00:00:35 subletting is not usually a joking matter 00:02:31 indeed 00:03:34 -!- GregorR_ has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 00:05:25 although come to think of it you could probably base a sitcom on it 00:10:25 -!- GregorR has joined. 01:02:01 -!- coppro has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 01:03:17 -!- coppro has joined. 01:14:57 -!- ehird has joined. 01:19:24 11:52:38 * coppro ding's the channel's don 01:19:25 11:52:40 *dong 01:19:25 this channel is pg-13. 01:20:00 your fault for interpreting it rudely then 01:22:25 protip: "this channel is pg-13" is a personal meme. 01:22:43 also, "dinging the channel's dong" is hard to interpret in any way other than (a) sexual, (b) nonsense 01:23:43 personal meme? 01:24:54 ehird: wait, you're 14 now 01:25:07 pg-13 is >= 13 01:25:08 not >13 01:25:12 I'm pretty sure that, by definition, a personal meme is impossible 01:25:23 well but we should be able to advance to pg-14 01:25:25 coppro: I use it a lot to mean one thing as a recurring gag, the intention is that other people in-the-know will laugh at it 01:25:28 but nobody elses uses it 01:25:37 oerjan: I advanced on your mom last night 01:25:41 coppro: take it as a paraphrase to catchphrase 01:25:45 ehird: necrophiliac 01:25:49 she reminded me of the restraining order 01:25:56 oerjan: that's just how bad I am 01:26:00 dead people get restraining orders against me 01:27:16 now if we make it _european_ pg-13 then dongs are probably fine but i'll have to stop with the swatter 01:27:53 oerjan: isn't the analogy only appropriate if we replace the swatter with like 01:28:00 an automatic swatter bomb gun 01:28:10 (it's pretty hard to make swatters dangerous) 01:29:28 well what about the saucepan then 01:36:32 oerjan: has anyone been hurt for more than 5 minutes with it 01:37:08 details 01:37:19 -!- oerjan has quit ("Also, good night"). 01:43:46 Wowowowowtf. 01:43:57 ehird: Add either citric or phosphoric acid to your swig ingest drink. 01:44:07 Getting the pH down = ultra-important. 01:44:07 GregorR: W...why 01:44:20 GregorR: Did you drink it or something 01:44:33 I want to know wtf sparked this XD 01:44:34 No, but I'm realizing from my own experiments that getting the pH down = hyperimportant :P 01:44:48 But I want it to be smooth and unassuming :-( 01:44:54 I wanna know what happened :P 01:45:05 "Happened"? Nothing happened *shrugs* 01:45:17 I just made it with citric acid and it's a huge improvement. 01:45:39 it = swig ingest drink? 01:46:01 No, my own. 01:46:05 Laaaaaaaame :P 01:46:10 What's yours made of 01:46:31 Presently: sugar and extracts of vanilla, peppermint and almond. 01:47:01 That sounds nice. 01:47:08 How did adding citric acid change it 01:47:46 It's hard to describe ... the flavor is a bit more citrusy (duh), but it's the mouthfeel that improved substantially. 01:47:59 interesting 02:14:10 -!- Sgeo has joined. 02:25:42 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 02:53:28 -!- Pthing has quit (Remote closed the connection). 03:52:25 -!- Sgeo_ has joined. 03:57:41 -!- sebbu has joined. 03:57:50 -!- coppro has quit (Remote closed the connection). 04:00:02 -!- coppro has joined. 04:12:54 -!- Sgeo has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 04:13:20 -!- sebbu2 has quit (Connection timed out). 04:21:18 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit. 05:56:39 "Hey Google, if I search the word review, I do not want pages containing reviews or reviewing." 05:56:45 Figure A, an insane person. 06:00:48 When I search "undressing", I don't want "dress" 06:00:49 >.> 06:01:22 Sgeo finds porn by searching for "female humans undressing". 06:01:24 maybe searching +review would help? 06:02:34 puzzlet: they quote it 06:02:37 but they're still insane 06:03:03 who searches "laptop review" and doesn't want to see "laptop reviews" or "a video of $person reviewing laptops"? 