00:00:41 <oerjan> ok, the definite article developed in Middle Bulgarian (12th-15th century)
01:50:22 <oerjan> how many rats can a ratspin spin if a ratspin can spin rats?
01:57:57 * oerjan doesn't manage to google a straight definition of ratspin.
01:58:17 <GregorR-L> I'm wondering which definition of the word "straight" you're using :P
01:58:55 <bsmntbombdood> i would be suprised if you could find a definition
01:59:34 <oerjan> i have found some uses, apparently meaning something like "hogwash" especially by politicians
02:00:18 <GregorR-L> So, not some very fetishist gay sex maneuver.
02:01:34 <oerjan> but, i wondered if it had a more direct meaning of some kind
02:01:50 <oerjan> something involving gerbils, i take
02:03:39 <GregorR-L> I think that the anal gerbil penetration would kill the gerbil anyway :P
02:04:11 <GregorR-L> Also: I've seen gerbils chew through plastic. The gerbil is not a good rodent to use X-D
02:04:47 <oerjan> barely beats the xenomorph
02:06:54 <GregorR-L> Y'know, I've looked for gerbiling/hamstering/whatever on Wikipedia.
02:07:14 <oerjan> i would imagine snopes.com a better place.
02:07:42 <bsmntbombdood> "The notion of gerbilling (not necessarily restricted to homosexuals — the insertion of items into the rectum for purposes of autoeroticism is practiced by heterosexuals as well) appears to be pure invention, a tale fabricated to demonstrate the depravity with which "faggots" allegedly pursue sexual pleasure."
02:08:17 <GregorR-L> The lack of medical evidence for gerbilling is not surprising when one considers that (1) rodents have claws, (2) frightened animals are likely to bite, and (3) rodents can be quite large.
02:09:37 <bsmntbombdood> <GregorR-L> Y'know, I've looked for gerbiling/hamstering/whatever on Wikipedia. \ I can't find it :(
02:10:32 <GregorR-L> For whatever reason, just using the word didn't occur to me :P
02:11:52 <GregorR-L> Hmmmmmm .... the page on "Rectal foreign object" says that Scrubs refers to two such instances. I can remember a third :P
02:14:30 <bsmntbombdood> I read about a guy putting wet concrete up his ass
02:14:53 <GregorR-L> In the unlikely scenario that that was true, that somebody would be infinitely stupid :)
02:15:13 <bsmntbombdood> I got the impression i was reading a medical report
02:15:41 <GregorR-L> I feel bad googling for "wet cement rectum"
02:15:42 <oerjan> i just recently read somewhere that concrete will set under water, so it must be true ;)
02:16:36 <bsmntbombdood> there was another article, even had a picture of the cement
02:18:09 <Pikhq> GregorR-L: Well, if someone actually *did* it, there'd be instant medical evidence.
02:18:47 <Pikhq> I was thinking about gerbiling, not the cement bit.
02:18:53 <bsmntbombdood> "the anus was dilated and two Foley catheters were inserted alongside the rectal mass to relieve suction. A concrete case of the rectum was delivered without incident."
02:19:07 <bsmntbombdood> "he attending physician recommended a psychiatric consultation, but the patient declined."
02:19:27 <bsmntbombdood> "A layer of concrete was chipped off the upper part of the specimen and revealed a white plastic ping-pong ball."
02:25:34 <bsmntbombdood> "In one review of colorectal foreign bodies and their management, all patients were male and mostly in the fourth and fifth decades of life."
02:28:04 <GregorR-L> "mostly in the fourth and fifth decades of life"
02:29:15 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
02:32:52 * oerjan wonders if bsmntbombdood has changed subject or not
02:33:51 <bsmntbombdood> the guy is talking about opening a coke, a guy enters the channel, he says what i said, guy leaves with a quit message of something like "sick fucks"
02:34:49 <oerjan> <bsmntbombdood> hmm, by representing strings as trees you get constant time concatenation and O(log n) time indexing
02:35:15 <oerjan> that's what haskell's Data.Sequence does
02:35:32 <Pikhq> But by representing strings as *arrays* of trees of lists, you get to be *really* confusing!
