00:00:07 <oerjan> arthur, you are an evil duck http://www.sheldoncomics.com/archive/131115.html
00:01:32 <fizzie> oerjan: As far as I know, the canonical stereotype involves no touching either. See http://depressingfinland.tumblr.com/post/65617168839/chibisuz-depressingfinland-234937289-bus
00:02:25 <fizzie> "it’s okay if you don’t pronounce it perfectly right because the only reason someone would talk to strangers in public transport is to ask them to move, so they will get the hint" very true
00:02:47 <olsner> you can't really mispronounce a grunt either
00:03:01 <oerjan> fizzie: what's a "standing up seat"
00:03:43 <fizzie> oerjan: A paradox. (I think a standing place was intended.)
00:03:56 <fizzie> We don't have seats you stand on in buses, no.
00:04:08 <oerjan> the rule in norway is similar but we do _not_ usually take standing places before starting to sit next to each other :P
00:04:21 <oerjan> well, some probably do, but it's not a rule.
00:05:04 <fizzie> Yes, well, I think maybe about half the people in here don't, either. (Could be more, could be less.) So it's not as strict rule as the no-talking one, or the others.
00:06:40 <fizzie> (Also depends on distance and such.)
00:07:05 <oerjan> mä jään tääs of course consists solely of the one finnish vowel i find awkward to pronounce.
00:07:11 -!- Bike has joined.
00:07:43 <oerjan> despite it being nominally in norwegian too
00:09:31 <fizzie> Älä rääkkää sitä kääkkää! En rääkkääkään.
00:09:57 <oerjan> i think my brain basically is prejudiced with "it's not in front of an r, use an "e" instead you idiot!"
00:10:43 <olsner> I'd consider it weird to stand on the bus if there are free seats even if they are no double free seats
00:11:10 <oerjan> quintopia: ä = [æ] afaik
00:11:49 <fizzie> I keep mentally hearing all the 'ä's in, say, LOTR (Eärendil) as the Finnish ä, which is so wrong.
00:13:34 <olsner> otoh it does avoid the difficult problem of deciding which person on the bus is least scary to sit next to
00:13:36 <oerjan> google cannot translate rääkkääkään, but still suggests it should be rääkkääkkään (which it cannot translate either)
00:14:09 <prooftechnique> Does it suggest rääkkääkkääkkään or rääkkääkään for rääkkääkkään?
00:14:44 <quintopia> oerjan: i cannot seem to tell the difference between æ and ɛ...there's just no reason to ever get that kind of find tongue control in english
00:15:07 <fizzie> "(enclitic, appended to a verb form) indicates confirmation of not doing something, e.g. if someone doubts it, or, when someone is more or less surprised at an occurrence, indicates the reason why some thing was not successful – which is by not doing that something
00:15:11 <fizzie> (Minä) en syönytkään eilen jäätelöä.
00:15:13 <fizzie> But I didn't eat ice-cream yesterday."
00:15:50 <fizzie> The "confirmation" one.
00:16:26 <oerjan> fizzie: it doesn't know rääkkää or kääkkää either.
00:17:04 <Taneb> Isn't that a pokemon
00:18:27 <fizzie> And kääkkä is... something like a pejorative term for an old person.
00:19:05 <fizzie> There's a proper English word for it, I'm sure.
00:19:22 <oerjan> i think that only applies to women
00:20:24 <fizzie> I guess kääkkä is gender-neutral, maybe slightly biased towards women.
00:20:42 <oerjan> also i think crone is sort of archaic?
00:21:43 <oerjan> which somehow needs "old" in front, i suspect
00:22:09 <shachaf> oerjan: are you thinking of "anacrone"?
00:22:23 -!- Sprocklem has joined.
00:22:42 <fizzie> http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/crone includes "kääkkä" as the Finnish translation.
00:24:19 <oerjan> "As a stock character in fairy or folk tale, the hag shares characteristics with the crone, and the two words are sometimes used as if interchangeable."
00:24:59 <Taneb> Is there such thing as a true synonym?
00:25:20 <Taneb> A word that is perfectly interchangable for another?
00:25:20 <oerjan> "The word "crone" is a less common synonym for "old woman," and is more likely to appear in reference to traditional narratives than in contemporary everyday usage."
00:25:39 <oerjan> "Using the word "hag" to translate terms found in non-English (or non-modern English) is contentious, since use of the word is often associated with a misogynistic attitude."
00:25:56 <oerjan> i'd say hag seems more like what you are implying.
00:27:05 <shachaf> oerjan: why do you shout so much
00:27:37 <oerjan> BECAUSE YOU'RE ALL THE WAY ON ANOTHER CONTINENT
00:28:01 <olsner> AND POSSIBLY HARD OF HEARING
00:28:32 -!- zzo38 has joined.
00:31:41 <quintopia> Taneb: i can think of a few examples, i'm sure. for words that have lots of synonyms, sometimes there are several subsets which also have the same connotations
00:31:47 -!- Sgeo has joined.
00:32:42 <quintopia> for instance, i can't see any situation where ill-at-ease and uncomfortable aren't completely swappable
00:32:58 <Taneb> When you're talking about a sofa?
00:33:09 <Phantom_Hoover> http://depressingfinland.tumblr.com/post/66945321786/i-love-your-blog-i-am-a-finnophile-it-all-came-about
00:33:15 <fizzie> What if your 'i' key is broken?
00:33:20 <Phantom_Hoover> i am not sure this person realises that we have a word for that in english also
00:34:01 <Taneb> "bloody freezing"?
00:34:03 <quintopia> Taneb: how about "delay" and "wait"?
00:34:16 <Bike> reallyfuckingcold
00:34:22 <Taneb> quintopia, you wouldn't delay for someone
00:34:52 <Taneb> Also you wouldn't want someone in a restaurant to delay on you
00:35:23 -!- nisstyre has quit (Quit: Leaving).
00:35:36 <Taneb> And I see "wait" as having much friendlier connoctations
00:35:53 <fizzie> You wouldn't wait a delivery, I think. (Though you might wait for one that's been delayedf.)
00:36:13 <quintopia> but i think the noun forms are identical
00:37:47 <fizzie> A prop or strut supporting the weight or flooring above it.
00:37:49 <fizzie> The shores stayed upright during the earthquake."
00:38:24 <quintopia> Taneb: how about miasmic and miasmal
00:38:37 <fizzie> It is a p. tricky task T. has set.
00:39:00 <Taneb> quintopia, I imagine miasmic referring to a substance and miasmal as to an environment, but maybe that's just me
00:39:10 -!- glogbackup has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
00:39:41 <olsner> hmm, is pakkanen a specific word for "below 0"? afaik none of the swedish words for cold have any specific temperature ranges
00:40:00 <Taneb> quintopia, hmm, good one
00:40:22 <fizzie> olsner: It does mean "freezing".
00:40:51 -!- glogbackup has joined.
00:41:36 <olsner> "freezing" is also a generic word for being/feeling cold
00:42:58 <fizzie> olsner: Well, the sense of freezing that means a temperature where water freezes.
00:43:01 -!- oerjan has set topic: The channel of the chimæric hellos | The most corum, clargoint chait you could ever loofefl your slance in. | Magnus!! | Koirammekokaan ei lennä? :( | https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2023808/wisdom.pdf | logs: http://codu.org/logs/_esoteric/ or http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/.
00:43:43 <fizzie> It's not "pakkanen" if it's above zero, that's non-negotiable.
00:44:21 <quintopia> fizzie: what if you are at abnormally high pressures?
00:44:30 <oerjan> hm doesn't swedish have a word like "kuldegrader"
00:45:22 <fizzie> "Pakkassen puolella" and "pakkasasteita" are both also real expressions.
00:45:46 <fizzie> q.: I don't know, actually.
00:48:23 <fizzie> It doesn't change all that much, right? Not like the boiling point.
00:48:56 <fizzie> (Matter. Sigh. What's it good for, anyway?)
00:49:07 -!- Taneb has quit (Quit: Leaving).
00:50:56 -!- APott has joined.
00:51:20 <olsner> oerjan: hm, we do have "minus degrees" (which doesn't mean that it's considered cold) or possibly "degrees cold" (but sometimes +20 is "cold"...)
00:51:36 <olsner> but those are like phrases for pronouncing temperatures
00:51:50 <APott> Has anyone here ever built an interpreter? I have a few questions
00:52:17 <APott> Of a normal language, may be a bit off topic
00:53:27 <APott> I've built a basic one before but I'm working on one right now
00:53:42 <APott> I have always never really understood the best way to construct an AST
00:54:02 <APott> specifically how meta data should be stored, and the different node types are determined
00:54:11 <APott> or the most proper way
00:54:13 <Bike> sounds like a job for a parser generator
00:54:27 <APott> This is not what I want
00:54:38 <APott> I find handwriting fun and actually a bit simpler than writing a grammar
00:54:56 <APott> I know how to create an AST I just don't know the best methods for it
00:55:07 <Bike> i guess you hvae to write a few parsers in order to learn to hate doing it yourself.
00:55:40 <APott> So you can't answer my question? xD
00:56:12 <Bike> well, to specify an AST the usual way basically amounts to an algebraic data structure.
00:57:23 <Bike> like you might have Form = Conditional Form Form Form | Call Form Form | Lambda Symbol Form | Access Symbol for a simple lambda calculus with ifs.
00:57:59 <Bike> that means, form is either a "conditional" with three subforms (for the condition, the "then", and the "else"), a call with two subforms (the callee and the argument), a lambda, or a variable.
00:58:35 <Bike> and uh... that's basically it?
00:58:38 <APott> how would I store metd data though?
00:58:45 <Bike> What metadata?
00:58:49 <APott> Like names of things and stuff
00:58:58 <Bike> Names of things... and stuff.
00:59:05 -!- Oj742 has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds).
00:59:53 <APott> if I'm parsing a javascript variable definition or something: "var name;" in the node how/where would be the best place to store "name"?
01:00:27 <Bike> Then in this AST you have a syntax type like VarDecl [Symbol].
01:00:41 <APott> I feel like I'm missing something huge or frustrating you, or both.
01:01:35 <Bike> The whole point of this algebraic thing is you just have a struct definition for every type of syntactic construct, basically.
01:01:48 <quintopia> Symbol is where the symbol is stored
01:01:55 <Jafet> data Expr a = Bound Nat a | Lambda (Expr a) a | App (Expr a) (Expr a) a
01:01:59 <APott> I understand this, but what confused me is how to structure them for interpretation later on
01:02:41 <Bike> i don't think you understand this.
