00:09:34 <fizzie> It's not the length of your general-purpose registers, it's how you use 'em.
00:09:43 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
00:11:43 <cpressey> And the label reads "General purpose register -- To be used for general purposes only"
00:13:05 <cpressey> (the "Enhanced Z80", ftr, is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilog_Z80000)
00:13:47 <cpressey> Hm, not Z80-compatible, though.
00:13:57 -!- tombom has quit (Quit: Leaving).
00:14:03 <fizzie> There's the eZ80, too.
00:14:07 -!- Sgeo has joined.
00:14:23 <fizzie> No on-chip MMU, but more address bits and so on.
00:20:41 <fizzie> Oh, and the Z180 has some sort of on-chip memory banking thing, but I don't know if you can (ab)use that for memory protection or not.
00:21:33 <olsner> haha, long mode would change the behaviour of NOP to not be no-op, unless they gave it a special case
00:22:15 <olsner> ("NOP" is actually xchg eax,eax - but 32-bit operations are supposed to clear the upper bits of the 64-bit register)
00:24:03 <pikhq> It is fucking *ridiculous* how much better video looks when you go and calibrate your monitor right.
00:24:09 <pikhq> Absolutely, positively fucking ridiculous.
00:25:06 <Sgeo> pikhq, any websites that can help with that?
00:25:14 <elliott> olsner: they do give it a special case :P
00:25:31 <elliott> olsner: Say, does x86 actually have a specific nop instruction?
00:25:38 <Sgeo> I remember seeing a page once...
00:25:45 <olsner> elliott: yes, they special-case it
00:25:54 <pikhq> Sgeo: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/index.php
00:26:00 <fizzie> Well, it does have a specific NOP now.
00:26:15 <Sgeo> It occurs to me that I have not the faintest idea how to adjust stuff on this thing
00:26:19 <olsner> if you really want the swap-with-self-and-clear-upper-bits you have to use a different encoding of the same instruction
00:26:37 <cpressey> fizzie: I wonder if it was the Z180 I was thinking of...
00:26:39 <fizzie> I wouldn't be surprised if it's been special-cased for a while now.
00:28:08 <Sgeo> How do I adjust contrast on a laptop?
00:28:14 <cpressey> Unlike the Z80,000, I can actually find units of Z180 for sale.
00:29:21 <cpressey> http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/ZiLOG/Z8S18010PSG/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMtp5ziQ9mm%252bAtzjy5qS0%252bme DIP-60 :)
00:29:22 <Sgeo> Might Windows's built-in calibration stuff be any help?
00:29:28 <Sgeo> I can disable what the OS does, right?
00:29:28 <pikhq> What's most important is getting your gamma set straight...
00:30:13 <Sgeo> How do I get the monitor's menu on this thing?
00:30:35 <pikhq> The gamma correction should be in your OS. I *highly* doubt your monitor can help you.
00:30:49 <cpressey> That totally must be what I was thinking of, although fizzie is absolutely correct that it's not clear if the "MMU" actually protects memory, or just pages it.
00:31:06 <Sgeo> Right now I'm looking at color calibration
00:31:18 <Sgeo> "press the menu button for the display"
00:31:29 -!- MigoMipo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
00:32:04 <Sgeo> Oh, gamma doesn't require that
00:33:01 <Gregor> I DO NOT PLAY WIND INSTRUMENTS
00:34:18 <pikhq> Gregor: Fix that, you monster.
00:34:45 <Sgeo> My dad's asking me to look for the best mp4 player
00:34:56 <Sgeo> All I can think is VLC, but he's asking me to look for writeups
00:35:09 <Sgeo> Does it even make sense for different players to have different qualities
00:35:19 <Gregor> pikhq: I'm gasping for breath because I'm playing a melodica :P
00:35:22 <pikhq> Just like for every other video format.
00:35:30 <Gregor> pikhq: Specifically, I'm playing ZEE3 on a melodica.
00:35:43 <Gregor> While wearing a retainer because this mouthpiece is effing up my teeth X-D
00:36:37 <Sgeo> Do different video players even play the same file at different video quality? That makes no sense to me
00:37:17 <pikhq> Some video players actually do suck ass at quality.
00:38:43 <pikhq> What matters is generally how it actually outputs to screen, though. Aside from a small handful of cases, they will all get the exact same raw video stream from a video.
00:39:00 <pikhq> (there's some players with *broken decoders*.)
00:40:02 -!- cpressey has quit (Quit: Lost terminal).
00:40:26 <elliott> <Sgeo> My dad's asking me to look for the best mp4 player
00:40:26 <elliott> <Sgeo> All I can think is VLC, but he's asking me to look for writeups
00:40:33 <elliott> Tell him to take the suggestion or leave it.
00:40:53 <Sgeo> He's satisfied knowing that I asked, I think
00:42:24 <elliott> I wonder if anyone still maintains KDE 3.
00:43:33 <elliott> The Trinity Desktop Environment project, organised and led by Timothy Pearson, Kubuntu release manager for KDE 3.5[9], has released Trinity to pick up where the KDE e.V. left. It is currently trying to keep the KDE 3.5 branch alive, attempting to fix bugs during the process, enhance it with additional features and make it more compatible with recent hardware.
00:43:42 <elliott> This project aims to keep the KDE3.5 computing style alive, as well as polish off any rough edges that were present as of KDE 3.5.10. Along the way, new useful features will be added to keep the environment up-to-date.
00:43:45 <elliott> http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/
00:44:01 <pikhq> And it's in Debian!
00:45:06 <elliott> It's a separate repository.
00:45:34 <elliott> Bit of an unfortunate name, what with the nuclear test.
00:45:36 <elliott> pikhq: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/wiki/pub/Documentation/Releases_3_5_12/sm_kde3_5_maverick_livecd_konqueror.png
00:47:31 <Sgeo> What's so bad about KDE4?
00:47:38 <Sgeo> And is anyone keeping KDE2 alive?
00:47:45 -!- augur has joined.
00:47:57 <Sgeo> Is KDE4 the Vista of KDE or something?
00:47:58 <Gregor> Sgeo: The UI. The fact that it lost all the wonderful customizability of KDE3 while gaining ... retard OS-X-Vista-ness.
00:47:58 <elliott> Everything is bad about KDE 4.
00:48:10 <Gregor> KDE4 is why I switched to XFCE.
00:48:18 <elliott> Gregor: The customisability hasn't been lost that much. But the applications are terrible.
00:48:28 <pikhq> Sgeo: The backend libraries of KDE4 seem decent. But the UI is terrible.
00:48:31 <Gregor> elliott: Do I have to get my LCARS screenshot out :P
00:48:37 <elliott> I could vaguely -- sort of -- understand KDE users in the days of 3.
00:48:47 <elliott> Now everyone who uses KDE is just an idiot and I don't talk to them. :P
00:49:23 <elliott> It's a software compilation now!
00:49:25 <pikhq> KDE 3 was usable. It took tweaking to get it nice, but it was *usable*.
00:49:36 <elliott> "October 30, 2007 (The INTERNET)." -- KDE press release
00:49:42 <pikhq> KDE 4... It's damned near impossible to tell it to stop sucking.
00:49:43 <elliott> WE COME FROM THE INTERNETS
00:50:32 <elliott> "The observers set up betting pools on the results of the test. Predictions ranged from zero (a complete dud) to 18 kilotons of TNT (predicted by physicist I. I. Rabi, who won the bet[24]), to destruction of the state of New Mexico, to ignition of the atmosphere and incineration of the entire planet." -- [[Trinity (nuclear test)]]
00:50:52 <elliott> "I'm gonna go with 'what we've done here will cause New Mexico to cease to exist'."
00:51:08 <olsner> I wonder who expected to cash in on the planetary incineration bet
00:51:23 -!- Mathnerd314 has left (?).
00:52:34 <Ilari> Wonder what they though the reaction (ignition of atmosphere) would be...
00:52:52 <Ilari> Obiviously something exotermic...
00:52:59 <Gregor> Hard to claim your part of the pool when you bet the world would be destroyed :P
00:53:45 <olsner> maybe if it destroyed new mexico and more than 50% of the rest of the world, but not the part where you are
00:53:59 <olsner> then you'd be closest but not correct
00:54:06 * Sgeo would say that that's worse than Hitler
00:54:11 <elliott> Assuming you weren't there when it happened :P
00:54:18 <Gregor> GODWIN'S LAW HAS BEEN INVOKED
00:54:20 <elliott> Sgeo: "Destroying the planet is worse than what Hitler did.
00:54:29 <elliott> Hitler, like, DESTROYED ANDROMEDA
00:54:40 <elliott> OH WAIT NO he just killed a few million people.
00:56:27 * Sgeo performs CPR on the conversation
00:57:29 <olsner> I wonder what's in all these reserved control registers in x86
00:58:03 <olsner> you can use 0,2,3,4,8 but 1, 5-7 and 9-15 are reserved
00:58:25 <Ilari> Uh.. CR8? Never heard about it before...
00:59:13 <olsner> it's the task priority register
01:04:46 -!- Gregor has changed nick to window.
01:08:41 -!- window has changed nick to Gregor.
01:11:09 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
01:35:46 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
01:49:54 <elliott> olsner: you're allowed to use them? Awesome.
01:49:58 <elliott> More general-purpose registers!
01:50:08 <elliott> allowed to use them for their purpose
01:50:15 <elliott> rather than not being allowed to use them at all
01:51:37 <elliott> Gregor types out his prompt when talking to a javascript console.
01:52:01 <olsner> perhaps Gregor plays both parts
01:52:26 <Gregor> olsner: Oh, I PLAY both PARTS *WINK WINK*
01:52:37 <elliott> What Gregor is saying is: sex.
01:53:02 <pikhq> elliott: What about it?
01:53:22 <elliott> pikhq: I've remembered why I have a bad taste in my mouth about it.
01:54:14 <elliott> pikhq: They funded XMMS development for quite a few years and owned the domain xmms.org, which the XMMS project used. Indeed, it was used in the present day, I think it had the XMMS2 site on it, and many XMMS developers used it for email and personal webspace.
01:54:20 * Sgeo attempts to determine if he needs to bring photo ID tomorrow
01:54:25 <elliott> pikhq: Then 4Front Technologies, developers of OSS, decided to sell it.
01:54:28 <elliott> pikhq: To a cybersquatter.
01:54:31 <elliott> pikhq: Without asking the XMMS team.
01:54:38 <elliott> pikhq: They then emailed the XMMS team asking for a webpage dump.
01:54:44 <elliott> pikhq: http://tobias.hieta.se/2010/04/28/what-ever-happened-to-xmms-org/ for the full, gory story.
01:55:29 <Sgeo> There's been debates about whether it's ok to require photo ID
01:56:45 <Sgeo> Found something about Minnesota
01:56:59 <elliott> Sgeo: I am pretty sure they have no constitutional right to demand photo ID...
01:57:02 <pikhq> elliott: The fuck.
01:57:11 <pikhq> elliott: Doesn't stop them.
01:57:46 <elliott> So Sgeo I take it you are voting for the Republicans
01:57:58 <Sgeo> elliott, I know you're joking
01:58:23 <Sgeo> You're in your "try to confuse Sgeo" mode
01:58:27 <pikhq> elliott: You'd have to be braindead to vote for them.
01:58:52 <elliott> Sgeo: So, wait. You're *not* voting for the Republicans?
01:59:09 <Sgeo> I'm not voting straight party whatever, though. Just in regards to people who I know about. Which turns out leaving me supporting all Democrats this election
01:59:33 <elliott> Long live the two-party system!
01:59:35 <Sgeo> Although I don't know as much about Peter King's opponent as I'd like to
02:00:05 <Sgeo> All I know is that Mr. King voted against HCR
02:01:21 <elliott> US health care reform: Because if you don't look to closely, it sort of resembles single-payer health care!
02:02:13 -!- FireFly has quit (Quit: swatted to death).
02:02:15 <Sgeo> As far as I'm aware, it's mostly regulations on what insurance companies can and cannot do
02:02:40 <elliott> Plus *fines* for not having insurance, unless I'm grossly mistaken.
02:02:53 <elliott> Which, y'know, is sort of *entirely great* for the *horrible insurance companies*.
02:03:20 <pikhq> elliott: On the other hand, the bastards can't drop anybody.
02:03:37 <elliott> And all of this is entirely stupid because you guys could *just have single-payer*.
02:03:42 <Sgeo> Aren't the fines cheaper than insurance...?
02:03:45 <pikhq> Still, bit of an ineffectual "reform".
02:04:04 <pikhq> And yet, it's easy to see why it is how it is.
02:04:24 <pikhq> People think that *this* was somehow going to send people to the gas chambers.
02:04:29 <pikhq> And those morons vote.
02:04:34 <Gregor> Killing the entire insurance industry outright wouldn't be good.
02:04:38 <Sgeo> Making the fines essentially worthless
02:04:53 <Gregor> I'm not talking about good for healthcare.
02:05:01 <Gregor> I'm talking about good for the economy, good for jobs.
02:05:14 <elliott> Which, as we all know, are more important than healthcare.
02:05:22 <pikhq> Gregor: It's a massive economic inefficiency, y'know.
02:05:43 <Gregor> pikhq: And a massive economic sinkhole would be better?
02:05:54 <Gregor> I'm not claiming we can't do anything, I'm claiming anything we do needs to be gradual.
02:05:55 <pikhq> Gregor: That's what we *have*.
02:06:09 -!- catseye has joined.
02:06:09 <pikhq> Gregor: We dump money in there that goes to kill people.
02:06:46 <Gregor> pikhq: Yes. But it's money that goes SOMEWHERE. As opposed to cutting off the industry outright and watching thousands of employed people flail.
02:06:56 <Gregor> Currently-employed, that is
02:07:40 <elliott> <Gregor> The US is so fucked up that we have a choice between killing people with massive megacorporations and killing people with unemployment.
02:07:47 <Sgeo> I suppose if the Democrats regain power, they're not going to bother fixing the fix of healthcare?
02:07:57 <Gregor> elliott: Yes. Exactly.
02:07:57 <elliott> <Gregor> Because, in the US, unemployment equals death. Did I mention we're fucked up?
02:08:15 <elliott> Sgeo: Uhh, they're the ones who wanted it so... no.
02:08:19 <Gregor> elliott: Clearly what I'm arguing is to do nothing whatsoever.
02:08:21 <pikhq> Sgeo: Which is an improvement over the Republicans, who intend to repeal the fix and then go under a witch hunt.
02:08:22 <Gregor> elliott: I mean obviously.
02:08:27 <Gregor> elliott: There's nothing else I could be arguing here at all.
02:08:33 <elliott> Gregor: I don't disagree :)
02:08:36 <elliott> Sgeo: You do realise the Democrats are only *slightly* to the left of the Republicans?
02:08:51 <elliott> I am continually amazed that Americans actually buy in to the two-party thing.
02:08:53 <pikhq> Gregor: How's about a 10 or 20 year migration to a public health system?
02:09:00 <Gregor> pikhq: That makes sense.
02:09:06 <Gregor> Preferably closer to 10.
02:09:17 <elliott> Gradually but not slowly extend Medicare to cover pretty much everyone.
02:09:26 <elliott> Insurance companies go "but with us, you get NICER coverage!".
02:09:29 <elliott> They survive because of idiots.
02:09:31 <pikhq> elliott: That's the easiest way to do it, yes.
02:09:34 <elliott> Then extend Medicare to everyone in one go.
02:09:35 <Sgeo> I think it might be possible that the broken fix might be WORSE than no fix
02:09:44 <elliott> Insurance companies cry, shrivel up, and die, but only after stagnating over the previous few years.
02:09:48 <elliott> OMG CAN I BE PRESIDENT NOW
02:09:57 <Gregor> Exactly what's happening to the music industry :P
02:10:02 <pikhq> Sgeo: At least now the insurance companies can't drop you because you became too expensive.
02:10:10 <elliott> Gregor: ...what's music medicare? X-D
02:10:19 <Gregor> elliott: The Pirate Bay
02:10:33 <elliott> Gregor: The Pirate Bay hasn't worked in ages :P
02:10:49 <elliott> Sure, you can search, but their tracker is down and OpenBittorrent never has any peers.
02:11:01 <elliott> They're great for getting .torrent files from torrentz.com, though!
02:11:26 <Gregor> OK, I'll change my answer to "torrents" then X_X
02:11:41 <elliott> pikhq: By the way: http://www.devmazumdar.com/
02:11:45 <pikhq> elliott: Yeah, but you can just generate magnet links from there.
02:12:05 <elliott> "As a gesture of gratitude for his long-lasting generosity (he “invested a lot of money in XMMS.org”, after all), we will be hosting the XMMS project on DEVMAZUMDAR.COM from now on.
02:12:05 <elliott> Thank you so much for everything, Dev."
02:12:23 <Sgeo> There will be people who delay getting insurance until they need it, due to ineffectual fines, which raises prices. What good is insurance that covers any expense if no one can pay for the insurance? (Note: I am not an economist, nor do I know to what extent prices would rise)
02:12:52 <elliott> "I also bought up zinf.org for the same reason. I want to use either or both of these brands to make a new media player that leads the market not follows. I know there are other projects out there but we can re-invent xmms."
02:13:00 <elliott> Dammit people, I bought your domain! Drop XMMS2 NOW and make my perfect media player!
02:13:31 <pikhq> Sgeo: BTW, it's actually a tax that you don't have to pay if you have insurance...
02:13:32 <elliott> Sgeo: Health insurance companies are more in the "wtf" category than the "economics" category.
02:13:41 <elliott> Since demand for healthcare is, uh, *infinite*.
02:14:13 <Sgeo> That site claims there's no guarantee that xmms.org downloads don't contain malware
02:14:14 <pikhq> Sgeo: And anyways, healthcare is one of those things that just plain does not function at all under free market conditions.
02:14:38 <elliott> Sgeo: There is no such guarantee, since a cybersquatter owns it.
02:14:58 <Sgeo> ...according to this devmazumdar person, or according to reality?
02:15:00 <elliott> olsner: i should totally write my OS in Literate Assembly.
02:15:06 <elliott> Sgeo: devmazumdar does not own devmazumdar.com.
02:15:12 <elliott> Sgeo: Try READING the TEXT on the PAGE with your EYES.
02:15:23 <olsner> elliott: you should totally do that
02:15:42 <elliott> Sgeo: Our dear friend Dev Mazumdar, from 4Front Technologies, sold our XMMS.ORG domain without asking the XMMS community.
02:15:43 <Sgeo> How do you determine which is real and which is lying?
02:15:44 <elliott> As a gesture of gratitude for his long-lasting generosity (he “invested a lot of money in XMMS.org”, after all), we will be hosting the XMMS project on DEVMAZUMDAR.COM from now on.
02:15:44 <elliott> Thank you so much for everything, Dev.
02:15:57 <elliott> Sgeo: Considering that message is from the *XMMS team* and is also on their *official blog*
02:16:01 <elliott> you'd have to be a moron to believe the cybersquatter.
02:16:06 <elliott> olsner: so have you got long mode working yet EH
02:17:57 <olsner> elliott: no, I'm still leisurely reading the manual
02:18:38 <olsner> probably would've gotten it done without knowing what I was really doing by now, but ehm, that'd be less fun
02:19:14 <olsner> unfortunately the example seems to be right at the end of the manual, like 400 pages away
02:19:28 <olsner> GOD FORBID I just skip to it
02:22:59 <olsner> the manual keeps luring me into reading about task switching and stuff, which isn't strictly required to get into long mode and write some data to vga memory
02:27:14 <elliott> http://www.posix.nl/linuxassembly/nasmdochtml/nasmdoca.html omg this is the best x86 reference ever
02:29:10 <elliott> olsner: i so totally want to write it in literate asm but, lack of tools
02:29:45 <olsner> you don't have sed installed? :D
02:30:42 <elliott> olsner: uh, literate programming also involves rearranging code
02:30:47 <elliott> olsner: also: emacs syntax highlighting, etc.
02:35:04 <elliott> olsner: I might try it with noweb.
02:35:13 <elliott> olsner: But really, I'd like to get into long mode first and I need YOU for that, slacker
02:37:40 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
02:37:51 <elliott> Sgeo: I do that all the time.
02:42:25 <elliott> Actually I don't think I like noweb, LaTeX isn't really ideal for what I'd like to use literate programming for.
02:44:35 <olsner> I'm not convinced about this literacy thing
02:45:10 <olsner> tried to read tex once, I couldn't find the program for all the text
02:45:11 <elliott> olsner: I'm not either, but it would be fun to have a literate bootloader.
02:45:19 <elliott> olsner: oh, TeX's use is all very archaic
02:45:26 <elliott> olsner: I mean, the Pascal doesn't compile on any modern Pascal compiler!
02:45:36 <elliott> olsner: And WEB itself is basically only distributed with TeX distributions.
02:45:49 <Sgeo> I think it's safe to say that Factor does the opposite of literate programming
02:45:50 <elliott> olsner: you mean you couldn't find the code snippets?
02:45:57 <Sgeo> Code and documentation are in separate file
02:46:11 <elliott> olsner: Well, you're not meant to :)
02:46:29 <elliott> Of course literate programming is basically designed for one person to write and everyone else to read...
02:47:59 <olsner> exactly, I couldn't find the code snippets in all the text... and I'm not meant to? huh?
02:48:53 <elliott> olsner: You're meant to read the text, not skip past it.
02:49:14 <pikhq> olsner: It's a book that just happens to be executable.
02:50:59 <olsner> elliott: IIRC, I just wanted to find the tex interpreter to figure out how the programming language in tex worked without accidentally learning any typography
02:51:17 <elliott> olsner: Knuth doesn't want you to. It's an ego thing. :)
02:51:35 <elliott> olsner: Of course one could always have the typography engine and the programming language in separate chapters.
03:00:07 <elliott> olsner: huh, "xor x, x" is slower than "mov x, 0" now
03:01:32 <olsner> mov is still longer since you end up with a 4-byte constant
03:02:30 <elliott> in my boot sector at least
03:02:37 <elliott> also "inc x inc x" is shorter than "add x, 2" :)
03:02:46 <elliott> didn't expect that one, but i guess it's obvious in retrospect
03:03:31 <pikhq> elliott: It actually depends on the CPU which one is shorter.
03:03:38 <pikhq> elliott: Erm, faster.
03:03:48 <elliott> well, in modern tymes mov x, 0 is faster
03:04:50 <elliott> It's because Intel were like "lol xor is so rare, fuck that".
03:04:53 <pikhq> The UK only has 5 OTA analog TV stations possible in their system?
03:05:03 <elliott> pikhq: Um, no, I think we *could* have a sixth.
03:05:12 <elliott> pikhq: But the government went "okay, that's it" after the fifth.
03:05:23 <elliott> pikhq: And a lot of people still can't pick up Five. :)
03:05:45 <elliott> Lol, they've renamed it back to Channel 5.
03:05:57 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
03:06:05 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
03:06:52 <elliott> pikhq: QUICK WHAT SHOULD I CALL MY TEENY TINY LISP INTERPRETER
03:06:56 <elliott> STIGMATISM, SIBILANT OR INTERDENTAL
03:07:31 <Gregor> How about IHEARTBRACKETS
03:07:40 <pikhq> elliott: The North American analog assignment currently allows for about 30 stations.
03:07:48 <pikhq> elliott: Used to allow for 45 or so.
03:07:51 <elliott> pikhq: Yeah but you guys are retarded.
03:08:07 <Gregor> elliott: I call them parentheses, I thought you guys called them brackets X-P
03:08:30 <elliott> Gregor: () parentheses, [] brackets, {} braces, <> angle brackets
03:08:43 <elliott> Gregor: It is the only terminology I accept. :)
03:08:59 <elliott> Gregor: [] can also be referred to as "square brackets" to disambiguate.
03:09:03 <Gregor> elliott: I call them "curly braces" in spite of their being no other braces, but otherwise that's what I use :P
03:09:30 <elliott> But if I'm talking quickly or whatever, I'd truncate square/curly.
03:09:56 <elliott> pikhq: OMG I should totally make my Lisp run on the bare metal.
03:12:14 <Sgeo> curly brackets
03:12:42 <pikhq> elliott: Seriously though, 6 stations being *at all possible*?
03:12:48 <elliott> pikhq: I think there's more...
03:12:57 <pikhq> elliott: What, do you have gigahertz allocations?