02:36:29 <oerjan> i sort of figured you had timed that exploding message to poiuy_qwert's arrival
02:37:08 <oerjan> but then, i think it would have worked better if you had _not_ changed the subject :)
02:37:41 <Pikhq> bsmntbombdood: First step in creating something more evil than Malbolge.
02:38:23 * Pikhq thinks about it. . .
02:39:10 <bsmntbombdood> http://images.andyblume.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=475&g2_serialNumber=1
02:40:43 <bsmntbombdood> http://images.andyblume.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=544&g2_serialNumber=1 <-- similar
02:42:43 <oerjan> darn the second one took me a while
02:45:41 -!- nuba has joined.
02:48:37 <Pikhq> That was less than subtle. . .
02:48:56 <GregorR-L> Must ... find ... good ... image comparison algorithm ...
02:50:06 <Pikhq> GregorR-L: Obviously what you need is the very, very powerful "Plof reference counting" algorithm.
02:50:20 <Pikhq> (sorry, I'm really not helpful)
02:51:58 <bsmntbombdood> there's a good talk somewhere that he explains it in detail
02:52:52 <GregorR-L> ... something called "esp game" is an image comparison algorithm?
02:53:16 <GregorR-L> Oh, I see. That wouldn't help my target problem at all.
02:54:16 <bsmntbombdood> here's the talk: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8246463980976635143&q=human+computation
02:54:36 <Pikhq> What, is that a mechanical turk sort of thing?
02:55:00 <GregorR-L> The ESP game wouldn't help my problem at all.
02:55:15 <GregorR-L> I need to be able to take two totally arbitrary images and get a comparison.
02:55:46 <Pikhq> GregorR-L: md5sum.
02:56:15 <Pikhq> Would you like a halting problem solver on the side?
02:57:09 <GregorR-L> Let's say I have three pictures. Two are of faces, the third is of a house.
02:57:22 <GregorR-L> The result of comparing the two faces should be lower than the result of comparing one of the faces to the house.
02:57:51 <Pikhq> I'm thinking you might want to write that algorithm, and use it for a pH.D thesis.
03:00:05 <bsmntbombdood> maybe an algorithm to find "blobs", and then compare the shape of the blobs
03:08:02 <bsmntbombdood> and you can compare blobs by putting their centers in the same spot, and taking the area of the region the both cover
03:59:24 <bsmntbombdood> i was thinking today about a method for assesing the danger of some activity, by multiplying the probability of failure by the gravity of failure
03:59:41 <bsmntbombdood> i couldn't figure out how to generalize it to multiple failure modes
04:02:20 <Pikhq> One should average the individual dangers.
04:04:12 <bsmntbombdood> i'm rusty on my statistics--what's the probability that either of two independent events happen?
04:06:55 -!- clog has joined.
04:06:55 -!- clog has joined.
04:07:24 <Pikhq> I'm sucky on my statistics. ..
04:07:49 <Pikhq> Unless it can be defined in terms of a derivative or integral, my brain doesn't handle it any more, I fear.
04:07:53 <bsmntbombdood> and that goes to 1 - \prod_i {1 - a_i} for a sequence of probabilitys?
04:08:08 <oerjan> well you need to consider what is the gravity of two things happening simultaneously
04:08:19 -!- sp3tt has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
04:08:19 -!- GregorR has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
04:08:20 <oerjan> it is just deMorgan's law, really
04:08:49 <oerjan> it is the probably that it is _not_ the case that neither happens
04:09:21 <oerjan> and the probability that _both_ of two independent events happen is the product
04:10:33 <oerjan> _if_ you assume that the gravity of two things happening simultaneously is the sum of the gravities, then you can just add the risks. even if they are not independent.
04:10:41 -!- sp3tt has joined.
04:10:58 <oerjan> because the expected value of a sum is the sum of the expected values
04:11:01 -!- GregorR has joined.
04:11:58 <oerjan> and the danger/risk is just the expected value of the gravity of the actual outcome
04:14:12 <Pikhq> Multiply the average by the number of dangers, not sum!