01:02:48 <APott> Mainly, how do I keep these types together in the tree structure. I have them all extend the root AST struct
01:03:02 <shachaf> Jafet: Pft, arbitrary Nats.
01:03:05 <APott> I know this, let me explain what I'im gertting aty
01:03:18 <Jafet> Whatever, ASTs are overrated.
01:03:32 <Jafet> @let eval = let e s@(_:'\\':v:'.':l)=let(x,')':t)=e$d l in(take 4 s++x++")",t);e('(':s)=let(x,t)=e s;(y,')':u)=e$d t in(a x y,u);e s=splitAt 1$d s;d=snd.span(==' ');a(_:'\\':v:_:l)s=let f x|x==v=s|1>0=[x]in fst.e$init l>>=f;a f x='(':f++" "++x++")" in e
01:03:37 <quintopia> so an expression might have subexpressions, which would eb its children in the AST
01:03:40 <Bike> get a job taneb
01:04:00 <Bike> god why do i confuse you
01:04:00 <APott> I don't even know what the hell that is
01:04:14 <Bike> jafet's thing is humorous if you're a goddamn nerd and we're not goddamn nerds here
01:04:26 <quintopia> the only things that are children of root are things that the start symbol could produce in the grammar
01:04:47 <APott> I haven't finished my explanation but yet I'm hearing obvious answers to questions not asked
01:05:26 <quintopia> okay. i'll give you a few minutes to narrow your question down
01:07:22 <APott> So I have a struct named AST. I have others for each language construct that extend this AST struct. Each struct has a property which determines what it represents. Each has an array for more AST structs, for the tree structure. Lets say I have a piece of data I need passed with a node, how do I do this?
01:07:53 <APott> That's quite specific to each rule/construct
01:08:18 <Bike> well, yeah, that's why the AST i laid out has some things with "Symbol" instead of just always more ASTs. you need a base case as it were.
01:08:20 <APott> Do I simply create a property in the struct for that rule?
01:08:44 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
01:09:01 <APott> Ok after reading that I feel the answer to that was way to simple to even be asked
01:09:11 <APott> at least you knocked my head straight
01:12:49 <Bike> basically this amounts to a tagged union - in C you'd have an AST struct with two fields, the tag and the actual object. the actual object is a union over all the syntactic types, and the tag just says which syntactic type this AST is.
01:17:30 <APott> Would you guys like an alligator?
01:18:17 -!- yorick has quit (Remote host closed the connection).
01:24:53 <oerjan> like these? http://worrydream.com/AlligatorEggs/
01:25:36 -!- nooodl has quit (Quit: Ik ga weg).
01:26:19 -!- ^v has quit (Quit: http://i.imgur.com/MHuW96t.gif).
01:26:43 -!- Sprocklem has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds).
01:26:46 -!- ^v has joined.
01:27:35 <kmc> ~metar RKSI
01:29:50 <augur_> i dont know if these a convention for doing the picture of the dude, so ill just count to 6
01:32:03 <augur_> prooftechnique: you watch QI :(
01:32:39 <augur_> prooftechnique: ok lets go again
01:33:50 <augur_> _ _ _ _ (2 wrong: i j)
01:34:12 <augur_> _ _ _ _ (3 wrong: e i j)
01:34:35 <augur_> _ _ _ _ (4 wrong: e f i j)
01:35:11 <augur_> _ _ _ _ (5 wrong: a e f i j)
01:35:52 <quintopia> hangman isn't fair with short words
01:36:01 <augur_> _ _ _ _ (6 wrong: a e f i j q)
01:36:16 <quintopia> also you should add a prog to hackego to do what you're doing :P
01:36:37 <augur_> prooftechnique: you didnt watch that episode of QI sufficiently :X
01:37:25 <zzo38> I never draw the picture in hangman; I always just count how many more tries you have
01:38:22 <quintopia> because that way you can give extra tries without making it obvious you're doing so with kids
01:39:05 <zzo38> I don't like that; I always want everyone to know exactly how many tries you have left. No cheating by giving extra tries!!!
01:39:49 <zzo38> Some hangman games set how many tries by the length of the word or phrase. Famicom Hangman does this too (a program I have written).
01:40:19 <zzo38> I do not like using the picture since it makes it unclear so it just makes a box containing the wrong letters and once it is fill up, then you lose.
01:40:20 <Bike> what's the point of hangman where you aren't murdering a stick figure
01:40:41 <APott> I agree with that statement
01:41:11 <zzo38> Bike: To guess the word. Of course you can draw the stick figure if you prefer but I prefer to not do so since it makes it less clear how many tries you have left.
01:41:36 -!- ^v has quit (Quit: http://i.imgur.com/MHuW96t.gif).
01:43:09 <APott> +you're right because there is a variable amount of body parts you could count
01:43:15 <APott> down to the eye lashes
01:43:37 <APott> to your individual hairs
01:44:30 <lambdabot> boily said 6h 39s ago: I owe you some royalties for the “at canada” brand.
01:45:00 <prooftechnique> "I have shown, by ingenious induction on the structure of man, that in fact I have (n+1) tries in hangman. QED, nyah nyah nyah"
01:45:11 <zzo38> boily: I do not accept royalties for such brand.
01:48:30 <oerjan> prooftechnique: famous last words
01:51:16 <quintopia> zzo38: do shorter words get you more tries than longer words?
01:52:33 <prooftechnique> quintopia: I wonder if shorter people get you fewer guesses
01:59:15 <APott> So I have a programming question
01:59:48 <oerjan> prooftechnique: seen it way back, possibly linked in r/haskell
02:00:10 <APott> Lets say in the source i'm analyzing there is a number that I need to perform mathematical operations with. How do I get the integer value of a string?
02:00:34 <Bike> most standard libraries have a function for that
02:00:47 <Bike> c has atoi, that sorta thing
02:01:09 <oerjan> !c printf("%d",atoi("42"));
02:01:20 <oerjan> `interp c printf("%d",atoi("42"));
02:01:24 <APott> D has the same sort of functions in it's library
02:01:38 <HackEgo> Does not compile. \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: for
02:01:50 <oerjan> Gregor: YOUR BOT IS ILL
02:02:02 <APott> Do i store this and perform operations with the float type for most accuracy? (some of this I stilld on't understand)
02:02:25 <APott> like "float num = atoi("42");"
02:03:05 <APott> anything could be several decimals long
02:03:07 <oerjan> double has double accuracy to float
02:03:51 <oerjan> although neither will give you exact arithmetic for huge integers.
02:04:04 <elliott> oerjan: `interp c does that
02:04:06 <APott> but it should be sufficient for my simple project
02:04:23 <oerjan> elliott: what, always? i thought it worked...
02:04:25 <APott> well thanks for that
02:04:32 <oerjan> `interp c printf("hm");
02:04:48 <Bike> holy cheese a new haswell costs $339
02:04:50 <HackEgo> Does not compile. \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: fork: retry: Resource temporarily unavailable \ ./interps/gcccomp/gcccomp: for
02:05:42 -!- Frooxius has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
02:06:04 <oerjan> <prooftechnique> I call it "Little Fermat's Theorem" <-- fermat's little theorem already exists.
02:06:16 <Bike> on the other hand i can get a six core vishera for under $150
02:06:18 <Bike> life is mysterious
02:06:56 <prooftechnique> oerjan: The proof was delivered childishly, so the idea is that it was delivered by a young Fermat
02:07:27 <Bike> "Current world record [for overclocking] is 8.79 GHz achieved on FX-8350 by Andre Yang using liquid nitrogen." why
02:08:00 <oerjan> you mean why didn't he use helium, right
02:08:03 <Bike> hmmmmmm i don't know how big the caches should be though
02:08:07 <Bike> is 8 MB sensible
02:08:53 <elliott> also do the haswells really cost that much?
02:09:11 <Bike> um, L3. L2 is three 2 MB caches, presumably pairs of cores share them?
02:09:32 <elliott> that sounds like a good amount of cache to me?
02:09:38 <elliott> I think L2 is a lot more relevant than L3 generally, but I might be wrong
02:09:40 <Bike> ok i have no idea.
02:09:46 <Bike> like at all. just saying.
02:09:52 <Fiora> I'm not sure which is more important either
02:10:02 <Fiora> I know on like, intel ones nowadays they only have like 256K per core L2? and the huge big thing in L3
02:10:11 <Bike> oh, here's a $200 haswell
02:10:20 <Bike> "Limit 5 per customer"
02:10:28 <Bike> pc shopping is really weird, y'all.
02:10:44 -!- Frooxius has joined.
02:10:46 <Bike> ah, you're probably right, this doesn't even mention the L2 size
02:10:47 <Fiora> if I remember right the big L3s are like, also a way to use up extra die space without emitting much more power
02:10:57 <Bike> but... it does mention the process size.
02:10:59 <Bike> thanks I guess?
02:11:07 <Fiora> L2 is the same on all haswells, I think? which might be why it's not mentioned
02:11:42 <Bike> well i was thinking because "256K per core" wouldn't be very impressive compared to this 2 MB per core-pair on this amd one, but that works too
02:12:01 <Bike> i don't know why i'm even looking this up, i don't think i'll be hacking deep enough that i need to know the µarch >_>
02:14:02 <Bike> http://c1.neweggimages.com/BizIntell/item/19/116/19-116-901/herox.jpg the ads are fantastic though
02:15:01 <Bike> he's the adaptive techniques. if you need more PROCESSING POWER he yells at the instruction decoder until it gets its shit together
02:15:32 <Bike> this thing lists more than one thread per core... is that that hyperthreading thing
02:17:48 <Bike> maybe i should just buy a bunch of DSPs to fuck with instead. people still use those right.
02:19:50 <zzo38> quintopia: Yes, in Famicom Hangman, shorter words/phrases get you more tries than longer ones.
02:22:00 <prooftechnique> https://gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net/8019B6/data.tumblr.com/a3ec9cd009cad7b4825479fae0a4b632/tumblr_inline_mvj43rbyXS1qik0w4.jpg
02:22:38 <prooftechnique> I'm a bit surprised that those two on the end are standing together
02:26:30 <quintopia> i uploaded two example programs to go with the SELECT. interpreter. these two work. just wish someone would write one that tests some other language features :D. http://rutteric.com/files/
02:37:25 -!- oerjan has quit (Quit: leaving).
02:43:00 -!- APott has quit (Quit: Page closed).
02:47:49 <zzo38> Have you played hangman games with a time limit?
03:16:35 <zzo38> Using the symbols &|!()10 only, can anything be made in Perl other than only the boolean condition checking if a 1 and 0 is only by itself?
03:33:18 <zzo38> In the Dungeons&Dragons game I was trying to add more tally marks. The DM said there was room for 818 in total. This doesn't seem right to me, since 818 isn't a multiple of five.