03:12:58 <elliott> Gregor: This was captioned "Tiny Core Linux 2.9": http://www.desktoplinux.com/files/misc/tinycorelinux_v29.jpg
03:13:03 <elliott> pikhq: I don't think so :P
03:13:09 <elliott> pikhq: But I think there could be more than 6.
03:13:41 <elliott> Gregor: You see, they're installing Tiny Core Linux from Windows!
03:13:50 <elliott> To be fair, a real screenshot followed, captioned "Tiny Core Linux 2.4.1 Yep, it's minimalist.".
03:15:05 <elliott> olsner: I NEED LONG MODE FOR MY LISPING
03:18:25 <Sgeo> HOT SEXY SEX BITS
03:18:27 <Sgeo> http://sgeo.diagonalfish.net/screenshots/sex_byte_determination.png
03:19:27 <elliott> `addquote <Sgeo> HOT SEXY SEX BITS
03:19:37 <HackEgo> 252|<Sgeo> HOT SEXY SEX BITS
03:19:45 <pikhq> elliott: Doesn't seem like it.
03:19:58 <elliott> pikhq: You thought it was five before I said no :P
03:21:08 <Sgeo> There's only one sex byte there, it's the byte that's 01 on the top and 37 on the bottom
03:21:23 <Sgeo> But the sex byte is repeated a multitude of times throughout the files
03:22:26 <pikhq> elliott: Aaah, PAL-I has significantly more *possible* but the bandwidth allocation is such that you can't squeeze more than 6 in.
03:25:06 <Sgeo> http://sgeo.diagonalfish.net/screenshots/ten_crea_sex_bytes_and_much_more_to_go.png At the point shown in the file, I had found 10 sex bytes
03:26:17 <catseye> say, hypothetically, that i wanted to code in the microcode that underlies the x86 code on a modern machine. what would i have to go through to do that?
03:26:18 <elliott> has Sgeo actually managed to be nostalgic about himself?
03:26:26 <elliott> catseye: you can't -- it's read-only
03:26:39 <elliott> catseye: also, afaik, not public
03:27:08 <elliott> Linux and FreeBSD(on x86 PCs) have a patch program that fixes botched CPU microcode. Of all UNIX (and UNIX-like) operating systems on Intel (and Intel x86-compatible) PCs there has been an ongoing requirement to patch erroneous microcode since the FPU multiplier problem that was endemic to some Pentiums.
03:27:15 <elliott> Several Intel CPUs in the IA32 architecture family have writable microcode.[10] This has allowed bugs in the Intel Core 2 microcode and Intel Xeon microcode to be fixed in software, rather than requiring the entire chip to be replaced. Such fixes can be installed by Linux,[11] FreeBSD[12] Microsoft Windows,[13] or the motherboard BIOS.[14]
03:27:23 <elliott> catseye: http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/manual/253668.pdf
03:27:34 <catseye> if you can patch you YOU CAN CODE IN IT
03:29:10 <catseye> hm, i need to build a pdf reader here don't i
03:30:20 <elliott> catseye: evince is very nice.
03:30:34 <elliott> epdfview or whatever it is is really shit
03:30:40 <elliott> evince is worth the few gnome dependencies :)
03:31:04 <Sgeo> http://z15.invisionfree.com/CC_Developers/index.php?showtopic=8
03:31:07 <Sgeo> That's my code
03:31:20 <Sgeo> (for the "Anyway, this is the script for the robot toy norn")
03:31:28 <Sgeo> Well, except the stuff I may have borrowed myself
03:32:17 <Sgeo> Which is probably everything but the first three lines, the born, and the vocb
03:32:39 <Sgeo> Oh, probably duplicating the physics stuff from the robot toy
03:32:42 <Sgeo> I am not Grendel man
03:32:47 <Sgeo> he copied my code
03:32:55 <Sgeo> I don't think he claimed it as his own though
03:35:21 <Sgeo> From that thread, Grendel Man made http://www.seeyou7.net/creatures/creatures3/breeds/grendelman/images/g-rainbowsharkling.html
03:35:45 <Sgeo> "This will cause problems with the GUI and the Creature Selection Menu, so I included an agent by Sgeo that fixes this issue - or at least with DS."
03:36:39 <catseye> hypothetically i would probably patch the sse instructions or something else i could, in theory at least, do without (make sure everything on the machine is built WITHOUT them, first)
03:36:43 <elliott> OMG HE MENTIONED YOUR NAME'#5;46
03:36:56 <elliott> catseye: yeah uh, everything uses sse nowadays
03:36:59 <elliott> catseye: maybe the latest version of sse
03:37:09 <catseye> elliott: well you can tell the compiler to not generate it, right?
03:37:16 <elliott> catseye: I would overwrite the BCD instructions.
03:37:29 <catseye> that's also a good candidate, but there are fewer of them.
03:37:44 <catseye> but i would only want to turn them into brainfuck anyway, so sure.
03:38:02 <elliott> catseye: Surely you could assign unimplemented instructions?
03:38:07 <elliott> I imagine it looks them up anyway. At least some of them.
03:38:25 <catseye> i don't know. possibly you could.
03:38:39 <elliott> catseye: what about 6502 microcode
03:39:47 <catseye> elliott: that seems less appealing somehow
03:39:58 <catseye> 6502's don't deserve having their brains rewired
03:39:58 <elliott> catseye: you were meant to go "OMG 6502 HAD MICROCODE?"
03:40:47 <pikhq> Y'know, I'm convinced that the bastards who designed analog TV were, well, bastards.
03:41:04 <pikhq> Why couldn't they have made everything simpler and just had 24 fps content go over the air?
03:41:23 <elliott> catseye: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSE4a#SSE4a
03:41:32 <elliott> five AMD-only instructions you could maybe reassign on your intel processor
03:43:11 <pikhq> Just... 24 fps progressive video. As already existed in large quantities.
03:43:44 <elliott> Has anyone gone through their day without a single crazy music video advertising a long-awaited Lisp book?
03:43:51 <elliott> I will now fix that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM1Zb3xmvMc
03:49:35 <olsner> elliott: I am now enabling paging in long mode and it fails when trying to read the next instruction (the page is not in the page tables)
03:49:58 <elliott> olsner: even if the next one is an appropriate jump?
03:50:05 <elliott> also, simple solution: add it to the page tables!
03:50:35 <olsner> it's *supposed* to be in the page table, obviously
03:50:55 <elliott> olsner: have you tried copying their example code more directly? :P
03:56:30 -!- Sgeo_ has joined.
03:56:50 <elliott> olsner: haha, oh boy; if my kernel gets bigger than 512k/1 meg or so, my bootloader will have to load it in unreal mode
03:57:26 <Sgeo_> Dear laptop battery: Fuck you in the ... thingies
03:58:03 <Sgeo_> I was trying to think of the names of the + and -
03:58:09 <Sgeo_> terminals? electrodes?
03:58:27 -!- Sgeo has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
04:04:47 <elliott> olsner: i take it it works perfectly now
04:05:05 <Ilari> Ugh... How many different *NAMEs DNS has? CNAME, DNAME, ZNAME? Oh and apparently there's proposals for BNAME...
04:12:48 <Ilari> Ah, there are only CNAME and DNAME. ZNAME is also a proposal...
04:15:27 * Sgeo_ kind of knows what CNAME is
04:15:33 <elliott> http://www.codlug.info/files/u1/gnome1_0.jpg GNOME 1 -- it's what plants crave!
04:16:19 <elliott> catseye: damn your BSD-usingness, I am becoming less and less convinced that advanced package managers matter.
04:34:00 <olsner> elliott: long mode achieved
04:34:14 <elliott> olsner: awesome! GIMME CODE
04:36:05 <elliott> olsner: haha, my bootloader is going to start in real mode, go into protected mode, go into unreal mode, go into protected mode, and then go into long mode
04:36:22 <elliott> olsner: protected to get to unreal, unreal so i can load a >1 meg kernel, protected to get to long, and long to run the kernel
04:45:04 -!- Decarabia has quit (Read error: No route to host).
04:45:27 -!- wareya_ has joined.
04:48:39 -!- wareya has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
04:49:20 -!- Decarabia has joined.
05:01:03 -!- augur has joined.
05:01:07 <elliott> olsner has figured out that if he doesn't give me code, i am powerless
05:01:21 <catseye> elliott: so does the loading work again yet?
05:01:37 <catseye> am i interested in what the problem was?
05:01:40 <olsner> elliott: http://gist.github.com/657234
05:02:07 <elliott> catseye: i'm stupid and olsner isn't
05:02:17 <elliott> catseye: some stupid parameter to the call
05:02:22 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
05:03:07 <olsner> hmm, it's really QUITE late now
05:04:22 <elliott> olsner: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
05:04:30 <olsner> happy code stealing and good night :)
05:04:46 <olsner> elliott: just ... figure it out :)
05:08:32 -!- augur has joined.
05:09:24 <catseye> elliott: surely you mean: PAE!
05:09:34 <elliott> catseye: i'm tired shut up :|
05:11:22 <catseye> ERROR: This package has set PKG_FAIL_REASON:
05:11:22 <catseye> ERROR: openmotif-2.3.1nb4 has an unacceptable license condition:
05:11:38 <catseye> DEAR PACKAGE YOUR LICENSE IS IN ERROR
05:12:50 <elliott> catseye: package managers; who neds em
05:13:49 <catseye> is what i'm thinking right now, certainly
05:13:55 <catseye> saving me legally from myself
05:14:30 <elliott> catseye: herz what im thinkin, in tired-shorthand;
05:14:46 <elliott> catseye: /usr/src. ok. buncha directories inside, dey pkgs.
05:15:24 <elliott> catseye: makefile. "all" rule, depend on like the-software-version/{configure,Makefile}, and dey just call dose. rul for dose configure and makefile, is, we download software tarball from internet, and unpack.
05:15:42 <elliott> catseye: and der a download-binary target, which does same for binary tarball which has makefile that install and etc.
05:16:46 <catseye> you know, as long as you can cleanly remove what you install, i don't care about the rest
05:18:31 <elliott> catseye: oh yaeh make uninstall target.
05:18:42 <elliott> catseye: with bianry package all this is much simpler
05:18:48 <elliott> install: tar xf, run shell script
05:18:59 <elliott> uninstall: remove all non-config files from some manifest, run shell script
05:19:08 <elliott> catseye: then we just plug that into a ports-style autocompile system
05:23:48 -!- evincar has joined.
05:24:36 <elliott> evincar: ah! the frontispiece!
05:24:58 <evincar> elliott: Beg coming your pardon?
05:25:15 <elliott> thou art'st'st'st'st's't'st'st'st; unbulate
05:25:27 <elliott> track the pititulancers oft'x blaeæit;
05:25:56 <evincar> Are you writing in some esolang we don't know yet? :P
05:26:17 <elliott> evincar: VERILY! crite understambulaters,
05:26:32 <elliott> creese down t'tirednes wht'sgrinnin'
05:29:03 <evincar> So I'm starting a site some folk on here might find interesting and useful.
05:29:44 <evincar> I have to do a final project for my Web Design class, and I figured it would be more beneficial to myself and mankind to make something other than a personal page that'll rot on the school server.
05:30:25 <evincar> Anyway, it's a site for vote-based advertisement of new open-source projects, so small developers can gain exposure.
05:31:37 <evincar> You get an icon, a URL, and a Twitter-sized description. You can upvote or downvote projects. Receiving a downvote loses you points, and giving one loses you a few fewer. Receiving upvotes on your project or your userpage gives you points.
05:32:13 <evincar> Projects and users are ranked by newest, most popular, and "hottest", that is, both new and popular.
05:32:58 <evincar> There's nothing quite like it out there.
05:33:05 <evincar> So I think I have a good niche.
05:33:05 <elliott> i think there is a reddit for that.
05:33:39 <elliott> evincar: i can't think i'd ever browse it -- it sounds like a site of ads, admittedly user-controlled ads
05:34:04 <elliott> it's not a good idea to go out in search of software "just because".
05:34:15 <elliott> software should be built to serve a use and people who want that use should use the software.
05:34:25 <elliott> i am not sure i approve of the idea of showcasing software just because it exists.
05:34:34 <elliott> it's the kind of thing i expect from commercial software
05:35:09 <evincar> Right, but if you want people to work on your software with you, but aren't established yet, what do you do? Sourceforge and freshmeat and even slightly smaller sites such as Google Code and github aren't geared toward exposure for new projects.
05:35:12 <Sgeo_> You don't approve of showcasing PSOX?
05:35:37 * Sgeo_ finds a bridge to duck under
05:35:50 <elliott> evincar: The kind of people who would read the site are, I feel, not the kind of people who would make good software contributors.
05:36:06 <elliott> evincar: Also, contributing to software you don't have a need for is an exercise in half-assedness.
05:36:18 <elliott> Better is to find a community or group of people with the need, and look for contributors there.
05:37:03 <evincar> elliott: You can't say what sort of people would use the site until it's actually been run. (Never optimise without profiling?) And who says you'd contribute to software you don't have a need for? You'd contribute to software that interests you because you have a need for it.
05:37:32 <elliott> evincar: then the software developer should ask for contributors on a relevant forum
05:37:37 <evincar> Or even just see what the open-source community is up to and take a ride on the bleeding edge.
05:37:37 <elliott> basically you're saying that the usecase is
05:37:45 <elliott> programmer who has a need for X reads this site on a regular basis
05:37:51 <elliott> just happens to see some software that does X
05:37:58 <elliott> this sounds like a very contrived usage scenario.
05:38:02 <elliott> <evincar> Or even just see what the open-source community is up to and take a ride on the bleeding edge.
05:38:05 <elliott> so software for software's sake.
05:38:41 <evincar> Yes, and gaining exposure, promoting good new ideas.
05:38:45 <catseye> i don't see how this is just about attracting contributors; users would also be part of the audience
05:38:52 <elliott> software for software's sake is the reason software sucks
05:39:00 <elliott> catseye: because users already have a way of finding software to meet need X
05:39:16 <elliott> and it's called freshmeat, google, etc.; okay, they're not very *good*, but the basic model can be improved upon.
05:39:22 <catseye> sometimes users don't know what their "needs" even are
05:39:23 <elliott> this site would merely showcase new software
05:39:32 <elliott> catseye: ok, so have a site for games
05:39:54 <elliott> catseye: what's your non-game example?
05:40:51 <elliott> because games are very different from other software
05:41:54 <evincar> elliott: That's what tags are for. Let a folksonomy develop.
05:42:03 <elliott> "folksonomy" please never use this word...
05:42:04 <evincar> Also, I'm just doing this for school, as an experiment. If it takes off, bully.
05:42:08 <elliott> evincar: ok, so it's basically freshmeat?
05:42:16 <evincar> elliott: WEB 2.0 AJAX CLOUD
05:42:25 <elliott> with a semi-pointless top list of all projects
05:43:13 <elliott> Must. Stay. Awake. To. Normalise. Sleep. Schedule.
05:43:50 <evincar> elliott: Yes, but with subtly different motivation and approach, and not targeted toward just "unix and cross-platform" software.
05:44:12 <elliott> uhm i just saw a piece of software on freshmeat that was windows/os x only.
05:45:08 * elliott pumps more liquid sugar + caffeine into system
05:45:30 <evincar> So...only Windows or OSX. That crosses two platforms, one of which is Unix-based.
05:45:39 <elliott> ok so basically you want windows-only software too
05:46:40 <evincar> It's more like Ohloh, except less like a wiki and more like Twitter.
05:46:56 <evincar> And no, I'm not just trying to sound "Web 2.0" here. I think it's got it's place.
05:47:02 <catseye> good luck on your project, evincar. hope you get a good grade
05:47:16 <elliott> catseye: i'm not trying to disparage his work or anything
05:47:16 <evincar> catseye: Cheers, that's all I'm asking.
05:47:23 <elliott> i'm just critiquing the idea from a standalone viewpoint
05:47:25 -!- catseye has quit (Quit: leaving).
05:47:27 <evincar> elliott: I realise that. I'm glad for the critique.
05:47:37 <elliott> evincar: the thing you're missing, i think, is that twitter is a vast cloud of meaningless noise :)
05:47:48 <elliott> evincar: what you have said sounds a *lot* more like reddit to me than twitter btw
05:47:59 <evincar> Yes, but a *very active* vast cloud of meaningless noise.
05:48:04 <elliott> evincar: i guess, you could say that what you want is the reddit to freshmeat's slashdot.
05:48:31 <elliott> evincar: freshmeat's descriptions of software are very long and it's "heavy-weight"
05:48:39 <elliott> no user input as to the order of things on the front page
05:48:48 <elliott> whereas you want short descriptions and user control
05:48:58 <elliott> well, if you pull it off, it might be worthwhile
05:49:00 <evincar> Centred around the idea of building a community.
05:49:02 <elliott> i don't think i'll use it though :)
05:49:10 <evincar> Hey, whatever. You'll know about it.
05:49:21 <elliott> but then, hey, i don't even like using most software that isn't mine
05:49:32 <elliott> because i'm a cynical bastard and hate software
05:49:41 <elliott> man what the hell am i going to be like when i'm 20
05:49:44 <evincar> Oh, you have Not Invented Here Disorder? :P
05:50:02 <elliott> (sleepiness is part of age, i swear)
05:50:17 <evincar> I was trying to coin a new term. The Syndrome refers to a company doing it. :P
05:50:58 <evincar> Well, I'm 19, and way less cynical than I was when I was 15.
05:51:03 <elliott> evincar: I do have NIH but I also have a separate hatred of most software :)
05:51:12 <elliott> Bring back Lisp machines! or don't, because they were flawed, but
05:51:16 <elliott> sure as hell better than what we have today
05:51:26 <elliott> thanks apple! thanks microsoft! thanks ib motherfuckin' m!
05:51:39 <evincar> You're cheeky. How long've you been awake?
05:52:03 <evincar> And what time is it there now?
05:52:15 <elliott> I plan to stay awake until 00:00 or so
05:52:20 <elliott> I'm normalising! hahahaha yeah right
05:52:35 <evincar> I was going to say "that's not so bad", but it's not not so bad.
05:52:47 <elliott> i should have gone to bed about, uh, now, but my probable sleeping disorder hates me
05:52:58 <evincar> And your urge to drink caffeine.
05:53:08 <elliott> evincar: in *this* case it's intentional
05:53:18 <elliott> to stop me falling asleep before i want to
05:53:37 <evincar> Well, it's just before 1:00 here, and I'm going strong since I woke up late today.
05:53:59 <elliott> I'm not actually as tired as it seems.
05:54:09 <evincar> And spent the rest of the day catching up on homework for the class I missed this morning.
05:54:10 <elliott> I was a little while ago, but I've perked back up.
05:54:22 <elliott> I intend to eat a damn good breakfast when it's morning to propel me through the day.
05:54:41 <evincar> I may take a run to the store and get an energy drink before it closes in an hour.
05:54:57 <evincar> Not sure, though, since I have 7 hours of class ahead of me.
05:55:05 <elliott> (related fun fact to a few lines ago -- melatonin is actually prescription only in the uk! can you believe that? if i cared about stupid laws like that, i'd need a *prescription* to legally own a hormone present in my own body at all times)
05:55:44 <elliott> in the us, it's not even a drug, it's a "dietary supplement" :)
05:55:50 <evincar> And I'm a lightweight, so half your typical energy drink, plus plenty of water, is more than enough to keep me awake for an extra 24 hours.
05:56:02 <elliott> evincar: yeah i should probably down one of those ridiculously unhealthy new "shot" energy drinks
05:56:15 <elliott> that taste like blended batteries
05:56:48 <evincar> Well, US law has some issues with drug laws. If you label it as a "supplement" it doesn't need to be evaluated under the Food and Drug Administration's stringent pharmacological requirements.
05:56:57 <elliott> "dos2unix $1 &> /dev/null && \
05:56:57 <elliott> unix2dos $1 &> /dev/null && \
05:56:57 <elliott> dos2unix $1 &> /dev/null &"
05:57:11 <evincar> So vitamins and homeopathic remedies are all labelled accordingly.
05:57:16 <elliott> evincar: yeah, that's why melatonin is such too
05:57:28 <elliott> I love the idea of FDA evaluating a natural hormone to see if it's safe.
05:57:52 <elliott> "As melatonin has been determined unfit for pharmaceutical use, its production is now prohibited. Consequently, reproduction is now illegal."
05:58:25 <evincar> Well, hormones aren't the worst things to mess with, but messing with them *is* messing with yourself.
05:59:15 <elliott> evincar: well, yeah. low melatonin levels aren't uncommon though, and i found several studies a while back
05:59:20 <elliott> one, in short term adult use -- no side effects at all
05:59:25 <elliott> another, in *long term* *child* use -- no side effects at all
05:59:29 <evincar> If I take growth hormones along with an exercise regime, I'll become far more bulky than I would just exercising normally.
05:59:47 <elliott> and the side effects are "you get a headache and oversleep"
05:59:48 <evincar> Right, melatonin in particular is benign.
05:59:54 <elliott> so uh, i'd have trouble thinking of a scenario in which bad things would happen :)
06:00:04 <evincar> Uh, miss an important event?
06:00:20 <evincar> That's so serious compared to, y'know, meth.
06:03:18 <evincar> I dunno, I've had some pretty crazy sleep.
06:03:33 <evincar> Then again, I'm all about fucking with the relationship between sleep, waking, madness, and death.
06:03:42 <elliott> i am totally not about that
06:03:57 <elliott> i do not like blurring the line between waking and death :)
06:03:58 <evincar> Well, I'm fond of existential bullshit. It's a hobby.
06:04:45 <evincar> Sometime, if you get the chance, you ought to stay awake for a few days. It's a very interesting experience.
06:04:57 <elliott> evincar: my max was about 40 hours
06:05:06 <elliott> i almost physically collapsed
06:05:58 <evincar> I think my record was pushing 70, which is still nothing compared to, say, the world record.
06:06:31 <elliott> the world record probably ended in death
06:07:03 <evincar> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Gardner_%28record_holder%29
06:07:12 <evincar> Not so! And he was only 17.
06:07:24 <elliott> oh man high school student
06:07:27 <elliott> i hope it was in school term
06:08:02 <elliott> [["I wanted to prove that bad things didn't happen if you went without sleep," said Gardner.]]
06:08:07 <evincar> Guinness has officially stopped keeping records of things that are too dangerous for their legal department. :P
06:08:09 <elliott> evincar: what a way to justify your all-nighters to your mother!
06:08:21 <evincar> Well, he did end up hallucinating.
06:08:23 <elliott> i refuse to accept any other explanation
06:08:30 <evincar> In reality, the hallucinations are very much like dreams.
06:08:54 <elliott> evincar: if you're experiencing them, it's probably microsleep
06:09:34 <evincar> Probably, yes, but for all measurable purposes you're still awake.
06:10:07 <elliott> evincar: not if you're driving
06:10:16 <elliott> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_rail_accident microsleeps were a factor in this
06:10:20 <evincar> Oh god, by the way, NEVER do that.
06:10:47 <evincar> I have been falling asleep while driving, and it's...just not worth whatever you're driving for.
06:10:53 <Sgeo_> I was already scared of learning to drive
06:11:00 <Sgeo_> I don't have a good sleep cycle
06:11:08 <elliott> microsleeps only happen after sleep deprivation
06:11:19 <elliott> protip: if you're tired DON'T FUCKING DRIVE MORON
06:11:32 <Sgeo_> elliott, does sleeping for 5 hours or less a night count as sleep deprivation?
06:11:36 <Sgeo_> Also, I fully agree
06:11:39 <evincar> Sgeo_: Driving is perfectly safe as long as you don't think about the fact that it's horrifically, phenomenally dangerous.
06:11:46 <elliott> being awake for like 18 hours or more counts
06:11:58 <elliott> evincar: i hate the road system etc.
06:12:17 <Sgeo_> But what if I plan a schedule around being able to drive, then fail to get enough sleep, and am tired, but can't do public transportation?
06:12:18 <elliott> even this little town is built entirely around these ridiculously dangerous machines driven by people who get angry so easily
06:12:26 <elliott> road rage is an indicator that driving is not good psychology...
06:12:47 <elliott> fuck people, let's just have them stand and wait for the lethal machines to slow down!
06:13:29 <elliott> evincar: "and state that the Guinness World Records record is 449 hours (18 days, 17 hours) by Maureen Weston, of Peterborough, Cambridgeshire in April, 1977, in a rocking-chair marathon."