04:15:16 <Pikhq> oerjan: That's the joke.
04:15:39 <oerjan> only if all outcomes have the same probability.
04:16:33 <oerjan> expectation is the integral with respect to probability.
04:16:57 <oerjan> (which is a sum if probabilities are discrete)
04:26:47 <bsmntbombdood> an average doesn't: three dangers of .25 together have an average of .25, clearly wrong
04:30:16 <oerjan> on the other hand this doesn't work if dangers don't sum, like lethal ones (you can only die once)
04:35:21 <oerjan> i read a discussion on that recently
04:36:01 <oerjan> in the context of a game where you could win a million dollars simply by showing up, but there was a chance that you would die
04:37:08 <oerjan> the paradox being that most people say they wouldn't participate for any price, yet most take greater risks every day just by crossing the street
04:37:49 <oerjan> basically the idea that death has infinite gravity doesn't hold up against people's actual behavior
04:39:33 <oerjan> i think a better "rational" behavior might be to maximise your expected total remaining life quality
04:40:01 <oerjan> although real people probably don't work by that either :)
04:41:07 <oerjan> not in small tasks at any rate
04:41:21 <oerjan> but perhaps in economical matters
04:42:01 <oerjan> although i am not one of those that do that, either...
04:46:49 <bsmntbombdood> in economic matters it's easy to quantify the gravity of failure/success
05:01:31 <oklopol> if death has inifinite gravity, the subject will do nothing.
05:01:42 <oklopol> if i understand what we're talking about
05:02:19 <oerjan> except you can die from doing nothing too, i'm sure
05:02:37 <oerjan> in fact you can probably die from excess worrying
05:03:09 * SimonRC likes the (Flash) game Mindscape.
05:03:26 <SimonRC> It has non of the usual run-along-2d-landscape-collecting-stuff-to-save-the-world crap
05:03:30 <SimonRC> No, you must run arond in your hallucinations cause by your delusional state of mind, to save your sanity.
05:03:40 <SimonRC> And the cute bunnies, despite their claims to the contrary, are EEEEVIL!
05:05:05 <oklopol> well, if every action is calculated a value indicating how good it is, death being a negative inifity means even a slight change of death will make that goodness index inifitely small, which means every action is as bad as the next one
05:11:16 <oklopol> if you think of death as infinitely bad, if someone asks you whether you want a bullet in your head or eternal life, you will pick a random choise.
05:11:33 <oklopol> because you might have a heart attack just before the eternal life.
05:13:34 <Pikhq> SimonRC: Thanks, now youv'e got that addicted.
05:16:41 <oklopol> oerjan: i meant 'random', by 'doing nothing' i meant it will be a sucky ai
05:27:28 <oerjan> i would usually interpret "infinitely bad" in a relative sense: you could still compare different probabilities of dying, it's just that unless the probabilities of dying are the same, no other kind of danger would have any effect on the comparison.
05:28:59 <oerjan> so then eternal life would be the preferable choice.
05:30:08 <oerjan> it would not be that kind of inf
05:30:27 <oklopol> yours requires a more complex view of assigning goodness values, which is only better in the case of infinite gravities.
05:30:44 <oklopol> i don't see the point, let's just say infinite values bug here
05:31:20 <oerjan> i was wondering about why you hadn't left yet. have a good day. :)
05:35:02 <bsmntbombdood> maybe it makes more sense to rank gravitys in [0, 1] rather than [0, inf]
05:37:30 <oerjan> depends. money inflates if there is too much of it.
05:37:59 <bsmntbombdood> how can you convert monetary winnings into [0, 1] though?
05:38:37 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit.
05:38:44 <oerjan> logically 1 would have to represent the maximal possibility.
05:39:28 <oerjan> what i am saying is that an infinite amount of money does not necessarily have infinite value, because of inflation.