03:43:29 -!- conehead has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.).
03:45:47 <Bike> huh. church's thesis doesn't hold in a newtonian universe. neat.
03:47:05 <Bike> "We will sketch a proof (it is based on Gerver’s proof of the ‘‘Painleve con-
03:47:08 <Bike> jecture’’ in the plane) of Theorem 4 that an uncountably infinite number of topologically distinct trajectories are
03:47:11 <Bike> possible in 1 s, among the planar N-body problems with fixed masses and whose initial locations lie within
03:47:14 <Bike> certain disjoint balls and whose velocities are bounded
03:47:27 <Bike> i don't like pasting the sentences on periods, it's a bad habit
03:49:32 <elliott> wait, what does that have to do with the Church-Turing thesis?
03:49:40 <elliott> or is this some other thesis of Church's?
03:49:57 <Bike> it means a turing machine can't simulate the topological properties of the bodies' trajectories
03:50:01 <Bike> (in finite time)
03:51:30 <Bike> oh and the initial configuration isn't even uncomputable, sweet
04:02:15 <Sgeo> What do people here think about Elixir?
04:02:40 <Bike> I like panaceas but I don't think they exist.
04:03:09 <Bike> The language of the birds?
04:09:22 <prooftechnique> Sgeo: I think the first Elixir demo I saw was pulling some data directly from some web service and turning it into code with macros
04:09:37 <prooftechnique> And the first reddit comment was "Oh, god, please never actually do this"
04:09:57 <prooftechnique> It looks like a nicer way to write Erlang, if nothing else
04:11:04 <kmc> i like that on mushroomobserver.org if you don't know what kind of mushroom is in your photo you can put "Agaricales sensu lato"
04:11:12 <kmc> which is latin for "looks like a mushroom, I guess"
04:11:36 <kmc> (okay it's latin for "agarics, in the loose sense")
04:12:11 <kmc> if you're extra unsure you can just put "fungi" instead
04:12:22 <kmc> is there a designation above kingdom which includes all life
04:12:38 <Bike> cladistics people usually just go for "unranked" i think
04:12:48 <Bike> since i mean, it's a tree, the levels are gonna get hairy anyway.
04:13:12 <elliott> kmc: there's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-domain_system at least?
04:13:15 <Bike> also using latin to obscure that you mean something boringly obvious is kind of great. incertae cedis~
04:13:34 <Bike> i should really hit up some taxonomists on twitter to see wtf they do in the presence of cladistics
04:13:58 <Sgeo> But what about maybe-life?
04:14:11 <kmc> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mammal_Diversity_2011.png mammal diversity
04:14:12 <Bike> viruses are a whole different ballgame.
04:14:20 <Bike> they change way faster than the rest, for one.
04:14:46 <kmc> petition to designate richard nixon as the type specimen for H. sapiens
04:14:52 <Bike> isn't that what i typed... oh, oops, yes sedis
04:15:13 <Bike> Sgeo: also viruses may be paraphyletic which is pretty cool imo
04:15:47 <kmc> that is cool
04:15:49 <Bike> i actually have no idea about viral taxonomy. i'd grab a book on it if i didn't already have five books checked out
04:15:57 <kmc> it doesn't take long for things like viruses to evolve in artificial life systems
04:16:18 <Bike> it kind of ties into abiogenesis stuff. like, were virus-like things first, or did they arise from bacteria, or what.
04:16:26 <Sgeo> Bike: I read the wiki page for paraphyly, still don't know what you mean by that
04:16:52 <Bike> Sgeo: viruses being paraphyletic would mean that the last common ancestor of all viruses is not a virus, i.e. that virality arose several times independently.
04:16:53 <kmc> so why has something like life only evolved once on earth, anyway? is it just that it took a really long time? or is it that anything life-like which starts out today gets eaten by the usual kind of life?
04:17:22 <kmc> (how would you designate the latter, anyway? "nucleic acid life"?)
04:17:24 <Bike> Sgeo: (or er that the tree of ancestry includes non-viruses anyway)
04:17:47 <Bike> kmc: i've thought about that a decent amount, but part of it is you have to qualify the universality of life
04:17:48 <kmc> I guess it's like asking why nobody has replaced UNIX
04:17:55 <Bike> i mean, we pretty much all use RNA
04:18:05 <Bike> BUT sometimes the amino acid coding is different!
04:18:13 <kmc> that's pretty cool
04:18:41 <Bike> And some things, like lipid bilayers, those are just... convenient. I'm not sure how they would be replaced.
04:19:46 <Bike> it probably comes down to "we don't know enough about abiogenesis to make decent guesses" though, which suckz
04:20:59 <kmc> there was that one abiogenesis experiment but it turned out to be wrong? i have a great memory of high school bio class as you can tell
04:21:08 <Bike> You mean Miller-Urey?
04:21:15 <Bike> the "throw some gas in a tube and get amino acids" thing.
04:26:07 <Bike> yeah the conditions they used weren't really very early-earth-like, and besides that life is rather more complicated than a couple monomers
04:26:47 <Bike> living organisms obviously have their bilayers and their nucleotides, but even with just proteins you need a damn complex system (itself made mostly of proteins) to make everything fold right...
04:27:41 <kmc> there's the theory that RNA itself served as the enzymes at first, right?
04:28:57 <Bike> Yeah. and rna even still does that in living organisms.
04:29:13 <kmc> that's cool
04:29:17 <Bike> yeah they call them 'ribozymes'
04:29:33 <Bike> Because... I dunno? I guess having an r plus the zy makes it even cooler sounding.
04:29:33 <kmc> what's the advantage of protein enzymes
04:29:48 <kmc> advantage of DNA over RNA for data storage is durability?
04:30:23 <Bike> that's about where my cargo culted molecular bio runs out i'm afraid
04:30:35 <Bike> i kind of think of proteins as being more... flexible
04:31:05 <Bike> when you really look at how a protein works, often it's made up of like four separate "domains" that each do their own thing, have their own binding sites, but can induce conformational changes in the other domains (i think) and stuff like that
04:31:20 <Bike> iunno if you could replace titin with rna, basically
04:33:33 <Bike> proteins are like, really complicated /mechanically/, and i don't know if you can do that while staying hereditarily stable, i guess...
04:34:31 <Bike> maybe it's like, separation of concerns. which is vague and the analogy hardly works at all god
04:35:23 <kmc> and if you're doing a translation thing anyway then maybe amino acids are a more flexible thing to translate to
04:35:55 <kmc> Bike: i was gonna make an analogy to hereditary source code vs. ephemeral build products but that's even worse ;)
04:37:25 <Bike> i'm kind of thinking of this like, here's gentoo on a macbook, now figure out how MULTICS worked.
04:37:58 <kmc> and your main tool is, you can break parts of the macbook and see what still functions
04:39:38 <Bike> you also have the fossil record, which is a bunch of partially accurate descriptions of how older linux distributions functioned you found on some help forums.
04:40:19 <kmc> okay time to ride some trains, ttyl all
04:56:09 <prooftechnique> > let hangman (x:xs) (y:ys) c | y == c = c : hangman xs ys c | otherwise = x : hangman xs ys c; hangman _ _ _ = ""; in hangman "____" "jazz" 'z' -- augur_
04:57:22 <augur_> prooftechnique: what does it do exactly
04:57:49 <Bike> you give it blanks, the real word, and a chosen letter, and it computes the filled in letters bla bla bla.
04:58:09 <augur_> oh oh i see what you mean
04:58:21 <Bike> It'll be a big help when you play against me. "methylenedioxymethamphetamine" is easy to remember, but the longer ones, welllll
04:58:47 <augur_> its methylene-dioxy-3,4-n-methylamphetamine, to be precise
04:59:20 <augur_> or 3,4 at the beginning, take your pick
04:59:22 <Bike> it's party dust mother fucker
05:20:26 -!- doesthiswork has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
05:23:39 <Bike> "Thus there exist initial configurations of N bodies in the plane in which several of the bodies will hit the unit circle within 1.2 s iff the Riemann hypothesis is false (and the trajectories may be interpreted as a description of a counterexample)"
05:25:23 <Fiora> does that require real number computation?
05:26:05 <Bike> yeah, but the initial configuration can be computable.
05:26:15 <Bike> obviously this isn't actually a practical help towards /finding/ a counterexample, but.
05:27:15 <Bike> hm, the state of unsimulatable initial configurations is of measure zero though..
05:27:18 <Bike> this paper is weird.
05:29:04 <Bike> also kind of informal. «The third and most complicated set of laws we discuss (and the one we will concentrate on) is "modified linearized general relativity", which has all the mathematically annoying features of SRTG, and also has tensors.»
05:31:42 <shachaf> http://www.theonion.com/articles/barbershop-pole-finally-runs-out,34491/
05:32:59 <Bike> Fiora: i think this stuff basically comes about because of the newtonian-physics-allows-infinite-energy thing.
05:43:02 -!- lambdabot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds).
05:47:30 -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
05:48:09 -!- Jafet has joined.
06:04:15 -!- nisstyre has joined.
06:14:34 -!- Jafet has left.
06:41:13 -!- asie has joined.
06:45:50 <Sgeo> A computer program just called me a distinguished Haskell coder
06:45:55 <Sgeo> Based on ... not very much
06:46:01 <Sgeo> http://osrc.dfm.io/Sgeo
06:46:11 <Sgeo> Open Source Report Card
06:46:33 <zzo38> What is it based on?
06:46:53 <Sgeo> GitHub profile
06:47:40 <Fiora> Bike: how does that thing work?
06:47:58 <Bike> the infinite energy thing
06:48:19 <zzo38> Not everyone has GitHub profiles though, and there may also be many programming languages that GitHub profiles do not yet include.
06:48:52 <Bike> I tried to read Xia's paper once but it was beyond me
06:49:29 <Bike> Basically, with the right initial conditions (and the paper is about what these conditions are) you can get an object infinitely far away in finite time
06:49:37 <Bike> but of course, that's just restating "infinite energy".
06:52:10 <Bike> I did get far enough to read that Xia's construction uses five bodies and is symmetrical across one axis.
06:52:36 <Bike> So I kind of imagine four bodies moving back and forth as the last goes straight between them, getting faster and faster exponentially (or uh, superexponentially i guess?)
06:53:13 <Fiora> is that possible without arbitrarily small distances between objects?
06:53:39 <Fiora> like. if you apply a constraint like the planck length does it stil work
06:54:11 <Bike> that would probably be a whole other paper. the classical n-body equations are in continuous spacetime.