06:03:54 maybe he's looking for a review exactly entitled "laptop review" 06:04:17 he's talking in general 06:04:25 he never wants to have "Xs" and "Xing" included 06:04:34 and from the tone of the sentence... seems to think that nobody sane would want this 06:04:56 who is he anyway 06:05:08 better ignore him 06:05:11 some guy on reddit. 06:05:14 i am 06:05:18 i was just pointing out he's insane :P 06:06:02 so you're saying you're pretend to be insane or .. 06:06:25 puzzlet: eh? 06:06:55 well maybe i'm not good at catching the behind context 06:07:37 some guy on reddit says insane thing 06:08:12 and you are ... ignoring him 06:08:16 ok now i get it 06:08:33 How many language->language tools exist 06:08:34 i'm ignoring him apart from mentioning it as funny 06:08:38 Sgeo_: too many. 06:08:41 Sgeo_: also, all compilers. 06:08:52 I know of two Python->JS tools, and now I learn there's a Python->Perl tool 06:09:01 all compilers. 06:09:21 True 06:10:27 Maybe I should have asked language->high-level language.. But then that includes BF->C compilers.. 06:42:09 -!- Leonidas has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)). 06:42:22 -!- Leonidas has joined. 06:58:11 at(1) doesn't appear to work here... 06:58:33 heh, it's never executed any jobs 06:58:52 IMPLEMENTATION NOTES 06:58:52 Note that at is implemented through the launchd(8) daemon periodically invoking atrun(8), which is disabled by default. See atrun(8) for information about enabling atrun. 07:01:21 you see, [[while true; do xsetroot -name "$(date '+%Y-%m-%d %H:%M')"; sleep 5; done]] is terribly wasteful and inaccurate 07:02:46 [[update() { xsetroot -name "$(date '+%Y-%m-%d %H:%M')" }; update; sleep $((60 - $(date +%S))); while true; do update; sleep 60; done]] should do it. 07:04:09 it works 07:26:28 gah, I love dwm 07:26:31 it's so perfect 07:30:02 exec $(cat ~/.histfile | dmenu -l ) 07:30:06 (w/ dmenu-vertical patch) 07:31:23 wish it supported non-linear searching 07:31:40 like 'fir awesome' matching 'firefox http://awesome.com' 07:31:47 and 'awesome fir' 07:31:49 guess I'll write it 07:32:42 ok, it's match() 07:32:47 hmm 07:33:13 problem is "google" might match "go http://foo.com/?g=l;e=f" 07:33:21 maybe I'll add points for consecutive strings 07:33:35 like, that would get 2+1+1+1 = 5 points 07:33:47 but "firefox http://google.com" would get 6 07:33:52 er 07:34:01 ignore me, I'm on drugs 07:34:24 (the drug of idiocy) 07:34:25 hmm 07:34:33 how can i reward consecutiveness, I wonder 07:36:14 maybe, considering one block, variable "factor"; 1 is "all chars from string in block"; 0 is "one char from string in block" 07:36:18 i.e., 100/percentageofstring 07:36:30 so let's say 07:36:39 ffx google 07:36:42 then 07:36:47 firefox → f, f, x, separate blocks 07:36:58 so we do 07:37:06 (1*1)+(1*1)+(1*1) 07:37:11 so 3 points there 07:37:13 then google 07:37:43 = 2.666666...... 07:37:47 so 07:37:57 (we add one to factor, ofc) 07:38:03 (2.66666667*6) 07:38:19 so that's 3+16 = 19 points 07:38:38 vs g http://foo.com?g=l;e=f 07:38:45 erm, make that 07:38:56 "g http://foo.com?g=l;e=x;f=r" 07:38:58 ffx google 07:38:59 so 07:39:06 g = 1*1 07:39:16 f = 1*1 07:39:35 oo = (10/2)*2 07:39:38 er 07:39:46 oo = (1+(10/2))*2 07:39:55 g = 1*1 07:39:57 l = 1*1 07:40:00 e = 1*1 07:40:02 x = 1*1 07:40:03 f = 1*1 07:40:23 ... which is 19 >_< 07:40:36 waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait 07:40:38 10/2 is backwards 07:40:41 should be 2/10 07:41:33 so it's 3+9.6 = 12.6 points on the first 07:41:35 and 07:42:01 9.4 on the second 07:42:08 success 07:51:37 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined. 07:51:53 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote closed the connection). