:27 <ehird`> I sort of have the programming language in my head
20:03:54 <ehird`> well, it's hard to write an example without the enviroment of objects
20:04:01 <ehird`> but it's kind of like a cross between IO and smalltalk in syntax
20:04:32 <ehird`> instead of "object a(b, c)" (Io) or "object a withSomeLabel: b withAnotherLabel: c" it's "object a[b c]"
20:04:37 <ehird`> well, that or object a[b, c]
20:04:47 <ehird`> comma-less is ambigious i think
20:06:27 <ehird`> if-then-else is done like in Smalltalk: "true if{x}" returns "x call" (Note: {} is closure. [] can be omitted if the only argument is a closure), "false if{x}" returns false,
20:06:45 <ehird`> conditional if{2} else{1}
20:06:49 <ehird`> err, false if{x} returns true
20:07:09 <ehird`> presumably every method would ignore else
20:07:37 <ehird`> cond if{2} else{cond2 if{3} else{4}}
20:07:52 <ehird`> is "if (cond) { 2 } elseif (cond2) { 3 } else { 4 }"
20:08:56 <ehird`> "bool elseif[x, y]" is "bool else{x if[y]}"
20:08:59 <ehird`> but, yeah, you get the syntax idea
20:11:08 <ehird`> of course, you won't write full definition blocks much
20:11:14 <ehird`> since there'll be a visual interface
20:11:25 <ehird`> when making an object, you'll have a tree of all the different events it can recieve
20:11:27 <ehird`> in plain english names, etc
20:11:34 <ehird`> and you can just navigate to one and get a small textbox
20:11:55 <SimonRC> also Christianity --> Newspeak
20:11:56 <ehird`> so, basically, it's like smalltalk with the visual interface on steroids, but much simpler
20:11:57 <RodgerTheGreat> in a freeform system like that, a functional language might not be what you really want. Perhaps you could break the language into universal "rules" and "axioms", with objects carrying "properties" and "values"
20:12:14 <ehird`> RodgerTheGreat: That's not really functional what I have
20:12:17 <ehird`> it's more object-oriented
20:12:44 <ehird`> And universal "rules" and "axioms" are just properties (for e.g. gravity) or methods (for more advanced stuff) on some sort of Universe object
20:12:59 <SimonRC> note also: http://www.math.utah.edu/~palais/pi.html "Pi is wrong" Correct IMO
20:13:04 <ehird`> but overriding behaviour for single objects is *exactly* what happens in lucid dreams
20:13:12 <ehird`> "oh, i can fly but nobody else can"
20:13:18 <ehird`> "oh, this building can walk but none else can"
20:13:24 <ehird`> well hey, that's what happens
20:13:35 <SimonRC> I am not having much success with them yet
20:13:37 <ehird`> have you ever been lucid and went "ok, everything that is blue MUST BE PINK"
20:13:47 <ehird`> no, you probably went "ok, that blue thing MUST BE PINK"
20:13:54 <ehird`> i'm not exactly the master of getting lucid either
20:14:03 <SimonRC> I haven't managed to be lucid yet
20:14:04 <ehird`> but my current game model models it as well as i can think of
20:14:28 <ehird`> wait until you have a dream whose plot is you doing various reality checks
20:14:58 <ehird`> after you have done about 10, you will think "wait... i am doing reality checks... and they are returning that i am in a dream... yet what i am doing in the dream, for some reason, is reality checking! wait a minu-"
20:15:05 <ehird`> ^^ actually happened to me
20:15:15 <ehird`> i don't know why i dreamed about doing reality checks
20:15:31 <SimonRC> I can't remember to do them often enough
20:15:44 <ehird`> how do you get that far - dumb luck
20:15:50 <ehird`> you have to suddenly happen to have a dream about RCs
20:15:55 <ehird`> yeah it's not a very good way :)
20:16:18 <ehird`> http://www.lucidipedia.com/misc/index.php this site's wiki is drowning in methods
20:16:34 <ehird`> but anyway, i think Lucid might be even better than a lucid dream
20:16:42 <ehird`> i mean, there's some things that would be very hard to do in a lucid dream
20:16:44 <SimonRC> I was just using the everything2 guide
20:16:54 <ehird`> morphing the universe so that pi is a different value for example.
20:17:04 <ehird`> your brain probably has no idea what a universe with a different pi looks like :)
20:17:10 <sp3tt> that would be.. interesting
20:17:13 <ehird`> a computer program could have a good guess though
20:17:16 <SimonRC> have you seen the simplicity of some formulae for pi?