06:54:21 <Fiora> oh. so it's not like. realistic
06:54:39 <Bike> Newtonian physics is unrealistic to begin with, though.
06:54:47 <Bike> Because, I mean. Einstein.
06:55:49 <Fiora> oh. so like, relativity doesn't have that ""vulnerability""?
06:56:13 <Bike> Can't exactly get to an infinite speed, now can you?
06:57:05 <Bike> xia's paper is http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946572 if you want to take a crack but it's long and hard
07:06:05 <Bike> oh, there's a short explanation of another construction in this paper...
07:06:12 <Bike> it involves arranging things so that an asteroid moves polygonally. @_@
07:07:03 <Bike> And uh the infinitizing comes by...
07:07:14 <Bike> As a consequence of properties I–III, the entire N-gon expands in roughly geometric progression to infinite
07:07:18 <Bike> size, but the asteroid traverses the N-gon edges in durations of time which shrink roughly geometrically
07:07:21 <Bike> toward zero. In consequence, the asteroid travels an infinite number of circuits around the N-gon (and this
07:07:24 <Bike> is an infinite distance), as the N-gon grows to infinite size, in a finite time tsingular,
07:08:04 <Bike> so, that's basically insane.
07:09:48 <Fiora> so like does this mean newtonian mechanics doesn't conserve energy?
07:10:37 <Bike> Um... I think in this construction, as the asteroid speeds up super fast the stars it's orbiting slow down.
07:10:54 <Fiora> does that mean you need an infinite number of stars or something?
07:11:02 <Fiora> since like, the energy has to come from somewhere
07:11:37 <Bike> it comes from the stars slowing down. i think.
07:11:42 <zzo38> Does it violate things like that? Without doing such an experiment, or proving it mathematically inconsistent, it isn'ta reason to call such a theory wrong. (Now we do, but that doesn't seem a way?)
07:11:48 <Fiora> the stars start with an infinite amount of energy... (???)
07:12:11 <Bike> zzo38: you're going to need to rephrase that more readably
07:12:17 <Bike> Fiora: i don't know. math is hard
07:12:32 <Bike> pretty sure newton is supposed to conserve energy though so lol i dunno
07:12:37 <Bike> maybe i was wrong in talking about infinite energy
07:13:19 <Fiora> maybe just, like, unbounded?
07:13:34 <shachaf> Bike: What, is he running out of food or something?
07:13:45 <Bike> that is a joke i do not understand
07:14:07 <zzo38> Bike: O, I thought it is clear to me at least.
07:14:32 <Bike> "A baseball player on a frictionless plane surface flings a ball against a wall repeatedly" physics.jpg
07:35:28 <kmc> http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-who-drinks-5-diet-cokes-per-day-hoping-doctors,34570/ this is me
07:36:15 <zzo38> Hoping doctors are what?
07:36:33 <kmc> "working on a cure for whatever he's getting"
07:36:46 <shachaf> Like "raining cats and dogs".
07:37:48 <shachaf> zzo38: i learned to play Magic: The Gathering
07:38:16 <kmc> are you any good at it?
07:42:57 -!- doesthiswork has joined.
07:42:59 <zzo38> shachaf: Do you think some of the rules are too klugy?
07:43:30 -!- doesthiswork has quit (Client Quit).
07:44:51 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
07:46:21 <shachaf> zzo38: It's v. complicated.
07:47:38 -!- nisstyre has quit (Quit: Leaving).
07:58:10 <oklopol> i even have cards and stuff
07:58:35 <zzo38> I have no cards, but I sometimes do play the game (not very commonly though).
07:59:39 <oklopol> http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=3315 i have this guy
08:00:15 <oklopol> i played this as a kid and i always mainly tried to manage to play that
08:00:29 <shachaf> oklopol: Is "unaffected by summoning sickness" distinct from "Haste"?
08:00:45 <zzo38> Haste makes it unaffected by summoning sickness.
08:00:51 -!- asie has joined.
08:01:08 <oklopol> i also had 4 cards that simply let you play that card
08:01:25 <oklopol> Haste is a very old mechanic, and has existed at least since 4th Edition on Ball Lightning. However the Haste keyword was not added until much later.
08:01:30 <oklopol> http://mtg.wikia.com/wiki/Haste
08:02:08 <zzo38> (Summoning sickness is given to all permanents when they enter play/are created. At end of each turn, all permanents lose summoning sickness. Creatures with summoning sickness cannot attack, and any abilities with the tap symbol in their cost are unusable if it is a creature.)
08:02:22 <shachaf> zzo38: All permanents? I thought it was just creatures?
08:03:02 <shachaf> Hmm, "unusable if it is a creature". So non-creatures have summoning sickness but it's unobservable?
08:03:56 <zzo38> shachaf: Yes, like that. It is also unused if the permanent has the Haste ability.
08:04:19 <oklopol> most of my friends play all sorts of rpg and card games and watch anime and stuff
08:04:41 <shachaf> oklopol: do you know things about chu spaces
08:06:01 <shachaf> oklopol: well anyway can you define a topological space/system/thingy as a product of some C and D^op
08:06:09 <oklopol> my first impression is that chu spaces sound a bit silly, topological spaces are already much more general than you need in real life
08:06:27 <shachaf> oklopol: well look at the definition of a morphism though! what's with that
08:07:03 <oklopol> of morphisms between chu spaces?
08:07:26 <oklopol> Understood statically, a Chu space (A, r, X) over a set K consists of a set A of points, a set X of states, and a function r : A × X → K. This makes it an A × X matrix with entries drawn from K, or equivalently a K-valued binary relation between A and X (ordinary binary relations being 2-valued).
08:07:40 <oklopol> okay maybe i should first try to parse that
08:07:42 <shachaf> so it's sort of like an adjunction (can you make it an actual adjunctiony thing by having p/q in p(f(a),b) = q(a,g(b)) be functors sort of like hom functors)
08:08:13 <Bike> i can't even make sense of the binary relation crap
08:08:23 <shachaf> oklopol: Well, the "topological system" thing in this book is less general than Chu spaces.
08:09:02 <shachaf> In particular, there's a "frame" -- a lattice that has finite meets and arbitrary joins, such that meets distribute over joins -- and a set of "points"
08:09:04 <oklopol> Bike: it just calls a function a binary K-valued relation.
08:09:19 <oklopol> i mean a function from A times X to K is called a binary K-valued relation
08:09:30 <shachaf> Where the frame corresponds to the topology, of course.
08:10:51 <shachaf> So you have (X,A) where X is a set of points and A is a lattice of "opens" (which aren't sets, just things). And you have a "satisfies" relation, x |= a, that tells you whether a point satisfies an open.
08:11:20 <shachaf> You could say that points are what things "are" and opens are what observations you can make of them.
08:11:31 <oklopol> so A and X are the other way around than in wikipedia?
08:11:57 <shachaf> Oh, I just used the other letters.
08:12:11 <Bike> so what do you get out of this
08:12:17 <shachaf> The definition of Chu space is completely symmetrical so it doesn't matter.
08:12:30 <shachaf> But this one isn't, since you have a set and a frame.
08:12:45 <oklopol> okay so that's something between a topological spaces and a pointless topological space i guess
08:13:05 <shachaf> In fact if X = {} you get a pointless topological space, I guess.
08:13:14 <oklopol> perhaps it's exactly the latter (it's properly more general than the former though)
08:14:18 <oklopol> i figured two opens are indeed distinct iff they have different points (they are then sets, but it's still more general than the usual notion of topology)
08:14:21 <shachaf> I think there's some adjunction relation with functors between this thing and topological spaces and locales being forgetful/free or something. I don't remember.
08:14:40 <shachaf> No, you could have distinct opens that satisfy the same points.
08:14:47 <shachaf> Er, that are satisfied by.
08:14:58 <oklopol> can you have U < V even if U has more points
08:15:05 <shachaf> That's the "that the open sets be extensional" part of the Chu space page.
08:15:47 <oklopol> or does the frame somehow be a refinement of a sublattice of the lattice of subsets of X at least (if that makes sense.)
08:17:03 <shachaf> OK, there are requirements on |=
08:17:42 <shachaf> "If S is a finite subset of A, then x |= Join S <-> x |= a for all a in S"
08:18:07 <shachaf> "If S is a finite subset of A, then x |= Meet S <-> x |= a for all a in S"
08:18:33 <shachaf> "If S is any subset of A, then x |= Join S <-> x |= a for some a in S"
08:18:53 <oklopol> okay the morphisms of chu spaces certainly seem adjunctive. however, i do not quite get them yet.
08:19:21 <shachaf> Well, the definition is pretty intuitive from the perspective of topological systems, at least.
08:19:41 <shachaf> If you think of opens as "finite observations" that you can make about points.
08:19:47 <oklopol> ("adjunctive" in a very non-mathematical sense that this looks vaguely similar to some things i've seen when trying to understand adjunctions.)
08:20:38 <shachaf> So you might have bit streams as points, and "starts with 00101" as an open.
08:21:04 <shachaf> But "the stream is all 0s" not as an open, because it observes an infinite amount of information, say.
08:21:23 <oklopol> okay "x |= Join S <-> x |= a for all a in S" and "x |= Meet S <-> x |= a for all a in S" makes things pretty simple
08:21:25 <shachaf> Or "this real number is within the interval (x-d,x+d)"
08:21:39 <oklopol> but perhaps that's a typo.
08:21:52 <shachaf> No, one of them was wrong.
08:22:04 <oklopol> so it seems that joins are really set-theoretical joins and meets are really set-theoretical meets, and the lattice is there only for presentational reasons?
08:22:20 <oklopol> i mean associate with each open the set of points that satisfy it
08:22:28 <shachaf> By set-theorical joins/meets do you mean unions/intersections?
08:22:39 <oklopol> now the join of 2 opens is open, and is satisfied by exactly the union
08:23:04 <shachaf> Yes, clearly for any topological space (X,ΩX), (X,ΩX,∈) is a "topological system".
08:23:32 <shachaf> But even if the set of points is empty you can have lots of different topological systems with different frames.
08:23:44 <oklopol> i thought the definition of join and meet was w.r.t. the lattice itself (in the abstract sense), so that they are just minimal upper bound etc.. then you get some weird additional stuff for i think.
08:23:46 <shachaf> Since there's no requirement that opens are extensional.
08:24:21 <shachaf> I'm not sure what you mean?
08:24:45 <oklopol> the current definition is interesting enough
08:25:22 <shachaf> Anyway so if you think of opens as observations that you ought to be able to make, then you might ask what a structure-preserving function between (X,A) and (Y,B) could be.