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:00:06 Silly Omegle prank: connect to three users A, B and C. Relay messages from A to B, from B to A, from A to C, and from C to A. 08:00:43 B will say something, A will respond, C will see it, and confusion will ensue. 08:01:15 You can do that with one chain. 08:03:44 Warrigal: wait, no, that's equivalent to A and B together :P 08:11:06 -!- sebbu2 has joined. 08:27:40 -!- sebbu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 08:43:10 -!- ais523 has joined. 08:54:43 hi ais523! 08:54:57 hi 08:55:07 GregorR: i've formulated a soda for you to make next 08:55:09 wow, you're here early, as am I 08:55:26 mix carbonated water, caffeine, and a shitload of Fisherman's Friend lozenges 08:55:35 then, don't drink it because you can't possibly handle it 08:55:46 ais523: well, I haven't slept; I'm on reverse monophasic 08:55:52 I sleep for about 8 hours in the day 08:55:55 fair enough, I get there sometimes 08:56:01 in fact, I've been there most of the holiday 08:56:14 it's quite nice, actually; I psychologically view the daysleep as taking a nap rather than going to bed 08:56:17 but I've decided that 8pm - 4am is probably about the best sleep period, and I'm sort-of deliberately aiming for it nowadays 08:56:18 which is easier to do 08:56:40 and I get a sort of "I'm staying up all night!" dim rush 08:56:47 which makes me happier 08:56:56 ais523: 8pm - 4am? that's a very strange sleep schedul 08:56:56 e 08:57:13 I couldn't possibly sleep at 8pm 08:57:37 also, strangely, a day or two ago the following happened: 08:57:44 woke up from sleep at around 10pm 08:57:44 ehird: you could if you'd woken up at 4am consistently, I suspect 08:57:51 stayed up until the next day 08:57:58 it's day now and I didn't really feel like sleeping 08:58:09 I get to about 10am 08:58:11 the next day 08:58:19 and then sleep 08:58:28 ehird: ah, when I wake up at 10pm, I generally wake all night and sleep some time the next morning 08:58:30 how come I missed a day and was only mildly sleepy? 08:58:39 ais523: right; I skipped the sleep somehow 08:58:42 until the morning after 08:59:22 ais523: how do you rank my fisherman's friend drink idea from -100 to -50? 08:59:31 [08:55] ehird: mix carbonated water, caffeine, and a shitload of Fisherman's Friend lozenges 08:59:31 [08:55] ehird: then, don't drink it because you can't possibly handle it 08:59:43 ehird: about -80 08:59:49 (liquidize them first ofc) 09:00:43 I wonder if there are any mints stronger than fisherman's friend 09:11:49 -!- Sgeo_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 09:16:14 zzoom 09:23:38 -!- GregorR_ has joined. 09:25:21 -!- GregorR has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 09:30:57 "Companies building java software are no better than scam artists." 09:30:58 uriel really deserves a fortune database of his own; maybe name it "idiot" 09:32:20 wait, that's a weird quote 09:32:33 if they were hired to produce java software in the first place, how is it a scam? 09:32:43 ais523: because java sucks, or something 09:34:03 good things about uriel: uses plan 9. bad things about uriel: free-market nutjob (think cato institute), hates every piece of software pretty much ad hominem, without attacking their actual flaws, repulsively barbaric attitude in anything he says (to the point of impossibility of arguing with him at all), etc 09:36:00 http://harmful.cat-v.org/ is a big ol' pile of lol; topics include "Fair trade is evil", "Minimum wage is evil", "Children are super-evil and if you have a child you're a psychologically fucked up egotist", "Gay marriage is evil because having 'marriage' be a convenient shorthand for 'a contract of a certain type' is evil", "Sweden sucks and is undemocratic", and that's ignoring the huge software section 09:37:15 oh, and though I can't find it on his site, "healthcare: the solution is to regulate them less. then they can pull off more and so will behave better" 09:37:35 laissez-faire never ceases to amuse 09:51:20 -!