20:17:24 <ehird`> SimonRC: ok, visualize me a universe
20:17:29 <ehird`> then visualize it with a different pi
20:17:40 <ehird`> how about 5.123 recurring
20:17:51 <ehird`> if you can do that - i'm impressed
20:17:54 <SimonRC> it would have to be one where pi became the normal value at small scales
20:17:57 <ehird`> >now< do it when lucid dreaming and make the universe do that.
20:18:04 <SimonRC> I can just about do negative and positiv curvature
20:18:14 <ehird`> ok what about this - a 4-dimensional universe
20:18:24 <sp3tt> or even 9!-dimensional
20:18:37 <ehird`> i don't think lucid would be good in 3d
20:18:59 <ehird`> it'd be too fussy, and the graphics would either have to be very good (not as fun! you can easily tell that pink elephant is fake!) or look absolutely horrible
20:19:07 <ehird`> plus placing objects and stuff would be annoying
20:19:11 <ehird`> a cartoony-2d style would be nice, i think
20:19:14 <ehird`> not too cartoony though
20:19:27 <SimonRC> actually dreams are very hard to draw
20:19:42 <SimonRC> there are percepts in them that *do not correspond* to a visual stimulus
20:19:53 <SimonRC> like, objects that do not have a colour
20:20:04 <ehird`> i've never had a dream that has an object sans colour
20:20:08 <SimonRC> people don't dream in B&W, they mostly dream in *no colour*
20:20:24 <lament> I dream in color, and i suspect that everybody does.
20:20:39 <ehird`> although my dream recall isn't spectacular - everything is a little blurred and hazy
20:20:42 <ehird`> but i DO remember colours
20:20:51 <ehird`> colours like real life
20:21:09 <lament> SimonRC: dreams are very realistic
20:22:16 <lament> SimonRC: you just tend to not remember that
20:22:32 <ehird`> you are wrong, whatever you remember
20:22:42 <SimonRC> ehird`: how do *you* know?
20:22:46 <lament> SimonRC: you are wrong, just wait till you get a lucid dream and look around.
20:22:58 <ehird`> if you didn't dream in full realism you would be lucid every time
20:23:03 <ehird`> this is scientifically tested
20:23:08 <ehird`> although where i cannot recall
20:23:31 <SimonRC> so why do they make no sense?
20:23:48 <ehird`> because the mind isn't barraged by things like - say, physical constants?
20:24:23 <lament> ehird`: no, that wouldnt't explain why they're realistic
20:24:24 <ehird`> but perception is excellent in dreams
20:24:29 <SimonRC> that is a interesting definition of "realistic"
20:24:29 <ehird`> i mean perception, anyway
20:24:37 <ehird`> your perception is realistic
20:24:45 <ehird`> and it all sounds real
20:24:57 <SimonRC> the plots don't hang together
20:25:11 <ehird`> you mean, abrupt changes?
20:25:28 <lament> SimonRC: presumably because the dream-world is constructed at a level of consciousness which is capable of analyzing and modeling the physical world, but not of doing logic checks such as "but does this make sense"
20:25:37 <SimonRC> My near-lucidity AFAICT brings me into a slightly-conscious panicy non-thinking state
20:26:02 <ehird`> my lucid dreams so far have not been very convincing
20:26:05 <ehird`> i didn't get lucid enough
20:26:12 <SimonRC> gah that wiki reads like an advert
20:26:22 <ehird`> and also i only remember it blurred
20:26:32 <ehird`> although i can do the basic stuff like morphing stuff and flying and all that
20:26:42 <lament> yay, i got this audio library working and set up!
20:26:44 <SimonRC> I think I was actually seeing out of my real eyes in one of them, but it was at 10am
20:27:11 <ehird`> my lucid dreams are always right before i would normally wake up
20:27:21 <ehird`> like, i'll stop lucid dreaming half an hour before my alarm would go off
20:27:35 <ehird`> and i'm only lucid for one dream - the short dream before that
20:29:07 <SimonRC> Actually, there are *some* unrealistic sensations in dreams. when I read, I can really feel the strain of my brin inventing the text.
20:29:18 <ehird`> yes you can't read in lucid dreams
20:29:24 <ehird`> it's just impossible and nobody knows why.
20:29:32 <SimonRC> I keep checking my (digital) watch
20:30:11 <SimonRC> I can read slightly, but the text is inconsistent and I can feel myself making it up
20:31:01 <ehird`> did you notice the previous words changing while you read new ones? :)
20:31:04 <ehird`> infinite story generator!
20:31:40 <ehird`> "once upon a time there was a asdasd" "on a dark and stormy night tear col d asdasd"
20:31:47 <SimonRC> You know when a program is using up all your CPU, making your mouse respond poorly. reading feels all stiff like the mouse feels stiff.