08:25:45 <shachaf> Clearly it maps points to points, so you have f : X -> Y
08:26:34 <shachaf> But if b is some B-open, and f(x) |= b, then that's a finite observation you were able to make (by using f and an observation in (Y,B)).
08:27:07 <shachaf> So there ought to be some A-open that x satisfies, if it's structure-preserving.
08:27:28 <oklopol> oh that's the role of the backmap
08:27:39 <oklopol> should've been obvious i guess
08:27:40 <shachaf> In particular, given f, there ought to be some thing g : B -> A such that f(x) |= b iff x |= g(b)
08:28:02 <shachaf> And it works out nicely for g to be a frame homomorphism, of course.
08:28:59 <shachaf> So a "continuous function" between (X,A) and (Y,B) is defined to be (f : X -> Y, g : B -> A) such that f(x) |= b iff x |= g(b)
08:29:00 <oklopol> that's something we require i guess?
08:29:07 <shachaf> (And g is a frame homomorphism.)
08:30:18 <oklopol> okay in the case of usual topology, g is precisely the map that maps an open to its f-preimage i guess
08:30:23 <shachaf> If you take a topological space, so that b is an open set, then clearly this is just defining g to be -- right.
08:30:56 <shachaf> So the morphism is entirely defined by f.
08:31:31 <oklopol> if the frame is like injective in the sense that no two opens have the same points
08:31:37 <oklopol> then i guess it's determined by f
08:31:49 <shachaf> I mean in the case of a usual topological space.
08:31:53 <shachaf> In general it isn't, of course.
08:32:01 <shachaf> (For example when X is empty.)
08:32:05 <oklopol> in general, i guess you explicitly require that it's a lattice homomorphism?
08:32:21 <shachaf> g? A frame homomorphism, yes.
08:33:13 <oklopol> The counterpart of a continuous function from (A, r, X) to (B, s, Y) is a pair (f, g) of functions f : A → B, g : Y → X satisfying the adjointness condition s(f(a), y) = r(a, g(y)) for all a ∈ A and y ∈ Y.
08:33:18 <oklopol> okay i totally get this now
08:33:29 <oklopol> that looked really weird a few minutes ago.
08:34:07 <shachaf> Right, so a Chu space generalizes a frame to not necessarily be a frame, and generalizes |= : (A,X) -> Bool to |= : (A,X) -> K
08:35:03 <oklopol> let X be a topological space and Y a subset
08:35:24 <oklopol> then you get a topological system on Y by taking as the frame the opens of X
08:36:08 <oklopol> the frame is always the same as it was in X, but for example if Y = {} then the satisfaction relation is pretty trivial.
08:36:15 <oklopol> perhaps all topological systems arise this way?
08:37:43 <shachaf> Hmm, it's possible. I don't know.
08:38:04 <oklopol> in general topology, subspaces are defined the same way (except you add Y as an open set), but some open sets of X become the same set for Y; now you just don't identify them. and i guess it makes sense for the "frame" of the sub-topological system to be the same as the frame of the original space.
08:38:52 <oklopol> (makes sense in the sense that the word "frame" could be considered to suggest that)
08:39:09 <oklopol> (or it could be considered to suggest anything else i guess)
08:40:45 <shachaf> I think possibly this book talks about that but I've only read some of it so far.
08:42:45 <shachaf> So this "adjointness condition" thing and the backwards-and-forwards maps thing are a bit strange.
08:42:59 <oklopol> i don't really get adjointness
08:43:27 <shachaf> It sounds like maybe you could define it as some product C × D^op or something, if you could figure out a nice way of talking about the extra condition.
08:43:38 <oklopol> (i've tried to get it quite a few times)
08:44:22 <shachaf> The usual definition of an adjunction F -| G is that Hom(F(A), B) ≅ Hom(A, G(B)), natural in A and B
08:44:27 <shachaf> (Where F and G are functors, of course.)
08:44:40 <oklopol> btw i've noticed you're on #categorytheory, did you perhaps mention the channel at some point? i have no idea why i'm there myself
08:44:57 <oklopol> yeah but what's "natural in A and B"
08:45:22 <shachaf> So this is very similar, except it's dealing with functions instead of functors, and it generalizes Hom_C/Hom_D to s/r.
08:45:23 <oklopol> something that takes a page to define and a week to take in, and then it's obvious?
08:45:45 <shachaf> Well, it means you have a natural isomorphism between functors.
08:45:51 <shachaf> I don't know if I mentioned ##categorytheory in here.
08:46:08 <shachaf> Naturality does take a bit to take in.
08:46:12 <oklopol> Hom(F(A), B) is not a functor, it's a set.
08:46:27 <shachaf> The functors \a b -> Hom(F(a), b)
08:46:36 <shachaf> Which is : C^op x D -> Set
08:46:52 <shachaf> Er, and the other Hom functor which gets the same type, of course.
08:47:42 <oklopol> that's actually something that sounds understandable
08:48:27 <shachaf> Usually people write it Hom(F(-), -) and so on
08:48:43 <shachaf> When you say "natural in X" it means that X is implicitly an argument.
08:49:01 <oklopol> but you have to guess what categories are dualed
08:49:04 <shachaf> And that you have a natural transformation.
08:49:16 <oklopol> i guess there's no choice...
08:49:21 <shachaf> Well, Hom_C : C^op x C -> Set
08:50:02 <shachaf> And F : D -> C, and we overload that to mean F : D^op -> C^op because it's the same thing.
08:50:28 <shachaf> I guess you could write Hom(F^op(-), -) ≅ Hom(-, G(-))
08:51:10 <oklopol> i'm not sure that's helpful though (is it unambiguous even?)
08:51:59 <shachaf> It's not very standard because it's usually pretty obvious which way F is being used.
08:54:20 <shachaf> Anyway, it seems pretty related to this whole topological system and/or Chu space thing.
08:54:26 <oklopol> so F and G are adjoint if the functors \a b -> Hom(F^op(a), b) and \a b -> Hom(a, G(b)) are adjoint, as functors C^op \times D \to Set
08:55:18 <shachaf> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjoint_functors#Hom-set_adjunction
08:55:24 <oklopol> naturally isomorphic = there's a natural transformation from F to G such that every object map F(x) \to G(x) is an isomorphism
08:56:51 <shachaf> (A natural isomorphism is probably defined as a pair (f : F -> G,g : G -> F) such that f . g = id, g . f = id with natural transformation composition. But I think that works out to the same thing.)
08:57:02 <oklopol> okay i guess that explains everything you just did
08:57:16 <oklopol> i haven't looked very closely at that definition, just the previous one
08:57:57 <shachaf> The unit-counit one is also nice but from a different perspective.
08:58:14 <shachaf> This is probably the simplest definition.
08:58:39 <shachaf> Note that when F has an inverse, it's always adjoint to its inverse.
08:58:48 <oklopol> probably, at least it looks like something i could understand if i spent half an hour looking at mental images of diagrams
08:58:56 <oklopol> might be a useful half an hour
08:59:13 <oklopol> adjoints are in some sense unique right
08:59:20 <shachaf> But if it doesn't have an inverse it might still have adjoints which you can think of as a best effort at an inverse or something.
09:00:14 <oklopol> i don't actually know what an inverse functor is, or at least what precisely should be required from one
09:00:38 <oklopol> in any case again that clarifies a lot
09:01:29 <shachaf> Well, the most obvious definition would be that you have an isomorphism between categories.
09:01:55 <shachaf> I.e. F . G = id, id = G . F
09:02:07 <oklopol> i guess F's inverse if G such that F \circ G and G \circ F are naturally isomorphic to the identity functors?
09:02:31 <oklopol> oh okay you mean that's the obvious one
09:02:44 <shachaf> Well, "exactly equal" is in practice too strong, you just want "naturally isomorphic".
09:02:56 <oklopol> so that you get for example equivalence with skeleton
09:03:11 <shachaf> If you pick "exactly equal" you get isomorphism of categories, which isn't really what you want in practice, so you use "naturally isomorphic" to get equivalent of categories.
09:03:35 <shachaf> And if you have F,G that give you an equivalence of categories then they're adjoint too.
09:04:00 <shachaf> You can often think of the special case of categories which are posets, and functors which are monotonic functions.
09:04:26 <shachaf> Where "≅" turns into "iff" and these are called "Galois connections" and people say it's simpler.
09:05:09 <oklopol> galois connections are awesome i hear
09:05:26 <shachaf> I hear that too but I don't understand them all that well.
09:06:27 <shachaf> Anyway, if you think of some way to relax "F . G ≅ id" and "id ≅ G . F", you might end up saying that those should just be natural transformations instead of isomorphisms.
09:06:39 <shachaf> That's the unit-counit of the other definition.
09:06:54 <shachaf> eps : F . G -> 1, eta : 1 -> G . F
09:07:25 <shachaf> You can think of it in the case of posets as relaxing f(g(x)) = x and x = g(f(x)) to f(g(x)) ≤ x and x ≤ g(f(x))
09:08:07 <shachaf> And there are some laws, namely that if you eta-and-then-eps you end up where you started.
09:08:31 <shachaf> Except they work in different categories, so it's more like "eps . fmap eta = id" and "fmap eps . eta = id"
09:08:49 <shachaf> I.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AdjointFunctorSymmetry.png
09:09:14 <shachaf> Going back and forth between these definitions is a good way to figure them out.
09:10:15 <shachaf> Well, that's how you write it in Haskell.
09:10:38 <shachaf> It's "eps . F eta" and "G eps . eta", or maybe the other way around.
09:11:40 <shachaf> Actually it's not exactly eps, it's eps-of-F-of, but anyway when you try to work out how these things could possibly compose there's only one way that makes sense.
09:12:58 <shachaf> Hmm, I guess talking about this helped me figure out part of my question.
09:13:27 <oklopol> i'm not really used to thinking about what makes sense when taking in definitions
09:13:51 <shachaf> OK, well, take the exact definition from Wikipedia or nlab.
09:15:02 <shachaf> The definition of continuous function didn't quite make sense to me until I saw the topological system formulation of it.
09:15:19 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
09:15:25 <shachaf> Where it's vaguely obvious -- it's just a structure-preserving map as usual.
09:18:44 <oklopol> eta is a functor from D to itself
09:18:54 <shachaf> eta is a natural transformation
09:19:19 <oklopol> eta is a natural transformation from 1_D to GF
09:19:36 <oklopol> and now we're composing if with a functor from D to C
09:19:37 <shachaf> Ah, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_transformation#Operations_with_natural_transformations for the notation used in that article.
09:20:12 <oklopol> (i've gone down this road but i usually lose patience at some point :P)
09:20:42 <shachaf> So for eta : G -> H, F eta : F.G -> F.H
09:22:25 <shachaf> (I'm explaining this much more confusingly than Wikipedia so just read that.)
