00:02:22 <pikhq> augur: I was wondering about your opinions on the topic, and if you could read past the somewhat stupid article and tell me whether or not it had any... Useful meaning.
00:03:01 <augur> human language is far more complex than just any silly little thing that shows that monkeys have "prefixes"
00:03:06 <augur> as if this is surprising to begin with
00:03:25 <lament> ##philosophy is discussing language as well, and their discussion is even more inane
00:04:40 <augur> philosophers are often completely ignorant of linguistics in any real sense.
00:04:59 <lament> i don't think the people there are philosophers, i think they're just trolls
00:15:19 <pikhq> ... Someone claimed that the Piraha don't have a language?!
00:23:50 -!- Pthing has quit (Remote closed the connection).
00:36:23 <lament> hey, I heard Piraha don't have a language..
00:38:05 <uorygl> The Piraha don't have a language? Interesting; I'll make note of that.
00:41:49 <lament> I don't have a language, so I have to speak English instead
00:49:27 <uorygl> ¿No tienes una lengua? Yo pensaba que hablabas... I dunno.
00:49:59 <uorygl> Finnish or Spanish o algo.
00:54:21 <lament> es que no tengo mi propia idioma, solo hablo los de los demás
00:57:19 -!- coppro has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
00:59:40 <uorygl> Tampoco yo tengo mi propia idioma; inventar una idioma es difícil y otros no me comprenderían.
01:01:05 <uorygl> A menos que se basa en griego o algo.
01:02:11 <uorygl> (Que siempre he querido hacer, inventar una idioma basado en griego.)
01:02:29 <uorygl> (Podría llamarla "griego".)
01:08:43 <pikhq> uorygl: Mi pensas ke vi bezonas studadi Esperanton.
01:09:04 -!- ais523 has joined.
01:09:30 <uorygl> It would be nice if I knew how to ask how to say stuff in Esperanto in Esperanto.
01:11:23 <pikhq> La vorto "foo" en Esperanto estas kion?
01:11:40 <pikhq> (... I think; my Esperanto isn't *that* good.)
01:11:55 <uorygl> Also to ask the meaning of an Esperanto thing.
01:14:53 -!- Asztal has joined.
01:15:11 <uorygl> I guess that would be 'La vorto "bezoni" en anglo estas kion?'
01:15:33 <uorygl> And I'm sure it would be fine to say 'Kion estas la vorto . . .'
01:16:13 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
01:16:15 <pikhq> And answering your question, "should" or "ought to".
01:17:04 <uorygl> Wiktionary says it's "needs to".
01:17:42 <pikhq> You're right. 'Tis late.
01:18:43 <uorygl> Remind me how the letter V is pronounced.
01:19:09 <ais523> like F, but you put your top teeth on top of your bottom lip while you say it
01:19:16 <ais523> and you end up with a buzzier sound as a result
01:19:26 <ais523> also, you let your throat resonate
01:19:30 <ais523> so V has a pitch whereas F doesn't
01:20:27 <uorygl> So it's pronounced like a V, in other words.
01:24:19 <ais523> oh, I was explaining in English
01:24:22 <ais523> I don't know about Esperanto
01:24:42 <ais523> I'd just assumed you'd forgotten how to pronounce it, it's not like it's used all this often
01:24:55 <ais523> nor like it's the sort of thing that the sort of people who typically hang out here would particularly need to remember
01:25:49 <uorygl> So you pronounce your Fs bilabially?
01:26:10 <ais523> it's too early in the morning to remember what "bilabially" means
01:27:00 <uorygl> In a manner involving both lips.
01:28:33 <fizzie> Technically, then, it would be very hard to pronounce anything non-bilabially without removing one of the lips, because they always affect how the sound radiates out.
01:28:50 <uorygl> Yes, but only minorly.
01:30:17 <fizzie> Vocal synthesizers still tend to have a lip radiation model. (Of course my viewpoint is the speech recognition one, not the linguistic one.)
01:30:36 -!- Pthing has joined.
01:31:31 <pikhq> ais523: It's roughly the same phoneme in Esperanto.
01:32:57 <uorygl> Says Wikipedia: "Mia kontribuo estas modesta sed mia subteno estas sincera."
01:34:00 <uorygl> Says another Wikipedia: "Mi cantidad es pequeña pero mi apoyo es sincero."
01:34:47 <uorygl> Says another: "My amount is little, but my support is sincere."
01:35:20 <uorygl> What a coincidence that three different donors with the same name should donate the same amount on the same date with messages that are word-for-word translations of each other.
01:36:38 <ais523> same person, presumably they just translated the messages
01:36:58 <uorygl> I wonder what the original was.
01:37:11 <uorygl> The guy's name is Yizhao Lang, so probably English. >.>
01:37:11 <fizzie> Maybe the donation form asks for messages in all the Wikipedia languages? To keep the less clever donators out.
02:21:42 -!- Gracenotes has joined.
02:41:58 -!- Gracenotes has quit (Remote closed the connection).
03:06:54 -!- quantumEd has joined.
03:36:16 -!- oerjan has joined.
03:37:50 <oerjan> <augur> oerjan: monkey "languge"? because not even human language is turing complete.
03:41:02 <oklofok> well if you don't understand his complicated linguistic babbles, you could just ask.
03:41:17 * oerjan swats oklofok -----###
03:41:59 <quantumEd> what does it mean to talk about human language in that way?
03:42:02 <oerjan> you misread the *WHOOSH* target
03:42:09 <oklofok> i mean helpless people are the ones you want to swat
03:42:28 <oerjan> _clue_less, oklofok, clueless
03:42:40 <oerjan> well, and willfully malignant
03:42:53 <oklofok> my will is full of malignant stuff
03:43:23 <oklofok> it's even worse puns than usual day
03:44:46 <oklofok> blah, i don't have a printer, can someone print these papers for me, scan them, and email them to me?
03:44:47 <oerjan> hm wait it's a US/british thing
03:45:25 <oerjan> you don't have a print to file option?
03:45:38 <oklofok> so willful would in fact only mean what i interpreted it as, in us english?
03:46:07 <oerjan> the reverse. if it is even that simple
03:46:45 <oerjan> those us/british spelling differences aren't always as clearcut as the dictionaries would seem to imply
03:47:01 <ais523> is there no way to open a 1 GB uncompressed tar file on Windows?
03:47:10 <ais523> without installing software?
03:47:25 <oerjan> you should write one - in feather, naturally
03:47:43 <oklofok> oerjan: printing to file doesn't help, i need the stuff on paper
03:47:44 <ais523> and, given that there isn't, why would anyone distribute Windows software in that form?
03:48:27 <oklofok> ais523: to get the thing in one file?