06:13:30 <Sgeo_> I'd say something about requiring the operators of the machines to be properly trained and certified, but that obviously doesn't work
06:13:35 <elliott> BEST REASON TO STAY AWAKE EVER
06:13:38 <elliott> Sgeo_: they sort of do that
06:13:46 <elliott> bicycles are nice if you're into that kind of thing :)
06:13:57 <Sgeo_> elliott, I know. And obviously people still do stupid things
06:14:01 <elliott> evincar: What a modern, humane city should do is this:
06:14:02 <evincar> Seriously, I'm interested in way too many things.
06:14:18 <elliott> evincar: Build it for people walking around and bicycles. Roads go to the *side* of everything else, crossings should be kept to an absolute minimum.
06:14:23 <elliott> STRICT policy of people taking priority.
06:14:27 <Sgeo_> That's why I said "that obviously doesn't work"
06:14:41 <elliott> Ideally, let there be no clear road/people space boundary on the road areas: there is no place that cars "own".
06:14:47 <elliott> People are there all the time, so drivers have to go slower.
06:14:57 <elliott> And keep it away from anywhere where people live, because of the damn noise!
06:15:02 <elliott> evincar: And then, to meet the needs of everyone:
06:15:15 <Sgeo_> Unless there are few people walking around at night, then drivers speed up, but there is one person walking there...
06:15:15 <elliott> evincar: Very regular entrances into a fast, underground railway system.
06:15:25 <elliott> evincar: Should never be more than five minutes away from a station.
06:15:36 <evincar> elliott: What you're describing is to be found in parts of India, I think.
06:15:47 <evincar> Less the underground, not sure.
06:16:05 <evincar> CLEAN, on the other hand...
06:16:25 <elliott> City is free of noise pollution, you can walk around nicely, bicycles have lots of open space to ride in, people who really want to use cars to get into the city or whatever can go via the to-the-side roads, and inside the city, non-bicyclists who want to go a long distance can just hop on the tube.
06:17:12 <Sgeo_> microsleep can last for 30sec?
06:17:14 <elliott> evincar: Oh, and of course, for inter-city transport, you have fast railways -- think Japan -- and also long motorways.
06:17:54 <pikhq> elliott: Randy Gardner's not-sleeping was in the name of science.
06:18:04 <elliott> evincar: Is that meant to be a rebuttal?
06:18:09 <pikhq> elliott: I hope he got an A for it.
06:18:19 <elliott> pikhq: F for Fucking Insane.
06:18:29 <evincar> elliott: It depends on whether you like socialism without free-market-driven progress.
06:19:16 <elliott> evincar: Okay -- so basically you see something you consider evil socialism, and immediately reply "Gee, Huxley", with no apparent justification or meaning.
06:19:28 <elliott> Is the invisible hand obscuring your vision?
06:20:54 <evincar> elliott: No, I see something I consider good, beneficial socialism, and Immediately reply "Gee, Huxley", leaving it to you to provide your own justification as to whether you think it's a good thing or not, and relying on the self-evident meaning in invoking his work.
06:21:09 <elliott> <evincar> elliott: It depends on whether you like socialism without free-market-driven progress.
06:21:28 <evincar> Hah, no. I meant it's only a rebuttal if you disagree with me. ^_^
06:21:55 <elliott> evincar: It's a very slippery-slope argument, to go from government-funded transport and city organisation to a futuristic, hedonistic dystopia.
06:22:12 <elliott> I mean to use the book as a keyword for it.
06:22:26 <elliott> evincar: Anyway, who said the railways weren't run by corporations? :)
06:22:56 <Sgeo_> I have this... thing, as a child, and still a little now, where if I didn't put my hand on my chest, I'd be worried about whether or not my heart's still beating
06:23:06 <elliott> evincar: As for market-dictated city plannings... take a look at New York's power grid in the 1890s, on the left: http://www.loper-os.org/wp-content/wires.jpg
06:23:27 <evincar> elliott: Maybe I don't consider hedonism inherently evil. I think the only problem with that world (other than those the book addresses, the loss of culture, etc.) is that a free market, or some form of competition is necessary for social progress because it provides the motivation for people to innovate.
06:23:42 <elliott> I am very sceptical of the idea that unrestrained markets can develop all beneficial social institutions. :)
06:23:55 <elliott> evincar: I approve of the idea of a market with competition; however, I do not approve of the idea of an unregulated one.
06:24:22 <evincar> Sgeo_: I used to have something similar. I also didn't believe my heart beat while I slept.
06:24:30 <elliott> Unregulated free-market capitalism is basically corporatism, sadly, and the political power of your dollar falls down after a corporation becomes big enough.
06:25:16 <elliott> Free market supporters seem to say "well, corporations won't get big enough!" and then when all the instances of unregulated corporations get big enough are presented, they say "well, that market wasn't *totally* free" as if somehow, increasing the freedom of a market makes it more and more terrible until it's totally free, at which point it becomes perfect.
06:25:31 <Sgeo_> Your heart is now beating manually.
06:25:43 <elliott> Sgeo_: It isn't, but I'm now breathing and blinking manually.
06:25:46 <elliott> Which I am too tired to do!
06:26:44 <elliott> evincar: I also think that absolute pure anarcho-capitalism is possibly the worst thing that could happen.
06:27:16 <elliott> Because when you go that far down the rabbit hole, you start having to pay a corporate police force to protect you. And if they don't want to get involved and you die, well... who's gonna stop them?
06:27:39 <evincar> elliott: I sort of resent the term "free" applied to the free market, because it *means* "free" as in "unrestricted", but it *implies* "free" as in "freedom", which proponents use to their subtle advantage in promoting it, as though a non-free market inherently bars people from their inalienable right to buy and sell shit in an unregulated fashion.
06:27:58 * Sgeo_ would love it if some form of anarchy could be made to work well
06:28:00 <elliott> evincar: It is one of those loaded terms like "pro-life"/"pro-choice".
06:28:01 <Sgeo_> But I highly doubt it
06:28:18 <evincar> Sgeo_: Chaos coalesces into order and might makes right.
06:28:22 <coppro> Libertarianism is an interesting study, but I don't think it would work
06:28:26 <elliott> Sgeo_: Anarchy could probably work with technology.
06:28:39 <Sgeo_> evincar, it's more that I hate centralization
06:28:42 <elliott> Nobody's fully realised, yet, just how much the Internet change everything.
06:28:45 <evincar> elliott: My jargon meter just went off. Care to elaborate?
06:29:14 <coppro> elliott: in your specific example, however, if news got out that a police force was not providing protection, it would lose customers
06:29:20 <coppro> or at least so the libertarian theory goes
06:29:20 <evincar> Sgeo_: I recall someone saying "You'll be hailed as an innovator if you centralise everything that's decentralised, and decentralise everything that's centralised."
06:29:32 <elliott> coppro: and what if the police force decided to club the valiant reporter to death?
06:29:39 <Sgeo_> That sounds Scott Adams-esque
06:29:43 <elliott> Suddenly they're clubbing all their opponents to death, and they are the only one with power.
06:29:53 <coppro> elliott: then the other police forces have to intervene
06:30:00 <coppro> but this shouldn't happen
06:30:01 <elliott> coppro: This one happens to be the biggest.
06:30:06 <coppro> because the police forces don't want to fight
06:30:19 <coppro> elliott: There are enough so that no single one is big enough to take on the rest
06:30:20 <elliott> coppro: Exactly -- so when one of their clients is about to get brutally murdered, they don't get involved.
06:30:31 <elliott> coppro: Yes, I am not convinced there would be enough.
06:30:37 <elliott> Also: Police fighting police would be interesting.
06:31:18 <elliott> evincar: I am trying to find a little blog post I find explains my pipe-dream rather well.
06:31:28 <coppro> elliott: But the idea goes that let's suppose police force A is about to kill police force B's client.
06:31:47 <coppro> elliott: police force B tells police force A of this, and rather than fight, they settle it (ideally with an independent adjudicator)
06:31:55 <elliott> evincar: http://r6.ca/blog/20050621T184100Z.html I don't agree with this entirely; direct democracy scares me. But it's an illustration, albeit incomplete and flawed, of how technology can change social structures...
06:32:03 <coppro> that's where the system breaks down in my mind
06:32:21 <coppro> insurace comapnies show that adjudication like that is dangerous
06:32:47 <elliott> like governments, corporations are something everyone should innately distrust
06:32:50 <coppro> elliott: Oh man, that funding rule
06:32:58 <elliott> with anarcho-capitalism... this becomes more or less impossible
06:33:01 <coppro> That rule nearly brought down the government in 2008
06:33:16 <coppro> elliott: but I have inteded to raise the point with a libertarian friend
06:33:16 <elliott> coppro: Are you pro or against? :)
06:33:28 <elliott> (The funding rule; I know nothing of it.)
06:33:43 <coppro> the part that nearly brought down the government was that they tried to get rid of it
06:33:47 <elliott> "Parties get funding related to the number of votes they get, and corporate donations have been all but eliminated." -- this, in its pure form, sounds wonderful to me.
06:33:52 <coppro> and the opposition parties were like "no"
06:34:29 <coppro> of course, they aren't gone entirely
06:34:44 <coppro> and that's probably why the Cons wanted to repeal that provision - they are fans of corporations
06:35:22 <coppro> I don't think the rest is necessarily right
06:35:40 <coppro> It will reduce the degree to which government decisions are made at arm's length from the population, hopefully
06:35:48 <coppro> but they won'd be made solely by the people
06:35:55 <elliott> coppro: As you are Canadian, I want to share another thing Russell O'Connor has done:
06:36:20 <coppro> in other news, the Pirate Party approved our first official candidate today!
06:36:41 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20040603T005300Z.html
06:36:42 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20060122T172700Z.html
06:36:42 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20060125T200600Z.html
06:36:42 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20060217T201200Z.html
06:36:42 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20081016T174811Z.html
06:36:43 <elliott> http://r6.ca/blog/20081107T061447Z.html
06:36:48 <elliott> coppro: read from top to bottom (they're short)
06:36:59 <coppro> oh man true timestamps
06:37:11 <elliott> coppro: of course, as it says, the votes that the simulated elections are run with aren't accurate
06:37:15 <elliott> coppro: since they include tactical votes
06:37:23 <elliott> coppro: but in a stochastic system, tactical votes would not be beneficial at all
06:37:29 <elliott> coppro: and so the votes made would be different and the outcome different
06:37:40 <elliott> coppro: still -- the idea is *very* intriguing and as a Canadian you may find the results interesting :)
06:37:45 <coppro> elliott: BUT WHAT ABOUT THE COMMUNIST PARTY
06:37:58 <elliott> of course the probability of it ever being adopted is *zero* because stupid people don't understand probability
06:38:10 <elliott> "TURN OUR ELECTIONS INTO A DICE ROLL?! YOU ANTI-DEMOCRATIC MONSTER!""
06:38:19 <elliott> but yeah, read those posts :)
06:39:41 <coppro> especially in the context of Canada
06:39:52 <coppro> where our governments have a surprisingly strong 'old boss same as new boss' tendency
06:40:04 <elliott> yeah, you guys have a bit of a depressing political system
06:40:27 <elliott> coppro: don't you want to swap new and old there? :)
06:40:47 <coppro> elliott: does it matter?
06:40:52 <elliott> evincar: i like how since coppro's started talking it's changed from a mainly me and you conversation into a mainly me and coppro conversation
06:40:54 <elliott> coppro: no, but it reads better :)
06:41:05 <coppro> and actually, the strong consistency does have its benefits
06:41:08 <elliott> coppro: and as it is there it makes it look like you're going back in time
06:41:29 <coppro> we also have a hell of a public service that typically the government listens to (except, apparently when it regards the census)
06:41:36 <evincar> coppro: Whether the independent adjudicator is independent, corporate, or government, it still must exist. The system doesn't "break down" per se.
06:42:22 <coppro> evincar: The problem is that the libertarian idea is removing a single point of failure
06:42:26 <elliott> coppro: what public service are you referring to? tired :)
06:42:39 <elliott> coppro: i mean, which... i mean name
06:42:44 <elliott> my thoughts are becoming incoherent! \o/
06:42:49 <elliott> coppro: btw, it's not the libertarian idea
06:42:50 <coppro> elliott: uh, the public service?
06:42:57 <elliott> it's the anarcho-capitalist idea
06:43:07 <elliott> libertarian is anarcho-capitalist with a police force and military :)
06:43:13 <elliott> which is significantly difference
06:43:19 <elliott> as the government claims a monopoly on coercive force
06:43:33 <elliott> which is less dangerous (but still shitty for other reasons)
06:43:41 <evincar> elliott: The government *is* the bastion of coercive force, effectively.
06:43:53 <coppro> your assertion that libertarianism has a single police force and military
06:43:58 <elliott> in an ancap situation, you have multiple competing police forces
06:44:03 <elliott> in a libertarian situation, you have one police force
06:44:12 <elliott> coppro: it's true! that's what differentiates the two
06:44:16 <elliott> libertarian has a minimal government
06:44:21 <elliott> ancap is anarchy -- no government by definition
06:44:38 <coppro> with multiple competing police forces, you can avoid conflict because it is not in the police forces' interest to have direct conflict
06:45:11 <coppro> however, there will be a small number of police forces (let us suppose for the sake of the argument that the number of significant forces is at least in the tens, which, given human nature, is unlikely but possible)
06:45:20 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
06:45:45 <evincar> elliott: I can actually see ancap working out if it had sufficient time to incubate before being subject to external influences. If they need to defend from invasion, they band together to do it and disband when it's over, on the principle that everyone does fine individually but everyone benefits from not getting royally fucked over by another country.
06:45:53 <coppro> Initially, each police force might resolve differences with each other force differently
06:45:59 <elliott> even aside from the unstable society
06:46:20 <elliott> Can't find work in a, by definition, ridiculously competitive work environment?
06:46:29 <elliott> Got cancer? FUCK YOU, PAY UP!
06:46:32 <coppro> however, a single force would gravitate towards increasing efficiency and consistency by adopting a single system of dealing with other police forces
06:46:34 <elliott> Can't afford food? Why not starve?
06:46:54 <coppro> elliott: part of ancap relies on the existence of private philanthropists
06:46:58 <elliott> (and no, charities can't just wish for donations and solve it all... when money is that important, how many people will give it up for others?)
06:47:06 <evincar> elliott: Actually, it depends on what you consider "society". Sure, leadership and governance and that would all be ad-hoc and arbitrary. But the stability of a social situation depends largely on the morals of the people involved, and almost all people basically work under the principle "don't be a jerk".
06:47:10 <elliott> coppro: sure... i don't think they'd be nearly common enough.
06:47:21 <coppro> elliott: If it became a social norm for rich people, it might
06:47:23 <elliott> evincar: I would love to believe that people are fundamentally nice.
06:47:31 <elliott> But no, sorry, selfishness takes over at some point.
06:47:45 <coppro> but in any case, as the police forces gravitate towards a single system, this system eventually becomes your single point of failure
06:47:49 <evincar> elliott: I never said that people are fundamentally nice, but it's also absurd to claim that there's anything fundamentally *wrong* with people.
06:48:11 <elliott> evincar: there isn't. selfishness is just a fact
06:48:29 <elliott> and a sane governmental system uses this to its advantage, and stops it being dangerous
06:48:40 <elliott> it lets it be expressed in a capitalist system so we get innovation and nice things
06:48:43 <coppro> elliott: according to wikipedia, we're both wrong
06:48:46 <elliott> but it stops it interfering with people's wellbeing
06:48:55 <evincar> elliott: Of course, look at, oh, ecology. You're selfish to the extent that you can be without destabilising the system around you. Anything that causes the system to become unstable eliminates itself automatically.
06:48:57 <coppro> anarcho-capitalism is a subset of libertarianism
06:49:07 <elliott> coppro: like nazism is etc.
06:49:14 <elliott> but ancap is basically libertarianism to the max
06:49:35 <elliott> evincar: of course, but society doesn't have the same sort of safeguards as nature really
06:49:52 <coppro> elliott: no, you were clear on libertarianism supporting minimal state
06:49:52 <coppro> but that is not necessarily true
06:49:52 <coppro> btw, it is in fact okay to admit wrongessness once in a while
06:50:08 <evincar> elliott: Interesting to note that libertarianism is a strict superset of ancap. But isn't every set a superset of the empty set?
06:50:12 <elliott> as their entire political philosophy
06:50:22 <Sgeo_> elliott was wrong?
06:50:24 <coppro> elliott: I have a counterexample
06:50:28 <coppro> elliott: *wrongnessness
06:50:36 <elliott> coppro: do you see the [007F]s?
06:50:45 <evincar> elliott: Society *does* have the same safeguards as nature *except* when totalitarian agriculture is involved.
06:50:50 <evincar> elliott: Read some Daniel Quinn.
06:50:52 <elliott> wrongess[007F][007F][007F]ness
06:51:02 <elliott> evincar: i know it has safeguards, just not the same
06:51:13 <elliott> coppro: i do admit i'm wrong, i just don't think i was wrong here :)
06:51:32 <elliott> "libertarianism" as referring to a distinct place on the political spectrum is perhaps a loose use of terms, but it's obvious what i was using it to mean
06:51:45 <elliott> and it's the most useful definition of that term when used to define a specific point on the spectrum rather than a whole spectrum in itself, in my opinion
06:52:08 <coppro> elliott: you are/were on a defensive "ohshithesgotfactsthatcontradictmyviewmustmitigatelosses"
06:52:17 <coppro> I know this because I do this all the time, so I can recognize it
06:52:17 <evincar> Can I just say that I'm experiencing a nerd head rush from carrying on a lucid, sophisticated, intellectual conversation with people who seem to be largely my junior?
06:52:34 <elliott> coppro: perhaps i am acting the same as if i was, but actually, i had *already loaded the wikipedia page* long before you mentioned it
06:52:43 <elliott> coppro: and i stand by my usage of the terminology in this case
06:52:47 <coppro> elliott: then my statement goes double
06:53:03 * coppro pops this conversation
06:53:05 <elliott> coppro: whatever, i'm uninterested in arguing the point -- but i have always used the term libertarian to mean two things, the philosophy and the particular point
06:53:12 <elliott> coppro: and i am not going to stop doing that, because many people do
06:53:40 <elliott> besides, arguments about terminology are *stupid*, there aren't any facts in terminology whatever wikipedia says imo :) and that goes for *every* term
06:53:44 <elliott> there's just what's most useful
06:53:53 <elliott> <evincar> Can I just say that I'm experiencing a nerd head rush from carrying on a lucid, sophisticated, intellectual conversation with people who seem to be largely my junior?
06:53:59 <elliott> heck, what about me? i'm sleep-deprived
06:54:11 <elliott> it's not quite a head rush so much as a... head the-bends
06:54:16 <evincar> elliott: Right you are. That says nothing of the actual members of the Libertarian Party, however...there's a large congregation of them here in the Northeast, and they're known for causing a certain amount of trouble, politically and legally.
06:54:21 <coppro> evincar: how old do you think I am?
06:54:38 <evincar> coppro: I have no idea. In your twenties, probably?
06:54:38 <elliott> coppro has always been 16 and always will be
06:54:44 <elliott> coppro's 18 :p last i checked
06:54:54 <evincar> Ah, still younger than me then, if you're right.
06:55:09 <elliott> don't take my word for it i don't actually know
06:55:23 <elliott> i was extrapolating from in high school recently + then in university
06:55:32 * evincar takes coppro's word that elliot's word is correct.
06:55:49 <evincar> So yeah, I'm the geezer in here.
06:55:54 <elliott> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BerserkButton
06:56:06 <elliott> Sgeo_ is 20 or 21, although i find it almost impossible to convince myself of this fact
06:56:23 <evincar> Ah. Well, fairly typical IRC age range, then.
06:56:31 <evincar> Then again, I might be biased.
06:56:40 <elliott> evincar: you were in here in 2008 right?
06:56:44 <evincar> The only chats I've ever joined have to do with deep, heady things.
06:56:48 -!- augur has joined.
06:56:51 <elliott> i talked to you when i was 12! hahaha! although i was a bit of an idiot
06:57:21 <elliott> evincar: aw great, now you've associated me with that guy :)
06:57:36 <coppro> in my view, part of the problem with libertarian groups in general is that they tend to contain both people who believe that the correct social structure has little/no government and are willing to carry on lucid, intellectual, well-thought-out arguments about why this is the case and how they intend to implement it.
06:57:39 <elliott> i've evolved from precocious to just being a dick
06:57:44 <elliott> in my defence, people are idiots
06:57:49 <elliott> (i'm not actually this misanthropic!)
06:57:50 <evincar> I am fully aware that people can evolve, my friend.
06:57:59 <coppro> *and people who just hate the fucking cunts in the motherfucking government
06:58:01 <evincar> I've changed drastically in the past month, since leaving my girlfriend.
06:58:23 <elliott> coppro: i was so confused before you added that correction
06:58:26 <coppro> actually, the same goes for communist groups too
06:58:52 <coppro> people who believe that the correct social structure is one of very strong government... and a bunch of ditto marks
06:59:06 <coppro> btw, do you want a laugh?
06:59:08 <coppro> google canadian action party
06:59:28 <elliott> it's interesting just how far apart and yet close statist communism and anarchic communism are
06:59:41 <elliott> and i am not entirely sure the transition from the first to the second could or would ever happen, ever :)
06:59:56 <coppro> evincar: are you Canadian?
07:00:05 <elliott> american, unless i'm mistaken
07:00:09 <elliott> i love answering other people's personal questions
07:00:14 <elliott> or at least, he's in america now
07:00:27 <elliott> coppro: canadian action party sound fun
07:00:28 <evincar> coppro: elliot's right, but living in New England gives me a pretty good sense of things, I think.
07:00:39 <evincar> I plan to move to Canada in a few years.
07:01:12 <elliott> evincar: you should move to europe, it's nice here! (note: i am not in one of the nice parts of europe)
07:01:14 <evincar> elliott: That's what I get for mistyping, incorrectly correcting, and failing to just use tab-complete.
07:01:23 <elliott> although immigration into the EU is probably non-trivial
07:01:54 <elliott> coppro: one of our nationalist political parties has clearly read http://zapatopi.net/belgium/
07:01:55 <evincar> elliott: I'd like to live somewhere in the south of England, or in the north country of France.
07:02:25 <elliott> evincar: no. you do not want to live in england.
07:02:31 <evincar> elliott: Speaking French gives me a certain fraction of French nationalism, not to mention I have French Canadian heritage (though I hate Québécois accents.)
07:02:35 <elliott> evincar: maybe cornwall. but england: no.
07:02:59 <elliott> evincar: our political climate is horrible
07:03:11 <elliott> we seem to have a ridiculous proportion of assholes in the population
07:03:17 <elliott> it's just not a very pleasant country :)
07:03:57 <evincar> elliott: How's the politics and culture surrounding gender identity and sexual orientation?
07:04:47 <elliott> you can have civil unions instead of gay marriage. there is a lot of homophobia and the like, and of course there is everywhere, but there's gonna be a lot more than in sweden or whatever
07:04:51 <evincar> elliott: Obviously, I'd've got more of an impression of this if I'd looked more seriously into living in the UK in the near future.
07:05:04 <elliott> i don't even know of any transphobia but then i don't know of much transphobia *anywhere* since it's such an ignored topic
07:05:10 <elliott> that i doubt most people even know of it
07:05:22 <elliott> evincar: i mean okay, generally people here are nice because... everywhere people are nice
07:05:37 <elliott> it's so hard to give a balanced idea of your own country!
07:05:46 <elliott> evincar: ok, you know how you're in the us, and top on your list of plans is "move outside the US"?
07:05:58 <evincar> elliott: Very true. I know a couple of transsexuals who also dress, and they can get by totally under the radar because people just don't know about it.
07:06:00 <elliott> because you don't want to do the interesting things in your life in the US?
07:06:13 <elliott> evincar: that's what you said! :p
07:06:23 <evincar> That was in response to the first thing.
07:06:26 <elliott> "I'm in the USA but I'm moving to Canada ASAP."
07:06:28 <evincar> No, I don't want to just escape the US.
07:06:42 <elliott> evincar: ok what i'm trying to say is
07:06:48 <evincar> I only want to move to Canada because I like French culture and because there are tax incentives for game developers. :P
07:07:01 <evincar> And, y'know, socialised health care, recreational marijuana, whatever.