09:23:41 <oklopol> well it's helpful to have someone be all like lol this is easy
09:23:53 <oklopol> usually i don't have much pressure to learn this since i don't know anyone who knows category theory
09:24:33 <shachaf> I don't know category theory. :-( Sometimes I pretend to know a bit on IRC.
09:25:12 <shachaf> But it certainly seems like it's relevant here to the whole adjointness thing.
09:26:16 <shachaf> Maybe you can generalize Chu spaces to work in arbitrary categories, with p/q being functors rather than functions?
09:26:58 <shachaf> I mean the ones in p(f(a), b) = q(a, g(b))
09:27:11 <shachaf> Except this is already more general than adjunctions in a couple of ways.
09:27:48 <shachaf> Talking about f . g doesn't even make sense here because A/B and X/Y are two different kinds of things, not necessarily both categories/sets/whatever.
09:28:22 <shachaf> And p/q aren't Hom, they're just functions.
09:29:12 <shachaf> (Saying that p/q are "2-valued" as opposed to "K-valued" seems a bit like talking about posets/preörders instead of general categories.)
09:30:50 <shachaf> Let's put the contravariant argument first to make it more like Hom.
09:31:37 <shachaf> So a space-system-thingy is (A,X,p : A×X -> K)
09:31:58 <oklopol> i had a dream that i tried to put my pants on and it was incredibly hard
09:32:33 <oklopol> i was just about to step outside my apartment, when i realized i had no clothes on
09:33:12 <oklopol> my girlfriend and her sister were inside, and i was embarrassed that they'd know i almost went outside without any clothes on so i started putting them on at the door, while afraid that someone would see me
09:33:59 -!- asie has joined.
09:34:07 <shachaf> And a homomorphism : (A,X,p) -> (B,Y,q) is (f : B -> A, g : X -> Y) s.t. for any b : B, x : X, p(f(b), x) = q(b, g(x))
09:34:27 <oklopol> so what are A, X, p and K here
09:34:39 <oklopol> sets, categories or nostrils?
09:34:46 <shachaf> In a Chu space? I think they're just sets and functions.
09:34:57 <oklopol> oh i thought you were already generalizing there.
09:35:15 <shachaf> No, this is still the old Chu space thing.
09:35:32 <oklopol> so the latter guy in the tuple is the points
09:35:36 <oklopol> and the first is the frame
09:35:59 <shachaf> So one issue here in the definition of Chu space is that f is just a regular function, not a homomorphism.
09:36:48 <shachaf> So I guess you should say that A/B are objects in one category and X/Y are objects in another category.
09:37:35 <shachaf> Running out of letters. :-(
09:38:06 <shachaf> OK, using categories instead of functions makes it clearer, actually.
09:38:39 <shachaf> So we have (A : C, X : D, p : A^op × X -> K)
09:38:44 -!- prooftechnique has quit.
09:39:22 <shachaf> There are probably properties that we want p to satisfy to make it "Hom-like".
09:39:42 <shachaf> Isn't there a thing for functors that are like Hom?
09:40:08 <shachaf> Related to presheaves or something, maybe?
09:40:08 <oklopol> when you say p is a functor
09:40:22 <oklopol> do you mean p is a functor from C^op \times D to K
09:40:31 <oklopol> or what's a functor from an object
09:40:43 <shachaf> Er, you're right, that made no sense.
09:41:21 <shachaf> What does A×X even mean when A and X are objects?
09:41:40 <shachaf> (In different categories.)
09:41:45 <oklopol> it means the tuple (A, X)?
09:42:13 <shachaf> I'm mixing up levels here.
09:42:36 <oklopol> but yeah it seems you are trying to work with morphisms between objects that come from different categories
09:43:40 <shachaf> Well, right. That's one of the ways in which these Chu space things are weirder than regular adjunctions.
09:44:16 <asie> this is the most interesting channel i keep not looking at because i don't understand a word
09:44:27 <shachaf> OK, so the old definition: A space is (A : Set, X : Set, p : A×X -> K)
09:44:50 <shachaf> Where K is some global fixed thing.
09:45:44 <shachaf> A homomorphism : (A,X,p) -> (B,Y,q) is (f : B -> A, g : X -> Y) s.t. forall b∈B, x∈X, p(f(b), x) = q(b, g(x))
09:47:22 -!- nooodl has joined.
09:51:04 <oklopol> i have no idea how that should be generalized
09:51:19 <shachaf> As it is it doesn't even cover our old notion of topological systems.
09:51:28 <shachaf> Since we can't get frame homomorphisms.
09:52:21 <shachaf> Maybe we can relax the "K-valued relation" thing for a bit and bring back the iffs.
09:52:41 -!- carado has joined.
09:53:25 <shachaf> I just want something that lets you express the topological system thing in a reasonable way.
09:53:46 <shachaf> But I'm pretty sure p ought to be something more than a function somehow.
09:55:05 <oklopol> you have two categories, the one of points (Set) and the one for frames (Lattice?). a topological system is, first of all, a tuple (X, A) where X is from the point category and A is from the frame category but how do you say which points are in which opens?
09:55:32 <shachaf> Frames aren't just lattices, they're a bit more.
09:55:52 <oklopol> you mean because they have infinite joins or what
09:56:00 <shachaf> And meets distribute over joins.
09:56:11 <shachaf> Anyway, a system is (X, A, |=), I guess.
09:56:25 <oklopol> let's say that's what Lattice is the category of.
09:56:31 <oklopol> but okay let's call if Frame
09:56:45 <shachaf> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_heyting_algebra calls it Frm
09:56:56 <oklopol> still how do you connect two objects from different categories
09:57:09 <shachaf> Anyway, "satisfies" is a relation, |= ⊆ X×A
09:57:10 <oklopol> i guess you could have a fixed functor from Frm to Set
09:57:23 <shachaf> Which is a pretty unsatisfying way of doing it.
09:57:24 <oklopol> or maybe that's a bad idea
09:59:51 <shachaf> Maybe I should read http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/coimbra.pdf
10:00:13 <shachaf> Ugh, it calls the points A and the "states" X.
10:00:20 <shachaf> That's too confusing for me.
10:01:27 <oklopol> proves that functions between Chu
10:01:27 <oklopol> spaces are continuous if and only if they are homomorphisms.
10:02:53 -!- impomatic has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds).
10:03:20 <shachaf> Well, given the definition of continuous that they have in that PDF, sure.
10:04:02 <shachaf> Oh, I should have read all of the Wikipedia article, too.
10:05:00 <shachaf> So if you put everything in some monoidal category you can do all the same things.
10:05:19 -!- MindlessDrone has joined.
10:05:55 <shachaf> I.e. a (C : Cat, K : C)-space is (A : C, X : C, p : A⊗X -> K)
10:06:50 <shachaf> And a morphism : (A,X,p) -> (B,Y,q) is (f : B -> A, g : X -> Y) s.t. forall b:B, x:X. p(f(b), x) = q(b, g(x))
10:07:00 <shachaf> Where maybe = means isomorphic?
10:08:08 <shachaf> Maybe we can recover the usual notion of adjunction from that.
10:09:15 <shachaf> Chu(Cat, Set), where every p is p(-,-) = Hom(-^op,-)
10:09:42 <shachaf> Having to insert that ^op is really ugly, surely there's a nicer way to express all this?
10:11:27 <oklopol> "<shachaf> Where maybe = means isomorphic?" i would default to "equal"
10:12:12 <shachaf> "isomorphic" gives us the wrong thing in the Set case.
10:12:28 <shachaf> But it gives us the right thing in the category case. :-) I don't know.
10:13:58 <shachaf> But neither of them lets us do the thing where we have two different categories.
10:14:38 <oklopol> what does p(f(b), x) = q(b, g(x)) doesn't even mean? is C a concrete category
10:15:39 <shachaf> I think it means that I'm saying complete nonsense again. Sigh.
10:16:05 <shachaf> So what am I trying to say here?
10:16:54 <shachaf> The original Chu construction as described in Po-Hsiang (Peter) Chu’s master’s
10:16:57 <shachaf> thesis took a symmetric monoidal closed category V with pullbacks and an
10:16:59 <shachaf> object k of V and “completed” V to a self-dual category Chu(V, k).
10:17:37 <oklopol> "forall b:B, x:X. p(f(b), x) = q(b, g(x))" could be changed into "p \circ (f \times id_X) and q \circ (\id_B, g) are isomorphic morphisms in some category (the arrow category?)" maybe, assuming the category has products in a nice sense.
10:17:50 <oklopol> or maybe that means nothing either
10:18:14 <oklopol> what's closed category, does that mean cartesian closed i wonder
10:18:42 <shachaf> "monoidal closed" is like "cartesian closed" but with some monoidal category, not necessarily categorical product.
10:19:47 <shachaf> analogy with categories enriched in V [Kel82] one might refer to the
10:19:47 <shachaf> objects of the general Chu construction Chu(V, k) as V -enriched Chu spaces,
10:19:48 <shachaf> and indeed Chu(V, k) can be formulated as a V -category, one whose hom-objects
10:22:21 <shachaf> Oh, hmm, apparently Chu spaces were introduced in the context of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/*-autonomous_category
10:23:20 <shachaf> Maybe that can be a place for the ^op to come from?
10:23:33 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
10:23:45 <oklopol> why is category theory so harrrrd
10:23:51 <oklopol> sooooooooo harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd
10:23:57 <shachaf> ⊥ is an actual object here.
10:25:42 <shachaf> I'm too tired now to think about any of this.
10:25:48 <shachaf> oklopol: Thanks for your help!
10:26:17 <oklopol> i was helpful?? i thought you were teaching me.
10:26:36 <oklopol> but you're welcome i guess :P
10:27:27 <shachaf> It looks like de Paiva's thesis was about something related to all this.
10:27:42 <oklopol> there are basically no courses that talk about category theory at our university
10:27:57 <shachaf> I hear she sometimes comes to bacat. Maybe we can get her to talk about it.
10:27:57 -!- mig22 has joined.
10:28:34 <shachaf> Well, the thing I was "really" trying to understand was the whole topological systems/Chu spaces bit. But it seems so categorical.
10:30:27 -!- Jafet has joined.
10:36:20 <shachaf> When I was asking whether you could express the space/system/whatever as some sort of C×D^op, I was focusing too much on (A,X) and not enough on p.
10:37:08 <shachaf> But p is the important thing here anyway.
10:37:41 <shachaf> So that's why I wanted to say something like p : A^op×X -> K
10:38:37 <shachaf> But that doesn't make sense as-is and I don't know what sort of thing p would be or what sort of thing ^op would be such that it causes the arrows to be reversed.