03:48:35 <ais523> they could have used .zip, though
03:48:40 <ais523> or, well, anything Windows actually handles
03:49:07 <oklofok> i thought it just had some sort of compressed folder thing of its own
03:49:21 <ais523> I thought you used Windows
03:49:22 <oklofok> i probably won't know tomorrow either
03:49:27 <ais523> or am I muddling you with someone else?
03:49:57 <oklofok> i'm just not interested in how specific programs work
03:50:27 <oklofok> unless the details feel theoretically interesting to me
03:50:49 <oklofok> but i recall compressing a folder once
03:50:59 <ais523> "new compressed folder" just creates a zip file
03:51:08 <fizzie> "Nowadays" is a bit stretching it, given that (source: Wikipedia) Windows has included zip file support (under the "compressed folders" terminology) since 1998.
03:51:31 <ais523> that's not very many versions of Windows, though
03:51:45 <oklofok> win98 is what i know most about, probably
03:51:47 <fizzie> 98, ME, XP, 2003, Vista, 7.
03:52:39 <fizzie> It's more of a server thing, I think.
03:53:14 <fizzie> Windows Server 2003 is the official name. But it's still arguably a version of Windows.
03:53:31 <oklofok> oh that actually does sort of ring a bell
03:53:48 <oklofok> which is weird, i'm not a serverologist
03:54:23 <fizzie> It's there sort-of between XP and Vista. The internal version numbers are 5.2.something.
03:54:57 <oklofok> xp and vista are both 5.2.something?
03:55:05 <ais523> vista's 6.0, Win7's 6.1
03:55:14 <fizzie> XP is 5.1.something, as far as I know; and Vista's 6.x.
03:55:24 <ais523> (I remember that precisely /because/ it's so ludicrous)
03:55:36 <fizzie> It's a bit bizarre that 7 is not 7 when it easily could've been.
03:55:45 <oklofok> would've been kinda weird if they'd had the same whole number for vista and xp
03:55:54 <oklofok> err whole number isn't a very good term for that is it
03:56:00 <ais523> apparently the reason is to support broken programs that check the version number with == rather than >=
03:57:16 <oklofok> was the whole point just the pun?
03:59:26 <oklofok> the other one is the watch thing?
03:59:42 <oklofok> wanna break that down for me, i don't think it quite works
04:00:29 <fizzie> Film the one: "The Core is a 2003 science fiction disaster film -- concerns a team that has to drill to the center of the Earth and set off a series of nuclear explosions in order to restart the rotation of Earth's core." Film the other: "Sunshine is a 2007 British science fiction film -- with the Earth in peril from the dying Sun, the crew is sent to reignite the Sun with a massive stellar bomb, a nuclear device with the equivalent mass of Manhattan Island."
04:00:33 <fizzie> When in doubt, blow it up.
04:01:40 <ais523> heh, I never noticed that my home dir was the same on the Windows and Linux systems here
04:02:07 <oerjan> there is also a film about prevent the sun from blowing up, or something
04:03:14 <oklofok> i don't see what sunshine has to do with this
04:03:27 <oerjan> oklofok: also the subtitle pun
04:03:31 <oklofok> why isn't there a proof for these jokes, annoying trying to reverse-engineer them
04:03:47 <oerjan> and the hovertext but i don't think that's different from the main one
04:04:44 <fizzie> Sunshine is the film the xkcd description most reminds me of. Though maybe that's only because I've seen it and not seen that The Core film.
04:05:27 <oklofok> well in the hovertext "happening on my watch" works (barely imo), in the actual comic i don't think the watch thing works at all
04:05:49 <oklofok> i tend to need some instructions for this stuff
04:05:51 <oerjan> oklofok: you need to reread it i guess
04:06:29 <oerjan> and by that i mean everyone
04:06:45 <oerjan> since you cannot get it before the end pun is revealed
04:07:40 <oerjan> that message into the phone is a bit amusing
04:08:28 <oklofok> but the thing is that guy is *for* daylight saving, is his point he wants to get to use the daylight saving feature on his watch?
04:09:28 <oklofok> the phone message is a side joke referring to the fact movie people are pretty, afaiu, if it's a joke about the sun being hot, i don't understand it at all.
04:09:51 <oerjan> oklofok: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FridgeLogic (MWAHAHA)
04:10:55 <oklofok> it's weird how reluctant people are to explain jokes properly, don't you want me to share the good laugh! :\
04:11:24 <oerjan> didn't you read the MWAHAHA
04:11:57 <oerjan> oklofok: puns don't work if you don't mostly get them yourselves?
04:12:41 <oerjan> that was a rhetorical question, you're not supposed to question it!
04:13:29 <oklofok> i was about to ask if there was a specific pun in that, but maybe i'll leave the subject of me being dense for now ;)
04:15:01 <oklofok> okay i guess i finally understand how tvtropes can be addictive
04:15:19 <oklofok> i guess the random articles i've tried to get hooked on didn't have enough terms
04:15:36 <oklofok> terms need to be checked of course
04:15:49 <oklofok> "what's this tomato surprise now?"
04:17:05 <oerjan> see you again on monday, then
04:19:19 <oerjan> are you one of those people who can eat just one peanut, or something?
04:21:16 <oerjan> good. i was beginning to question your humanity, there
04:27:40 -!- ineiros has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
04:43:43 <ais523> why question that which you know does not exist?
04:45:29 <oerjan> i must not have got the memo
04:50:15 -!- ineiros has joined.
04:52:03 <oklofok> is there a tvtrope about characters never fucking telling someone "i'll explain this later" when someone starts asking something, but they really need to do something
04:52:20 <oklofok> happens in pretty much everything i watch, i'm like "tell him to fucking ask you tomorrow"
04:54:08 <oklofok> well, except in rare cases, doesn't always work, although that never seems very plausible, sure people can say something like "you always say that", but, well, if that's true, then maybe the characters should've been less crappy friends in the past.
04:54:25 <oklofok> should be *except in rare cases;
04:54:56 <oklofok> also "no seriously this is life or death, i'll explain this tomorrow at 12:00"
04:56:20 <oklofok> ...i mean that would definitely work, not sure it was clear.
05:18:13 <oklofok> oerjan: okay took almost an hour of my time
05:18:51 -!- kar8nga has joined.
05:19:04 <oklofok> wikipedia surfing is much more dangerous though
05:19:49 <oklofok> that's just because you already know everyhing
05:20:18 <oklofok> or possibly because you don't want to know everything... well might be a bit of a stretch
05:20:25 <oklofok> well, have to go clean dog vomit ->
05:24:20 -!- oerjan has quit ("Or both!").
05:34:59 <fizzie> So you cleaned dog vomit or both? What's the other thing?