07:07:06 <elliott> so much for open source :)
07:07:19 <evincar> Not that I even smoke marijuana with any regularity or frequency.
07:07:55 <evincar> elliott: I love open source. I also love making money. The two are not incompatible. I'll release everything I can freely.
07:08:15 <elliott> i don't see many open source games with good sales
07:08:53 <evincar> elliott: There's nothing to say I can't release the source after the game has run its lifetime.
07:09:07 <coppro> Or you can release the engine and make the media proprietary
07:09:17 <elliott> coppro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iulNvamNzeg#t=40s
07:09:19 <elliott> coppro: watch this for a laugh
07:09:27 <elliott> coppro: (start from the beginning if you have the attention span)
07:09:31 <coppro> DROD has experienced modest success under this strategy
07:09:36 <evincar> coppro: I do have a solid engine that I wouldn't even need to open-source, just make the API available and people would be pretty happy.
07:09:56 <coppro> evincar: even better from a financial point of view
07:09:56 <elliott> evincar: I oppose copyright, basically, so I can't support you I'm afraid :) but it's better than most game selling models at least.
07:10:15 <elliott> scratch the basically, i oppose copyright
07:10:26 <coppro> elliott: Do you oppose commercial copyright?
07:10:52 <elliott> evincar: intense and idiotic :)
07:10:54 <coppro> elliott: copyright law used to prevent someone from making money off of another's work
07:11:06 <elliott> evincar: if you keep listening you'll eventually hear him saying that belgium is "not even a real country"
07:11:15 <elliott> which is possibly the funniest thing i've ever heard
07:11:18 <elliott> i repeat, http://zapatopi.net/belgium/
07:11:30 <evincar> elliott: "Basically a non-country".
07:11:45 <elliott> evincar: read that page, it's amusing :)
07:11:55 <elliott> coppro: well. you already see GPL'd software being sold legally but shadily
07:12:01 <elliott> coppro: all over the place
07:12:09 <elliott> coppro: and while it's legal (sometimes not, but let's ignore that for now), it isn't a huge problem
07:12:15 <elliott> coppro: few people get suckered into it
07:12:21 <coppro> elliott: No, I mean something like me starting a bookstore where I sell other people's books at only the printing costs and never give the author a red cent
07:12:36 <elliott> coppro: that's basically like selling someone else's free ffmpeg wrapper.
07:12:43 <elliott> coppro: which happens. and is mostly legal
07:13:01 <elliott> coppro: but is not a problem
07:13:04 <coppro> elliott: the books in this case are not free for others
07:13:19 <coppro> elliott: so you are okay with creators being forced to compete with reproducers?
07:13:27 <elliott> coppro: yes they are; there's no copyright, so any book that is sold would just be reproduced online immediately
07:13:39 <elliott> coppro: let me find something pertinent for you
07:13:42 <coppro> elliott: Copyright exists.
07:13:51 <elliott> coppro: not in my hypothetical world, it does not
07:13:53 <evincar> elliott: I find it remarkable that your views on copyright are so liberal, after the discussion we just had.
07:14:22 <evincar> elliott: I perceive a contrast, but there may not actually be one.
07:14:30 <coppro> elliott: I accuse you of committing a fallacy
07:14:42 <elliott> <coppro> elliott: so you are okay with creators being forced to compete with reproducers?
07:14:44 <elliott> please read this http://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/10/19/the-point
07:14:50 <elliott> it's a very nice, and enlightened, view on these kinds of things.
07:14:56 <elliott> and is even to do with books!
07:15:20 <evincar> Ah, never mind, I was mistaken.
07:15:34 <evincar> Chalk it up to the hour or something.
07:15:37 <elliott> evincar: what contrast did you perceive, just of curiosity?
07:16:10 <evincar> Well, you were advocating rather strongly against anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism alike, no?
07:16:27 <coppro> And I do believe that many creators will create for the joy of creating
07:16:41 <coppro> However, it is far easier to go about this creation if I'm paid for my work
07:16:43 <Sgeo_> elliott, but that's that one person's choice
07:16:49 <evincar> coppro: Creators gonna create.
07:16:52 <elliott> coppro: I still believe that a commercial incentive could be made to create creative works
07:17:08 <coppro> evincar: I do not have time to work on open-source stuff right now
07:17:30 <evincar> elliott: So I didn't take into account the capitalist aspect of that. I figured you'd like to be paid for your work, as a creative.
07:17:36 <elliott> coppro: off the top of my head -- this probably wouldn't work, but if i can generate possibilities off the top of my head this easily... -- creator makes several excellent works for free, gets a reputation -- and then operates a donation system: once I get N donations, you get a new film/whatever on [date]
07:17:37 <coppro> elliott: How, if the creative work will instantly be distributed free and thus become worthless?
07:17:45 <elliott> coppro: this probably would not work, but... it's an idea
07:18:07 <elliott> just because we can't think of something perfect yet (and for all i know someone already has) doesn't mean we should stop trying
07:18:15 <elliott> evincar: i'm a free culture hippie :)
07:18:20 <elliott> evincar: really it's all so... non-clear-cut.
07:18:22 <evincar> coppro, elliott: I think a balance like Creative Commons is really the solution here. :P
07:18:25 <coppro> elliott: fair... for now
07:18:33 <elliott> i'm not as sure as i portray myself
07:18:44 -!- Sgeo_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
07:18:46 <elliott> evincar: even creative commons lets other people republish another's book and give them no money
07:18:50 <elliott> well, unless you count non-commercial
07:18:57 <elliott> which is a bad license IMO
07:19:04 <coppro> Personally, I would love to remove as much copyright as is possible
07:19:04 <elliott> (no-derivatives is even worse)
07:19:16 <coppro> but I believe it needs to be done with care
07:19:29 <elliott> yeah... for now i support the pirate party
07:19:43 <evincar> elliott: What's so bad about the non-commercial clause? I think it's reasonable to assert that work that you intend to be free ought to always remain free, even in derivative form.
07:19:43 <elliott> as wimpy and unrevolutionary as they have turned out to be, it's better than what we have now :)
07:19:52 <evincar> And even then, someone can always obtain the permission of the creator.
07:19:53 <elliott> evincar: you have mixed up free and Free
07:20:00 <elliott> an easy mistake, considering how stupid the terminology is
07:20:06 <elliott> try libre, it's obnoxious but will help sort out your sentence
07:20:17 <evincar> Ugh, I meant gratis, not libre.
07:20:27 <elliott> evincar: gratis for both of them?
07:20:44 <elliott> say someone has published a novel online
07:20:52 <elliott> i can easily go to lulu or whatever and make myself one
07:20:59 <elliott> but what if i want to give other people the opportunity to get one, too?
07:21:09 <elliott> no reason to make other people to typeset it,
07:21:14 <elliott> go through the lulu process
07:21:22 <elliott> so, i put it up for sale at lulu's *minimum price*
07:21:24 <elliott> i see not a cent of profit
07:21:35 <elliott> and people who want to read this free novel in print can do so for the cost of publishing it + some profit for lulu
07:21:39 <elliott> yet a non-commercial license forbids this
07:21:49 <elliott> i do not view this as a good thing: this forced duplication of effort
07:22:02 <elliott> indeed, "forced duplication of effort" summarises patents and proprietary software too!
07:22:07 <evincar> elliott: Valid example. Subvert it with an addendum. Legal language is, after all, language.
07:22:09 <elliott> you can't use this: you have to make your own. because i say so.
07:22:19 <elliott> evincar: you cannot make such an addendum meaningful
07:22:23 <elliott> it is very much a commercial use
07:22:29 <elliott> and people (lulu) are profiting from it
07:22:39 <elliott> making money off what is primarily someone else's work without permission
07:22:44 <elliott> yet it is not wrong, it is a good service to offer
07:22:53 <elliott> commercial use doesn't mean commercial *ab*use
07:23:05 <elliott> and you can't really distinguish the two when you get down to it, it is very subjective
07:23:07 <evincar> "NC except by permission", "NC except by (insert term defined as meaning 'derivative service' or some such)".
07:23:16 <coppro> elliott: actually, looking at NC, you could do that
07:23:22 <elliott> evincar: well, perhaps that would be better.
07:23:28 <elliott> of course it is still *definitely* not libre like this.
07:23:31 <coppro> to make it more funny, lulu would be violating copyright
07:23:43 <elliott> coppro: but lulu will have TOS saying
07:23:47 <elliott> hey you can't make us violate copyright
07:23:53 <elliott> so you'd be breaking lulu's rules
07:23:58 <coppro> elliott: Probably it will say you can't upload copyrighted material
07:24:00 <elliott> even if this isn't legally enforceable they could still drop you.
07:24:02 <coppro> or something like that
07:24:14 <elliott> evincar: a fundamental part of the definition of libre is that there is *no* discrimination due to fields of use
07:24:18 <elliott> evincar: that includes commercial.
07:25:02 <elliott> this is a nice conversation
07:25:22 <elliott> so often interesting conversations are bogged down in trivial, silly debates underlying a larger point you want to get to
07:25:32 <elliott> but we all seem to share some sort of bedrock of opinions which is helpful
07:25:34 <evincar> elliott: So, once again, free-as-in-beer conflicts with free-as-in-freedom.
07:25:44 <coppro> elliott: in the case of lulu, technically you would be violating lulu's ToS by failing to license them the work
07:25:53 <elliott> coppro: i guessed something like that, yeah
07:25:54 <evincar> elliott: And, you're right, this conversation is stimulating and the disagreement is lively rather than irritating.
07:26:19 <elliott> "Stalin and Hitler.png" best filename ever
07:26:44 <elliott> coppro: remember when we spent hours getting absolutely nowhere about copyright?
07:27:17 <evincar> Okay, allow me to cite the relevant clause 4b:
07:27:21 <evincar> You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by means of digital file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to be intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary...
07:27:23 <evincar> ...compensation, provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection with the exchange of copyrighted works.
07:27:29 <coppro> elliott: yes, I recall
07:28:08 <evincar> Re: the lulu example, you're not in violation because you're not primarily intending or directing your actions toward commercial advantage etc.
07:28:26 <coppro> right, you don't violate copyright
07:28:32 <coppro> the worse that could happen is lulu could terminate you
07:28:50 <evincar> coppro: Okay, I just wanted to make sure I was understanding your argument correctly.
07:30:12 <elliott> we should turn this into a computing flamewar
07:30:41 <evincar> Uh, not quite finished yet.
07:30:44 <coppro> btw, good news: The Pirate Party is close to running a candidate!
07:30:58 <evincar> But it's designed to question the nature of computation, so it could be an interesting discussion starter.
07:32:09 <elliott> modern computing is fundamentally badly designed, filesystems are a crock, and current systems are a mire of historical debris that don't respect the user.
07:32:14 <evincar> (Uh, provided anyone notices.)
07:32:20 <coppro> by 'close', I mean that he needs to file nomination papers
07:32:28 <coppro> he's been approved and is ready to go
07:33:51 <evincar> elliott: It's a hell of a good place to be.
07:34:12 <evincar> Oh, and there's nothing to DISCUSS. :P
07:34:22 <coppro> this channel is a bizarre bastion of mostly-erudite thought
07:34:28 <elliott> you're all meant to disagree
07:34:32 <elliott> and defend the wonderful linux
07:34:32 <coppro> (as opposed to, say, mathNEWS (shut up elliott))
07:34:40 * evincar listens to balalaika music and can't wait to get a new one.
07:34:43 <elliott> SO COPPRO HOW'S MY ARTICLE DOING IN THAT THAR PIPELINE
07:34:57 <coppro> I already told you to shut up about it
07:35:36 <elliott> it's amusing to compare conversations like these to the rabble that goes on in here sometimes :)
07:35:52 <elliott> what i am learning is: 4, 5, 6 am is when the cool people are on!
07:36:02 <evincar> Yeah, that was like 20 or 30 KB of a single conversation. :P
07:36:08 <elliott> elliott@dinky:~$ dd if=/dev/random of=foo bs=512 count=4
07:36:08 <elliott> 174 bytes (174 B) copied, 1.59379 s, 0.1 kB/s
07:36:17 <elliott> i wonder why dd is ... mysteriously giving up
07:36:39 <elliott> evincar: unfortunately we're too busy talking about the conversation to converse any more
07:36:49 <coppro> elliott: iirc dd stops if /dev/random runs out of input
07:36:56 <evincar> elliott: Well, *I'll* bloody take charge.
07:36:58 <elliott> coppro: that's retarded, do you know how to stop that?
07:37:04 <elliott> i guess cat /dev/random | dd if=/dev/stdin
07:37:22 <elliott> elliott@dinky:~$ cat /dev/random | dd if=/dev/stdin of=/dev/null bs=512 count=4
07:37:22 <elliott> 280 bytes (280 B) copied, 2.54588 s, 0.1 kB/s
07:37:35 <evincar> Okay, so would it be fair to distribute the major programming paradigms along an axis from "more imperative" to "more declarative"?
07:37:52 <elliott> evincar: about as fair as the left/right political spectrum, which means: no but go on anyway
07:37:53 <evincar> Actually, any programming language. :P
07:37:57 <elliott> it's rather reasonable really.
07:38:05 <elliott> just not as a sole descriptor of a paradigm, obviously
07:38:55 <evincar> My sense of it is that functions encapsulate actions, therefore functional programming is inherently declarative in some sense, because actions, being the basic unit, become sort of implicit.
07:39:29 <evincar> And objects encapsulate things, therefore imperative programming is inherently, well, imperative, because nouns, being the basic unit, become implicit as well.
07:39:29 <coppro> evincar: you should come up here to Waterloo!
07:39:33 <elliott> evincar: what is an action in lambda calculus?
07:39:47 <evincar> elliott: Everything is an action.
07:40:05 -!- mimcpher has joined.
07:40:07 <evincar> \x.x is the action of returning what you were given.
07:40:12 <elliott> coppro: DAMN YOU WATERLOO PEOPLE
07:40:19 <elliott> mimcpher: You cannot take over!
07:40:35 <elliott> evincar: ok, so every function in lambda calculus is the action of returning [f x].
07:40:45 <elliott> evincar: that's not very helpful :)
07:40:49 <evincar> elliott: In its canonical form, though.
07:41:07 <evincar> It's not intended to be a useful statement as such, just a definition for what I'm going on to say.
07:41:13 <elliott> evincar: i see. well in lambda calculus' canonical semantics there is no returning, just rewriting
07:41:24 <elliott> your model is FLAWED! Mwahahaha! Give up now! okay carry on
07:41:31 <elliott> coppro: is amstan that guy who came in a while ago
07:41:43 <evincar> elliott: Allow me to simplify my language for the sake of not going mad, and trust that I do have some idea of what I'm talking about. :P
07:41:43 <coppro> elliott: no, he's just the guy we always blame around here
07:41:48 <coppro> you're thinking dbelange
07:42:12 <mimcpher> Our sysadmins get complains about dbelange from random IRC servers
07:42:39 <evincar> Okay, so we've got functional/declarative/verbal, and procedural/declarative/nominal. What's missing is an "adjectival" paradigm, in which the fundamental unit of computation is the *description*.
07:43:30 <evincar> What would an adjectival programming language look like? I think it could not have just any measure of imperative versus declarative nature, because descriptivity is NOT orthogonal with the others.
07:43:38 <evincar> It's a triangle, not two axes.
07:44:00 <elliott> evincar: Don't you mean a square?
07:44:03 <elliott> A triangle-shaped spectrum would be odd.
07:44:22 <elliott> evincar: Because, basically, the only totally-descriptivist language would be exactly in the *centre* of imperative vs declarative.
07:44:34 <elliott> And the more imperative or declarative you get, the less descriptive you could possibly be.
07:44:35 <evincar> elliott: Not really. The language is defined by its relative proximity to three points.
07:44:50 <elliott> Hey, my spell checker finally accepts "alright".
07:45:20 <evincar> So what I did was say: okay, everything is a "description", or, for the purposes of the language, a "property", which I'll shorten to "prop" for ease.
07:45:44 <evincar> Now, a prop can "be" other props, or it can "have" them. It amounts to the same thing.
07:46:05 <evincar> You can imbue a prop with another prop, and you can test the props of a prop.
07:46:38 <evincar> In a typed adjectival language, a prop can also "be" a value, such as a number or an array or whatever.
07:48:01 <evincar> Now, for props there is no real notion of ownership, so this leads to some interesting things about, say, defining functions.
07:48:02 <elliott> evincar: coppro: why haven't either of you disputed my controversial statement about computing? sheesh
07:48:07 <elliott> okay reading evincar's messages now
07:48:55 <evincar> elliott: Sort of. We are assuming a typed system.
07:49:17 <evincar> Props are unordered, first of all, so they're more like sets, but as I said, there's no notion of "ownership" of props with which a prop is imbued.
07:49:26 <elliott> evincar: yes, but props have/be props
07:49:31 <elliott> and that set is the list of props that this prop is
07:49:40 <elliott> evincar: presumably you have a few primitive props?
07:49:45 <elliott> prop = value * set(prop) | awesomeness | yayness
07:49:53 <elliott> (you get what i mean; like "builtins")
07:50:22 <evincar> elliott: Props have/be props, yes, but a prop-expression can also be treated as a prop on its own.
07:51:07 <evincar> Effectively you've got a directed graph, which can be cyclic, and also for which an edge can point to a group of nodes rather than just a single node.
07:51:38 <evincar> Although you can model the last bit as just "A -> G -> { X, Y, Z, ... }" for groups.
07:51:59 <evincar> So it's a lot more fluid than just a set.
07:52:24 <evincar> If A is B and B is C then A is C.
07:52:59 <evincar> Further, the source of an edge can be a group of nodes, so you can imbue a prop-expression with props, as well.
07:53:11 <evincar> (And this leads to the coolest syntax ever.)
07:53:32 <evincar> You can say [a divides b] means [b % a == 0].
07:53:59 <evincar> And that imbues the prop-expression "[a divides b]" with the (builtin) prop "means", which refers to "[b % a == 0]".
07:54:21 -!- sebbu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds).
07:54:31 <evincar> Whenever you say "x divides y", if there's no match on x for y, then it looks at the meaning of the expression instead, and finds a match that way.
07:54:50 <elliott> i will understand this a lot better with a spec, gotta say :)
07:55:06 <evincar> So execution of a program in a purely adjectival language constitutes lots of ridiculous pattern-matching on a mutable directed possibly-cyclic graphlike structure.
07:55:28 <evincar> Actually, mutability isn't necessarily a requirement, come to think of it, but it'd be nice.
07:55:44 <elliott> evincar: getting rid of mutability will make your execution model much more interesting -- that is my prediction
07:55:57 <elliott> it tends to, since you lose a lot of the idea of evaluation order
07:56:18 <evincar> elliott: It seems to be inherently parallel, this language.
07:56:24 <elliott> then state is even worse :)
07:56:41 <evincar> I'd definitely want to go with implicit parallelism + monads.
07:57:02 <evincar> Monads could be encapsulated in a builtin "then" property.
07:57:02 <elliott> We functional programmers support the separation of Church and state.
07:57:19 <elliott> You have a strange definition of cheeky. :)
07:57:45 <evincar> "brash; offensively bold".
07:57:57 <elliott> It was a pun. I don't see the brashness.
07:57:58 <evincar> I guess I use it in a manner somewhat more synonymous with "saucy".
07:58:12 <elliott> Oho, those saucy functional programmers.
07:58:16 <evincar> Whether that's right or not is for the prescriptivists to decide.
07:58:26 <elliott> It's certainly confusing :)
07:58:41 <evincar> Aaanyhow, I'm not sure correctness is a decidable problem. ;)
07:59:11 <evincar> Not that nothing else was.
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:00:25 <evincar> So...yeah, it's very much Lispy in the sense that you've got essentially no syntax (or only one syntactic element, technically) and the language is just a set of fundamental operations mushing around the graph of the program.
08:00:44 <evincar> I shudder to think what self-modifying programs would look like, but I imagine they would be frighteningly beautiful.
08:01:05 <evincar> But as in Lisp, the program could easily have inherent access to its own source.
08:01:38 <elliott> I just got annoyed enough with Midori that I installed Firefox. Sigh.
08:01:55 <elliott> evincar: Lisp doesn't really have that.
08:02:13 <elliott> It has macros, sure, but a program can't say "(setq me '(exit))" or whatever.
08:02:18 <elliott> Unless you use lukego's silly hack for that. :)
08:02:36 <evincar> elliott: It has the notion of program as data, though, and you can traverse an expression-tree just as you traverse an ordinary list.
08:03:07 <elliott> evincar: The []s remind me of Nock (http://moronlab.blogspot.com/2010/01/nock-maxwells-equations-of-software.html), although it's clearly nothing like that.
08:03:16 <evincar> That's the concept I meant to refer to, and there must certainly exist a parallel in a language that's very similar in spirit but based on an entirely different data structure and model of computation.
08:03:29 <elliott> evincar: It sounds like a nice language.
08:03:38 <elliott> evincar: It sounds like something that could be adapted into something "useful", too.
08:03:57 <elliott> evincar: I would be very interested in seeing what compilation tricks you could do to a no-builtin-state version.
08:04:05 <evincar> elliott: I know, that's the frightening bit.
08:04:26 <evincar> elliott: Compilation isn't something I want to think about. A nice, stringly-typed interpreter for me, thanks, just to get it working and done.
08:04:41 <elliott> Stringly-typed -- like SNOBOL!
08:05:04 <elliott> evincar: It just sounds like the basic operation might actually be very efficient.
08:05:07 <evincar> You should prove your concepts in the fastest way possible for you, then polish them into the fastest possible thing for the computer.
08:05:25 <elliott> Yes, yes; I'm talking specifically about compilation theory here.
08:05:50 <elliott> As in... given a regular imperative CISC architecture, how efficient can we translate a bunch of applications of this one functional operation?
08:08:09 -!- tombom has joined.
08:08:45 <evincar> elliott: I wonder if the language has a single fundamental operation. :P
08:08:57 <elliott> evincar: Tree-traverse-rewrite-match-thing.
08:09:00 <evincar> I mean, it can be made complete by isomorphism with Lisp.
08:09:16 -!- mimcpher has left (?).
08:09:38 <evincar> Yeah, I was figuring search-and-rewrite-if-not-matched.
08:10:09 <evincar> Well, push-search-and-rewrite-if-not-matched-then-pop. :P
08:10:46 <evincar> So it could be implemented easily in a language that's conducive to graph- or list-based pattern-matching.
08:15:00 <coppro> oh man, graph-based pattern matching
08:15:26 <evincar> coppro: Believe me, using it as a basis for a language is the most awesome thing ever.
08:15:32 -!- sftp has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
08:15:50 <evincar> In fact, this is the first thing I've made that actually works whose implicationsI really don't fully understand.
08:15:52 <coppro> evincar: do you have any examples?
08:16:28 <evincar> coppro: It's not done, so I'm not releasing it yet, but I'm making it a priority, because it's cool.
08:19:47 <evincar> Here, some imperative style that runs:
08:19:50 <evincar> [a divides b] means [b % a == 0]
08:19:54 <evincar> if 3 divides n && 5 divides n
08:20:16 <evincar> Yes, I'm going with whitespace, even though I'm not a Python fan. :P
08:20:51 <coppro> how is that graph-based?
08:21:12 <evincar> It's subtle. The syntax deliberately masks it. If you were to remove the "to 100" property from the range, it would loop from 1 to forever.
08:21:40 <evincar> Bah, this is the worst example I could have given, isn't it?
08:21:51 <coppro> yeah, since every language and its brother can do that
08:22:07 <coppro> (though I do like the declaration syntax of infix divide. That's cool
08:25:30 <evincar> [(a)] means [a]; [+ [a b]] means [a + b]; [* [a b]] means [a * b]; n is (+ (* 2 3) 5)
08:25:42 <evincar> There, I just implemented prefix notation.
08:26:17 <evincar> The gist of that example was to show how context-free grammars could be trivial to write.
08:26:39 <evincar> Making it really easy to make DSLs.
08:28:09 <coppro> yeah, that's definitely cool
08:28:25 <coppro> but what about the graph-basedness?
08:29:05 <evincar> coppro: See, this is me, demonstrating how I don't understand what I've made.
08:29:22 <evincar> coppro: Let me try to come up with a better example.
08:32:38 <evincar> coppro: Okay, two very simple examples. You can write optimisations for the language in the language itself.
08:32:50 <evincar> All multiplications by two are now optimised into additons.