10:38:59 <shachaf> Anyway, I'm going to sleep.
10:50:08 <oklopol> and yeah i too have no idea what anything should be, is, will be, or squirrels about.
11:06:05 <zzo38> What sort of games could be made out of category theory?
11:09:58 <zzo38> Or other various mathematical systems?
11:10:37 <zzo38> I have managed to make some out of sequent calculus.
11:17:30 -!- zzo38 has quit (Quit: zzo38).
11:35:42 -!- ais523 has joined.
11:41:16 -!- yorick has joined.
11:45:03 -!- Taneb has joined.
11:56:03 -!- Taneb has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
11:57:34 -!- asie has joined.
11:57:39 -!- Taneb has joined.
12:04:34 -!- mig22 has quit (Quit: mig22).
12:04:35 -!- auzboz has joined.
12:08:59 -!- auzboz has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds).
12:44:26 <ais523> oh wow, someone created a substitute-all-the-symbols language that /isn't/ based on brainfuck?
12:44:36 <ais523> that doesn't make it any better as a language, but at least it's more original than usual :)
12:44:49 * ais523 wonders what the Phantom Hoover verdict on that sort of language is
12:45:20 <asie> i'm learning Io
12:56:11 -!- impomatic has joined.
12:59:15 -!- KingOfKarlsruhe has joined.
13:05:23 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
13:37:18 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
13:38:41 -!- asie has joined.
13:52:20 <quintopia> ais523: it's not the first time. RAGE!!! is a syntax replacement for python
13:52:46 -!- MindlessDrone has quit (Quit: MindlessDrone).
13:53:16 <ais523> so it currently seems to be BF-or-(non-eso)-language, right?
13:53:40 <quintopia> i can't think of one that doesn't fit one of those two, no
13:56:50 -!- mig22 has joined.
13:59:20 <quintopia> ais523: i have a challenge for you. come up with an algorithm that clears cells from an infinite BF tape based on a (cautious not-likely-to-make-type1-errors) analysis of the portion of the program that has left to be run
13:59:47 <ais523> quintopia: I'm not 100% sure what you mean by that
13:59:50 <quintopia> basically "it looks like this cell will never be read or written again, so delete it"
13:59:54 <ais523> is this about BF Joust or regular BF?
14:00:28 <ais523> so it's an attempt to throw away memory that will never be touched again?
14:00:39 <ais523> I just added a command for that in Shove
14:00:47 <ais523> which is a bit of a cop-out
14:00:55 -!- oerjan has joined.
14:07:31 -!- S1 has joined.
14:11:10 -!- mig22 has quit (Quit: mig22).
14:19:48 -!- S1 has left.
14:25:04 -!- impomatic has quit (Quit: impomatic).
14:33:58 <oerjan> @tell fiora <Fiora> is that possible without arbitrarily small distances between objects? <-- i am assuming no, since that's the only way i can see you getting infinite kinetic energy from potential...
15:11:57 <FreeFull> A black hole should be able to give you infinite kinetic energy, right?
15:13:42 -!- MindlessDrone has joined.
15:14:29 <olsner> FreeFull: by accelerating you to infinite velocities?
15:14:55 <FreeFull> Yeah. There might be problems with regards to time though
15:15:35 <FreeFull> With regards of an external observer, you never even cross the event horizon
15:17:51 <oerjan> FreeFull: this was about newtonian mechanics, which doesn't have black holes.
15:18:49 <FreeFull> Newtonian mechanics has an infinite speed of light, right?
15:19:29 <oerjan> it might, in any case other objects don't have a speed limit.
15:20:52 <FreeFull> In Newtonian mechanics, you need either infinite velocity or mass
15:21:27 <FreeFull> Which probably does mean accelerating towards a singularity
15:22:08 <oerjan> the previous discussion was about how you _can_ get infinite speed in newtonian mechanics, even without starting with it.
15:22:18 <oerjan> for point masses, anyway.
15:29:06 <oerjan> Phantom_Hoover: just plain gravitation, no other forces.
15:30:25 <oerjan> as i was implying to Fiora, it's probably borrowing potential energy from two of the masses getting infinitely close/colliding.
15:33:18 <Phantom_Hoover> well, two point masses falling towards each other will go infinitely fast won't they
15:34:10 <oerjan> think so. although the actual example has a point mass going infinitely fast towards infinity.
15:45:39 -!- oerjan has quit (Quit: Later).
16:07:29 <Bike> Phantom_Hoover: golddfish breeding is kind of messed up sometimes.
16:08:19 <Phantom_Hoover> it seems to consist mostly of "how much can we fuck up a goldfish and still be able to breed it"
16:14:56 -!- lambdabot has joined.
16:18:12 <Taneb> Well, that was odd
16:18:24 <Taneb> Someone hid the carpet from my flat's hallway
16:22:13 <Taneb> Then, when everyone was standing around the bare underlay, he said "We need to cover it up. Maybe we can cover it up with this?", holding the carpet
16:53:53 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
16:57:49 -!- conehead has joined.
17:09:27 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
17:25:45 -!- sebbu has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds).
17:36:50 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds).
17:46:33 -!- sebbu has joined.
17:49:04 <fizzie> Today's innovation: In many (Windows) games, I can keep an SSH client open on a second monitor, while the game itself is fullscreen on the first -- but typically there's no way of interacting with the SSH client without alt-tabbing out of the game. However! I can "screen -x" the same screen window that's visible in the SSH client from a mobile device, and then connect a small Bluetooth ...
17:49:10 <fizzie> ... keyboard to that mobile device. And now I have a separate keyboard for blathering in IRC or whatever. So fancy.
17:51:17 <Taneb> Is there a way to have two different keyboards on the same device interacting with different windows
17:51:36 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined.
17:51:47 <fizzie> You could certainly hack something up for that.
17:52:10 <fizzie> Write something that listens for /dev/input/eventX of the other keyboard, convince X not to listen to it, and have that program synthesize key events.
17:52:11 -!- Sgeo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
17:52:22 <fizzie> I don't know of any out-of-the-box solutions, though.
17:52:38 <fizzie> There's MPX if you want different mice to have their own independent pointers.
17:53:27 -!- Sgeo has joined.
17:53:39 <fizzie> (At least I think it was called MPX.)
17:54:25 -!- Sgeo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
17:55:42 -!- Sgeo has joined.
17:58:24 <Gregor> pavucontrol (pulse audio volume control) turns volumes UP when you scroll-wheel DOWN and DOWN when you scroll-wheel UP.
17:58:35 <Gregor> Software written by people who have never used software is the best kind of software.
17:58:52 <quintopia> ais523: the reason i want that problem solved is because SELECT. has no way of returning sufficiently modified cells to their original state without clobbering another cell, which means SELECT. programs are memory hogs by necessity (you have to use a new cell for every new number you want). so it would be nice if my interpreter could clean up unusable cells automatically
17:59:18 <ais523> quintopia: yeah, it's clearly an unsolvable problem in general, but it may be solvable in useful special cases
18:11:13 <Taneb> I HAVE BROKEN MY OATH
18:12:30 <Taneb> I promised I'd try to drink less caffeinated soft drinks
18:12:31 -!- prooftechnique has joined.
18:12:37 <Taneb> After an incident a couple of weeks ago
18:12:52 <Sgeo> There is a CAOS command:
18:12:53 <ais523> Taneb: I decided to give them up for a bit several years ago
18:12:57 <ais523> like, umm, trying to work it out
18:13:02 <ais523> and haven't drunk them since
18:13:28 <ais523> giving up vehicles only lasted a month, though, but then that wasn't meant to be permanent
18:13:46 <ais523> still, it's interesting to learn how rarely they're needed
18:13:59 <ais523> atm I only use them if I'm in a hurry or it's raining really badly or I need to go a long distance
18:14:28 <ais523> actually when I give things up, it's never really meant to be permanent, sometimes it just turns out that way
18:14:30 <Taneb> Right now I actually don't need vehicles, the furthest I need to be is about half an hour's walk from here
18:14:47 <ais523> for me, s/half an hour/one hour ten minutes/
18:14:53 <ais523> much the same situation
18:15:15 <Taneb> But that's only in term time and not-term time. The edges I need to travel, I guess
18:15:58 <ais523> that's close to the reason I was travelling, too; I don't need to move house between termtime and holiday, but I'm sometimes needed to help other people travel
18:16:02 <ais523> coppro: that used to be the case for me, too
18:16:13 <ais523> but my bus pass ran out and I needed exercise and the commute seemed like a good time
18:16:32 <ais523> the nice thing about using walking as exercise is that nothing forces the start point and destination to be the same
18:16:38 <coppro> I have a student bus pass so it costs me nothing
18:16:43 <Taneb> Can you guys give any tips for finding flatmates
18:16:50 <ais523> yeah, I used to have a student bus pass, but I'm not eligible for it any more
18:16:57 <Taneb> I'm starting to think that I need to start to think about that
18:16:59 <ais523> Taneb: no, I can't, or at least my advice would probably be really bad
18:17:23 <Taneb> ais523, how about some cautionary tales?
18:17:35 <ais523> I've never had a flatmate
18:17:37 <coppro> step one, find a mate. step two, find a flat. step three, mate the flat and the mate
18:17:53 <ais523> you could probably get some cautionary tales from oerjan, though
18:17:53 <Sgeo> I'd paste a video I took yeserday, but when I made it, I was incompetent with the recording tool I used
18:18:14 <Sgeo> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpufk1bed9M
18:18:19 <coppro> Taneb: be careful if you room with a good friend; it can deteriorate a friendship quick if you don't get along as roommates
18:18:24 <ais523> based on comments he made in #esoteric, he used to be with some if he disliked
18:18:30 <ais523> coppro: that sounds like good advice
18:19:03 <Taneb> coppro, I think that if that happened I'd blame myself and then be really sad
18:19:34 <coppro> if you can be choosy, ask about things like sleeping habits
18:20:00 <coppro> if you're social people, being on the same sleep schedule is good; if you're not, you may prefer being on different ones
18:20:26 <ais523> my sleep schedule is not actually random, but I'm not convinced it compresses well
18:21:01 <coppro> also figure out if you want to share food/dishes
18:21:26 <coppro> some people take the approach that each roommate brings their own and there is no sharing, others handle it communally. if you're doing communal, make sure to sort out payment
18:22:09 <coppro> cleaning is another big source of friction; work out your mutual expectations
18:22:18 <coppro> some people can't stand to live with things not clean, and others can't be bothered to clean
18:22:27 <coppro> unsurprisingly, these two types of people don't go well together
18:24:08 <Taneb> Thanks for the advice, coppro
18:24:17 <Taneb> And the caffeine and sugar are going to my head and I feel woozy
18:25:31 <coppro> (depending on the layout and personal preferences, significant others may also be an issue)
18:28:49 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
18:29:50 -!- Lymia has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds).