- sebbu has joined. 10:02:13 stood and standing that you would? 10:03:51 -!- sebbu3 has joined. 10:04:54 ehird: an attack on Sweden in particular seems weird 10:05:04 ais523: he's swedish. 10:05:30 totally not a coincidence, though! he's clearly rationally examined this... like he does with everything else? 10:05:50 I mean, come on 10:05:52 "the single party system" 10:05:56 He's simply deluding himself 10:05:58 -!- sebbu2 has quit (Connection timed out). 10:19:01 -!- sebbu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 10:34:36 * ehird wonders how small he could get a purist R5RS scheme implementation in C 10:34:45 let me bet... 1,000 lines 10:34:50 for the library, eh 10:34:53 2,000 10:36:17 hmm 10:37:18 ais523: do you think it's safe using the 4 top bits of a 32-bit int? 10:37:23 a pointer malloc just gave me was 21 bits 10:37:47 no, I don't think so; IIRC malloc starts low but gets higher the more memory you're using 10:37:55 it feels much less safe than relying on malloc()'s lsb to be 0 10:37:57 ehird: "Purist"? 10:38:25 and 1/16 of 4GB is 256MB 10:38:30 and I can easily imagine a program using more than that 10:38:42 ais523: the lowest infringing pointer is 268435456 10:38:49 which is much larger than I've ever seen 10:38:53 but tru, dat 10:39:06 28'@:::***** 10:39:12 ehird: if you allocate more than 256MB of memory, at least one pointer will have to be that high 10:39:22 just would be nice to store it all in the pointer and not worry about it 10:39:26 Deewiant: heh 10:39:31 the use of '@ confused me for a while 10:39:45 what does that do? 10:39:47 if you feel /really evil/, store everything in a long double 10:39:50 apart from multiply a lot 10:39:55 ehird: pushes the ASCII code of @ onto the stack, which is 64 10:39:57 It's 268435456 allowing ASCII 10:40:03 ais523: no, I don't feel evil; I'm trying to be as simple as possible here 10:40:05 and the code in general is working out 2^28 10:40:21 putting the tag in the pointer would be the simplest way; unfortunately it looks like it won't work 10:40:23 28::::::::********* if you don't like '@ 10:40:35 maybe I'll preallocate a pool of memory 10:40:39 Deewiant: 28::*:::****** 10:40:45 hmm, no 10:40:53 that'd still have to be like 256mb 10:40:54 ais523: Sure, that's just what my program gives :-P 10:41:08 you have a Befunge constants program? 10:41:17 Yep, since a few days ago 10:41:39 I should have made it a few years ago, would have saved me some time with Mycology :-P 10:42:35 http://cca.org/dave/tech/machine.html 10:42:36 AKJSdhsdkjghdkfhgskdfjhgtoibsjofgpdgmkj hkfdjgh 10:42:37 holy fuck want so much 10:42:52 my inner buddha came out to dissuade me, then saw it and immediately inverted itself 10:43:07 i now have an all-consuming materialist desire for that object. 10:43:18 what is it? 10:43:37 ais523: I'm not going to answer that, because you have a program that can tell you that requires less work and less irritation of people. 10:43:58 meh, I can't be bothered to understand the context of your discussions, then 10:44:04 then don't ask. 10:44:15 I find it hard to believe that you can't just click to open the page 10:44:33 and if you actually cared, you wouldn't make a deal out of it wrt "look at me, I'm unable to click links" 10:50:07 hey, they guy who made that page coined the term eternal september 10:50:09 uber-cool 10:50:10 *the 11:15:30 -!- oerjan has joined. 11:16:46 It's hard to describe ... the flavor is a bit more citrusy (duh), but it's the mouthfeel that improved substantially. 