05:36:49 <oklofok> actually there were 4 puddles of vomit
05:40:01 -!- OxE6 has quit.
06:08:54 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: 101 (Network is unreachable)).
06:09:20 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
06:19:28 <ais523> in most situations, holding someone's eyelids open, then shining bright lights into their eyes, then asking them lots of questions
06:19:39 <ais523> would be considered a torture, or at least a really nasty interrogation
06:19:45 <ais523> so why are opticians allowed to get away with it?
06:20:42 <oklofok> i've heard similar arguments about dentists
06:22:48 -!- lifthrasiir has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
06:26:24 -!- lifthrasiir has joined.
06:28:47 -!- augur has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
06:42:07 -!- Slereah_ has joined.
06:42:15 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)).
07:00:39 <quantumEd> "Roger Penrose is the king of bullshit. He's got a fucking PhD in bullshit (and mathematics). However, since he actually understands quantum mechanics, he had to find another rug to sweep the details under: quantum gravity."
07:05:23 <oklofok> because you agree, because you don't, or other?
07:09:37 -!- FireFly has joined.
07:20:24 <quantumEd> "Quantum computers are not known to be able to solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time."
07:27:37 <AnMaster> that doesn't seem quite true from what I remember
07:27:47 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote closed the connection).
07:44:56 -!- coppro has joined.
07:51:25 -!- coppro has quit ("I am leaving. You are about to explode.").
07:52:41 <Gregor> That statement needs clarification.
07:52:53 <Gregor> Quantum computers are not known to be able to solve /all/ NP-complete problems in polynomial time.
07:53:04 <Gregor> There are NP-complete problems which are solvable in polynomial time by quantum computers.
07:55:39 <oklofok> do you know the definition of np-completeness?
07:56:15 <oklofok> or can't quantum computers do polynomial time reductions in polynomial time
07:56:18 <Gregor> It's NP-complete if it's in NP and it's NP-hard. It's NP-hard if all problems in NP can be reduced to it.
07:56:37 <Gregor> When I say the definition, clearly it's stupid to think that some NP-complete problems are and some aren't X-D
07:56:40 <Gregor> Didn't think that one through :P
07:56:55 <Gregor> Well, certainly some NP problems are solvable in polynomial time on a quantum computer.
07:57:00 <oklofok> yeah remembering stuff is dangerous
07:57:08 <oklofok> yes, like doing nothing :P
07:57:30 <Gregor> Fleh, some NP-P problems.
07:58:17 <oklofok> i can't find a reason to laugh at that, so it's probably true.
07:58:35 <quantumEd> if someone finds a quantum algorithm to do NP-hard problems then did they prove P=NP?
07:59:01 <quantumEd> if they find an quantum algorithm to solve NP problems in P
07:59:17 <oklofok> well can polynomial time runs on a quantum computer be simulated by polynomial runs on a tm?
07:59:24 <Gregor> They just prove that quantum computers are more powerful than they thought.
07:59:35 <quantumEd> more powerful than a turing machine?
07:59:50 <Gregor> Not more powerful per se
07:59:56 <oklofok> if they can, then that would prove P=NP, because you'd have an algorithm to solve the problem in polynomial time, just simulate the quantum algo.
07:59:56 <Gregor> But able to compute more in less time.
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:00:17 <quantumEd> since everyone seems to think P <> NP, then the reasonable assumption is that quantum computers are stronger than normal computers?
08:00:17 <oklofok> Gregor: the question was mostly socratic method, i think
08:00:43 <quantumEd> oklofok: my questions? They were not socratic I was genuinely asking
08:00:47 <Gregor> quantumEd: In the sense that they can compute things in lower time bound, not in that they can compute more overall.
08:00:57 <oklofok> quantumEd: no i mean my question about the polynomial runs
08:01:07 <Gregor> T.M.s are still valuable as a representation of all that can be computed, Q.C.s can just compute it faster.
08:01:10 <oklofok> Gregor answered it, i was sort of trying to make you answer your own question
08:02:22 <quantumEd> even if it can only compute the same things.. it's still stronger than a turing machine though?
08:02:26 <oklofok> quantumEd: afaiu the quantum computing model is somewhere between determinism and nondeterminism, i haven't seen a formal definition for that stuff, and sadly i don't understand anything but that.
08:02:32 <quantumEd> well it's still a TM complexity class isn't it.....
08:02:35 <oklofok> anything that isn't formal
08:02:57 <Gregor> It's not more powerful, it's just faster. At least by the definition of computational power I'm used to.
08:04:05 <quantumEd> so can you make a random number generator on a quantum computer?
08:04:15 <oklofok> quantumEd: it's just as strong in the turing reduction sense, less strong using other reductions, like a polynomial time reduction, at least nondeterministic tm's
08:05:01 <Gregor> Now that's an interesting point ... kinda. Quantum computers may be able to produce truly random numbers, which could arguably make them more powerful than a T.M. since the problem "produce a completely-random number" can be run on them but not a T.M.
08:05:05 -!- `Fuco` has joined.
08:05:17 -!- `Fuco` has changed nick to Fuco.
08:05:30 <quantumEd> I'm still confused about the P vs NP thing
08:05:52 <quantumEd> it can only compute tthe same set as the turing machine... but it can do it faster: Without proving P=NP
08:06:34 <oklofok> np doesn't mean you do things faster
08:06:49 <oklofok> it means you do them in polynomial time in a different model of computation
08:07:06 <Gregor> Specifically, nondeterministic Turing machines.
08:07:30 <oklofok> we know the actual algorithms you can write are the exact same, but in the known reductions, nondeterministic algorithms just map to deterministic algorithms that take a fuckload of time.
08:07:47 <quantumEd> Am I getting mixed up between computational models and complexity classes?
08:08:38 <oklofok> usually we define complexity classes as classes of languages that have some properties
08:08:48 <oklofok> these properties can involve different computation models
08:09:20 <quantumEd> but there's quantum complexity classes
08:09:21 <oklofok> like the property defining P is "the problem of whether w \in L can be solved in polynomial time with a deterministic turing machine"
08:09:35 <quantumEd> why do they exist? I mean aren't the nomal complexity classes good enough?
08:10:08 <oklofok> if the quantum complexity classes are not equal to any known complexity class, but they are studied, why not give them a name?