18:35:59 -!- asie has joined.
18:55:53 -!- ais523 has changed nick to ais523\unfoog.
19:00:36 -!- zzo38 has joined.
19:01:19 -!- S1 has joined.
19:01:25 -!- S1 has left.
19:01:40 -!- S1 has joined.
19:11:08 -!- S1 has left.
19:15:48 -!- doesthiswork has joined.
19:30:47 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
19:31:04 -!- asie has joined.
19:48:32 <shachaf> ski: did you see the longversation about chu spaces in here yesterday
19:51:47 -!- Guest72395 has joined.
19:53:13 -!- conehead has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.).
19:54:03 <mroman_> How's everyone's hardware programming language going?
19:54:19 <zzo38> What hardware programming language?
19:56:58 <mroman_> I assumed everybode was working on one .
19:57:08 <mroman_> but really I just forgot how it was how was doing that
19:57:59 <mroman_> I'm apparentely a little bit legasthenic
19:58:01 <zzo38> Well, I am one of the people who was designing a hardware programming language, and wanted some comments about it
20:00:05 -!- conehead has joined.
20:02:58 <zzo38> I didn't add a lot recently since I didn't know what else needs to be change; one thing would be analog stuff, CMOS stuff, and various other things.
20:06:03 <zzo38> I think the macros are OK now though; do you think of anything missing or redundant or something with the macro system I have defined for this purpose?
20:20:10 -!- Frooxius has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
20:22:52 -!- conehead has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.).
20:24:38 -!- Guest72395 has quit (Quit: Leaving).
20:26:30 -!- Frooxius has joined.
20:30:47 <Phantom_Hoover> you know i'm still waiting for jsvine to write that article
20:34:18 <zzo38> Yes, I didn't know they haven't done so yet?
20:35:03 -!- Sprocklem has joined.
20:43:35 -!- nisstyre has joined.
20:45:33 <mroman_> it has come to the point where I'm seriously designing esoteric processing units
20:50:06 <zzo38> mroman_: Can you describe it please?
20:52:57 -!- sebbu has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds).
20:57:58 -!- MindlessDrone has quit (Quit: MindlessDrone).
20:58:36 <mroman_> zzo38: I'm designig weird cpus :)
20:59:07 -!- Sprocklem has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds).
20:59:10 <Bike> have you ever designed a blitter
21:05:53 -!- Sprocklem has joined.
21:11:02 <mroman_> zzo38: http://codepad.org/43llKpDB
21:11:08 <Bike> aw, but they're cool.
21:11:33 <Bike> well, yeah. basically a coprocessor that can do memory movs according to a mask.
21:12:39 <mroman_> that SBA could actually be moved out of the loop to make it run faster
21:14:29 <mroman_> zzo38: I'm designing something with integrated Support for graphics stuff and stuff
21:14:34 <mroman_> then I'll write some crappy game for it
21:14:41 <mroman_> and then I consider the project done :)
21:18:59 <mroman_> DST and SRC set the destination and source
21:19:03 -!- Sprocklem has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
21:19:07 <mroman_> because they arent encoded in instructions itself
21:19:20 <mroman_> but must ruther be set by instructions
21:19:45 <doesthiswork> Programming is a meritocracy because it’s an empirical activity. That’s why we don’t have programming fads or fashions.
21:20:02 <Bike> 1/10 not even mad
21:21:56 -!- conehead has joined.
21:22:36 <Taneb> doesthiswork, by wonderful do you mean humorously completely wrong?
21:23:10 <Bike> it's not a real opinion.
21:24:51 <doesthiswork> the consequence is so hilariously wrong that it disproves the antecedent.
21:26:25 -!- nooodl has quit (Read error: Operation timed out).
21:26:25 <Bike> "It's about time Stephen Wolfram got credit for inventing Lisp." good blog here
21:26:47 <olsner> huh, he hasn't taken credit for that yet?
21:27:23 <prooftechnique> Wolfram Language will be the last programming language we ever need™
21:35:36 -!- Sprocklem has joined.
21:44:32 <Bike> is it called "Wolfram"
21:45:23 <olsner> doesthiswork: copywritten? :(
21:46:25 <olsner> or did you mean that the copy writer added the trademark sign
21:47:05 <zzo38> mroman_: OK, that is you have some idea
21:48:01 <doesthiswork> how are we supposed to make jokes if real life beats us to them
21:49:35 -!- Sprocklem has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds).
21:50:26 -!- impomatic has joined.
21:54:54 <mroman_> One always needs an idea before doing anything.
21:55:07 <zzo38> mroman_: What game did you intend to write?
21:55:12 <mroman_> but I'm also designing a CPU for my university ;)
21:55:30 <zzo38> What CPU do you design for your university?
21:55:38 <mroman_> zzo38: I was thinking of Pong.
21:56:05 <mroman_> zzo38: It's actually a whole "computer system"
21:56:23 <mroman_> It's supposed to be a simplified "real computer"
21:56:36 <mroman_> for demonstration purposes.
21:56:55 <mroman_> It has a full cache and MMU emulation
21:57:25 <zzo38> What I wanted is a CPU with explicit caching/pipelining rather than being implicit.
21:57:47 <zzo38> I am not sure exactly how, but I think it would be a good idea.
21:58:01 <mroman_> If have to explictly cache data?
21:58:39 <zzo38> Yes, that would be one thing, I suppose.
21:58:54 <mroman_> Or due you just treat the cache as memory
21:59:06 <mroman_> but you have instructions to write from the cache to memory?
21:59:29 <mroman_> which would be roughly the same as having an internal RAM and external RAM
21:59:40 -!- prooftechnique has quit.
21:59:40 <mroman_> like some microcontrollers have
21:59:50 <zzo38> I suppose you would have instructions to transfer between the cache and the external memory, and to transfer between the cache and registers.
22:00:23 <zzo38> Another idea I had is some instruction to swap between cache and microcode RAM.
22:00:55 <mroman_> as it is harvard architecture
22:01:35 -!- asie has quit (Quit: I'll probably come back in either 20 minutes or 8 hours.).
22:02:15 <mroman_> I don't really see why you'd want explicit caching
22:02:49 <mroman_> of course, for some microcontrollers it makes sense to keep often accessed data in the internal ram and not the external ram
22:02:51 <zzo38> I would want explicit caching and pipelining so that it can all be software-controlled with predictable instruction timings, as well as user-defined microcodes.
22:03:26 <mroman_> which means you explicitly programm "caching"
22:03:43 <mroman_> Hard-Realtime Constraints?
22:04:19 <mroman_> That I accept as an argument :)
22:04:42 <mroman_> I'm not well informed about real-time CPUs
22:04:58 <mroman_> if there are any specifically designed for that
22:05:14 <mroman_> you could argue that old CPUs with predictable cycles per instructions are more or less real-time-safe
22:05:16 <zzo38> It may also simplify the implementation of the CPU somewhat, depending on how it is done, and allows software to figure out the best way to cache data for the application rather than the hardware to guess.
22:05:32 <zzo38> mroman_: Yes, it is one of the things I prefer about the older CPU designs.
22:05:57 <mroman_> If you have the assembler code you can make worst case timing analysis on the assembler code
22:06:07 <mroman_> it get's a little bit trickier with interrupt latency
22:06:14 <zzo38> And make it slow on purpose too if you want to.
22:22:51 -!- carado has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
22:29:15 -!- lambdabot has quit (Quit: requested).
22:31:39 -!- yiyus has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
22:33:11 -!- lambdabot has joined.
22:45:45 -!- Sprocklem has joined.
22:50:00 -!- sebbu has joined.
22:50:39 -!- sebbu has quit (Changing host).
22:50:39 -!- sebbu has joined.
22:57:12 -!- lambdabot has quit (Quit: requested).
22:57:36 <int-e> gah, tab completion is evil. I should stop using it.
22:57:53 <zzo38> int-e: Is it? Not if you are careful?
22:58:17 <int-e> well, lamb<tab> completed to lambdabot rather than the intended lambdacat ...
22:58:36 <zzo38> Do you have a file named lambdacat in your computer?
22:58:39 <int-e> maybe I should pick a different name for my test bot :)
22:59:44 <Bike> elliott used to use mubot
23:00:36 <zzo38> What program are you using with tab-completion anyways? Different programs sometimes implement it a bit differently, such as Windows difference from Linux tab completion.
23:01:14 -!- lambdabot has joined.
23:01:28 <Taneb> Bike, clearly the next one is nubot
23:02:32 -!- ais523\unfoog has quit.
23:08:14 -!- JesseH has joined.
23:11:56 <zzo38> I have made up the program which will provide two low-pass filters and one signal selects any fraction in between the two filters; one filter stops while the other one is running, or the effect of the audio on the filter and vice-versa is only partial and the other filter is the other part of the fraction. A triangle wave then is used to control this fraction, and the signal filtered with a fixed fraction is subtracted from it, to make the output.
23:12:05 <zzo38> Is this a known thing too?
23:12:55 -!- ^v has joined.
23:13:21 <FreeFull> Could you provide a sound file?
23:13:32 <zzo38> Yes, I could do so
23:15:42 <zzo38> Yes, just wait a minute
23:24:17 <zzo38> FreeFull: http://zzo38computer.org/csound/music/example1.wav (see example1.csd for the parameters)
23:28:08 <Taneb> What am I a hater of this time?
23:28:22 <FreeFull> zzo38: Do the filters alternate very quickly?
23:28:32 <Taneb> No. Merely a disbeliever
23:29:14 <zzo38> FreeFull: They alternate at the frequency of the triangle wave (the p4, p5, and p6 correspond to the fourth, fifth, and sixth parameters on each line of the <CsScore> block in the input file)
23:29:31 <zzo38> See ../csoundextraopcodes.c to see what "mixlpf" does.
23:52:03 -!- oerjan has joined.
23:53:29 <oerjan> `addquote <Bike> Phantom_Hoover: golddfish breeding is kind of messed up sometimes. <Phantom_Hoover> it seems to consist mostly of "how much can we fuck up a goldfish and still be able to breed it"
23:53:34 <HackEgo> 1133) <Bike> Phantom_Hoover: golddfish breeding is kind of messed up sometimes. <Phantom_Hoover> it seems to consist mostly of "how much can we fuck up a goldfish and still be able to breed it"