20:33:19 <ehird`> so, what do you think about this game idea?
20:33:30 <ehird`> it would be hard to make; of course
20:33:42 <ehird`> but i think the end product would be mind-exploding-awesomeness
20:36:12 <ehird`> especially if you could export/import just about everything
20:36:58 <lament> now, i want to write a program that needs microphone input, and my computer doesn't have a microphone....
20:38:22 <ehird`> do you think? really? :p
20:39:19 <ehird`> i got the idea for Lucid from the Spore demo and http://www.official-linerider.com/play.html linerider
20:39:30 <ehird`> sort of as a combination of those taken out of control
20:39:49 <lament> it's a bit of a pain to debug. I have to compile it, upload it somewhere, and then download and run it on my friend's computer (which doesn't have any devtools)
20:40:30 <ehird`> you could...get a microphone
20:42:37 <oklokok> spore sounds like a game i might actually want to try
20:44:36 <SimonRC> (I just remembered the most irritating one though: I was using the power of my mind to change reality, and I failed to notice I was dreaming! Gah!)
20:46:12 <ehird`> i wonder if lucid was released today, on all the major platforms, with not-too-much hardware requirements, if it would sell well
20:46:19 <ehird`> i think it wouldn't, because today's games market isn't creative
20:46:33 <ehird`> it wants there to be 1 way to complete the game, and it wants to be shown that way
20:46:40 <ehird`> it wants to be entertained only on a predefined path.
21:02:26 <lament> admittedly it does sound terribly boring
21:05:25 <RodgerTheGreat> the most striking aspect of my dreams, to me, is the dialogue. It's particularly interesting whenever someone starts to explain things (which happens quite often in my dreams.)
21:05:43 <ehird`> but you can do anytthiiiiiinnnggg
21:06:25 <RodgerTheGreat> visually, my dreams are usually either strikingly realistic or highly abstract (I can recall 2d dreams).
21:06:59 <ehird`> i barely have any dialog in my dreams
21:07:09 <ehird`> beyond 3 or so muffled words
21:07:26 <ehird`> 2d dreams... what was it like?
21:07:37 <ehird`> did you have 1px of vision and black at each side or was the 1px of vision stretched out?
21:08:40 <ehird`> i wonder what a lucid third-person dream would be like
21:12:10 <SimonRC> well that wiki partially contradicted the everything2
21:13:33 <ehird`> lament: well why do you think Lucid would be boring?
21:24:15 <ehird`> i wonder how long Lucid would take to make
21:24:19 <ehird`> years and years and years
21:24:23 <ehird`> duke nukem forever-years
21:24:40 <SimonRC> Many games have some kind of restriction or thing that is trying to stop you.
21:25:04 <ehird`> Lucid is more a toy than a game :)
21:25:08 <ehird`> there are no objectives
21:25:11 <ehird`> apart from to have fun
21:25:28 <ehird`> you could, of course, use the editor to code an objective
21:25:37 <SimonRC> How will it be different from single-person Second Life?
21:25:46 <ehird`> it'll be 2d, and have much less restrictions
21:25:54 <ehird`> and you'll be able to completely modify everything
21:25:57 <ehird`> gravity, universe code, everything
21:26:04 <ehird`> if it's there, it's modifiable
21:26:07 <SimonRC> will things take a fraction of a second to render once they cme on-screen?
21:26:09 <ehird`> and you can create new things too
21:26:20 <ehird`> probably not too noticable though
21:26:27 <ehird`> .3 seconds when you first spawn them
21:26:30 <ehird`> then it'll all be instant
21:26:35 <ehird`> but, of course, the game will pause for those .3 seconds
21:26:39 <SimonRC> It should just be slightly noticeable, maybe
21:26:40 <ehird`> so any timing isn't destroyed
21:26:56 <ehird`> that doesn't give the impression of a universe you can morph in realtiem
21:27:17 <SimonRC> Ehn I am semi-lucid, i can tell that some things idon't appear until I looked for them
21:27:21 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:27:42 -!- ehird` has joined.
21:27:47 <SimonRC> I am lacking sleep, and it is 21:27.
21:27:49 <ehird`> you can code objectives
21:27:57 <ehird`> you could code some simple AI objects, and some global triggers, and boom - catch the flag or whatevr
21:28:15 <SimonRC> (I realise, excitement is also needed.)
22:09:36 -!- Sgeo has joined.
23:12:13 -!- test_ has joined.
23:20:22 -!- oerjan has joined.
23:25:46 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
23:26:24 -!- test_ has changed nick to ehird`.
23:45:43 -!- sebbu2 has quit ("@+").
23:54:33 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).