05:41:04 <bsmntbombdood> if one person has unbounded moneys...money isn't worth anything anymore
05:42:17 <oerjan> unless that person is smart enough not to spend it all
05:42:40 <oerjan> that person looks a lot like a central bank
05:43:04 <oerjan> or rather, a government with complete access to the central bank
05:43:37 <bsmntbombdood> a smart government knows not to mint unbounded moneys, and back their moneys by something that actually is limited
05:44:56 <oerjan> nowadays i thought interest had taken the place of gold
05:46:11 <oerjan> the bank will mint unlimitedly, but those that want any of it must pay interest and give collateral
05:46:22 <oklopol> nice, since i waited for the bus for 5 min
05:46:33 <oerjan> i guess the collateral limits it
05:47:51 <oerjan> i also suppose this system can only work during economic growth
05:55:21 <Pikhq> bsmntbombdood: Currently, most monetary systems are based, not on something of actual value, but merely the trust that it *is* valuable.
05:55:31 <Pikhq> Welcome to the credit-based economy.
06:02:42 <Pikhq> I think there's a level of hell reserved for that.
06:07:53 <oerjan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_currency
06:11:10 <bsmntbombdood> demanding taxes to be paid in a certain currency gives it value also
06:35:39 -!- oerjan has quit ("Good something").
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:53:34 <GregorR-L> I have insanely written a neural network for comparing images.
08:53:43 <GregorR-L> It asks the human operator which image is more similar.
08:53:52 <GregorR-L> So the training function is ultra-slow (as slow as a person ;) )
08:54:01 <GregorR-L> I doubt highly that it'll work to any useful degree.
08:58:02 * GregorR-L types "tits" into google image search
08:58:55 <GregorR-L> There aren't enough tits on the internet to train this neural net :P
09:00:40 <GregorR-L> That statement was an exaggeration for the sake of emphasis :P
09:02:01 <GregorR-L> Select sexuality upon registering.
09:03:10 <GregorR-L> To get my training set, I just used google image search with the following search terms:
09:03:16 <GregorR-L> a, the, art, architecture, man, woman
09:03:58 <GregorR-L> Shockingly, there is very little porn.
09:04:26 <GregorR-L> I think that porn doesn't generally use the term "woman" :P
09:09:20 <GregorR-L> "WATCH THESE ATTRACTIVE WOMEN ENGAGE IN CARNAL RELATIONS WITH PHYSICALLY GIFTED GENTLEMEN!"
09:14:40 <GregorR-L> Laughing ... on the floor ... laughing?
09:42:19 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving").
10:23:06 <oklopol> <bsmntbombdood> how can you convert monetary winnings into [0, 1] though? <<< 1-1/money
10:23:53 <oklopol> plus, the rise of gravity for money grows logarithmically over the amount of money.
10:24:20 <oklopol> i mean... a billion might be 10 times better than a million
10:26:44 <oklopol> also, it is so even if we assume an infinitely big world where inflation is impossible
10:27:41 <oklopol> because people simply don't see a difference between "one helluva lotta money" and "one thousand helluva lots of money"
10:28:19 <oklopol> i myself, don't really even see a difference between a billion and a million... since i've rarely even had a thousand
13:34:03 -!- jix_ has joined.
16:58:48 -!- fizzie has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
16:58:48 -!- GregorR has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
16:58:49 -!- nuba has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
16:58:49 -!- meatmanek has quit (kubrick.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
17:01:44 -!- nuba has joined.
17:02:32 <lament> i certainly do see the difference between a billion and a million.
17:02:50 <lament> a million is enough to buy a decent but not a very good house.
17:02:57 <lament> there're cars that cost over a million.
17:03:11 <lament> a billion is enough to live the rest of your life without having to worry about money.
17:03:21 <lament> (this is in dollars, anyway)
17:03:43 <lament> sounds like a pretty significant difference to me :)
17:10:12 -!- meatmanek has joined.
17:11:21 -!- GregorR has joined.
17:17:55 -!- fizzie has joined.
17:22:37 -!- Izak has joined.
17:43:46 -!- sebbu has joined.
17:46:48 <Pikhq> lament: Where, exactly, do you live, Mr. "Million can buy a decent but not very good house"? California?