08:32:56 <evincar> [[a is const] x [b is const]] means [statically [a x b]]
08:33:06 <evincar> All operations between two constants are now performed statically.
08:33:31 <coppro> this could quite possibly get as nuts as Feather
08:33:35 <evincar> (The syntax is speculative.)
08:34:27 <evincar> coppro: You see, it's hard to come up with good examples. Graph-rewriting is definitely powerful, but it lacks succinct examples. It's obviously especially useful in the context of anything to do with programming languages.
08:34:53 <coppro> yeah, I think I sort of understand now
08:35:12 <coppro> ... actually, this sounds like Feather except for the lack of retroactivity
08:35:57 <evincar> coppro: But the "means" property isn't the only trick the language has up its sleeve, which is what makes it even more useful.
08:38:55 <evincar> You could provide hints such as [a == b && b == c] implies [a == c], making the transitivity of equality explicit, and subject to possible optimisation.
08:39:40 <evincar> And, naturally, you could make an "implies" for a user-defined function.
08:39:56 <evincar> Where user-defined functions are naturally specified using "means", of course.
08:51:17 -!- tombom has quit (Quit: Leaving).
08:58:47 <evincar> coppro: Totally unrelated note: what's with the abysmal state of pop music? I'm happy there are a few very innovative artists, but what the hell?
09:04:16 <elliott> Consultant, McAfee Associates, Jan. 1996-Aug. 1997, Mar. 1998-Mar 1999
09:04:17 <elliott> Ported McAfee’s VirusScan product from Microsoft DOS to SunOS, Solaris, Linux, and FreeBSD.
09:04:17 <elliott> Designed and was principal programmer for WebShield, McAfee’s Linux-based antiviral firewall product.
09:04:41 <elliott> <evincar> [a divides b] means [b % a == 0]
09:04:56 <elliott> also, your addition of imperative features clouds the alnguage.
09:05:06 <elliott> <evincar> [[a is const] x [b is const]] means [statically [a x b]]
09:05:10 <evincar> elliott: I'm indecisive. :P
09:05:11 <elliott> you use x here to denote a placeholder
09:05:26 <elliott> you need a way to distinguish the two syntactically
09:05:34 <elliott> evincar: no, you're not; operator precedence is just silly in a language like this
09:05:37 <evincar> Yeah, I was arbitrarily assuming that a..z count as placeholders.
09:05:49 <elliott> <evincar> You could provide hints such as [a == b && b == c] implies [a == c], making the transitivity of equality explicit, and subject to possible optimisation.
09:05:59 <elliott> what are the semantics of "implies"?
09:06:27 <evincar> elliott: It means that the expression can be rewritten as such, but need not be. It's "can means".
09:07:03 <elliott> evincar: but if you rewrite [[a == b] && [b == c]] (you DO need the nesting, if these are *sets*) to [a == c] you lose the information that [a == b]
09:07:08 <elliott> so it isn't an equivalent transformation at all
09:07:22 <evincar> So if it helps the interpreter perform a rewrite, or if it's more efficient, then it's chosen, otherwise not.
09:07:24 <elliott> evincar: can you tell me how this is at all different from term rewriting languages?
09:08:07 <evincar> elliott: Just looking at the two props "means" and "implies", it's not.
09:08:35 <evincar> Those nifty features are for transforming the graph. coppro asked about the graph-manipulating features.
09:08:53 <elliott> evincar: are you sure you're not building five languages and then sticking them together? :)
09:09:51 <evincar> elliott: You can easily bring in other interesting things like inversion of properties, so saying "not white" actually implies any colour other than white, or anything in general, if you don't restrict it.
09:10:13 <evincar> And no, I'm not sure of that, but it's where the philosophy is taking me right now.
09:10:30 <evincar> I'm just exploring the concept because I think it deserves to be explored.
09:10:44 <evincar> I'll get a clearer direction as I go along.
09:12:26 <elliott> stomach starting to hurt. breakfast soon
09:12:38 <evincar> elliott: An important thing seems to be that props can convey loads of semantic information about the program itself, because they're inherently descriptive. So you could have a "parallel" prop, or a "quickly" prop that tries to do things using SSE or in parallel as it sees fit.
09:15:01 <evincar> elliott: Also, operator precedence is a pretty little addition that makes it nicer to use, and I see no reason why symbolic properators (coin!) can't default to having a precedence while named properties don't.
09:15:09 <evincar> Or rather, they all share the same precedence level.
09:15:10 <elliott> evincar: because if properties are sets
09:15:20 <elliott> then [a % b == 0] is the same as [% == a 0 b]
09:16:48 <evincar> elliott: Not quite, no. It's inherently infix. All expressions are assumed to be of the form "expr prop", where "prop" can be "id expr" or "properator expr" and "expr" can also be "[ expr expr* ]".
09:17:10 <elliott> evincar: Definitely scrap all this imperative nonsense, thoug.
09:17:18 <elliott> Distill and refine your core concept -- that's the way to go.
09:17:36 <evincar> elliott: I appreciate the advice, and I definitely take it to heart.
09:17:54 <evincar> The imperative nonsense was me being wishy-washy. :P
09:18:50 <elliott> evincar: In fact, I'm not convinced any sort of effect model does this paradigm well; it sounds suited to pure evaluation to me.
09:18:59 <evincar> As I implied before, I'm into existential bullshit, so I often spend a lot of time exploring the philosophical nature of something, going in totally the wrong direction with it while wandering, in order to feel that I have a deep enough sense of it to actually code it, when I probably should've just coded it from the beginning.
09:19:54 <evincar> elliott: Well, all of the effects would be internal, that's all. There has to be some notion of the current state of the graph from the interpreter's point of view.
09:19:55 <elliott> -NickServ- Last failed attempt from: elliott!~Adium@phy-dhcp-34-229.mps.ohio-state.edu on Nov 01 14:06:56 2010.
09:19:58 <elliott> hey -- would you look at that.
09:20:01 <elliott> Some Ohio fucker thinks he's me!
09:20:12 <elliott> But NO! I will defend this nick forever. Someday it will be valuable.
09:21:17 <evincar> I'm not so attached to this nick in IRC, but you'll find me under the name "evincarofautumn" everydamnwhere else.
09:21:40 <evincar> Except for a certain other persona that I'd like to keep separate from my public work.
09:21:41 <elliott> I have never been able to stick to a pseudonym.
09:21:47 <elliott> I change my mind about everything so much.
09:22:02 <elliott> evincar: Oh come on, you just know I have to try and find a link from evincarofautumn to some other guy on the web now.
09:22:33 <evincar> elliott: Good luck, I'll be interested. The only other instance I've seen of it was on an RPG Maker users' forum back in 2003 or so.
09:22:50 <elliott> evincar: Now you're giving me clues!
09:23:09 <evincar> The site is defunct. I'm not sure even Sherman and Peabody could find it.
09:23:27 <evincar> And...it's just a username, to me. It only carries a little bit of deeper meaning.
09:25:51 * elliott goes about configuring Iceweasel to not suck quite as much
09:27:28 <elliott> evincar: Talk more, this is boring! :P
09:27:39 <evincar> elliott: Hah. Every single accessible Google result seems to pertain to me, anyway.
09:27:55 <elliott> have you considered that that might not be a good thing?
09:27:59 <evincar> For some reason I can't go past many pages.
09:28:15 <elliott> wow, you're one of three people to ever use infogami
09:28:16 <evincar> Like, 7 pages in, it says I no longer have 22,000 results, but more like 70. :P
09:28:30 <evincar> elliott: I know, I was using Markdown before it was cool.
09:28:37 <elliott> "So Obama has been elected, and we've created an Obamanation. Hillary had no such luck; this is a Hillarious failure."
09:28:59 <coppro> evincar: I take it you're a Magic player?
09:29:54 <evincar> I am, but only a bit. The "evincar" name is actually (as you may find explained somewhere online) a deliberate perversion of "evincer", a nonexistent word that supposedly means "one who evinces". My username therefore ought to be spelt with a cedilla on the C, and in fact is intended to mean "he who brings the autumn forth".
09:30:16 <evincar> coppro: So, coincidence. :P
09:30:19 <elliott> tiredness setting in. fuckfuck
09:30:34 <coppro> the first word that comes to mind after 'evincar' to me is 'rath'
09:30:38 <evincar> elliott: Keep at it. I intend to stay awake until the sun has set again.
09:30:54 <evincar> ...I've heard that somewhere.
09:30:55 <elliott> and the mome raths evincarred
09:31:07 <evincar> I don't really know anything about Magic's BS backstory.
09:31:19 <coppro> evincar: In the Magic universe, the evincars were a series of rulers of the plane Rath
09:31:23 <evincar> Although a recent cstheory.stackexchange.com question proved Magic is Turing-complete.
09:31:36 <elliott> evincar: on only the second page of your name i see "xkcd"
09:31:37 <coppro> also, if memory serves, a card has evincar in the name
09:32:01 -!- Wamanuz2 has joined.
09:32:06 <evincar> elliott: I joined the XKCD fora recently, so it must have been bumped up in the results because that site is so high-ranking.
09:32:52 <evincar> Oh, incidentally, I've decided to call this language, however it turns out, D-script.
09:33:00 <evincar> Since, you know, it's a delicious pun.
09:33:09 <evincar> And a fairly generic name that's also searchable.
09:34:05 <elliott> ugh tree style tab is so close to perfection
09:34:06 <evincar> elliott: Come to think of it, how will you know if a result doesn't pertain to me? Or will you just submit results to me for verification?
09:34:15 <elliott> - every link opens in a new child tab BUT history is retained
09:34:28 <elliott> - previous history is retained, vertical scrollbar; as you scroll up, more history from the past
09:36:03 <coppro> elliott: tree style tab?
09:36:15 <elliott> coppro: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/5890/
09:36:26 <elliott> it's nice but i'm still not sure i can spare any of my 1366 horizontal pixels for it
09:36:27 -!- Wamanuz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
09:36:34 -!- wareya_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
09:37:13 <evincar> So it seems I stand a pretty good shot of being the best non-professional balalaika player on YouTube, if I just get a webcam. The majority of the people who put up videos are fairly bad amateurs, or are only interested in traditional music.
09:37:22 -!- wareya has joined.
09:38:23 <elliott> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPv9VZQkxJI this guy is hilarious, what is he even
09:38:33 <evincar> There are of course a few videos of pro players and orchestras and stuff, against whom I stand no chance whatsoever.
09:38:48 <elliott> this is the worst i have heard any instrument played
09:39:04 <evincar> elliott: Old stuff. He's got presence at least.
09:39:16 <elliott> evincar: he can't breathe properly
09:39:19 <evincar> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFmZfgiczho&NR=1
09:39:40 <evincar> elliott: Very good player, but falls into the category of "only wants to do traditional music".
09:40:12 <evincar> It's an instrument that needs attention. I think it's got a great sound.
09:40:23 <elliott> it looks like an asshole instrument :)
09:41:25 <elliott> evincar: SO WHAT HAPPENED TO PROG and god googlestalking is boring
09:41:33 <evincar> elliott: Not sure what you mean. It *was* originally a peasant instrument made out of a pumpkin. :P
09:41:48 <elliott> evincar: i mean the designer was an asshole who wanted to torture people who just wanted to make some music
09:41:54 <evincar> elliott: Prog is in the feckin works, mkay? I just gave a talk about it a couple of weeks ago.
09:41:54 <elliott> by making it impossible to play
09:42:02 <elliott> evincar: THE LAST CHANGE WAS 200 DAYS AGO
09:42:05 <evincar> elliott: It's very easy to play, but hard to master.
09:42:56 <evincar> elliott: I quit using Subversion and sorta abandoned the SourceForge project because I wanted to move in a new direction with it. I got a basic compiler working, then decided that the operator precedence parser might not be the best idea and decided to rework it into an ANTLR grammar. :P
09:43:25 <evincar> Not to mention the shitloads of stuff I've reworked for concurrency's sake, after spending this past year getting really acquainted with FP.
09:44:35 <evincar> I mean, I've used Scheme and what have you enough, and I've always been comfortable with functional computing abstractions, but it wasn't until I read up on the Actor model and started preaching the benefits of immutability that I really truly got it myself.
09:44:58 <elliott> evincar: erm, you do realise Scheme basically *debunked* the actor model?
09:45:05 <elliott> and that was its claim to fame?
09:45:29 <evincar> Okay, I should probably have included "stuff like".
09:45:58 <evincar> I mean, I went through shitloads of research articles and actual programs written in various languages and taking different approaches to concurrency and parallelism.
09:46:07 <elliott> evincar: It was originally created as a vehicle to explore the actor model. But then they realised that their code for procedures and actors were identical, and so they dropped the actor code, and everything worked fine.
09:46:10 <evincar> I'm partial to implicit parallelism and monads, as I said earlier. :P
09:46:26 <elliott> Implicit parallelism is rather impractical; it was tried with Haskell but didn't work very well at all.
09:46:44 <evincar> Was tried? Is being tried. Is working just dandy, actually.
09:47:08 <elliott> because you end up parallelising even trivial expressions
09:47:13 <elliott> this is a well-known result in haskell circles
09:47:29 <evincar> elliott: There was some talk I watched in which the author of GHC discusses how he is solving those problems of granularity.
09:49:11 <evincar> I may be getting loopy here.
09:49:47 <evincar> Anyway, Haskell definitely does sequential operations right, with monads, specifically encapsulating everything nicely in the type system.
09:50:16 <evincar> If you want everything to be immutable, monads are how you need to handle sequence.
09:51:12 <evincar> Although you could say I'm just stating "Haskell's way of doing things is the best way of doing things in Haskell".
09:51:22 <evincar> Not sure whether you'd be right.
09:51:27 <elliott> Most of the high-echelon Haskell intelligentsia are dissatisfied with the IO monad.
09:51:33 <elliott> Note that monads aren't just about state and side effects...
09:53:32 <evincar> elliott: Of course. Which Haskelligentsia in particular?
09:53:42 <elliott> Conal Elliott is the main one.
09:53:45 <evincar> (By the way, I think it was Simon Peyton Jones in that lecture.)
09:54:00 <elliott> The problem is that if you say "Haskell with the IO monad is a purely functional language", then C is purely functional, too.
09:54:10 <elliott> The implication being *the IO monad is not functional, it is imperative*.
09:54:25 <elliott> And there is a functional way to do these things, FRP. Although nobody's quite figured it out yet :-)
09:54:30 <elliott> http://conal.net/blog/posts/the-c-language-is-purely-functional/
09:54:36 <evincar> elliott: Right, but who needs I/O? :P
09:54:37 <elliott> "My first inclination was to suggest that Haskell, as commonly practiced (with monadic IO), is not a functional language either. Instead, I’m going to explain how it is that the C language is purely functional."
09:57:03 <olsner> elliott: so did you get long mode running yesterday?
09:57:11 <elliott> olsner: Yesterday? I haven't slept!
09:57:17 <evincar> elliott: Yeah, I wonder how scathing he intended this to be. It could be read as fun and light, but it could conceal some dark cynicism. :P
09:57:18 <elliott> olsner: Wait, you've slept? But it went by so quickly...
09:57:35 <elliott> olsner: I decided, upon looking at your code, that what the fuck long mode is complicated and I love protected mode and my babies are all raised in a system of protectedm ode.
09:57:49 <olsner> yes, well, I didn't get much sleep tonight
09:57:54 <elliott> evincar: He's not cynical, he just doesn't think the IO monad is functional, and he thinks that FRP is nicer. :)
09:58:05 <evincar> elliott: A fair assessment.
09:58:08 <elliott> The most plausible scenario in which I am still awake at midnight involves dubious amounts of cocaine. This is not reassuring.
09:59:02 <evincar> elliott: Don't worry, it'll all be sorted out eventually. Hell, depending on how things go, you might be awake for the rest of your life.
09:59:21 <evincar> In the sense of "set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life". :P
09:59:42 <elliott> After a few seconds of tired-induced dumbness.
10:00:18 <elliott> Omg, Debian dropped support for 6800.
10:00:46 <olsner> the most complicated thing is to set up the page tables IMO, and that's not even that complicated
10:01:48 <elliott> olsner: but i'm a lazy, tired as hell fucker.
10:02:49 <evincar> elliott: Misintoned that as "But I'm a-lazy, tired as hell-fucker". That is, right now you're lazying, because you're as tired as someone who fucks hell.
10:03:13 <evincar> Well, not necessarily "because", but at least "and also".
10:03:15 <elliott> are you sure you didn't parse that properly and then decide to misparse it? :)
10:04:29 <evincar> elliott: English grammar is ambiguous. You can't prove anything. >_>
10:07:20 <evincar> I should write an esolang whose grammar is intentionally ambiguous, and whose parser decides between ambiguous expressions based on how amusing the result will be, rather than some arbitrary notion of "correctness" imposed by an ill-conceived attempt to implement DWIM.
10:08:03 <evincar> Rather it will be an arbitrary notion of "humour" imposed by an ill-conceived attempt to implement...uh, line?
10:09:59 <evincar> That is not an English word. :/
10:10:06 <evincar> Although I can't prove that.
10:13:50 <elliott> evincar: as futile as this quest is when one is so tired -- and as irritable as i am -- would you like to know of my current programming endeavour?
10:14:12 <evincar> Hey, if it keeps you awake and keeps me entertained, by all means.
10:15:00 <elliott> evincar: define a minimal term rewriting language L; write a short implementation of L in Haskell and a short implementation of L in L
10:15:04 <elliott> if the latter is not short, redesign and repeat
10:15:12 <elliott> aim for elegance on the level of the first lisp self-interpreter
10:15:27 <evincar> elliott: A noble goal, and far better-defined than mine!
10:15:50 <evincar> Although what constitutes "short" is still subjective.
10:16:11 <elliott> i am aiming for the kind of thing you might see in a Functional Pearl paper.
10:17:10 <elliott> evincar: The language needs a name -- perhaps "deinate", after DE-term-ine and term-INATE
10:17:30 <evincar> I'd be interested to do some research into language minimisation like this. What is the minimal complete subset of L for which the self-hosted implementation is minimal?
10:17:42 <elliott> evincar: btw for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_rewriting
10:17:47 <elliott> evincar: wrt self-interpreting subsets,
10:17:53 <elliott> http://catseye.tc/projects/pixley/
10:18:10 <evincar> elliott: Already saw the graph-rewriting article, while I was desperately fishing for examples in that department.
10:20:02 <elliott> although the one-qwerty-sidedness of that may irritate me at some point :)
10:20:11 <elliott> fuck! no haskell-mode installed
10:20:22 <evincar> elliott: I love how it's defined as meta-circular based on the fact that it's already a strict subset of Scheme. It seems like a cheat.
10:20:34 <elliott> when i'm tired you DO NOT GIVE ME THE EMACS I DO NOT WANT, Operating System
10:20:49 <elliott> bash: ghci: command not found
10:22:03 <elliott> evincar: see in my perfect os, when i tried to open an .hs file
10:22:11 <elliott> it would go "ok, i don't know what an .hs is; I'll look it up"
10:22:21 <elliott> and it sees, on the network, that .hs = haskell-mode is the most popular thing
10:22:28 <elliott> it would then obtain and use haskell-mode for me
10:22:33 <elliott> so i don't have to goddamn install it myself fffffffff
10:22:37 <elliott> this is what tired does to me
10:22:45 <evincar> I'd add an interstitial confirmation dialog that allowed me to pick an alternative.
10:23:38 <evincar> .hs = haskell-mode. Install? (3 alternatives, y=install, n=more, x=cancel)
10:23:50 <evincar> For y, n, and x of your preference.
10:24:07 <evincar> I haven't paid attention to any confirmation prompt in emacs for a long time.
10:24:18 <evincar> It's all chords all the time.
10:24:25 <elliott> evincar: no, because you could always just say
10:24:35 <elliott> "i would like to use a different mode"
10:24:39 <elliott> and it would have suggestions for you
10:24:49 <evincar> M-x wrong-fucking-mode-emacs
10:24:50 <elliott> no point prompting when a reasonable default can be picked, you can always override it
10:25:10 <elliott> of course, with elisp not exactly being secure and emacs sucking this will never happen :)
10:25:16 <elliott> Of course, the very concept of a *file* is stupid...
10:25:26 <elliott> ...so it's more like when you edit some text tagged as being haskell code or something, i guess
10:25:34 <evincar> What, you'd prefer to be able to arbitrarily scribble on your disk? :P
10:25:50 <elliott> evincar: you know how you have nice structures and objects and things in memory?
10:25:57 <elliott> and they're all rich and useful and aware of their own type?
10:26:06 <elliott> evincar: instead of just byte streams associated with names?
10:26:22 <elliott> evincar: yeah, you put those objects on the disk.
10:26:34 <elliott> and remove the artificial, historical RAM/disk address space distinction.
10:26:41 <evincar> In reality, in both places, you have bytes that are not associated with names. :P
10:27:07 <elliott> every bit of data in a program is reachable by some accessor unless it's garbage or not your data
10:27:17 <evincar> The association is meta-information.
10:27:19 <elliott> in C, at least, every piece of data has a name -- *(type *)address
10:27:26 <elliott> but you probably can't access most of them due to the security model
10:28:33 <elliott> evincar: here's the whiny, pissed-offness-induced rant i wrote about it early this year: http://catseye.tc/ehird/files-suck.html
10:28:45 <elliott> it is about as coherent as i would be if i tried to explain it in this state :)
10:30:49 <evincar> So...you're saying that data of a certain type ought to have a canonical representation on disk? But...file formats are created for reasons other than circumventing the leaky abstractions of file systems.
10:31:21 <elliott> i'm too tired to talk about such a heated issue, sorry :)
10:31:38 <evincar> Does encoding and decoding PNG streams really belong in a filesystem driver module? :P
10:31:55 <elliott> <evincar> Does encoding and decoding PNG streams really belong in a filesystem driver module? :P
10:32:07 <elliott> try to actually read the article, even if it is whiny :)
10:34:09 <evincar> I am, carefully. If, say, PNG is the backing format of my image, and I query the filesystem to get at the image data, either the filesystem needs to decode it into the system's canonical representation of an image, or my application needs to decode it into whatever representation it sees fit. If you place it in the system driver, you've created a perfect abstraction at the cost of bloat,...
10:34:10 <evincar> ...even if the bloat is modular.
10:34:22 <evincar> If you place it in the application, you have the same problem.
10:34:24 <elliott> you are making an invalid assumption
10:34:34 <evincar> What does it mean to say "there is no filesystem"?
10:34:57 <evincar> There has to be, at some level, a driver that manages the interaction between software and hardware.
10:35:44 <elliott> disk is big object space, ram is smaller object space acting as cache and temporary modification holding area of disk
10:35:55 <evincar> It doesn't matter *when* the serialisation takes place, but at the hardware level, it has to happen.
10:36:20 <elliott> i don't think you understand
10:36:36 <olsner> the point is that the driver doesn't implement a "file system", but rather persistent storage of objects
10:36:37 <evincar> Well, okay, here's a use case, and you give me the underlying do-how.
10:37:01 <elliott> specifically, ram is simply a cache of a selection of objects from disk that are being used right now
10:37:11 <elliott> modifications to the ram copies automatically are synchronised to disk
10:37:19 <elliott> and you can refer to any object whether it's in ram or not, and it will be loaded from disk
10:37:23 <elliott> the ram is managed by the os
10:37:24 <evincar> olsner, elliott: I understand that, but I'm asking how an application actually interacts with it.
10:37:36 <elliott> evincar: ok, here's an example
10:37:52 <elliott> myProgram = {masterpieces: {}};
10:38:09 <elliott> func myProgram.createMasterpiece(foo) { masterpieces.append(foo) }
10:38:16 <elliott> func myProgram.masterpieceNumber(n) { masterpieces[n] }
10:38:24 <elliott> func myProgram.editMasterpiece(n, foo) { masterpieces[n] = foo }
10:38:27 <elliott> create ui around that, etc.
10:38:34 <elliott> this object is automatically synchronised to disk
10:38:38 <elliott> so every masterpiece is stored on disk
10:38:46 <elliott> and if masterpiece N is loaded, but it's not in ram
10:40:35 <evincar> elliott: Okay, but that implies that the names and identities of objects are inherent in the models and implementations of the languages involved. How does a C++ program accomplish the same thing without losing performance to the fact that its memory model is no longer just flat bytes, but some kind of associative store?