08:10:24 <quantumEd> well why aren't they equal to the other classes
08:10:32 <quantumEd> how can a new model of computation lead to new complexity classes
08:11:03 <oklofok> for the same reason that it's not necessarily true that P = NP
08:11:04 <quantumEd> it is just to give a more fine grained characterization so that we can observe the difference in 'speed' like that
08:11:11 <oklofok> because we define the steps the machine can take differently
08:11:16 <quantumEd> (between quantum computers and turing machine)
08:11:31 <oklofok> so differently, that a polynomial amount of steps in the other can't necessarily be translated into a polynomial amount of steps in the other
08:13:57 <oklofok> also there's probabilistic machines, which afaik give us completely separate classes again
08:14:24 -!- AnMaster has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:24 -!- Fuco has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:24 -!- kar8nga has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:24 -!- sebbu has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:25 -!- HackEgo has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:25 -!- lament has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:25 -!- uorygl has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:26 -!- Leonidas has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:26 -!- Pthing has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:28 -!- dbc has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:28 -!- olsner has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:28 -!- Cerise has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:28 -!- yiyus has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
08:14:55 <oklofok> i don't really know much complexity theory, it's fascinating, but we don't have courses about it atm, and i don't really have much time for anything outside courses and irc
08:15:02 <quantumEd> but if it's just a language why are the different
08:15:21 <oklofok> a prof did tell me today he might give a course in recursion theory if i managed to recruit more people interested in it
08:15:32 <oklofok> quantumEd: it's a class of languages
08:15:43 <oklofok> a specific machine recognizes some language
08:15:55 <oklofok> we define a class of them by taking all possible machines and seeing what they can do
08:16:22 <oklofok> usually given some restriction, like finite termination, termination on positive instances, termination in polynomial time...
08:16:45 <oklofok> oh and by class i just mean a set
08:16:46 <quantumEd> termination in polynomial time????
08:17:25 -!- Pthing has joined.
08:17:25 -!- Fuco has joined.
08:17:25 -!- kar8nga has joined.
08:17:25 -!- sebbu has joined.
08:17:25 -!- AnMaster has joined.
08:17:25 -!- Leonidas has joined.
08:17:25 -!- HackEgo has joined.
08:17:25 -!- lament has joined.
08:17:25 -!- uorygl has joined.
08:17:27 <oklofok> termination in polynomial time. that's how P is defined, there's some polynomial that bounds the computation steps for an input of size n
08:18:06 -!- dbc has joined.
08:18:06 -!- yiyus has joined.
08:18:06 -!- olsner has joined.
08:18:06 -!- Cerise has joined.
08:19:23 <oklofok> P is defined as the set of all such languages L that there is some machine M that recognizes exactly L, and there's a polynomial p such that the machine M always halts in p(|w|) steps or less
08:19:51 <oklofok> oh and the polynomial can be specific to the machine M
08:20:03 <oklofok> we define it as a deterministic turing machine in the case of P
08:20:16 <oklofok> in the case of NP, we take the exact same definition, but use nondeterministic turing machines
08:20:32 <oklofok> well i'm not sure what it's supposed to do with negative instances
08:20:46 <oklofok> as i said i don't know any complexity theory
08:21:16 <quantumEd> which replaces the turing machine with a quantum machine
08:21:18 <oklofok> but in any case it must recognize exactly the correct instances, and if the instance is positive, then it must halt in polynomial time.
08:21:36 <quantumEd> the question P = NP or QP = NP don't make sense.....
08:21:44 <quantumEd> since it's for different machines how can you compare
08:21:59 <oklofok> and probabilistic P, where you also have some sort of details about probabilities with which it succeeds
08:22:07 <oklofok> P = NP makes sense, these are just sets of languages
08:22:44 <oklofok> p contains stuff like {{"a", "b"}, a*b*c*, {"a", "aa", "aaa", ...}, ...}
08:22:51 <oklofok> np also contains some languages
08:22:57 <oklofok> we just ask whether they contain the same languages
08:23:11 <oklofok> (where a*b*c* is a regexp defining a language)
08:23:30 <quantumEd> what's the definition of a language? A set of strings?
08:23:32 <oklofok> complexity classes are sets of languages which are sets of words which are sequences of characters
08:23:48 <quantumEd> alright then I suppose the questions make sense
08:24:00 <oklofok> words must be finite, languages and classes can be infinite
08:24:18 <oklofok> in fact a language is considered trivial if it's finite.
08:24:51 -!- ais523 has joined.
08:25:15 <ais523> ugh, this laptop is getting more and more broken
08:25:21 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
08:25:30 <ais523> now the screen frame has got deformed somehow, and the screen doesn't shut as a result
08:25:53 <quantumEd> so is there a proof that NP <> QP?
08:26:03 <quantumEd> I wonder if I invented QP or if that's a real one...
08:27:29 <quantumEd> QMAM: Quantum Merlin-Arthur-Merlin Public-Coin Interactive Proofs
08:27:49 <oklofok> i don't know the answer, but i think NP is a superset of QP, and QP is a superset of P, in which case we couldn't know, because then we'd also know P!=NP
08:28:38 <quantumEd> so if you prove P = QP and QP <> NP, or P <> QP and QP = NP, then you'd have solved the NP thing
08:29:18 <oklofok> yes, assuming the chain of inclusion
08:29:27 <oklofok> but that's just basic set theory
08:29:51 <oklofok> they're just sets of languages, remember
08:30:08 <quantumEd> The class of decision problems solvable by polylogarithmic-depth quantum circuits with bounded probability of error. (A uniformity condition may also be imposed.) "
08:30:28 <quantumEd> that's interesting a lot of the quantum stuff incorperates error bounds
08:30:44 <quantumEd> I guess what we really want is hooking up quantum computers with normal ones -- so we can check the outupts
08:31:06 <oklofok> so many things to learn, so little time... oh wait, i have tons of time left
08:31:37 <quantumEd> BQP: Bounded-Error Quantum Polynomial-Time
08:31:44 <quantumEd> http://qwiki.stanford.edu/wiki/Complexity_Zoo:B#bqp
08:31:56 <quantumEd> that means you can use subroutines
08:32:13 <quantumEd> in general, for a class C, C^C = C means you can use subroutines?
08:32:47 <quantumEd> Arthur is a BQP (i.e. quantum) verifier who can exchange quantum messages with Merlin. So Arthur and Merlin's states may become entangled during the course of the protocol.
08:32:49 <oklofok> yes, usually A^B means you have an oracle that solves B in, say, one step, and you solve A given that oracle
08:34:44 <oklofok> like P^NP = NP, in P^NP you can solve any problem in NP in one step, but a nondeterminitic turing machine can already do that.
08:35:04 <oklofok> i think, at least, might be talking out of my ass, in which case i hope someone corrects this.
08:35:12 <oklofok> no in fact i don't think that's true...
08:37:56 <oklofok> it's an open question whether P^NP = NP
08:38:11 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
08:38:59 <oklofok> NP \subset P^NP anyway... :)
08:39:54 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined.
