00:10:37 -!- drdanmaku has quit. 00:15:27 -!- Bike_ has changed nick to Bike. 00:20:21 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 00:26:03 -!- brrr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 00:43:07 -!- aretecode has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds). 00:46:58 -!- yorick has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 00:58:51 -!- FreeFull has quit (Quit: Lightning storm). 01:00:57 -!- brrr has joined. 01:44:11 -!- madbr has joined. 01:44:15 most numbers are really weird 01:45:20 Name three. 01:47:37 -!- conehead has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep). 01:48:32 Taneb: most numbers are unnameable hth 01:48:51 yes 01:48:55 now i feel like that was the joke :'( 01:51:02 taneb : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specker_sequence 01:53:15 I think 3 is quite a weird number 01:53:19 It's the first odd prime 01:53:41 most numbers are way weirder than that 01:55:07 like, a reasonable number is something like a computable number - you can ask a program to give you the value within a certain precision (like, say, a pi calculator where you ask for N digits) and it runs in a finite amount of time 01:56:11 Yeah 01:56:19 since there are countably infinitely many programs, there are countably many computable numbers. which means that they are infinitely more un-computable numbers (since the real numbers are countably infinite) 01:56:28 But I'd say all numbers are weird 01:57:17 what about numbers in a ring, are those less weird? 01:57:22 what about 1148? i think 1148 is pretty average 01:57:37 works hard, drinks with his mates 01:58:54 madbr, natural numbers in a group, what's a group to a ring, what's a ring to a field? 01:59:03 41*7*4 01:59:04 What's a field to an art historian? 02:01:01 something to encrypt his data and error-correct his CDs? 02:14:57 I try to think of what more questions to add into the "Quiz of Many zzo38's Questions"? I have actually added some already, but it doesn't have enough questions yet. 02:27:36 If you say about numbers, you should say if you mean natural numbers, real numbers, complex numbers, etc 02:28:40 -!- Sorella has quit (Quit: It is tiem!). 02:32:13 The world is a scary place right now :( 02:33:03 most of it is minerals. 02:33:29 it's been worse 02:35:08 at least communism isn't really a thing anymore 02:35:53 taneb: https://twitter.com/Plane_Talking/status/489843455192227840 02:36:23 madbr, I was more referring to the shit going down in Gaza 02:36:41 that's the other one 02:37:03 and the third one is the white house suspect package shutdown thing 02:37:28 Haven't heard that 02:38:14 Summary? 02:39:14 they found something weird on a white house lawn, did usual security things in response 02:39:37 it was probably communists 02:52:03 Ugh, it's suddenly almost 5 am 02:52:06 Bed is a mile away 02:53:03 luckily tomorrow is a week long so you have time to get there 02:54:31 newsham_, I have essentially no commitments until the end of September so I could in theory just stay here 02:54:45 Taneb: um, it's 4 am 02:54:51 3:54 rather 02:55:15 ...yes, that one 02:55:27 WHICH IS ONLY AN HOUR AWAY FROM FIVE AM 02:55:41 Hmm, if I wait an hour I can catch the sunrise 02:56:19 the way the morning broke was quite unusual... 03:01:45 That feels like the first half of a quote 03:05:17 hmm.. odd.. android apps will be able to run in chromeos soon 03:06:17 I now have eighteen questions in this quiz file. See if you can answer them or at least to guess. 03:06:54 zzo38: I guess "Yes" on all of them. 03:07:05 How did I do? 03:07:14 shachaf: Sorry, you got all of the questions wrong. 03:07:50 whoa, whoa, whoa, we were supposed to get them right too? 03:08:10 You should try to read the questions at first. And then, yes, to try to get them right too. 03:08:25 How can I read the questions? 03:08:31 I don't want to use gopher. 03:10:21 Then wait a minute 03:17:16 http://sprunge.us/TeXX 03:17:22 There are the questions! 03:17:43 Oh no, I've reached morning twilight 03:17:58 And I'm still sat here in a university computer lab doing a whole lot of nothing 03:21:48 shachaf: Do you like these kind of questions? "Yes" isn't even one of the choices!!! 03:22:02 ("No" also isn't even one of the choices!!!) 03:22:08 zzo38: Can I use a reference to answer them? 03:22:35 shachaf: That is kind of like cheating, so try first to do it without a reference. 03:22:55 Too late, I already looked up the answer to one of the questions. 