11:16:57 it's that slight flavor of dissolving teeth 11:18:27 ais523: That turned out to be a simple optimization, 288:*:*:*** is what comes out now 11:18:41 reminds me of Underload a lot 11:18:49 my words exactly 11:18:49 with chaining together : and * to make numbers 11:19:40 ^ul (*):*:*:***S 11:19:41 ...out of stack! 11:19:45 hm 11:20:04 oh right 11:20:08 Well, typically there's + too, that was just a power of 2 :-P 11:20:29 underload has no + 11:20:41 Sucks to be underload 11:20:52 multiplication's a lot easier than addition in underload 11:21:11 addition is something like ((:)~*(*)*)~^^ 11:21:30 ^ul (::::****)(::::::******)((:)~*(*)*)~^^S 11:21:31 :::::::::::*********** 11:21:42 >_< 11:21:48 off by one? 11:21:54 oerjan: not at all 11:21:59 5 + 7 = 12 11:22:02 er right 11:22:10 you're off-by-one in attempting to parse Underload numbers 11:22:56 I was going to say something 11:23:18 he never wants to have "Xs" and "Xing" included 11:23:40 i _do_ sometimes get annoyed by google being a bit too clever at second-guessing me 11:24:00 and thus including exactly what i try to avoid 11:27:51 Warrigal: wait, no, that's equivalent to A and B together :P 11:28:04 that's essentially conway game subtraction iirc 11:28:26 it's obvious that B linking A and B is identical to A and B talking 11:28:35 *C 11:28:36 B linking A to B to C isn't equal to anything but that 11:28:39 oerjan: uhh 11:28:41 see my line above 11:28:46 you stoopid 11:28:55 no 11:29:10 there is no C 11:29:11 in mine 11:29:15 C linking A and B 11:29:32 -!- MigoMipo has joined. 11:30:32 linking yourself into it means you'll actually have to come up with conversation :D 11:31:49 mix carbonated water, caffeine, and a shitload of Fisherman's Friend lozenges <-- are we trying to test just exactly how far GregorR_ is from human now? 11:31:56 mwahaha 11:32:00 I've gotta do that, actually 11:32:02 I'm sure I could 11:32:09 I might throw up afterwards, though 11:32:23 or at least need to spend a day fasting and drinking salt water to cleanse it out 11:32:56 at least you should have a clear throat 11:33:12 my throat clearness might wrap around 11:33:30 that could be a problem 11:35:45 I wonder if there are any mints stronger than fisherman's friend 11:35:52 of course not. strongest there is. 11:36:01 naturally :P 11:36:12 -!- MigoMipo has quit. 11:37:46 might even be true, since if it wasn't, the competition could sue them for false advertising 11:37:58 i think other brands do it too 11:38:06 "strongest there is" is so vague to be meaningless 11:38:20 they could argue "well it feels punchier than the others even though it isn't actually stronger", etc 11:38:23 that's marketing for you 11:38:46 anyway, i propose calling my drink: Fisherman's Fiend 11:39:26 hm, would it cause a diet coke and mentos-type explosion? 11:39:27 well 11:39:28 i guess not 11:39:35 since the carb water + caffeine isn't "diet" 11:39:39 and i guess it's in the name for a reason 11:42:50 heh, pfizer _did_ get smacked down in norway for stealing that slogan for one of its pills, and not being able to document it was true 11:43:18 but that's not a confectionary 11:43:26 well true 11:52:05 oerjan, iwc (just connected to bouncer from university) 11:52:23 though I don't get the broom reference 11:54:09 dammit he removed the links to the other sites on the top 11:55:44 AnMaster: "sweeping under the rug" 11:55:58 "Persion" 11:56:01 x_x 11:56:52 must be a typo 11:57:07 it's not hard to proof-read a four-frame comic 11:58:00 oerjan, oh 11:59:53 ehird: he _did_ mention he had little time that week ;D 12:00:19 This is related to earlier things, but in the Scheme compiler I wrote recently I did put everything in the pointer; but that was for x86-64, which has 64-bit pointers even though the current hardware only has 48 address lines, so it's quite safe. 12:00:53 fizzie, not future proof in any way 12:01:03 fizzie, plus, doesn't the spec say they *have 12:01:10 oerjan: accounting for the buffer? 