17:53:19 <lament> Pikhq: anywhere in the world.
17:53:38 <lament> well, not really, but certainly anywhere interesting in the states or europe.
17:54:24 <lament> obviously the definition of 'very good' varies
17:54:24 <sekhmet> You can get a really good house for $1mil in most places in the states
17:54:39 <lament> mine includes things like location
17:54:43 <Pikhq> It depends upon where. . .
17:54:45 <lament> view, neighbourhood, etc
17:54:52 <sekhmet> Outside of, you know, Manhattan, central LA, etc
17:55:06 <sekhmet> I imagine Silicon Valley is somewhat pricey as well
17:55:10 <Pikhq> If you want a damned nice house in, say, LA, you're talking a hell of a lot of money.
17:55:15 <lament> sekhmet: good houses are expensive everywhere.
17:55:22 <sekhmet> lament: Not >$1m expensive, though
17:55:28 <lament> i'm not talking McMansion, i'm talking good house.
17:55:32 <sekhmet> I mean, unless you mean a Mansion or something
17:55:47 <Pikhq> If you want one out in, say, Colorado Springs, you're talking $1 million as your max. . .
17:56:11 <lament> i'd prefer to live somewhere on the ocean front
17:56:27 <Pikhq> Well, that *would* add up to >$1 million, then.
17:56:30 <lament> so there's somewhere to tie the yacht too :)
17:56:35 <sekhmet> Obviously if you tack on "want to live on the beach near a major city" then yeah
17:56:58 <lament> sekhmet: location is very important. Good locations aren't cheap, and cheap locations normally aren't good.
17:57:05 <lament> a good house is in a good location.
17:57:09 <lament> it's not good otherwise.
17:57:10 <sekhmet> That's not necessary for most people's definition of "a very good house" though
17:57:18 <sekhmet> Well I see we disagree on that
17:57:39 <lament> sekhmet: you think if i take my good house on the ocean front and move it to antarctica, it remains a good house?
17:57:44 <sekhmet> I agree that location is important, but I take a much broader view
17:57:53 <sekhmet> lament: That's pretty extreme
17:58:02 <lament> any suburb is not a good location, because suburbs just suck.
17:58:07 <sekhmet> lament: If I take my good house on an ocean front and move it five miles inland, it certainly does
17:58:12 <Pikhq> lament: The definition of "good location" does vary.
17:58:13 <sekhmet> But whatever, obviously we disagree
17:58:21 * sekhmet steps out of the conversation
18:56:15 -!- ehird` has joined.
18:59:37 -!- ehird` has quit (Remote closed the connection).
19:11:58 -!- Izak has quit ("Farewell").
19:13:04 -!- aarcane has left (?).
19:27:33 -!- jix_ has changed nick to jix.
19:55:13 <SimonRC> "<Pikhq> SimonRC: Thanks, now youv'e got that addicted." <--- me no speech broken English
19:55:34 <Pikhq> SimonRC: Now you got me *addicted*.
19:57:59 <SimonRC> surely you can win that in about 1/2 hour?
19:58:38 <GregorR> Pikhq: You highlighted the wrong word X_X
19:59:26 <Pikhq> SimonRC: Sure. . . If I've got enough of an attention span.
20:04:03 -!- Sgeo has joined.
20:19:51 <Pikhq> SimonRC: Damned trippy.
20:27:58 <SimonRC> You *did* watch all the cut-scenes, right?
20:37:19 <Pikhq> I skipped over some when I started it back up today, but that was only because I had already seen them.
20:45:12 <SimonRC> did you get all the trophies?
20:54:27 -!- ehird` has joined.
20:54:32 <ehird`> LOLCODE is a much better language than Ruby, and so we need to work hard to make LOLCODE ON MONORAIL the standard web development language!
21:04:33 <Pikhq> SimonRC: Not yet..
21:36:00 <bsmntbombdood> <Pikhq> SimonRC: Now you got me *addicted*. <--- addicted to you
21:36:20 <oklopol> lament: well, i would never buy a big house, just http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-OOGN8YmtE
21:36:44 <oklopol> i prefer living cramped in a corner.