03:23:03 But let me simulate a version of myself that didn't look it up. 03:23:08 And then revise it with a reference afterward if you prefer, but I would like to see your first guesses too. 03:23:34 What, I can't even refer to earlier questions in the same quiz? 03:24:16 The computer is supposed to ask you one at a time, but since it is like this, you can print out and refer to the same quiz if you want to, even though it isn't designed that way at first. 03:25:27 If you want, send me your answers in the private; I can tell you how many is correct. Make it public too if you want to, but perhaps you shouldn't in case other people want to try it independently instead. 03:27:01 But I would like to see your initial decisions and opinions too! 03:29:44 Do you like this? 03:30:02 Mostly "I don't know". 03:30:43 For the questions that you don't know, try to make a good guess, I suppose. 03:32:11 please add "How do you make a slow horse fast?" 03:32:15 * Taneb --> watching the sunrise 03:32:19 i'd like to see the options for that question 03:32:48 Well, I don't know! 03:33:23 try to make a good guess 03:33:43 OK 03:34:02 I think it is, if they won't eat then it is fasting 03:34:50 What are your answers in this quiz so far though? 03:45:28 This campus seems to have been designed specifically to prevent people watching the sunlight 03:45:31 *sunrise 03:53:38 If I have a Commodore 64 program which consists of 256 bytes to load starting at $500 and the rest to load starting at $D00, how to convert that into a disk image? 03:54:28 The whole concept of "read a different member of a union than the one that was last written to" is only (barely) legal due to a footnote, and that in a late (C99?) standard. And even with the footnote, some people argue against it from the perspective of the strict-aliasing rules. 03:54:48 fizzie, The issue is that it can be very useful, and I don't really know a good alternative in C 03:54:55 C++ has reinterpret_cast of course 03:54:59 Vorpal: I think the GNU C compiler documentation says that it is specifically allowed. 03:55:01 But C? Not so much 03:55:38 zzo38, oh yes, GCC allows it. So does Clang. But from a standard perspective it is definitely a murky area 03:56:13 bbl 03:58:35 Gregor: hbd 04:02:53 -!- Lorenzo64 has joined. 04:03:13 Vorpal: memcpy through char* is allowed, right? 04:04:38 having to call out to the library just to look at some bytes in a new light seems like kind of a bummer 04:04:41 T x = ...; U y; char c[sizeof x]; memcpy(c, (char *) &x, sizeof x); memcpy((char *) &y, c, sizeof x); or something at least 04:04:48 Bike: well, you can implement memcpy yourself 04:04:58 I suppose memcpy((char *) &y, (char *) &x, sizeof x) should be okay too 04:05:29 for (int i = 0; i < sizeof x; i++) ((char *)&y)[i] = ((char *)&x)[i]; if you want to avoid memcpy I guess 04:05:37 but why 04:05:57 and that works for whatever types x and y are? 04:06:58 well, i don't care really, i shouldn't talk about these things so far outside my future experience 04:12:02 you're allowed to view any object through (char *) 04:12:19 otherwise how would you write memcpy? 04:12:27 it takes two pointers to anything (void *) and copies 04:12:36 it does this by casting the pointers to (char *) internally 04:12:42 so that it can copy the objects byte-by-byte, whatever they are 04:37:53 <^v> VERSION 04:37:53 VERSION SimpleIRC v0.3 04:37:57 <^v> plsno 04:38:03 <^v> +C this channel or i kill everyone 04:38:20 <^v> so many irssi users :o 04:38:38 ^v: stop it 04:38:49 <^v> shachaf, ;-; sowee 04:40:13 -!- Shubshub has joined. 04:40:16 Oh hey 04:40:44 <^v> Shubshub, i can read your mind 04:40:48 <^v> you are using..... 04:40:50 <^v> IceChat! 04:40:53 No shit 04:40:58 My Ident does say that 04:41:24 Yes it is in the username too 04:41:31 -!- Shubshub has quit (Client Quit). 04:41:44 <^v> o/ 04:41:44 <^v> bai 04:42:02 <^v> zzo38, wtf? 04:42:03 <^v> * Ping reply from zzo38: 1405608507.670 second(s) 04:43:06 ^v: what are you doing here 04:43:29 <^v> shachaf, typing 04:44:00 -!- shachaf has left. 04:44:58 Can you type fast? 04:46:40 <^v> zzo38, idk 04:46:52 <^v> define fast because i type faster than everyone i know 04:47:33 How fast is that? 04:57:00 take one of those typing speed tests 04:57:03 get your wpm 05:06:01 Vorpal: memcpy through char* is allowed, right? <-- Hm true 05:06:52 -!- shachaf has joined. 05:06:58 elliott, I guess it could be less optimised than a simple union conversion though. GCC probably would optimise it, but still, for some implementations it might involve a function call 05:07:06 Taneb: are you the person that i talked to about categories in here a while ago or was it someone else 05:07:17 Are you allowed to read object as a different type if both types are volatile? 