12:01:12 *have* to be sign extended? 12:01:19 fizzie: right, with 54-bit it's fine 12:01:21 *64 12:01:24 AnMaster: dude 12:01:25 shut UP 12:01:28 ehird: "that" yes 12:01:35 ehird, no 12:01:48 AnMaster: 64-bit is 16,777,216 terabytes 12:02:01 '@:*:* 12:02:02 so fuck off with the "future proof" bullshit 12:02:03 ehird, yes I know. 12:02:09 it's just irritating 12:02:10 nothing more 12:02:24 ehird, however, No one will ever need more than 32 bits. A whopping 4 GB RAM? Never. 12:02:26 !haskell 2^48 12:02:27 The sign-extension doesn't really matter; I mean, there's a sign-extending shift operation and everything. (And anyway I'm dealing with user-land pointers only, which have the sign bit set to zero.) 12:02:30 AnMaster 12:02:38 281474976710656 12:03:18 '@:*:*:* 12:04:52 Besides, I do a fixed-address mmap for my memory, so it's "future-proof" in some sense (though not portable at all), in that it won't stop working, it's just limited to some 64 petabytes of addressable space. 12:05:57 AnMaster: Comments on a Postcard :D 12:06:03 AnMaster: Let's say that you manage, by force of pure magic, to fit a megabyte in ONE ANGSTROM. 12:06:18 AnMaster: The whole 64-bit address space would take up 1,119 miles, with nothing between the megabytes. 12:06:38 AnMaster: Such colossal, colossal storage in the future - and you believe these will use today's 64-bit processors running on today's operating systems? 12:06:53 AnMaster: And, in fact, our current stuff does less. 12:06:55 ehird: one cubic angstrom, surely? ;D 12:06:59 For instance, all addresses are even. 12:07:00 Ångstrom* 12:07:04 Even. 12:07:09 So half that. 12:07:10 BUT 12:07:17 Some of the top bits are reserved for internal amd64 stuff, I forget how much 12:07:21 So subdivide it even more 12:07:23 Deewiant: Ångström 12:07:25 The hardware is ALREADY limited 12:07:36 oerjan: Oh, true, woops 12:07:38 And current physical constraints much, much moreso. 12:08:00 CALLING USING THE UPPER BITS OF A 64-BIT POINTER "NOT FUTURE PROOF" is... just unbelievably retarded. 12:08:15 So please, shut up. 12:08:51 thx 12:08:53 `calc 2^64 cubic angstrom in cubic meters 12:08:54 (2^64) (cubic angstrom) = 1.84467441 � 10^-11 cubic meters 12:09:29 `calc 2^64 cubic angstrom in cubic millimeters 12:09:30 (2^64) (cubic angstrom) = 0.0184467441 cubic millimeters 12:09:48 oerjan: sure thing then. i'm eagerly awaiting your megabyte-in-cubic-armstrong technology 12:09:58 somehow I don't think the laws of physics are on your side. 12:10:00 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.org <- Nobody cares enough to cybersquat it"). 12:10:07 fizzie: if I was doing 64-bit only I wouldn't even think about it 12:10:13 I'm actually using the lowest byte (it's easier to test for types, since the least significant byte of x86-64 registers is independently accessible, and a single "sar rn, 8" makes a suitably sign-extended pointer out of it), to be a pedant. 12:10:27 comes out to the same thing 12:10:37 ehird: i am merely pointing out that putting things on a line rather than in a volume is disingenious 12:10:40 Sure, but you said "top". 12:10:47 oerjan: I didn't think properly 12:10:49 but it doesn't matter 12:11:01 a far more reasonable thing would be, say, "4 bytes in an angstrom" 12:11:12 even that would be extremely lucky... 12:11:53 ehird: oh wait, you said megabyte? i calculated for single bytes ;D 12:12:24 shrug - show your tech 12:12:26 it sounds amazing 12:12:46 you can fit a whole byte in an angstrom somehow, and bunch this right up against other bytes with no instability? 12:12:48 _you_ brought up the example 12:12:50