10:40:54 <elliott> evincar: who says its memory model isn't flat bytes?
10:40:58 <elliott> the internal representation is irrelevant here
10:41:02 <elliott> and, in fact, forget C++ even exists
10:41:12 <elliott> it's bad enough trying to explain this to people without thinking about that awful abomination too
10:42:03 <olsner> evincar: how objects look when loaded into programs is pretty much irrelevant to the idea, I think
10:42:27 <evincar> olsner: Yes, but how do they get there and back?
10:42:44 <olsner> through an API, using abstractions
10:43:04 <elliott> from the program's point of view
10:43:05 <evincar> And that is what I was asking about, elliott.
10:43:07 <elliott> every object is always there
10:43:18 <elliott> just because it hasn't referred to a list that's a property of one of its objects
10:43:29 <elliott> you access it as a variable if it is a variable
10:43:33 <elliott> as a property if it is a property
10:43:36 <evincar> That only works in a language that is designed to support something similar.
10:43:37 <elliott> with [n] if it's a list member
10:43:55 <evincar> Okay, I was going to present you with an example.
10:44:25 <elliott> evincar: ok, imagine a program
10:44:31 <evincar> I have a program that loads a PNG, performs a convolution on the image data, and outputs the result.
10:44:33 <elliott> that stores data, in memory, a text editor that stores stuff in memory, let's say
10:44:41 <elliott> now imagine you never close down the program, ever
10:44:49 <evincar> (Well, if you had let me start in the first place...)
10:44:50 <elliott> evincar: you know the "hibernate" feature of all modern OSes?
10:45:01 <elliott> of course, you could hibernate as much as you want when running this program
10:45:05 <elliott> and it would still run just fine
10:45:13 <elliott> evincar: now imagine we wanted to store more documents than we have RAM
10:45:23 <elliott> evincar: imagine the computer is "constantly" hibernated -- the contents of RAM are constantly mirrored on disk
10:45:26 <elliott> evincar: now imagine inverting this
10:45:35 <elliott> evincar: "objects in memory" are considered to actually be on disk
10:45:42 <elliott> evincar: and RAM is merely where they are loaded to, when they are referenced
10:45:53 <elliott> the program still works, and it works even across total shutdowns
10:45:57 <elliott> and it can store more documents than fit into ram
10:45:59 <evincar> elliott: Okay, I've understood that bit.
10:46:33 <evincar> But what I'm asking is what sort of API you would present, and how, from a programmer's point of view, it would actually change anything.
10:46:54 <elliott> the exact same program that was written for a normal OS is used in the final stage, there
10:48:47 <evincar> Okay, so a program that is designed around the concepts of loading and saving named files as unadorned byte streams will still work as expected.
10:48:56 <elliott> there is no filesystem api
10:49:02 <elliott> <elliott> that stores data, in memory, a text editor that stores stuff in memory, let's say
10:49:05 <elliott> it NEVER touches any files
10:49:15 <evincar> So the same program that was written for a normal OS will NOT work. :P
10:49:26 <elliott> THE PROGRAM THAT WAS WRITTEN FOR A NORMAL OS WAS THE ONE SPECIFIC PROGRAM THAT I DESCRIBED
10:49:29 <elliott> NOT "ANY PROGRAM FOR A NORMAL OS"
10:49:37 <elliott> *THAT* SPECIFIC PROGRAM, WHICH WAS WRITTEN FOR A NORMAL OS >_<
10:50:13 <evincar> I'm not trying to be irritating.
10:50:25 <elliott> i know, and i don't hold it against you, it's just that you're succeeding :)
10:50:32 <elliott> evincar: btw, this is not some new-fangled concept.
10:50:35 <elliott> the literature has done it to death.
10:50:37 <evincar> I just...disagree with you, but you seem to think I don't understand you, so I'm trying to make sure I do before I assert you're incorrect.
10:50:42 <elliott> I think even freakin' *Multics* did it.
10:51:30 <evincar> elliott: So, alright...if I were to abstract "loading" as simply "the first read of an object, which implicitly brings it into working memory"...
10:51:39 <evincar> ..."editing" as working on a copy of that object...
10:51:53 <evincar> ...and "saving" as commiting changes...
10:52:06 <evincar> ...then would an ordinary program...
10:52:19 <elliott> olsner: you take over, i'm done
10:52:46 <olsner> nope, have to go to work :)
10:52:47 <evincar> The ability to decide when *not* to save your data is just as important as whether your data is retained.
10:53:11 <elliott> evincar: how about drop this and talk about it when i've actually slept :)
10:53:13 <olsner> actually, should've gone at least an hour ago
10:53:14 <evincar> If my documents are implicitly written to disk, how do I roll back changes? Are they versioned?
10:53:17 <elliott> or i'm just going to get really annoyed.
10:53:42 <evincar> I am trying very hard to get this.
10:53:50 <elliott> and i don't hold it against you :P
10:54:04 <evincar> Oh well. I guess right now it's just one of those things.
10:54:22 <evincar> If it's explained right, I'll get it, but until then, I feel as though it's a logical fallacy, or at least a bad idea.
10:54:25 <elliott> evincar: trust that i'm right, though :)
10:54:30 <elliott> and yes, you are misunderstanding badly.
10:54:41 <elliott> filesystems have poisoned your brain :)
10:54:55 <evincar> elliott: I will not trust that you're right, only that you think you're right, and you may very well be, but I don't know that yet.
10:55:12 <elliott> well, if it helps, i am *far* from the only person to think this.
10:55:42 <evincar> All I'm saying now is that there needs to be control over revisions in order for persistent objects to retain the backup-safety of traditional filesystems.
10:55:45 <elliott> wtf haskell what f ijiojioj what is up with you my code is right
10:55:49 <elliott> evincar: that is true, yes.
10:55:57 <elliott> evincar: but i was discussing an "api" issue not a UI one
10:56:06 <elliott> moving on to things we can talk more productively about with my tiredness!
10:56:32 <elliott> show (Conj xs) = map (\x -> '(' : show x ++ ")") xs
10:56:34 <elliott> AND WHY DOES THIS NOT WORK
10:57:51 <elliott> instance (Show e) => Show (E e) where
10:57:51 <elliott> show (Conj xs) = '(' : unwords (map show xs) ++ ")"
10:58:34 <olsner> elliott: bah, your error is obvious
10:59:08 <evincar> olsner: I feel bad for not noticing it. :P
10:59:38 <elliott> someRule :: (HoleyE, SolidE)
10:59:38 <elliott> someRule = (conj [atom "car", conj [atom "cons", hole "x", hole "y"]],
10:59:41 <evincar> Ugh, doing multiple things at once.
11:00:03 <evincar> elliott: Don't worry about it.
11:00:04 <elliott> unify :: HoleyE -> SolidE -> Maybe [(SolidE, SolidE)]
11:00:17 <elliott> so tempted to rename it HolyE
11:01:51 <evincar> Sing it like this and you've got a deal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJlAop6SyLI
11:02:10 <evincar> FUNK IT IS THE BEST DON'T YOU KNOW
11:03:38 <elliott> holy shit! my unify function is almost written and it's so simpl;e
11:04:30 <evincar> Functional programming is always startingly simple.
11:05:04 <evincar> No, of pancreatic cancer, but you're close.
11:05:22 <evincar> I'm not very easily offended.
11:05:22 <elliott> "I have pancreatic cancer." "Oh. I'm in a funk band." "Ouch, sorry man."
11:05:44 <evincar> There's a reason that funk has "fun" in it, though.
11:06:56 <evincar> elliott: Quote from a friend of mine from his professor: '...teaching the Juniors about buttons: "Why does the download arrow point down? Because the internet is above us. Go outside, look up, and you'll see it."'
11:07:18 <evincar> It's as good a justification as any.
11:08:56 <evincar> Also, another friend of mine just got a tragus piercing, which looks way cooler than it ought to.
11:10:06 <evincar> I'm not into piercing enough to get anything done. Same with tattoos. Although I hope to get my tattoo license some day.
11:10:29 <evincar> Which means I'll basically have to practice on myself if I want to get practice on skin.
11:10:32 -!- Quadrescence has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
11:10:34 <elliott> I find all piercings and tattoos unattractive. :/
11:10:37 <evincar> Unless I have a very tolerant partner.
11:11:05 <elliott> Couldn't match expected type `[a]'
11:11:05 <elliott> against inferred type `Maybe [(String, SolidE)]'
11:11:05 <elliott> In the first argument of `zipWith', namely `unify'
11:13:55 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> unify (conj [atom "car", conj [atom "cons", hole "x", hole "y"]]) (conj [atom "car", conj [atom "cons", atom "head", atom "tail"]])
11:13:55 <elliott> Just [("x",head),("y",tail)]
11:14:22 <elliott> evincar: The first one there is (car (cons 'x 'y)).
11:14:26 <elliott> evincar: The second is (car (cons head tail)).
11:14:38 <elliott> evincar: And so, it matches the latter against the former and tells me to bind x=head, y=tail.
11:14:45 <elliott> (Note: 'x means placeholder x, not quote x like in lisp.)
11:15:00 <evincar> (Ah, that threw me off a moment.)
11:15:34 <evincar> Uh, I have no useful response at this time.
11:17:26 <evincar> Does it betray some latent sexism that I don't really care for female singers?
11:18:12 <elliott> Singers no, violinists probably :P
11:19:12 <evincar> I'm saying nothing of skill. I just mean I can't tolerate watching a woman play a violin because something about it irks me, regardless of how brilliant she may be.
11:19:18 <elliott> evincar: anyway, here is my unify function
11:19:21 <elliott> unify :: HoleyE -> SolidE -> Maybe [(String, SolidE)]
11:19:21 <elliott> unify (H (Atom s)) (S (Atom t)) | s == t = Just []
11:19:21 <elliott> unify (H (Conj xs)) (S (Conj ys)) = fmap concat . sequence $ zipWith unify xs ys
11:19:21 <elliott> unify (Hole s) x = Just [(s,x)]
11:19:30 <evincar> I think it might have something to do with the fact that I can't reconcile the bearing of a violinist with the proportions of a woman. They seem incompatible somehow.
11:20:44 <elliott> My evaluator is going to be pretty inefficient. But I don't care much.
11:21:26 <elliott> Also I *think* I'm going to end up with some form of dynamic scoping. Ha ha, what a life.
11:23:25 <evincar> elliott: Somehow I can't resist dynamic scoping with explicit dynamic imports. It's easy to implement and has the same effect as lexical scoping in most cases. You only have to worry about closures. *shrug*
11:23:57 <elliott> i refuse to give you a choice
11:25:16 <evincar> elliott: But...but...dynamic scoping is more expressive! And more error-prone. :P
11:25:27 <elliott> even mccarthy acknowledged it was a mistake
11:25:30 <elliott> and thats motherfucking mccarthy
11:25:34 <evincar> You know, if you actually decide it's a good idea to do a dynamic import up the call stack.
11:25:46 <elliott> you do realise the problems are far deeper than that?
11:25:59 <elliott> for instance if x is bound in your scope
11:26:11 <elliott> be passed to another function or returned
11:26:14 <elliott> YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT X WILL BE
11:26:30 <elliott> and if anyone else decided to name a variable x anywhere else in your call stack at the time, it's not what you want.
11:27:33 <evincar> Eh, judicious mixing of dynamic and lexical scoping is fine. I equate a lambda with a hygienic macro, in some ways.
11:28:04 <evincar> It should just import at the point of instantiation and the closure lasts as long as the lambda exists.
11:28:12 <evincar> My language is degrading. I hope I make any sense.
11:30:04 -!- FireFly has joined.
11:30:16 <evincar> elliott: Yes, we've established that. I have strong opinions about language design, weakly held.
11:30:45 <evincar> Also, I'm contrary and rebellious and however you've got to get it done, have at.
11:31:59 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> someExpr
11:31:59 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> someRule
11:31:59 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> rewrite someExpr [someRule]
11:32:09 <Vorpal> elliott, have you ever implemented an AVL tree or a Red-black tree?
11:32:31 <elliott> i don't recall ever doing so, but i've certainly read about implementing them
11:33:05 <Vorpal> elliott, right, which type of self balancing binary tree would be easiest to implement? Certainly not red-black.
11:33:17 <Vorpal> I guess AVL might be easiest, but perhaps there is some other one?
11:33:35 -!- sebbu has joined.
11:33:54 <Vorpal> elliott, as for why: looking for what is easiest to memorise for an exam where something like this is likely to be required.
11:34:52 <Vorpal> chances of it requiring a specific variant is rather low... based on old exam papers for the same module
11:35:05 <elliott> do whatever okasaki did :)
11:35:30 <Vorpal> elliott, name rings a bell, can't place it *googles*
11:35:31 <evincar> Gah, charlieissocoollike is so, like, cool. And cute. <3
11:35:59 <Vorpal> elliott, purely functional data structures?
11:36:07 <Vorpal> the other google hits seem unlikely in the context
11:36:09 <evincar> elliott: He did come up with it utterly arbitrarily by tacking on words instead of numbers to "charlie".
11:36:51 <evincar> "charlie. Damn. charlieiscool. Damn. charlieissocool. Damn. charlieissocoollike. Bingo!"
11:37:30 <elliott> rewrite :: SolidE -> [(HoleyE, SolidE)] -> SolidE
11:37:31 <elliott> case catMaybes $ map (\(l,r) -> fmap ((,) r) (unify l x)) ys of
11:37:31 <elliott> (x',bs):_ -> rewrite x' (map (\(s,b) -> (atom s, b)) bs ++ ys)
11:37:32 <Vorpal> evincar, what about charlieis? wouldn't that logically be a required step after the original?
11:37:38 <elliott> in my defence, i do feel remorse for writing that.
11:38:22 <evincar> Vorpal: Ask thee not! For verily I know not.
11:38:34 -!- Velmont has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
11:38:39 -!- Velmont has joined.
11:38:58 <elliott> Velmont: hi oklopol-holder
11:39:05 <elliott> unify :: HoleyE -> SolidE -> Maybe [(String, SolidE)]
11:39:05 <elliott> unify (H (Atom s)) (S (Atom t)) | s == t = Just []
11:39:05 <elliott> unify (H (Conj xs)) (S (Conj ys)) = fmap concat . sequence $ zipWith unify xs ys
11:39:05 <elliott> unify (Hole s) x = Just [(s,x)]
11:39:05 <Vorpal> elliott, ah that explains why it wasn't in Prelude either
11:39:09 -!- wareya has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds).
11:39:17 <elliott> that one is actually pretty
11:39:26 <Vorpal> elliott, what are the data types HoleyE and SolidE?
11:39:47 <elliott> data HoleyE = H (E HoleyE) | Hole String
11:39:48 <elliott> data SolidE = S (E SolidE)
11:40:26 <Velmont> Hmm. Why did I cycle? Ah, server problems. Yes.
11:40:29 <elliott> Vorpal: a data constructor?
11:40:36 <Vorpal> elliott, right, just woke up
11:40:46 <elliott> Vorpal: i haven't slept in ... many hours
11:40:50 <elliott> Vorpal: you'd do better to ask what E is
11:40:56 <Vorpal> elliott, I slept for um, 11 hours now
11:40:57 <elliott> data E e = Atom String | Conj [e]
11:41:06 <evincar> elliott: I challenge you to stay up as long as meee.
11:41:17 <elliott> Vorpal: essentially I took
11:41:22 <elliott> data E = Atom String | Conj [E]
11:41:25 <elliott> and separated the recursion out
11:41:29 <elliott> data E e = Atom String | Conj [e]
11:41:33 <elliott> data SolidE = S (E SolidE)
11:41:38 <elliott> so now SolidE is equivalent to
11:41:51 <elliott> just with a data constructor in-between to make haskell happy
11:42:00 <elliott> then i used this to create
11:42:01 <evincar> (Where meee = (lambda (x) (me (me (me (x))))).)
11:42:02 <elliott> data HoleyE = H (E HoleyE) | Hole String
11:42:08 <elliott> which is E with another constructor added on
11:42:27 <Vorpal> elliott, what are you trying to achieve with this?
11:42:34 <elliott> basically SolidE is an expression, and HoleyE is an expression with placeholders.
11:42:38 <elliott> Vorpal: it is a term rewriting language
11:42:50 <elliott> Vorpal: unify and rewrite constitute the entire evaluation engine
11:42:52 <Vorpal> now it makes some sense
11:43:08 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> someExpr
11:43:08 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> someRule
11:43:08 <elliott> *Main Control.Monad> rewrite someExpr [someRule]
11:43:21 <elliott> someRule is a (HoleyE, SolidE)
11:43:32 <elliott> (a b c) represents Conj [a,b,c]
11:43:36 <elliott> and foo represents Atom "foo"
11:43:42 <Vorpal> which just shows that you can't figure out most haskell code from the data type names and function names + the type signatures alone.
11:44:34 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
11:45:24 <elliott> rewrite :: SolidE -> [(HoleyE, SolidE)] -> SolidE
11:45:24 <elliott> case mapMaybe (\(l,r) -> fmap ((,) r) (unify l x)) ys of
11:45:24 <elliott> (x',bs):_ -> rewrite x' (map (first atom) bs ++ ys)
11:45:37 <elliott> you're just insufficiently thoughtful :)
11:45:49 <elliott> Vorpal: so i'm using firefox, feel free to laugh at me
11:45:56 <Vorpal> elliott, why should I?
11:46:16 <evincar> elliott: When FP is intuitive, you are in a certain state of Zen that can only result from one of a few things, of which lack of is the easiest to come by.
11:46:35 -!- wareya has joined.
11:46:42 <Vorpal> elliott, as long as you don't use chatzilla you are unlikely to induce laughing
11:46:58 <evincar> (Highly appropriate that I omitted "sleep" from a sentence about lack thereof.)
11:47:15 <evincar> Vorpal: I'm using Chatzilla because I am lazy.
11:47:27 <Vorpal> evincar, you are not elliott however.
11:47:50 <evincar> Vorpal: elliott is known for his, ah, well, he's opinionated, eh?
11:48:26 <elliott> Y'ALL DIPSHIT FUCKERS ARE WRONG
11:48:43 <Vorpal> evincar, I guess you could say that. And I couldn't imagine him using chatzilla for any reason other than 1) because someone said he wouldn't 2) because he is not at his own computer and has no choice, but then he would probably use mibbit
11:49:42 <evincar> I am slowly remembering how hard caffeine can be on an empty stomach. I need to remember to eat more.
11:49:42 <Vorpal> if he now uses chatzilla he of course just proves that (1) holds.
11:49:44 <elliott> what kind of not-my computer has chatzilla?
11:49:54 <elliott> Vorpal: i'm too sleep-deprived for that
11:50:01 <elliott> evincar: porridge, i feel, is good in these situations; i have been eating it
11:50:05 <elliott> evincar: do you guys even know what porridge it?
11:50:18 <Vorpal> elliott, who knows. Maybe some RL friend's computer?
11:50:24 <evincar> elliott: Yes, but it's not so common.
11:50:29 <elliott> Vorpal: i do not comprehend the conjunction of these two terms :)
11:51:42 <evincar> evincar: Over here people wouldn't generally know what you were talking about unless you said "oatmeal
11:52:10 <evincar> *elliott: (the above, less fail).
11:52:12 <elliott> evincar: oatmeal isn't really the same thing though is it
11:52:15 <elliott> i mean when people say oatmeal
11:52:21 <Vorpal> strange, every night at the same time I get a few UDP packets to the same ports over my ipv6 tunnel from the same ip. Targeted at a specific non-existent IP on my subnet.
11:52:28 <elliott> they don't mean rolled oats + milk + sugar do they?
11:52:36 <elliott> to mean a lovely sweet oaty sludge
11:52:42 <elliott> they mean that but... not sweet and... weird
11:52:51 <Vorpal> the source ip is a he.net tunnel, I have a sixxs tunnel. So this makes no sense.
11:52:55 <evincar> elliott: Oatmeal is just rolled oat porridge.
11:53:09 <elliott> right, but how do you guys make it? well, when you do
11:53:22 <Vorpal> destination ports: a sweep from 33476 to 33480
11:54:06 <Vorpal> this night I'll put up tcpdump to actually dump the packets (all 40 bytes according to the ip6tables log) and figure out what they are
11:54:13 <evincar> elliott: People usually buy the instant variety, that is, packets of oats and usu. dried apple that they add boiling water to to reconstitute into what, if you're lucky, may not turn into a brick in your belly.
11:54:34 <elliott> evincar: that sounds rather terrible
11:54:35 <evincar> elliott: People who know better buy plain old oats and work from there. :P
11:54:38 <elliott> evincar: it's not hard to prepare manually :P
11:55:03 <elliott> Step one, buy Quaker oats. Their faith in God makes the oats superior. (I can see no other explanation for their obvious superiority over Scots Porage Oats.)
11:55:04 <evincar> elliott: Of course it sounds rather terrible. I was trying to make it sound terrible.
11:55:11 <elliott> (Also, as you can see, Scots can't spell. Fuckers.)
11:55:46 <evincar> If I have to have oats for breakfast, I think I'd prefer oat cakes and preserves.
11:57:08 <Vorpal> talking of porridge... how many variants do you have?
11:58:34 <Vorpal> I mean, you can use wheat instead of oats
11:58:41 <Vorpal> so oatmeal hardly makes sense
11:58:56 <evincar> Uh, hard to say. It's all oats, here, and the only real variety comes in the instant brands. Some are better than others, for instance Quaker makes a few good ones such as Simple Harvest, which is a multi-grain one that will make your guts happier than anything on the face of the planet.
11:59:06 <elliott> Vorpal: porridge here just means rolled oats.
11:59:11 <elliott> prepared in the way i describe.
11:59:18 <elliott> obviously you can add shit to it if you can't handle simplicity.
11:59:29 <elliott> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Porridge.jpg this is not porridge.
11:59:33 <Vorpal> elliott, here it generally means wheat unless you specifically indicates something else
11:59:49 <evincar> Grits is a corn-based porridgey stuff.
11:59:54 <evincar> Mostly eaten in the South.
12:00:07 <Vorpal> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porridge#Varieties <-- impressive list of different stuff you can use to make porridge!
12:00:38 <evincar> It bothers me that people outside America don't seem to know the different regions, and especially the different accents. I mean, yeah, most people here couldn't tell you shit about the UK, but I'd like the situation to be improved on both sides.
12:00:46 <elliott> http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/scotts-oats.jpg THE ENEMY.
12:00:52 <Vorpal> rice is a quite common base too around here for it.
12:01:01 <elliott> http://www.english-shop.de/images/Quaker%20-%20Quaker%20Oats.jpg THE GOOD GUYS.
12:01:15 <evincar> elliott: What's your accent like? I mean, where are you from?
12:01:55 <elliott> evincar: My accent is pretty generic British, I think. Which of rhotic/non-rhotic is typical for Britain? Because I'm that one.
12:02:15 <evincar> Rhotic = pronounces Rs rather than long vowels.
12:02:26 <evincar> Britain...eh...well, you can't say.
12:02:30 <evincar> England is typically non-rhotic.
12:03:13 <evincar> Vorpal: So you wouldn't really know?
12:03:15 <Vorpal> wtf, you call porridge made of rice "rice pudding" according to wikipedia
12:03:47 <evincar> Vorpal: I mean, are you saying you wouldn't know what sort of English accent you have, other than perhaps a Swedish-sounding one?
12:04:20 <evincar> Vorpal: Rice pudding is a cold, puddingy thing. How is that porridge?
12:04:29 <Vorpal> evincar, indeed, I learnt UK English in school though. So Swedish sounding with some RP bits?
12:04:38 <Vorpal> evincar, then wikipedia fails somewhere
12:04:45 <Vorpal> "Rice pudding, sweetened rice porridges usually made with milk and commonly flavored with butter and baking spices such as cinnamon. In Nordic countries, it is a traditional breakfast for Christmas Eve."
12:04:58 <Vorpal> the interwiki is to the porridge thing
12:05:08 <Vorpal> and that quote is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porridge#Varieties
12:05:34 <evincar> Vorpal: Oh, okay. Rice pudding commonly refers to Tapioca pudding.
12:05:54 <evincar> Vorpal: So it's just an issue of terminology.
12:06:17 <evincar> Again, probably an Americanism.
12:06:38 <elliott> tree style tabs is so close to perfection, argh :)
12:06:55 <evincar> I have a semi-typical educated American accent, but it's tinged a bit with New England, which has its own idiosyncracies
12:07:20 <elliott> I swear the American accents are optimised for irritatingness.