05:07:19 oh man the strict aliasing stuff 05:07:20 It may have been me 05:07:24 In fact, I think it was 05:07:42 volatile I'm not sure guarantees much safety at all 05:07:57 zzo38, I don't think volatile changes that stuff at all 05:08:10 it's almost a comment by now 05:08:32 Taneb: i don't remember what you do and don't know so it's hard to figure out what to recommend 05:08:36 how does gcc deal with pointer aliasing anyways? 05:08:41 madbr, well, I used it for stuff aliasing hardware registers when programming on bare metal 05:08:53 yeah that's the one place I've seen it 05:09:16 shachaf, I'm between 1st and 2nd year at university doing maths and computer science 05:09:18 though doing that probably takes a memory barrier on x86 by now 05:09:23 madbr, I have also seen it in multi-threading context, for use with stuff like compare and exchange and so on 05:09:40 Vorpal : for multithreading you shouldn't use volatile I think 05:09:46 you should use mutexes 05:09:59 madbr, I said for compare and exchange, locked such 05:10:03 atomic operations 05:10:10 Anyway I ought to get some sleep just in case anyone comes round. 05:10:39 madbr, you know LOCK CMPXCHG16 and similar instructions on x86 05:10:48 msvc lets you interpret volatile in multiple ways o_O 05:10:52 ouch 05:11:29 Taneb: that doesn't help much 05:11:44 "The volatile keyword in C++11 ISO Standard code is to be used only for hardware access; do not use it for inter-thread communication." 05:11:56 shachaf, I don't get much in the way of options until third year 05:12:15 I'm pretty sure there's no guarantee that volatile compares into a cmpxchg 05:12:21 I have a vague interest in functional programming, mostly because of this channel 05:12:36 tbh applications where mutex isn't the solution are rare 05:12:40 madbr, hm. The location I saw it used for threading stuff was in legacy Windows C++ code iirc 05:12:40 And I like group theory? 05:12:52 Vorpal : legacy? 05:13:03 as in pre ~1996? 05:13:05 madbr, as in years and years of old stuff in the massive code base 05:13:07 no 05:13:12 more like 2000 05:13:18 hm 05:13:20 I think volatile read/writes should be used to mean that volatile reads/writes can be neither reordered nor optimized out, so it is then considered similar to like an external subroutine call. 05:13:41 And I'm also pretty terrible at, like, life and stuff 05:13:41 madbr, Anyway I used non-mutex syncronization, but then I work on real-time control systems 05:13:58 yeah exactly 05:14:07 Sometimes just notifying a thread about something using a mutex is too much overhead 05:14:09 I have never used multithreading except for audio with SDL 05:14:26 And I also am not here any more 05:14:38 In the case of SDL there are function calls for the case of locking and unlocking the audio thread. 05:14:42 I do audio code so it's about the same thing, multithreading for audio 05:15:35 some people avoid all memory allocation and mutexes when dealing with audio threads 05:15:46 because they have to work at low latencies 05:16:56 madbr, oh yeah memory allocations can be quite annoying, at least I'm not working on a low-power real-time system. We are basically using Pentiums. 05:17:05 ARMs? 05:17:11 Not really 05:17:15 Why should we need to? 05:17:15 Power is not an issue when you have a 1000 V three-phase AC connection driving the equipment anyway 05:17:29 (Mining equipment) 05:17:56 was just assuming ARM since they're the popular embedded arch of the day 05:18:11 madbr, I believe there are some plans on using ARM in the future though 05:18:53 But for now it is all x86, about 1 GHz, 512 MB RAM. Really rugged industrial PCs basically. With CAN and all that jazz. 05:19:08 interesting 05:20:19 audio is like all floating point and sorta number-crunchy, but also real-time and kinda video game-like 05:20:21 madbr, Someone told me that the only way to get more rugged is to get hardware intended for space. I mean we have to deal with some really bad environments... Humid +50 C with salt water running over the stuff. As well as -50 C in Siberia above ground 05:21:10 what's the latency that it has to respond at? 05:22:00 We have IO read/write cycles times of 40 ms to 80 ms depending on the product. That is what drives most stuff in the system. 