08:40:16 <quantumEd> only 10 mins and we stumble over an open question
08:40:44 <quantumEd> now I remember why I was too scared to study complexity theoryy befor
08:41:42 <quantumEd> http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/qchallenge.html
08:41:44 <quantumEd> Ten Semi-Grand Challenges for Quantum Computing Theory
08:42:32 <oklofok> yeah complexity theory is full of open stuff, and it's full of towers that might be completely useless, like the whole polynomial hierarchy
08:43:04 <oklofok> towers, as in, we have these infinite sequences A1, A2, ..., and it's not known whether we're actually just talking about one set
08:43:31 <oklofok> but the thing is we have tons of structure between these sets, it's just... it might all be just relations between the set and itself :P
08:44:53 <oklofok> "yay we solved the open problem of whether the complexity class A <= complexity class A with regard to this awesome reduction, using this awesome binary search technique"
08:45:54 <oklofok> (...at least, again, this is how i see it, mostly hearsay...)
08:46:47 <quantumEd> "After twelve years of effort, not only do we still not know whether BQP sits in the classical polynomial hierarchy, there's really no evidence either way"
08:48:32 <oklofok> we do have courses about quantum computing, or at least one
08:49:12 <oklofok> we have a lot of computing stuff here, discrete math uni sorta
08:49:44 <ais523> AnMaster: I just found http://whybzrisbetterthanx.github.com/
08:50:24 <oklofok> then again the materials for our real analysis course come from another university completely, and the professor who lectures the course doesn't even really do it.
08:50:43 <ais523> ofc, github are potentially biased
08:51:20 <quantumEd> oklofok here's a good one "Is BQP = BPP^BQNC? In other words, can the "quantum" part of any quantum algorithm be compressed to polylog(n) depth, provided we're willing to do polynomial-time classical postprocessing?"
08:51:37 <quantumEd> (This is known to be true for Shor's algorithm.)
08:51:41 <oklofok> ...let me do some polynomial time classical postprocessing on that sentence for a while
08:52:29 <quantumEd> if it was true the implication is that it's easier to build quantum computers than currenlty though
08:54:01 <oklofok> well... i don't know how they're currently built, so...
08:54:44 <quantumEd> it's something to do with physics and chemisty, I think.. not my domain
08:55:39 -!- boily has joined.
08:55:48 <oklofok> not mine either, although interest has arisen this year
08:56:16 <oklofok> well... i don't really know... i have this problem that i find pretty much everything interesting.
08:56:41 <quantumEd> I hardly find anything interesting
08:56:42 <oklofok> used to be all of math and cs, but it's getting out of hand!
08:57:16 <quantumEd> well with this quantum stuff it seems like knowing a good bit of physics is important for the computing bits
08:57:49 <oklofok> anyway i need to go read about mortality now
08:59:13 <quantumEd> those 3 things sound completely unrelated
08:59:15 <oklofok> mortality of matrices means given a set of matrices, can you multiply them to zero
09:00:16 <oklofok> in this course, basically leading to proving gödel's incompleteness, although mortality is a much studied field in our uni
09:00:40 <quantumEd> who cares about proving godels incompleteness :/
09:01:06 <oklofok> oh well i guess no one, but isn't it sort of something people are supposed to hear about?
09:02:04 <oklofok> maybe you're right, maybe it's the mortality problem that's the interesting one, and not the provability of statements
09:02:20 <quantumEd> I thought mortality was about death rates
09:02:52 <oklofok> terms can have many meanings
09:03:06 <oklofok> especially in mathematics where every word has a separate mathematical meaning...
09:05:12 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit (Nick collision from services.).
09:05:32 -!- abasjueuygeg has joined.
09:11:50 -!- boily has quit ("leaving").
09:14:05 -!- p_q has joined.
09:15:00 -!- p_q has quit (Client Quit).
09:29:26 -!- abasjueuygeg has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
09:32:26 <fizzie> Mortalitys could be some sort of "more philosophical" finishing moves in the Mortal Kombat games. They already have plain old fatalities, and a huge number of variants (animality, babality, brutality, friendship; probably some I don't know of), so why not a mortality too.
09:37:15 -!- facsimile has joined.
09:37:40 -!- quantumEd has quit (Remote closed the connection).
09:38:23 -!- facsimile has quit (Remote closed the connection).
09:38:39 -!- quantumEd has joined.
09:38:53 -!- mu has joined.
09:38:59 -!- mu has changed nick to OxE6.
09:47:53 <oklofok> and the animation could be like a bunch of matrices around the dude that multiply towards it and finally implode into singularity
09:48:46 <oklofok> he becomes a total zero and everybody laughs at him
10:27:12 <uorygl> "We wish you a merry Christmas and a happy new year" is a famous unsolved problem in mathematics.
10:27:31 <uorygl> It's been proven that we wish you either a merry Christmas or a happy new year, and most mathematicians believe we wish you both.
10:28:00 <uorygl> Also, it's been proven that we wish him a merry Christmas and that they wish you a happy new year.
10:28:20 <OxE6> what if I want a happy christmas and a merry new year?
10:28:23 <ais523> are there any norwegians here? there are dubious reports of a giant UFO above the whole of norway
10:28:34 <ais523> and I was wondering if someone would confirm or deny
10:28:53 <uorygl> And there are a few papers about whether we wish you other time periods of other degrees of novelty and other enjoyabilities.
10:29:22 <uorygl> OxE6: that would contradict the axiom of choice, but it's believed to be consistent with plain old ZF.
10:29:25 <quantumEd> there's some links to pics and news reports
10:30:25 <uorygl> Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.
10:31:04 -!- augur has joined.
11:00:13 -!- jpc has joined.
11:02:00 -!- Pthing has quit (Remote closed the connection).
11:03:01 <AnMaster> <ais523> AnMaster: I just found http://whybzrisbetterthanx.github.com/ <-- heh
11:04:20 <AnMaster> ais523, if I said something like that about git then ehird would get very angry and point out how irrelevant it was due to being opinion based. Yet I'm quite sure he won't act that way when it is about bzr
11:04:55 <ais523> meanwhile, I've been having my own thoughts about writing VCSes
11:05:07 <ais523> anyway, I should really go home
11:05:17 <ais523> issue is that the laptop screen's having hardware problems, and as a result the laptop no longer closes
11:05:20 <ais523> I really badly need a new computer
11:05:35 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote closed the connection).
11:05:36 <AnMaster> ais523, get a new laptop then?
11:20:12 -!- jix has joined.
11:23:49 -!- oerjan has joined.
11:24:58 -!- jpc has quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)).