12:07:23 <Vorpal> anyway common porridge bases around here: oats, wheat, rice, (looks at interwiki...) something called "semolina" in English it seems...
12:08:05 <elliott> ever since i heard lament's lounge version of O Fortuna
12:08:07 <evincar> Major accents in the US include New England, Eastern, South, Deep South, Appalachian, Great Basin, Midwest, North, Pacific Northwest, and West...
12:08:18 <elliott> i find it hard to associate it with the orff version
12:08:19 <evincar> ...and there are loads of subdivisions in all of those.
12:08:33 <Vorpal> maybe because I think it is so awful
12:09:00 <evincar> elliott: You might be thinking of the fact that the only American accents any Brit ever imitates are the Southern hick drawl and the California ditzy girl. :P
12:09:13 <elliott> evincar: No, just Standard American.
12:09:25 <elliott> evincar: Seriously. American news programs can be really irritating. (Not talking about Fox.)
12:09:33 <elliott> It's brash like America. :)
12:09:36 <evincar> elliott: There is...not really such a thing, just like there's no "Standard English".
12:09:49 <evincar> elliott: I want to hear an example of an accent you find grating.
12:09:52 <elliott> i basically mean all of them
12:10:00 <elliott> british accents are nice and that's it :P
12:10:34 <elliott> http://filebin.ca/qyxpp/ofortuna.mp3
12:10:38 <evincar> Egh...I think some American accents are nice, some British accents are nice, some AustralioNewZealandarea accents are nice. It depends on a lot of things, including the personality and voice involved.
12:11:03 <Vorpal> elliott, AU accents aren't too bad. Though I guess in the long run they could be irritating as well
12:11:15 <elliott> i'm going to play this on loop FOREVER
12:11:16 <evincar> elliott: What is this that I'm hearing?
12:11:25 <elliott> evincar: lament's lounge version of O Fortuna.
12:11:35 <elliott> evincar: You know it as this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrML6s1wNHk
12:12:07 <evincar> elliott: Oh, yes I do. I sang it in choir.
12:12:23 <elliott> evincar: Well, congrats; from now on, you will associate it with a chill lounge version.
12:12:59 <Vorpal> <elliott> i'm going to play this on loop FOREVER <-- how do you plan to deal with the heat death of the universe? Compared to "forever" that is quite soon...
12:13:12 <evincar> I'm a deep bass with a large high range. Not falsetto, head voice. I am missing a few notes, though. But it's always fun to surprise people with my low baritone on first meeting them, since I don't weigh much.
12:13:43 <evincar> People expect skinny guys to have high voices.
12:13:48 <elliott> Detestable life / now difficult / and then easy!
12:13:54 <evincar> Then again, people don't give a damn about singers with low voices. :(
12:13:59 <elliott> (Admittedly I translated it^W^Wused Wikipedia's translation.)
12:14:16 <elliott> evincar: SOME STAY DRY AND OTHERS FEEL THE PAIN
12:14:38 <evincar> elliott: I will record myself singing that song if you give me an example of a general American accent you find grating.
12:15:04 <elliott> i actually guess most american accents are fine
12:15:10 <elliott> some of them are really terrible :)
12:15:39 <evincar> I just love language stuff, so I'm interested in how we're viewed. Or, heard, rather.
12:17:43 <Vorpal> the concepts of weeks make so little sense.
12:18:37 <evincar> Vorpal: You're quite right...segmenting time in a running period that doesn't line up with the rest of the calendar? What the heck?
12:18:43 <Vorpal> for a start, the 52 weeks / year thingy? Not true for either normal or leap years.
12:19:08 <elliott> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYmrg3owTRE
12:19:21 <elliott> calenders are for ... RACISTS!!!
12:19:39 <Vorpal> 7*52 is in fact 364 days
12:20:15 -!- cheater_ has quit (Disconnected by services).
12:20:21 <evincar> elliott: This is a disappointing video. All of the slang is from black pop-rap. :
12:20:32 <evincar> I'm so neutral my mouth fell off.
12:20:50 <Vorpal> elliott, you just passed the point between "sleep deprived and quite jolly" and "sleep deprived and incomprehensible"
12:21:12 <elliott> evincar: All of the American slang, sure :P
12:21:15 <evincar> I hardly knew any of the supposed American slang, but had heard most of the supposed British.
12:21:34 <elliott> Vorpal: but only after WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOowoOOOoooOOOOOoooOOooo
12:22:00 <Vorpal> elliott, maybe a bitmask would be a better representation of these states...
12:22:28 <evincar> elliott: "Badonkadonk? That's a fantastic word." Hugh purrs.
12:23:11 <elliott> I recall a particularly memorable moment in House when Hugh Laurie got the chance to, while putting on an excellent American accent, put on a terrible British accent.
12:23:22 <evincar> Hah, that sounds familiar.
12:23:53 <evincar> Daniel Radcliffe appeared on Ellen and did a solid Northeastern American.
12:26:58 <evincar> elliott: Do you think it's fair to say that Americans doing British accents usually end up sounding either way too posh or way too "Oi fink oi'm tehnin into a Ci'y Bri'ish"?
12:27:26 <elliott> evincar: i think it's safe to say that i have seen few try, presumably because they're not idiotic enough to think they could pull it off
12:28:09 <evincar> elliott: Makes sense. Oh, lemme look something up.
12:29:35 <evincar> elliott: A friend of mine attempting (and not accomplishing) a "British accent": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DUqw3R8KnI
12:30:14 <elliott> 7 seconds in and i want to stab someone
12:30:35 <evincar> elliott: I know, she's a nice girl but she makes me cringe. :P
12:31:01 <evincar> But this is an example of "too posh", I think, but also just awkward.
12:31:14 <evincar> At one point she slips into something that sounds more like Edinburgh. :P
12:34:49 <elliott> https://addons.mozilla.org/img/uploads/previews/full/11/11593.png?modified=0
12:36:02 <evincar> elliott: What is this dark magic?
12:44:14 <evincar> THE CONVERSATION MUST NOT DIE
12:50:00 -!- ais523 has joined.
12:50:04 <evincar> elliott: I think it's about time I quit and started preparing for the day ahead.
12:50:25 <elliott> evincar: I thought you were going to stay up ridiculous times.
12:50:34 <evincar> elliott: Well, I have class in an hour and change.
12:50:55 <evincar> Yeah, I meant like take a shower and brush my teeth and stuff.
12:51:23 <elliott> DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO QUIT IRC!
12:51:46 <ais523> I'm in a seminar, but it hasn't started yet
12:52:13 <elliott> Seminarl! wow that was terrible
12:52:20 <elliott> ais523: I'm sleep-deprived; isn't that fun?
12:52:33 <ais523> elliott: you're acting sleep-deprived, at least
12:52:43 <ais523> what caused it? did you stay up all night worrying about Vorpal's exam?
12:52:53 * ais523 picks the most recent sleep-deprivation cause mentioned in this channel
12:52:59 <ais523> see, extrapolation, it's science!
12:53:17 <elliott> ais523: I was so worried he might pass, thus furthering his education and potentially putting him in a future position of power.
12:53:41 <evincar> ais523: It's true, every word. We changed the logs to protect the guilty.
12:54:04 <elliott> ais523: Or, if you're concerned with things such as facts, it's because as of yesterday my sleep schedule was precisely upside down, and I have to be up at 9 am tomorrow.
12:54:54 <ais523> that happens to me quite a bit
12:55:08 <ais523> having a regular timetable seems to help solve it, but I'm not sure if it's necessarily worth solving
12:55:26 <elliott> ais523: yeah school usually ... "helps"
12:55:52 <ais523> did you have half-term last week?
12:55:55 <elliott> ais523: I'm just going to start taking melatonin if I keep being as sleepcrastinaty as I have been.
12:56:30 <elliott> [[Iceweasel, an extension or a plugin has been installed, upgraded or removed by the system.
12:56:30 <elliott> It is strongly recommended to restart Iceweasel.
12:56:30 <elliott> Do you want to restart it now?]]
12:57:04 <elliott> evincar: It's a holiday half-way through the high school and lower "term".
12:57:34 <Vorpal> elliott, no school today?
12:57:54 <Vorpal> elliott, what about tomorrow?
12:58:13 <evincar> It's time for me to quit and get ready for MY seven hours of class, thank you very much.
12:58:28 <elliott> evincar: I saw the word "semen" in that sentence.
12:58:31 <elliott> And I'm not even sure where.
12:58:34 <Vorpal> evincar, 7 hours? can't be university then
12:58:36 <elliott> Whoo, my reading abilities are declining.
12:58:46 <evincar> Vorpal: University indeed.
12:58:47 <elliott> It was probably seven, yeah.
12:59:06 <evincar> The talk was good tonight, anyway.
12:59:12 <Vorpal> evincar, huh, generally for me it is spread out all over the week so you have 2 hours there, and then an hour free and then two hours somewhere else
12:59:21 <evincar> I'll keep the channel posted on that language.
12:59:24 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
12:59:47 <elliott> well what you said made little sense
12:59:47 <evincar> Vorpal: I have a weird schedule this quarter. 1 hour on Mondays and Wednesdays, then seven solid on Tuesdays and Thursdays. :P
13:00:12 <Vorpal> majorly inconvenient, not enough time to go home during between since it takes about 1.5 hours home by bus from university
13:00:37 <evincar> Vorpal: That sucks for you. At least I have the luxury of living on campus.
13:00:55 <Vorpal> evincar, technically I had 6 hour labs, though almost always I finished before half the time.
13:01:07 <Vorpal> evincar, cheaper to live with parents :P
13:01:21 <elliott> Vorpal: BUT I THOUGHT SWEDEN PAID FOR EVERYTHING
13:01:23 <Vorpal> evincar, and by car it takes much less. Half an hour or so.
13:01:52 <evincar> Vorpal: Parents are seven hours away. :P And the longest class I ever had that consistently lasted that long was the four-hour critique sessions for my life drawing class back when I was an art major.
13:02:06 <elliott> why can't i resize my columns in emacs
13:02:21 <evincar> elliott: What do you mean by "resize columns"?
13:02:23 <Vorpal> evincar, what do you study now?
13:02:29 <elliott> i mean resize the split columns
13:02:55 <evincar> Vorpal: I moved from New Media Design and Imaging to New Media Interactive Development. They're both interactive media majors, but one's geared toward art and the other toward programming.
13:03:25 <Vorpal> well, rather modern CS sadly
13:04:00 <evincar> Vorpal: It should be obvious that I don't really need the programming study, but it's better for me to have a science degree than one in arts.
13:04:08 <evincar> I originally went into the design major because, you know, I'm better at programming, so I wanted to round out my education.
13:04:21 <evincar> I did well, but it wasn't satisfying.
13:04:22 <elliott> <evincar> Vorpal: I moved from New Media Design and Imaging to New Media Interactive Development. They're both interactive media majors, but one's geared toward art and the other toward programming.
13:04:26 <elliott> those both sound like the most obnoxious things ever
13:04:45 <Vorpal> evincar, that doesn't work because you wouldn't have papers to show future employers that you knew programming
13:05:12 <evincar> elliott: Not really. It's just the university's blanket term for game design, web design, and other interactive stuff.
13:05:24 <elliott> it's not even software engineering!
13:05:50 <Vorpal> elliott, saying that means he must loath whatever it is
13:05:57 <evincar> elliott: Look, I can study high-level and esoteric theoretical computer science on my own time. In school I want to be forced to practice marketable skills so I don't let them atrophy.
13:06:29 <elliott> Vorpal: i don't actually mind software engineering
13:06:34 <elliott> Vorpal: i just wish it wasn't taught as CS
13:07:20 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined.
13:07:20 <evincar> elliott: And New Media majors have to take programming and software engineering in addition to mathematics and art and interface design and user experience design.
13:07:37 <elliott> ha, i shudder to think what a modern UI design course looks like.
13:08:07 <evincar> elliott: Not so bad, actually. The jury is in on what constitutes good graphic design for user interfaces. :P
13:08:31 <elliott> Vorpal: so have you slept yet
13:08:36 <evincar> Hint: it's exactly the same as good graphic design in general.
13:08:42 <elliott> right you just slept for ages
13:08:50 <elliott> evincar: if i talk i'll argue so just don't
13:08:55 <evincar> Baaah I really need to go, yeah.
13:09:04 <evincar> I'll talk to you guys later.
13:09:06 <Vorpal> elliott, ah, I didn't even have time to type "see scrollback" before you answered yourself :P
13:09:16 <Vorpal> not that I would have done that
13:09:46 <Vorpal> (I had got to "as I said before, I " when you answered yourself)
13:09:50 -!- evincar has quit (Quit: Later, pup.).
13:32:42 <elliott> i love how my type recursion is reflected everywhere
13:32:42 <elliott> <evincar> Vorpal: I moved from New Media Design and Imaging to New Media Interactive Development. They're both interactive media majors, but one's geared toward art and the other toward programming.
13:32:46 <elliott> e :: (EC e) => Parser e -> Parser e
13:32:47 <elliott> e ee = atom <$> identifier
13:32:50 <elliott> holey = e holey <|> (char '\'' >> hole <$> identifier)
13:54:54 <elliott> Statement of Subject: Initiative Measure No. 1069 concerns the state seal.
13:54:55 <elliott> Concise Description: This measure would require the Washington State Seal to depict a tapeworm attached to a taxpayer’s intestine, encircled by the words: Committed to sucking the life blood out of each and every taxpayer.
13:54:55 <elliott> Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
13:54:56 <elliott> This measure would require the Seal of the State of Washington to be changed to depict a vignette of a tapeworm dressed in a three piece suit attached to the lower intestine of a taxpayer shown as the central figure. The seal would be required to be encircled with the following words: “Committed to sucking the life blood out of each and every tax payer.” The illustration would be selected from subm
13:55:01 <elliott> issions submitted by taxpayers.
14:21:32 <elliott> "The Firefox logo, the very reason why Iceweasel exists, is now free as in speech. Its use is still limited by trademarks, but it is free."
14:21:39 <elliott> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/99d80bc3f18b
14:22:42 <elliott> "Hacking for Christ" -- a worse blog title, i cannot imagine.
14:22:55 <elliott> [[Yes, I'm a Christian, and I am one because I am convinced that two thousand years ago, God walked on the earth in order to reveal himself to us. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, predicted in advance, show that he was not merely a 'good man' or even just a prophet. He brought a message of the need to turn away from our rebellion against God (what the Bible calls "sin"), and he made availabl
14:22:55 <elliott> e free, unconditional forgiveness for past and future sins to all who put their trust in him.]]
14:27:25 -!- sftp has joined.
14:28:08 -!- alcatraz has joined.
14:28:50 -!- alcatraz has left (?).
14:29:55 -!- ais523 has joined.
14:33:45 <fizzie> I thought the trademark thing -- "you can't call it Firefox if you do changes we don't like" -- was the main reason they had to rebrand it to Iceweasel. Sure, the logo was non-free copyright-wise, so they dropped the logo and still called the browser Firefox, and then the Mozilla folks complained that you can't do that. (Admittedly I haven't really followed it that much.)
14:41:41 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
14:41:58 -!- ais523 has joined.
14:42:13 <elliott> fizzie: Actually, the logo was the main reason.
14:42:22 <elliott> ais523: I've been interesting-tarpitting!
14:52:45 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
14:57:23 -!- nooga has joined.
15:07:49 <elliott> Heh, they've replaced gconf.
15:46:48 -!- Quadrescence has joined.
15:49:48 <elliott> "Why haven't KDE and Xfce merged? Can they merge or does the source code not go good together? I know you can run them side by side, but I want Xfce and KDE to merge into one awesome DE (Desktop Environment)! If they could merge or if anyone knows a way to merge them then it would be better than e17 and/or Gnome, at least for me." --Ubuntu Forums
15:53:25 -!- Sgeo has joined.
15:58:44 <elliott> Whoa, Linux didn't use revision control until 2002.
16:02:04 * Sgeo wants everyone to stop torrenting him already
16:02:55 <Sgeo> Or downloading me
16:02:58 <Sgeo> http://freshwap.net/284/dl/sgeo
16:03:54 <Sgeo> It's pretty clear that it will claim that there are links for anything you search for
16:04:10 <Sgeo> The real mystery is how Google Alerts managed to find it as containing sgeo
16:56:23 -!- Quadrescence has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
17:01:58 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
17:17:26 -!- jcp has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds).
17:22:29 -!- MigoMipo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
17:23:17 -!- jcp has joined.
17:36:45 -!- Zuu has quit (*.net *.split).
17:36:45 -!- Ilari has quit (*.net *.split).
17:36:45 -!- Ilari_antrcomp has quit (*.net *.split).
17:36:45 -!- Vorpal has quit (*.net *.split).
17:36:51 -!- Zuu has joined.
17:36:51 -!- Zuu has quit (Changing host).
17:36:51 -!- Zuu has joined.
17:37:09 -!- Vorpal has joined.
17:44:12 -!- Ilari has joined.
17:46:02 -!- Ilari_antrcomp has joined.
18:02:04 -!- tombom has joined.
18:03:29 -!- xtreme has joined.
18:11:22 <Gregor> Is it me, or did this channel suddenly become
18:11:25 <Gregor> EXTREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEME
18:19:18 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
18:20:05 <Jackoz> elliott: I need an advice
18:20:34 <Jackoz> since you seem quite fond of functional programming :)
18:23:18 <Gregor> xtreme: Yes, we're all aware you're here, you have to actually say something with substance to get a meaningful response :P
18:23:23 <xtreme> it channel is wikipedia?
18:23:45 * Gregor elliott ... O_O ... that was the wtfiest thing ever said on IRC.
18:24:01 <Gregor> xtreme: I have no idea what that means :P
18:24:37 <elliott> xtreme: Yes, it channel is Wikipedia.
18:27:28 <elliott> xtreme: We make spells and knowledge.
18:28:48 <Jackoz> I mean asking if *it* channel is Wikiedia
18:29:25 <elliott> xtreme: ah yes, we are racists too
18:29:31 <elliott> the kkk are good friends of ours
18:31:12 -!- xtreme has left (?).
18:31:25 <Jackoz> you played that one too hard :(
18:31:37 <elliott> RIP #esoteric's xtremeness 2010 -- KKK
18:32:00 <Jackoz> do you think he was looking for esoteric issues?
18:32:10 <elliott> I think he was confused, and I have no idea.
18:34:18 <fizzie> There's a Finnish grocery store chain ran by a company called Kesko; their stores used to be called "K-kauppa" ("K-store") way back when; then they clustered the stores by size so that the smallest ones have one K, "regular"-sized ones are "market"s with two K's (so "KK-market"), big ones are "supermarket"s with three ("KKK-supermarket") and huge ones are "citymarket"s with four ("KKKK-citymarket").
18:34:41 <fizzie> For some reason you don't much see signage with the full "KKK-supermarket" name nowadays, it's mostly just "K-supermarket".
18:35:15 <fizzie> There's a picture of one at http://failblog.org/2008/08/19/supermarket-fail/
18:36:57 <Vorpal> <Gregor> EXTREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEME <-- how so?
18:37:05 <fizzie> Nice comments: "It's not fake, it's in Finland." Yeah, that's pretty much synonymous.
18:37:26 <Gregor> fizzie: I'm not convinced that Finland actually exists.
18:37:58 <Gregor> Vorpal: "xtreme" had just joined the channel X_X
18:38:13 <Vorpal> Gregor, was there a netsplit or something when I quit?
18:38:20 <fizzie> * Vorpal has quit (*.net *.split)
18:38:55 <fizzie> (But it was easier to copy-paste than to type four characters.)
18:39:01 <fizzie> (Except that now I had to explain.)
18:39:04 <fizzie> (And I'm still doing it.)
18:39:25 <elliott> <Gregor> fizzie: I'm not convinced that Finland actually exists.
18:39:36 <elliott> As we have discussed, there are three people in Finland, and five of them are in this channel.
18:39:38 <elliott> One of them drives the bus.
18:39:46 <Vorpal> fizzie, probably a leaf since I lost connection to the server
18:39:47 <fizzie> Gregor: Yeah, well, I'm not convinced that YOU do! Or your MOM.
18:42:47 <fizzie> There's a rather popular (well, in Finland) Twitter account called "sporakuski" ("tram driver", colloquially), where a tram driver tweets about all the stuff he does to annoy customers. ("How fast does the tram go when it's full of old ladies? As fast as it can! AHAHA!" and so on.)
18:43:05 <Vorpal> <fizzie> There's a picture of one at http://failblog.org/2008/08/19/supermarket-fail/ <-- the comments are sad, they fail to take into account the different language and so on
18:44:01 <fizzie> Well, it *is* the fail blog.
18:47:11 <elliott> fizzie: Don't you mean the bus driver?
18:47:36 <elliott> fizzie: "830 followers" -- that counts as rather popular in Finland?
18:47:48 <elliott> I guess it's an achievement considering there's only two Finns who could friend him.
18:48:11 <fizzie> elliott: Well, he seems to have stopped tweeting in February, so maybe people have unfollowed.
18:48:45 <elliott> fizzie: That would be a strange reason to unfollow someone as it has no effect on you and you wouldn't be able to see if he started again.
18:49:00 <fizzie> Here's a Klan Market pretty near my place -- been there several times -- assuming I managed to do a Google Street View link right: http://p.zem.fi/kkk-market
18:49:46 <elliott> fizzie: Whoa, they know which way the walls of the building curve.
18:50:03 <fizzie> That's from the laser range-finders, I think. It is scary indeed.
18:51:12 <elliott> fizzie: I don't want Google to know that :(
18:53:18 * Sgeo decides to attempt to watch the black hole episode of SG-1 again
18:53:32 * Sgeo tries not to have an aneurism
18:53:49 <Vorpal> I have a link here I think elliott would really like, but I'm afraid it would be a time-waster.
18:53:53 <Sgeo> I will never learn how to spell that word
18:53:54 <Vorpal> thus it would be evil to paste it
18:55:17 <elliott> I have time to kill until sleep.
18:55:25 <elliott> http://www.google.com/chart?cht=tx&chl=x^2 <-- Apparently LaTeX rendering counts as a chart now. Who knew?
18:55:57 <Vorpal> elliott, you know the evil overlord list of things to do/don't do? Well, tvtropes has a link-heavy version of it. Plus this additional list: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesAdditionalEvilOverlordVows
18:56:22 <elliott> Vorpal: Ooh, that's SUBJECTIVE!
18:56:26 <elliott> They should move it to a TroperTales page.
18:57:01 <Vorpal> elliott, wait, the trope names are subjective, how do they deal with that?
18:57:16 <elliott> Vorpal: with the power of idiocy
18:58:59 <Vorpal> elliott, hypothesis: the size of a wiki and the stupidity of the editing rules are directly proportional.
18:59:25 <elliott> Vorpal: hmm, C2 isn't exactly big, but it's not tiny either, and their policies are almost universally good
18:59:28 <Vorpal> just look at wikipedia
18:59:33 <elliott> On the other hand, it *is* old-school.
19:00:06 <Vorpal> elliott, wikipedia has loads of stupidity, tvtropes recently started getting some
19:06:12 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
19:17:35 -!- Jackoz has quit (Quit: Page closed).
19:19:30 <Phantom_Hoover> I am now on the verge of physically strangling my computer.
19:19:42 <Phantom_Hoover> After Googling where a computer's trachea is, of course.
19:23:35 <elliott> Vorpal: Well, this is a first.
19:23:46 <elliott> Vorpal: I have just seen someone argue that giving away software for free is *wrong*. As in morally.
19:23:51 <elliott> Your own software. That you made.
19:23:53 -!- cheater99 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
19:25:20 <Vorpal> elliott, how did he/she justify it?
19:25:35 <elliott> It's in the context of mobile apps, but still:
19:25:39 <elliott> "Let's not beat around the bush. Free apps are evil. [...] When you make an app that you've sweated over and spent days crafting—so it's as good as it can be—you owe it to yourself to charge for that app. Otherwise what you're saying is your app is worthless; it's literally not worth even a small amount of someones hard earned cash. What, not even the cost of chocolate bar? Seriously can this be ri
19:25:57 <elliott> The entire, mind-numbingly colossal idiocy: http://brendandawes.posterous.com/great-work-is-worth-paying-for-why-free-apps
19:26:27 <elliott> The post after that one on this moron's blog: "This looks fantastic. Nodebox meets Processing."