21:37:13 <lament> (i'm not gonna watch videos at work)
21:37:52 <oklopol> i do. well, i guess i'd like a big empty storage hall
21:38:23 <lament> would your friends like it when you invite them over?
21:38:46 <oklopol> my friends are as insane as i am.
21:39:07 <oklopol> you don't know how insane i am, of course
21:40:49 <oklopol> on a scale of 4-10, i got 8 on the integration test
21:41:18 <oklopol> i even had a thinking error in one question
21:41:27 <oklopol> others were copy paste ones
21:42:39 <bsmntbombdood> http://www.improveverywhere.com/2005/12/10/suicide-jumper/
21:43:33 <Pikhq> Obviously, countries with Germanic languages can't do anything that makes sense.
21:43:39 <Pikhq> Finland has a 4-10 scale.
21:43:49 <Pikhq> America has an A,B,C,D,F scale.
21:44:14 <lament> A,B,C,D,F is pretty brain-damaged
21:44:32 <lament> on the other hand, Russia has grades 1-11, but without grade 4
21:46:35 <Pikhq> Could they please just throw in an "E" to the scale?
21:46:58 <Pikhq> It'd make me happy.
21:47:22 <lament> e will be added to the scale
21:47:38 <lament> with its usual meaning of 2.718281828459....
21:50:41 -!- lament has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:54:00 <Pikhq> I'd prefer a system of pass or dumbass.
21:54:11 <Pikhq> There is no failure, only being labeled a dumbass. :p
21:55:28 <oklopol> pass/fail, i don't see a need for more
22:09:57 -!- oerjan has joined.
22:17:30 <oerjan> ehird`: i got your language finished more properly, in python
22:18:00 <oerjan> http://oerjan.nvg.org/esoteric/ehird.py
22:23:30 <oerjan> Pikhq: finnish is not a germanic language. although swedish, which is, is also an official language in finland.
22:27:21 <fizzie> We also quite commonly use the scale 0-5 in establishments of higher education, like universities and such.
22:27:53 <oerjan> when i was in junior highschool the grades were LG,NG,G,M(G),S(G). In senior high school they were 0-6. In university they were 1.0-4.0, although the universities now have changed to an A-F system.
22:29:49 <oerjan> (G meaning "good", with an appropriate adverb)
22:30:42 <fizzie> For the very first three or so years of school (age: 7-9 years or so) our school used the grades "H", "K" and "L" (descending order), with the letters meaning: "H" -> "hyvä" ('good'), "K" -> "kaipaa lisäharjoitusta" ('more practice required', basically) and "L" -> "kaipaa runsaasti lisäharjoitusta" ('a lot more practice required').
22:31:35 <fizzie> I never really understood why exactly the latter two were named "K" and "L". Especially the "L" makes no sense, since the only word it could come from ("lisäharjoitus") appears in both grades.
22:32:18 <fizzie> Maybe it was only for the first two years, not three.
22:32:24 <oerjan> ah yes. in the first 6 years we had essentially "satisfactory" and "could improve". no abbreviation that i recall.
22:32:36 <oklopol> well, pretty much nothing makes sence outside math and programming.
22:33:01 <oklopol> in my school there was no grading before 4th grade :<
22:34:59 <oerjan> well the L is somewhat like G in our system then.
22:35:33 <fizzie> I don't think our "exams" (were there any?) or other work was graded during the HKL years, but those letters appeared in the semiannual certificate-given-at-the-end-of-study-term papers.
22:35:58 <oklopol> well, as if i could remember anything beyond yesterday
22:36:26 <fizzie> Oh, it was a common practice? For some reason I thought the silliness was limited to my particular school.
22:36:35 <oerjan> it's not like i remember that much from my school years...
22:37:54 <oklopol> fizzie: actually we had 3 different SMILEYS.
22:39:54 <oerjan> "this year we will present your grades in the form of an interpretive dance"
22:59:59 -!- ehird` has quit.
23:00:33 <oerjan> that ehird` guy is _really_ hard to get in touch with...