11:26:21 <oerjan> <Gregor> When I say the definition, clearly it's stupid to think that some NP-complete problems are and some aren't X-D
11:26:50 <oerjan> glad you realized it. also glad that i didn't comment before reading on in the logs for once
11:27:46 <oerjan> 23:57:30 <Gregor> Fleh, some NP-P problems.
11:28:24 <oerjan> i am not sure whether any of the candidate problems are known not to be in P, even assuming P != NP
11:29:22 <oerjan> (factorization and discrete logarithm are the once i recall reading about)
11:31:08 <oerjan> problems in NP not in P
11:31:10 <oerjan> <oklofok> well can polynomial time runs on a quantum computer be simulated by polynomial runs on a tm?
11:31:23 <pikhq> oerjan: I was interpreting that as "NP minus P" problems.
11:31:23 <oerjan> i think that's as unknown as P vs NP
11:31:40 <pikhq> ... Which suggests I'm not sure what.
11:31:53 <oerjan> well the - is set difference, which is probably pronounced minus rather often
11:33:19 <oklofok> oerjan: quantumEd found that out
11:33:48 <oerjan> oklofok: well i've obviously gone back to commenting before finishing reading, haven't i :D
11:34:01 <oerjan> <quantumEd> since everyone seems to think P <> NP, then the reasonable assumption is that quantum computers are stronger than normal computers?
11:34:23 <oerjan> it's _a_ reasonable assumption, but i'm not sure there's a clear implication either way
11:34:34 <oklofok> anyway i really don't know anything about quantum computing, not all my questions were socratic method
11:34:42 <oklofok> they were also "i have no idea"
11:35:00 <oerjan> as in quantum computers _could_ be simulated in P even if P != NP, but they might also require PSPACE which is harder than NP...
11:35:54 <oerjan> all unsolved problems iirc
11:36:17 -!- jpc has joined.
11:36:55 <oerjan> <Gregor> T.M.s are still valuable as a representation of all that can be computed, Q.C.s can just compute it faster.
11:37:58 <oerjan> heck T.M.'s aren't that good for fine-grained complexity anyway, because they don't have random access memory so you might get a quadratic overhead to use memory
11:38:39 <oerjan> although all the "big" questions that i know about care only about polynomials, so aren't that fine-grained
11:38:40 <lament> infinitely addressble random access memory would certainly be cool :)
11:38:58 <oerjan> subleq may be a good model for that
11:39:32 <fizzie> Hey, whoa; Debian unstable's updating VirtualBox from 3.0 to the recent 3.1, which *finally* adds: "VM states can now be restored from arbitrary snapshots instead of only the last one, and new snapshots can be taken from other snapshots as well ("branched snapshots"; see the manual for more information)"
11:40:24 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
11:42:23 <oerjan> <oklofok> quantumEd: afaiu the quantum computing model is somewhere between determinism and nondeterminism, i haven't seen a formal definition for that stuff, and sadly i don't understand anything but that.
11:43:14 <oerjan> i think it's a different kind of nondeterminism than NP, with adding (superpositions) of quantum states and all, so not obviously contained either way as i said
11:43:17 <fizzie> (Also a couple other nice changes; virtio-net support for guests to sidestep the silly "emulate a real network card" and live migration of VMs between hosts, for example.)
11:45:00 <oerjan> PSPACE might be considered a higher form of nondeterminism than both (arbitrary mixing of existential and universal quantification is the essence of the PSPACE-complete problem QBF (quantified (nothing to do with quantum) boolean formula)
11:46:39 <oerjan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_quantified_Boolean_formula
11:46:40 <oklofok> so can we also define pspace with an alternating turing machine
11:50:14 <oerjan> well the wp article on the latter seems to imply so
11:55:44 <oerjan> <quantumEd> how can a new model of computation lead to new complexity classes
11:56:18 <oerjan> many complexity classes are simply what you get when adding resource bound measurements to a computational model
11:57:27 <oerjan> L, P, PSPACE you get from adding it to ordinary deterministic turing machines
11:57:38 <oerjan> NL, NP with nondeterministic ones
11:58:06 <oerjan> and those are believed to be different. so why shouldn't quantum models give yet another set
11:58:26 <oerjan> (PSPACE = NPSPACE but that is a theorem which needed proof)
12:02:21 <oerjan> 00:20:16 <oklofok> in the case of NP, we take the exact same definition, but use nondeterministic turing machines
12:02:24 <oerjan> 00:20:32 <oklofok> well i'm not sure what it's supposed to do with negative instances
12:02:42 <oerjan> if you switch positive and negative, you get the class co-NP instead
12:03:25 <oerjan> co-SPACE = SPACE is another nice theorem...
12:06:08 * oerjan notes he is repeating some of what oklofok said
12:06:31 <oerjan> well, except oklofok actually explained in some detail
12:07:22 <oerjan> <oklofok> i don't know the answer, but i think NP is a superset of QP, and QP is a superset of P, in which case we couldn't know, because then we'd also know P!=NP
12:07:32 <oerjan> ok that one i think i contradicted ;D
12:10:19 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote closed the connection).
12:10:19 <oerjan> <oklofok> like P^NP = NP, in P^NP you can solve any problem in NP in one step, but a nondeterminitic turing machine can already do that.
12:10:27 <oerjan> <oklofok> i think, at least, might be talking out of my ass, in which case i hope someone corrects this.
12:10:40 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined.
12:11:41 <oerjan> that's connected with the unsolved NP = co-NP problem, i think
12:12:19 <oerjan> basically NP cannot obviously use itself as a subroutine because there is no way to utilize a "no" result
12:13:07 <oerjan> but if NP = co-NP then you can convert between yes and no, so you get a way around that
12:13:32 <oerjan> also in that case the polynomial hierarchy collapses iirc
12:15:28 <oerjan> actually i'm not quite sure about that, should goolge
12:20:43 -!- Gracenotes has joined.
12:21:47 <oerjan> bah i cannot find a clear statement in any of wp articles i checked
12:24:16 <oklofok> oerjan: ok that one i think i contradicted ;D <<< but unfortunately so did quantumEd :P
12:24:41 <oerjan> yes he did, i just got to it
12:24:45 <oklofok> that was not QP, i think it was some other character mess
12:24:56 <oerjan> <quantumEd> "After twelve years of effort, not only do we still not know whether BQP sits in the classical polynomial hierarchy, there's really no evidence either way"
12:25:07 <oklofok> the NP vs. P^NP thing i googled myself :D
12:25:37 <oerjan> i assumed BQP was what you meant by QP
12:25:52 <oklofok> "oerjan: basically NP cannot obv..." <<< oh lol that should've been obvious, thanks
12:26:01 <oklofok> that's what you get for not knowing the exact definition
12:26:36 <oklofok> "oerjan: if you switch positive and negative, you get the class co-NP instead" <<< this doesn't tell me what the machine does with negative instances, does it?