19:26:33 <fizzie> My initial guess would've been some sort of "teach a man to fish" logic, about not giving other people ready-made stuff; I wouldn't have guessed *that*.
19:26:34 <elliott> Hmm, NodeBox and Processing.
19:26:38 <elliott> Two open-source applications.
19:26:43 <elliott> Distributed freely over the Internet.
19:26:53 <elliott> Oh, and running on OS X, based, at the bottom of it all, on FreeBSD.
19:27:05 <elliott> Distributed freely over the Internet...
19:27:08 <elliott> and not even a chocolate bar.
19:27:23 <Vorpal> elliott, do you expect idiocy to actually be consistent?
19:27:47 <elliott> "Amazing birthday present from Lisa: an F78 Henning Andreasen phone!"
19:27:50 <elliott> She gave you that birthday present for nothing?
19:27:56 <elliott> I guess she didn't think it was worth anything.
19:28:01 <elliott> Looks like you got punk'd, my friend.
19:28:16 <elliott> I am far too lazy for that.
19:28:30 <elliott> And he'd make some ridiculous "well, it only applies to devices you can fit in your pocket" excuse.
19:29:11 <elliott> http://www.brendandawes.com/project/mac-osx-hard-drive-icons/
19:29:15 <elliott> You are offering these icons for free?
19:29:20 <elliott> Then, they are worthless, I presume?
19:35:13 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: links from places that link to link that etc
19:37:15 <elliott> "You can download the source files for the presentation but note you'll need to grab the various libraries yourself - it won't run without them."
19:38:26 -!- cheater99 has joined.
19:47:41 <Vorpal> elliott, huh, someone just spammed #freenode with a message that included "/join #freenode"
19:48:59 <Vorpal> elliott, it will probably show up again soon enough
19:49:06 <Vorpal> elliott, since it already did once after the first kill
19:49:58 <Vorpal> elliott, if it doesn't show up soon I'll paste it or something, though it really wasn't that interesting apart from the fact I mentioned
19:50:24 * elliott wonders if RPM has been unfairly maligned
19:50:29 <elliott> what are the standard criticisms again?
19:51:15 <Vorpal> not sure, my main criticism of it is the experience of RPM hell
19:51:21 <Vorpal> and that it is cpio-based iirc
19:51:22 <coppro> which has, admittedly, been making me money
19:52:21 <elliott> no, can't figure that one out
19:52:42 <elliott> Vorpal: Isn't RPM hell just... I mean, how is it different from the hypothetical "deb hell"?
19:52:55 <elliott> cpio -- well, debs are freakin' ars
19:53:06 <Vorpal> elliott, well, deb hell never happened.
19:53:24 <elliott> Vorpal: Then what *is* RPM hell?
19:53:35 <Sgeo> Would deb hell require generally installing individual debs instead of using apt?
19:53:37 <elliott> And was it RPM's fault, or just bad distribution managers? I have never seen a satisfactory explanation.
19:53:51 <Vorpal> elliott, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_hell#Platform-specific
19:54:11 <elliott> "# RPM hell - A form of dependency hell occurring in the Red Hat distribution of Linux and other distributions that use RPM as a package manager[3]."
19:54:13 <Vorpal> elliott, I think it might have been a combination of red hat and rpm. This was back on red hat 5 or so
19:54:31 <Vorpal> elliott, see the entire article for what dependency hell is
19:54:44 <elliott> I know what dependency hell is, Vorpal.
19:54:53 <elliott> However, I do not see how it is specific to .rpm, rather than .deb and the like too.
19:55:50 <Vorpal> elliott, true, iirc old versions of RPM was prone to this due to not having very good ways to specify dependencies. This was so long ago I don't remember the details...
19:56:22 <Vorpal> elliott, stuff like not being able to say "needs a version between x and y of package z" but only "need package z" or "need package z version w"
19:56:33 <Phantom_Hoover> Well, that's an unfair slander, but this computer is being unbearable and I won't stand for it any longer.
19:56:59 <coppro> elliott: according to a quick google, RPM hell was really the problem of the central repos being sparse, and so you'd have to use other repos which would install conflicting versions of libraries sometimes
19:57:10 <Vorpal> Phantom_Hoover, err okay. So I was not involved in whatever it was? Good.
19:58:00 <Phantom_Hoover> Vorpal, well, you delayed me by 3 days, so you must bear some responsibility.
19:58:02 <Vorpal> coppro, and the limited dependency specification support of old versions of rpm didn't help
19:58:03 <elliott> coppro: Right. So now everyone is afraid of rpm for no reason. :)
19:58:06 <coppro> but apparently the RPM structure is generally bad with dealing with awkward situations
19:58:17 <Vorpal> coppro, indeed, though not as bad as it used to be
19:58:19 <coppro> such a half-complete upgrades
19:58:31 <elliott> Vorpal: I wonder why they want people to use SASL so much.
19:58:45 <Vorpal> elliott, the spammers you mean? Who knows.
20:00:28 <Sgeo> There is a ##comment-on-spam channel
20:00:49 <Vorpal> <Phantom_Hoover> Vorpal, well, you delayed me by 3 days, so you must bear some responsibility. <-- how
20:02:20 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds).
20:02:31 <Vorpal> elliott, I remember getting a version conflict on glibc on red hat
20:09:34 <fizzie> The Slackware libc5 → glibc update was... somewhat problematical, too. Slackware and package management, though...
20:18:28 <elliott> I am not quite hardcore enough for Slackware.
20:19:04 <elliott> Tarball + dependency list + install/uninstall script + list of non-configuration files so uninstall works + simple package manager that just recurses if there's unsatisfied dependencies.
20:19:10 <elliott> I think that's the minimum I could live with.
20:20:17 <pikhq> Now to find an acceptable form of identification so I can vote.
20:20:30 <pikhq> My driver's license is missing, so can't do that.
20:20:39 <Sgeo> pikhq, signature...
20:20:45 <Sgeo> I just needed to sign
20:21:05 <Sgeo> But then again, registering to vote... I think it may be a bit late for that
20:21:14 <pikhq> I already did register.
20:21:22 <pikhq> Still need identification to vote.
20:21:43 <elliott> pikhq is going to write-in Sarah Palin. In every box. Yes, including *those* boxes.
20:21:51 <pikhq> Birth Certificate counts.
20:22:09 <Sgeo> I didn't vote in each race
20:22:17 <Sgeo> Just the ones I had some inkling of a clue about
20:22:43 <Sgeo> Even though I saw Tax Revolt Party in some races. After I voted, I kept wondering if I should have voted against them.
20:23:09 <pikhq> A fucking birth certificate counts.
20:23:10 <elliott> Congratulations -- the US has managed to convince you that voting is about voting against *them*, not voting for *them*.
20:23:18 <elliott> pikhq: DEN I GUESS OBAMA CAN'T VOTE HUH?
20:23:54 <elliott> Sgeo: "The Tax Revolt Party benefits from New York's electoral fusion laws that permit a single candidate to receive endorsements from multiple parties. The Tax Revolt Party only endorses Republican Party candidates."
20:24:05 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
20:25:14 <Phantom_Hoover> If I tell the Ubuntu installer to use a partition as an ext4 filesystem and mount it at a location, but don't tick the "format" box, does it just mount it and leave it alone?
20:25:16 <Sgeo> I can imagine voting for a Republican some day. If said Republican were to break with party on HCR, and supported LGBT rights
20:25:56 <Sgeo> Or the Democrat were to do something incredibly offensive
20:26:02 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: Note: If you lose your data, it's not my problem.
20:26:12 <pikhq> ... As does any other government documentation that has name and address on it.
20:26:16 <Sgeo> Or idiotic [ not knowing amendments, say ]
20:26:35 <pikhq> That's a shitty-ass requirement.
20:26:35 <Phantom_Hoover> <Sgeo> I'd vote for a Republican if they were entirely unlike a Republican and the Democrats were unpalatable!
20:27:07 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: it won't wipe it.
20:27:19 <elliott> but if it *does*, by some weird turn of events, you cannot hold me responsible
20:28:44 <elliott> <Jean-Luc_Picard> Howcome one can't nick to "Q"?
20:28:50 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: It *will not wipe your drive*.
20:28:59 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: You are confusing a "cover my ass clause" with an "unsureness clause".
20:29:09 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: Before formatting ANY partitions, the installer TELLS YOU it's going to.
20:29:19 <elliott> So if you don't tick format, and it doesn't list it, it won't be formatted.
20:29:30 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: ...it is *designed to be able to do this*
20:29:58 <Sgeo> So Freenode cares that people not confuse a user Q from a services Q on another network
20:30:45 <Phantom_Hoover> elliott: OK, call me paranoid. It's next to no extra work and a lot of worrying off my mind.
20:31:04 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: Not paranoid; crazy. The Ubuntu installer cannot wipe any partition without displaying it in the preceding step first.
20:31:35 <Phantom_Hoover> elliott: yes, I'm not worried about accidental formatting, more overwriting during the installation process. Probably crazy as well.
20:32:18 <Phantom_Hoover> I really can't be bothered getting into this over what is, ultimately, an utterly trivial matter.
20:34:02 <Phantom_Hoover> In other news, I am informed that I will become a hopeless deadbeat with no prospects in life unless I write an essay on a poem.
20:35:24 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Quit: Page closed).
20:35:32 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
20:35:56 -!- augur has joined.
20:40:39 -!- augur has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds).
20:41:37 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
20:51:04 -!- FireFly has quit (Quit: swatted to death).
20:51:37 -!- FireFly has joined.
20:52:41 -!- MigoMipo has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
20:53:15 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
21:17:13 <olsner> I just realized: when allocating pages you may need to allocate pages for page tables
21:18:23 <olsner> then again, seemingly very difficult things always turn out to be the easy parts, and vice versa
21:23:25 <Sgeo> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm2glu3WLGk
21:23:36 <Sgeo> Is this by the same Tool whose lyrics I'm supposed to hate?
21:26:12 <Sgeo> "Tuesday voters were advised to pay special attention to the ballot itself, which included at least one error. It did not properly instruct voters to fill in the oval below the name of the candidate of their choice."
21:26:48 <Sgeo> It looked like the oval I filled in was in the same box
21:26:54 <Sgeo> But it wasn't below the name
21:30:14 <coppro> this problem would be solved if they used voting machines right?
21:30:45 <Sgeo> This election, we switched from lever-based voting machines to filling in a paper ballot and scanning them in
21:31:28 <coppro> scanned paper ballots are sensible. Easy counting but also verifiable
21:33:09 <Sgeo> http://www.theonion.com/articles/election-day-guide,8124/
21:40:21 -!- ais523 has joined.
21:48:00 <fizzie> "Document is currently being inspected. Please allow 7-10 days. No action is required by you at this time." It's been in that state 13 days now! The liars.
22:02:31 -!- Mathnerd314 has joined.
22:06:45 <elliott> ais523: you've been rather quite all day...
22:08:03 <Gregor> Oh, you said rather quite.
22:15:34 <elliott> <Sgeo> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm2glu3WLGk
22:15:34 <elliott> <Sgeo> Is this by the same Tool [...]
22:15:45 <elliott> There's only one Tool, but, uhh, that's a cover in case you can't tell :P
22:15:55 -!- augur has joined.
22:20:15 * Sgeo still wants there to be a single page on which he can see all his YouTube favorites (over 1000)
22:20:33 <elliott> The fact that you have over a thousand YouTube favourites speaks very, very deep things.
22:21:54 <Sgeo> My polling place is in the elementary school I used to attend...
22:26:11 <elliott> Sgeo: Wait wait -- don't tell me -- it made you nostalgic.
22:26:43 <Gregor> He recorded a video of himself voting, put it on YouTube, and favorited it.
22:26:57 <Gregor> It was over six hours long, so he broke it into 10 minute segments and favorited each of them.
22:31:06 <elliott> Gregor: I am trying to imagine the circumstances where Sgeo takes six hours to vote :P
22:31:21 <Gregor> elliott: IT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT DECISION
22:31:38 <elliott> WARNING: You selected a non-Republican candidate. Please note that if you submit this vote, all existing copies of Active Worlds will be destroyed.
22:31:50 <Sgeo> Me using my phone to ask various IRC channels who to vote for.
22:32:01 <elliott> Sgeo: Pretty sure you actually did that
22:32:34 <Sgeo> Yes, you are not correct.
22:32:42 <pikhq> Sgeo: Rule #1 of voting in the US: DO NOT VOTE FOR THE REPUBLICAN.
22:33:02 <elliott> Rule #2 of voting in the US: FAIRLY LIKELY, DON'T VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRAT EITHER.
22:33:03 <pikhq> Sgeo: Rule #2: Accept that you are voting between "shitty" and "fucking nuts".
22:33:37 <pikhq> Sgeo: Rule #3: Don't like it, engage in armed revolution. The politicians will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
22:34:53 <elliott> Rule #4: Turns out your vote means something like jack shit in New York under a fundamentally broken election system and two-party system! But don't throw away your vote by voting for who you'd actually like to see; THE REPUBLICAN MIGHT WIN
22:35:02 <elliott> And then the SKY WOULD FALL
22:35:15 -!- Sgeo has left (?).
22:35:22 -!- Sgeo has joined.
22:35:52 <Sgeo> WTF is the combination key+touchpad movement that tells XChat "Oh, hey, go ahead, part this channel"?
22:38:52 -!- augur has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
22:38:59 <Sgeo> pikhq never voted in the 2008 election!
22:39:45 <elliott> pikhq shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
22:40:28 -!- augur has joined.
22:42:50 <elliott> pikhq isn't denying it 'cuz it's true.
22:43:59 <pikhq> elliott: The US system is so broken that you actually have no sane option but to vote defensively. It is fucking nuts.
22:44:42 <elliott> pikhq: If I was in the US, I'd use reliable predicted results to determine what the risk of the Republicans getting in is; if it's sufficiently low, I'd vote honestly.
22:45:48 <pikhq> elliott: That is indeed defensive voting.
22:46:09 <elliott> pikhq: I've never heard of anyone do that; most idiots just vote Democrat no matter what because OMG REPUBLICANS.
22:46:13 <pikhq> elliott: In my area the Democrats need every single vote they can get to avoid the anti-tax crazies.
22:46:26 <elliott> You know what, if everyone wasn't so chickenshit, the two party system could be broken.
22:46:41 <elliott> I think that's worth a Republican candidate winning once or twice in the process.
22:46:48 <pikhq> elliott: I had to vote against 4 *different* ballot measures that would essentially bankrupt the state.
22:47:01 <elliott> Well, yeah. That's different.
22:47:11 <Sgeo> They said something about ballot measures on the back. I didn't see any
22:47:34 <Sgeo> Or maybe it said it on the ballot, which makes sense, why vary the instructions?
22:47:49 <pikhq> elliott: And the Republicans had a decent chance of winning. Including the guy who thinks that a bike sharing program is a UN plot to take over the US.
22:47:53 <Sgeo> pikhq, what measures?
22:48:12 <Sgeo> I don't think I'd be able to determine that they could bankrupt the state
22:49:48 <pikhq> Sgeo: Amendment R, which would remove property taxes for individuals or businesses who use government-owned property for a private benefit.
22:49:59 <pikhq> Sgeo: Amendment 60, which would halve property taxes.
22:50:15 <Sgeo> I don't think I'd vote on economic issues
22:50:17 <pikhq> Sgeo: Amendment 61, which would forbit the state government from ever taking out loans.
22:50:25 <Sgeo> I'm too clueless to make informed decisions
22:50:31 <elliott> Sgeo: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." --Winston Churchill4
22:50:54 <pikhq> Sgeo: Amendment 101, which would cut vehicle, income, and telecom taxes to an 8th of the size.
22:51:33 <Sgeo> Isn't this what not having direct democracy is for? Besides administrative purposes
22:51:47 <pikhq> Sgeo: And a lot of things around here are very very underfunded because of morons who think that removing taxes just means they have more money in their pocket.
22:52:09 <pikhq> Sgeo: Anyways. If you're too uninformed to vote on something, *inform yourself*.
22:52:14 <elliott> Sgeo: All democracy relies on at least most of the people not being complete idiots.
22:52:21 <pikhq> Sgeo: We live in the fucking information age.
22:52:29 <pikhq> Sgeo: YOU CAN GET FUCKING INFORMATION.
22:52:38 <elliott> Information about fucking.
22:52:45 <pikhq> elliott: Well, yes.
22:52:51 <pikhq> elliott: The Internet is for porn, after all.
23:03:55 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
23:08:50 <Mathnerd314> continuation: is inform 7 an esoteric programming language?
23:09:10 <Phantom_Hoover> A slow, horrible realisation creeps over you that the Befunge program is trying to take over the world.
23:10:00 <Phantom_Hoover> 45. Run away? Turn to page 74. Submit to your fungal overlord? Turn to page 89.
23:10:49 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover: that is not interactive fiction.
23:10:55 <elliott> Mathnerd314: it's strange, that's for sure
23:11:41 <elliott> Mathnerd314: ais523 wrote an esoteric interactive fiction thing once but never finished i.
23:11:45 <elliott> literally, based on esolangs
23:12:46 <elliott> Fool! I am hiring pikhq for a reason!
23:13:00 <pikhq> elliott: My standard rate is $5,000,000 an hour.
23:13:11 <pikhq> elliott: (or about £1 per week)
23:13:31 -!- tombom has quit (Quit: Leaving).
23:13:36 <elliott> pikhq: How much would you say a week's worth of two people working on Kitten would be worth, to you?
23:13:44 <elliott> As part of the global value "how much Kitten is worth overall".
23:13:51 <elliott> Convert utilons to the almighty dollar.
23:14:09 <elliott> pikhq: If it's £1 per week or more, congratulations! You'll be paying yourself!
23:14:19 <elliott> pikhq: If it's less, WHAT DO YOU HAVE AGAINST KITTEN
23:14:22 <Gregor> pikhq: Working all of 0.0004 seconds per week? That's a lot!
23:14:31 <pikhq> elliott: About several quintillion Zimbabwean Dollars.
23:14:49 <elliott> pikhq: Wow! You're making a five quadrillion times profit!
23:14:54 <elliott> pikhq: You're IN THE MONEY and I don't even have to pay you.
23:14:58 <olsner> elliott: I'd say it's worth about a week's worth
23:15:39 <pikhq> elliott: Well, such dollars aren't even worth the paper they're printed on.
23:15:49 <Phantom_Hoover> Gregor, the pay at Hoover Enterprises is £5 for every unit of influence gathered.
23:15:57 <pikhq> elliott: I'd gain money by burning them and selling the ashes.
23:16:09 <elliott> pikhq: Point is: You get to work on Kitten for free. How lucky are you?
23:18:47 <Phantom_Hoover> Sgeo, OK, you can be head of the aural warfare department.
23:19:37 <Mathnerd314> what's Kitten? some other crazy vaporware I missed?
23:20:21 <Phantom_Hoover> Mathnerd314, elliott is developing it. Of course it's crazy vapourware.
23:22:47 <Mathnerd314> yeah, but I can't criticize it if I don't know what it is :p
23:24:35 <Phantom_Hoover> Oh, if he actually makes any of its crazy vapourware it'll be as awesome as sliced bread which has been sliced again.
23:24:55 <Gregor> OMG sandwich so delicious
23:25:32 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
23:25:41 <elliott> Phantom_Hoover is grossly overestimating the vapourwareness of Kitten.
23:26:08 <elliott> Mathnerd314: Kitten is possibly the least ambitious of all my projects, existing solely because stuff sucks.
23:26:44 <elliott> Mathnerd314: It's basically a Linux distribution, except probably a BSD kernel instead of Linux and without rubbish. I swear it's more interesting than that, but it's not actually meant to be hugely interesting.
23:27:10 <Gregor> Totally not Debian GNU/kFreeBSD though.
23:27:28 <elliott> Gregor: If you're meant to say "hurr you're making Debian", I'm... really not.
23:27:35 <Ilari> Uh oh... "Comcast has previously announced that they are running out of the RFC1918 space and that they are using real IPv4 addresses for internal network devices."
23:27:44 <elliott> "They use kFreeBSD and I use kNetBSD! And in every other respect we are different! LOL DUPLICATION OF EFFORT"
23:27:53 <Gregor> elliott: I have no idea, I'm just pointing out that your description there doesn't distinguish you from Debian GNU/kFreeBSD :P
23:27:56 <elliott> Gregor: That's like saying Gentoo and Ubuntu are the same because they both use Linux :P
23:28:03 <elliott> Gregor: Well, I also prefer a BSD userland.
23:28:11 <elliott> And generally... non-GNU userland.
23:28:23 <Gregor> So, you prefer a shitty outdated userland.
23:28:25 <elliott> Gregor: And I'll use the NetBSD libc, basic /sbin tools and the like.
23:28:37 <elliott> Gregor: OK, let me get this straight: non-GNU userland = outdated by definition?
23:29:00 <Gregor> It's clear what userland you're using; NetBSD's.
23:29:07 <elliott> Gregor: That is not clear at all, actually.
23:29:18 <Gregor> Well, then I made an ASSUMPTION
23:29:30 <elliott> Gregor: I *might*, but it's far from certain.
23:29:57 <elliott> Gregor: And besides, I find it really hard to conceive of a *coreutils* being outdated.
23:30:03 <pikhq> Ilari: Oooooh fuck.
23:30:04 <elliott> Seeing as they haven't changed since, y'know, 1980.
23:30:28 <Gregor> cp -a and date --iso come to mind immediately.
23:30:36 <Gregor> I know I constantly run into unsupported stuff on Mac OS X.
23:31:12 <elliott> Gregor: At the same time, tons of people use the BSD userland and have no issue with it. It *does* come down a lot to personal preference, you know.
23:31:48 <elliott> Gregor: FreeBSD cp has -a, anyway.
23:31:59 <elliott> I could easily transplant its /bin in.
23:32:02 <Gregor> elliott: Then whereTF did Mac OS X get its cp from X-D
23:32:16 <elliott> (NetBSD doesn't have cp -a)
23:32:27 <elliott> Gregor: You do realise OS X basically became a fork in 2000? :P
23:32:38 <Gregor> Yeah, but they could, y'know, MERGE.
23:33:01 <elliott> Gregor: That would be painful and expensive :P
23:33:19 <pikhq> Gregor: They even have a forked GCC.
23:33:19 <Gregor> Especially for an OS that doesn't care about developers or console users at all *shrugs*
23:33:29 <pikhq> One which is falling waaaaaay out of date.
23:34:15 <olsner> well, they are going clang+llvm anyway for GPL-FUD reasons (or whatever), so why update their gcc fork
23:34:30 -!- augur has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
23:34:34 -!- Mathnerd314 has quit (Disconnected by services).
23:34:52 -!- Mathnerd314_ has joined.
23:35:19 -!- Mathnerd314_ has changed nick to Mathnerd314.
23:39:55 <elliott> Yeah they've abandoned gcc.
23:46:09 <pikhq> And polls have begun to close. Let election night begin!
23:48:14 <elliott> Mathnerd314: http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/
23:48:45 <pikhq> Mathnerd314: It's quite alive.
23:49:04 <olsner> I'm thinking about starting on a kernel in that language I've been building a compiler for
23:49:12 <Gregor> But Charlie, they care about you!
23:49:15 <elliott> olsner: what kinda language?
23:49:15 <olsner> now that I have the booting stuff done :)
23:49:22 <elliott> Mathnerd314: by what evidence?
23:51:05 <Mathnerd314> elliott: lack of google news search results
23:52:34 <elliott> Mathnerd314: ...are you serious?
23:52:43 <pikhq> Mathnerd314: That's a retarded criterion. Absolutely positively retarded.
23:54:14 <Mathnerd314> ok, look at ohloh: http://www.ohloh.net/p/pcc "Decreasing year-over-year development activity"
23:55:12 <pikhq> BSD is dying; Netcraft confirms it.
23:55:40 <Mathnerd314> and there's only ~1 person who committed recently
23:58:31 <elliott> Mathnerd314: you do realise ohloh's metrics suck very often?
23:58:36 <elliott> Mathnerd314: how about looking at the *actual CVS*?
23:59:10 <elliott> Mathnerd314: Furthermore: You do realise that it has been continuously maintained as a single codebase since the 70s?
23:59:15 <elliott> And many, many compilers are based on it?
23:59:21 <elliott> At some point, software just begins to mature.