12:27:19 <oerjan> a nondeterministic turing machine answers "yes" if there is any path which gives a yes answer, "no" otherwise
12:27:24 <oklofok> oh yeah i prolly meant BQP
12:27:31 <oerjan> the co-classes reverse that
12:27:55 <oerjan> it's the same as switching existential and universal quantification
12:28:04 <oklofok> but how fast does it answer no?
12:28:37 <oerjan> if you know the polynomial bound, then there is no reason not to cut off after you get to it, regardless
12:28:48 <oklofok> i mean in cook's original reduction he said it returns false right away iirc
12:29:34 <oklofok> well okay i've read a version of it that uses a more traditional model of a computer
12:29:53 <oklofok> to think after all this time i don't know exactly what NP means :D
12:29:53 <oerjan> there is also the answer checking version...
12:30:05 <oerjan> but they are equivalent
12:30:58 -!- iamcal has joined.
12:31:14 <oerjan> well i am pretty sure assuming the machine has the same time available whether it answers yes or no gives the right class
12:31:49 <oklofok> well, i suppose it's enough that it accepts stuff in polynomial time, and doesn't accept the wrong stuff
12:32:11 <oklofok> i mean for proofs... would just make it easier to think of it as an actual machine if i had any idea what it actually does for other instances
12:32:54 <oerjan> as i said, if you know the polynomial bound, you can just cut off once it is reached, say by adding a time counter to your machine
12:33:14 <oerjan> so you don't get anything more general
12:33:40 <oerjan> what was it about again? ;D
12:33:44 <oklofok> oerjan: is calculating the time bound a computable function though?
12:33:49 <oklofok> i mean just out of interest
12:33:58 <oklofok> doesn't change the argument if it isn't
12:34:42 <oerjan> oklofok: well in a sense no, it could involve a constant you don't know...
12:35:29 <oerjan> but for proofs, you can just start with the assumption a polynomial bound exists
12:36:14 <oerjan> unless you are doing something meta over many problem instances, i am sure this subtlety _can_ trip you up somehow then :D
12:37:20 <oerjan> ein little bischen romance
12:37:53 <oklofok> little was a bigger typo imo
12:37:55 <oerjan> oklofok: i was not attempting perfect german here
12:38:13 <oerjan> that wouldn't fit into the theme anyway :D
12:38:29 <oklofok> "ein bisschen" is like "a bit"
12:38:38 <oerjan> for proper german i would leave out the "little"
12:38:47 <oerjan> bisschen already implies it
12:39:32 <oerjan> (actually this should be sz but that is awkward on this keyboard)
12:39:33 <AnMaster> oerjan, err klein being small would be more "common knowledge" wouldn't it?
12:39:51 <oerjan> AnMaster: well to non-german speakers perhaps...
12:40:00 <AnMaster> oerjan, that is what I meant yeah
12:40:15 <AnMaster> oerjan, after all everyone surely knows about Eine kleine Nachtmusik?
12:43:10 <oerjan> i was more wondering about the "kleine", since it's a title
12:44:05 * oerjan notes the top google results are inconsistent, but wp doesn't use caps for it
12:44:29 <oklofok> isn't that just an english thing
12:44:44 <oerjan> well my german is rusty
12:48:39 -!- cal153 has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
12:48:51 <oerjan> <ais523> are there any norwegians here? there are dubious reports of a giant UFO above the whole of norway
12:49:06 <oerjan> i cannot say i noticed while walking home today :D
12:50:15 <oerjan> would be bad timing, they have put out a lot of anti-aircraft batteries for obama's visit tomorrow ;D
12:51:11 <oerjan> changed the other day from something US
12:52:08 <oerjan> AnMaster: also, around oslo, in case of any terrorist airplane hijackings
12:52:58 <oerjan> well or airplanes anyway
12:54:09 <AnMaster> oerjan, hm there is just one news story in those links mentioned there: dailymail
12:54:16 <AnMaster> from what I remember that is untrustable
12:54:26 <AnMaster> but I'm no expert on UK news papers
12:55:09 <AnMaster> the daily mail article looks like a joke
12:55:14 <oerjan> also "whole of norway" could very well be just one town before rumors spread
12:55:51 <AnMaster> oerjan, it said "northern norway" there
12:57:02 <oerjan> and trøndelag, which is here
12:59:05 <AnMaster> oerjan, which place with that name?
12:59:27 <AnMaster> Sør-Trondelag? Slightly south of Trondheim?
12:59:44 <oerjan> Sør-Trøndelag is the county containing Trondheim
13:00:00 <augur> anmaster: is your name oerjan?
13:00:24 <augur> why did you comment about monkey "language" not being TC?
13:00:25 <AnMaster> augur, no but I was confused by that it wasn't followed by anything else on the line?
13:00:29 * oerjan goes to check norwegian newspaper
13:00:55 <augur> AnMaster: is tht a statement or a question
13:00:55 <oerjan> augur: because Gregor made an Ook joke and i followed along
13:01:51 <augur> as long as you dont think that human language is TC
13:02:22 <oerjan> ah it's the top story at vg.no
13:02:48 <augur> italian for "male vagina"!
13:02:56 <oerjan> it's short for "verdens gang" (although no one uses the long form these days)
13:03:39 <oerjan> hm gang is hard to translate idiomatically
13:03:50 <oerjan> verdens = of the world
13:04:28 <oerjan> literally it means walk, movement
13:04:44 <augur> a large one a vaginissimo, and a small one is a vaginino!
13:04:49 * AnMaster just had a new idea for silly warranty/license combination
13:05:33 <AnMaster> inside the shrink-wrapped package there is a paper with the text "warranty void if shrink wrapping is broken"
13:07:10 <oerjan> hm it seems to be genuine
13:08:15 <oerjan> well as in people really have seen something
13:10:25 <augur> i think you could write an interesting story around that
13:11:04 <oerjan> *seen and taken videos of something
13:11:36 <oerjan> our "experts" suspect a russian rocket
13:12:29 * oerjan is happy irssi didn't know how to run that command
13:15:06 <oerjan> http://www.vg.no/nyheter/vaer/artikkel.php?artid=596439 includes video
13:17:16 <quantumEd> it's not a rocket they don' whirl :/
13:18:50 <oerjan> speculation is it could be a rocket spiraling out of control
13:31:03 <AnMaster> oerjan, what does "selv" mean?
13:34:49 * AnMaster notes that Google translate for Norwegian → Swedish is quite a lot better than usually, but still far from good
13:35:39 <AnMaster> "skyldes en russisk rakett, selv om det ennå ikke er offisielt bekreftet."
13:35:56 <AnMaster> oerjan, so one word means self and even?
13:36:14 -!- kar8nga has joined.
13:37:33 <AnMaster> in the context "Ifølge kilder i den russiske TV-kanalen Russia Today"
13:38:24 <oerjan> so "själv om" doesn't mean "even if" in swedish?
13:38:42 <AnMaster> " benektet en talsmann for at de visste noe om en rakettoppskyting."
13:38:52 <AnMaster> "nekade en talesman att de inte visste något om en raket lansering. "
13:39:15 <oerjan> a bit too much negation?
13:39:30 <AnMaster> oerjan, is it in the original too?
13:39:42 <oerjan> no, just "benektet" is negative
13:40:22 <AnMaster> for the benefit of English speaking users: "denied that they knew anything" turned into "denied that they didn't know anything" basically
13:40:23 -!- MigoMipo has quit ("co'o rodo").
13:40:29 <augur> ok so the idea is like
13:40:55 <augur> maybe in some future world companies will just do this shit with license-violated-if-plastic-is-broken
13:41:02 <augur> but theyll take it to the extreme where the license is INSIDE the plastic
13:41:16 <augur> but in its OWN plastic so youd have to break the plastic to read the license
13:41:46 <augur> and then some smart guy down in econometrics realizes, well, who cares then if we just leave out the actual inner material for the license
13:41:54 <augur> just let the license sheet be blank, but for the front page
13:41:59 <augur> we'll save a boatload of money
13:42:39 <augur> and eventually theyre just selling software or whatever without licenses
13:42:56 <AnMaster> <augur> but theyll take it to the extreme where the license is INSIDE the plastic <-- yes I said that far
13:42:58 <augur> and this leads to some humor and a doctorowesque tragedy-of-copyright-law thing
13:43:54 <AnMaster> oerjan, "hevder fenomenet kan komme fra en lyskaster"?
13:46:24 <oerjan> wp crosslink gives me "stage lighting instrument"
13:47:29 <oerjan> (section on that crosslinked page)
13:48:09 <oerjan> hm could be spotlight too
13:48:18 <AnMaster> oerjan, ufo, and government trying to hush it up and failing to coordinate the hushing up with Russia.
13:48:49 <AnMaster> oerjan, is there a video somewhat watchable? Like youtube or youtube?
13:49:08 <oerjan> what was wrong with the video on that page?
13:49:19 <AnMaster> oerjan, no javascript, no flash
13:49:43 <oerjan> well the article mentioned youtube so probably
13:51:33 <AnMaster> the one I found was quite a fail
13:51:42 <AnMaster> it looks nothing like those static pictures
13:52:44 * oerjan is not terribly interested
13:53:14 <AnMaster> oerjan, missile does sound plausible *shrug*
13:54:06 <AnMaster> and if it is high enough up in the atmosphere it could easily be illuminated by the sun
13:54:09 <oerjan> might check out the thread on the reddit front page. if you can read _that_
13:54:38 * oerjan hasn't reached that yet though
13:55:59 <oerjan> well yeah... much of that region probably has no sunlight this time of year
13:58:52 <SimonRC> oh dear god not over here as well
14:07:37 <AnMaster> <oerjan> might check out the thread on the reddit front page. if you can read _that_ <-- which one on there
14:08:04 -!- bsmntbombdood_ has joined.
14:09:12 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
14:09:13 <oerjan> http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/actjs/mystery_as_spiral_blue_light_display_hovers_above/
14:09:23 <oerjan> is the one i see on the front page
14:09:38 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:09:57 <oerjan> http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/acp3d/strange_spiral_phenomenon_appearing_on_the_sky_in/ is much larger
14:12:23 <oerjan> ok when i suggested the reddit thread it was in case there were further video links there, maybe i should have mentioned that
14:12:49 <oerjan> the actual discussion can be ... variable ...
14:13:05 <oerjan> and i still haven't looked at it myself, mind you
14:19:57 <AnMaster> hm 255 points, first I wondered why reddit was using unsigned char for the vote
14:20:05 <AnMaster> before I realized it probably wasn't max
14:23:00 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:26:07 -!- augur has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
15:31:50 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving").
15:36:08 -!- coppro has joined.
16:42:18 -!- oerjan has joined.
16:50:43 -!- coppro has quit ("I am leaving. You are about to explode.").
17:01:03 <MizardX> My guess is a semi-failed fireworks experiment. :)
17:03:58 <quantumEd> failed?? peopel around the world saw it!
17:11:54 -!- quantumEd has quit ("* I'm too lame to read BitchX.doc *").
17:12:16 -!- coppro has joined.
17:32:26 -!- Gracenotes has quit (Remote closed the connection).
17:42:02 -!- Fuco has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
17:42:33 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
18:11:05 -!- bsmntbombdood_ has changed nick to bsmntbombdood.
18:24:40 -!- jpc has quit ("Leaving.").
18:24:48 -!- jpc has joined.
18:26:54 -!- jpc has quit (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer)).
18:27:02 -!- jpc has joined.
18:44:33 -!- OxE6 has quit.
19:20:10 -!- oklokok has joined.
19:22:53 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
19:22:53 -!- oklofok has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
19:22:53 -!- Deewiant has quit (farmer.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
19:23:45 -!- Deewiant has joined.
19:23:59 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
19:23:59 -!- oklofok has joined.
19:25:11 -!- OxE6 has joined.
19:26:36 -!- augur has joined.
19:35:11 -!- oerjan has quit ("Good night").
19:49:16 -!- oklofok has quit (Success).
19:50:27 -!- OxE6 has quit (Nick collision from services.).
19:50:28 -!- OxE6| has joined.
19:50:36 -!- OxE6| has changed nick to OxE6.
19:53:58 -!- augur has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
19:54:23 -!- augur has joined.
20:36:10 -!- augur has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
21:06:25 -!- Pthing has joined.
21:16:45 -!- coppro has quit (Remote closed the connection).
21:17:33 -!- coppro has joined.
21:23:36 -!- Gracenotes has joined.
21:29:27 -!- OxE6 has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
21:47:28 -!- Guest67800 has joined.
21:47:50 -!- augur has joined.
21:51:01 -!- Pthing has quit (Remote closed the connection).
21:51:38 -!- Guest67800 has quit (Client Quit).
22:16:50 -!- jpc has quit ("Leaving.").
22:37:52 -!- FireFly has quit ("Leaving").
23:37:55 <coppro> the following is legal C++0x: struct foo { long inline int explicit unsigned volatile virtual long const f(); }; fun
23:38:28 <coppro> replace f with operator long const int volatile long unsigned
23:39:14 * coppro wonders what the longest chain of nonredundant keywords possible is
23:54:54 -!- kar8nga has joined.