05:22:11 pro audio often uses 96 sample buffers. at 44.1khz, that's 2ms 05:22:23 Yeah, you don't have to do quite so many things though 05:22:30 I don't like ARM though 05:22:37 zzo38: why not? 05:23:00 I think past the first version is too complicated, like x86 also is past the first few versions 05:23:06 madbr, we have to (depending on product again) calculate how to move an articulated robot arm, drive around obstacles and so on. 05:23:16 zzo38 : that's like every cpu 05:24:07 zzo38 : once you add an MMU and an FPU (ie make it actually useful) they all turn into sprawling architectures 05:24:19 Heh true 05:25:21 not to mention a 64bit version 05:25:36 or a simd instruction set or two 05:25:42 madbr, also: fuck hydraulics. It is just annoying 05:26:06 can you kill someone if your code explodes? 05:26:18 -!- MoALTz__ has quit (Quit: Leaving). 05:27:01 madbr, well, we do have heartbeats that will close down all IO if it is skipped and so on. But yes in theory a bug could have some really bad consequences. 05:27:13 It can be done without MMU and FPU 05:27:42 zzo38 : without an MMU you're ok if you're doing, like, a nintendo DS or something like that 05:28:05 madbr, There are of course physical emergency stop circuits and so on that won't fail, but still, there could be some danger yes. 05:28:13 once you have multitasking, that is over and you need an MMU 05:28:48 Vorpal : still kinda cool 05:29:10 like everything that isn't java enterprise servers and the like :o 05:29:14 madbr, I think there is probably more safety features than on a car. I never seen an emergency stop button for all the computers in a car! 05:29:39 madbr, Well it is C++. And boost to some extent. Fuck boost. 05:29:45 oh man 05:29:56 yeah vaguely heard about boost 05:30:10 And Qt for GUI. 05:30:23 "oh shit once you add once small piece you have the whole shebang and it compiles super slow" 05:30:52 madbr, it is the link times that kill it. We are switching platforms to Linux currently. The old RTOS only supported static linking. 05:30:58 Vorpal : does QT do the job ok? 05:31:08 madbr, eh, it is ok 05:31:31 the one I've used was java's swing and it's kindof horrible 05:31:42 like, it's superficially okay 05:32:06 and I'm sure for enterprise software that nobody cares if it works sorta wonky, it's fine 05:32:30 but like none of its gui components are the real thing and they all work subtly wrong 05:33:17 You can make task switching in other ways too which are done by software; depending on the system it might be workable, although this is only for saving tasks rather than having multiples at once in an easy way, unless you run them on separate CPUs. 05:33:39 madbr, anyway compile and link times on Linux are so much better than the old RTOS. We had Windows CE for some modules, that really unknown RTOS for some other. All built using MSVC 2005. That was slow to compile, even when distributed over the network. 05:33:39 if you're trying to do a tight productivity app it's not going to work out ok if you use swing and will probably end up overriding everything 05:33:39 I think is good idea to have separate processors for separate tasks. 05:34:27 madbr, heh 05:34:39 zzo38 : MMUs give you virtual memory basically 05:34:46 zzo38, what, you mean running one thread per CPU? 05:34:49 That seems insane 05:35:00 and also they generally prevent memory fragmentation 05:35:21 ps aux indicates my system is running 316 processes. And god knows how many thread. 05:35:26 Vorpal: Yes it is what I mean 05:35:29 I would love having 316 cores... 05:35:58 $ ps Haux | wc -l 05:35:58 733 05:35:59 madbr: Yes, but I am meaning you would do it without virtual memory, so you don't use MMU 05:36:05 So 733 threads 05:36:24 and then when you run out of ram, instead of just going slow, everything crashes? 05:36:32 zzo38, that seems stupid. Virtual memory helps isolate processes, limiting the scope of errors 05:36:37 Then your system is too complicated; Windows and Linux system get too complicated. 05:36:44 madbr: Any new programs won't start! 05:36:58 zzo38 : what about allready running programs 05:37:11 malloc will fail and they will explode 05:38:03 Hm, virtual memory does not imply swap though. 05:38:21 Swap requires it yes, at least as commonly implemented 05:39:00 But I think we are mixing up "virtual memory", "swap" and "over committing" here. 05:39:06 it's like, if you're doing a non-multithreading platform 05:39:12 like an embedded ap 05:39:21 or a Gameboy advance 05:39:27 madbr, embedded systems are probably multi-threaded 05:39:45 well, some really low level kind of system probably without an OS 05:39:49 Hm true 05:39:54 then you don't need an MMU 05:40:05 Yeah I guess all the controllers for dish-washers and so on 05:40:29 I would want to do it without OS; just the BIOS is used. 05:40:51 zzo38, BIOS? You are kidding me. An embedded SOC doesn't have a BIOS 05:41:11 yeah I'm not sure BIOSes make that much sense anymore 05:41:16 It is then up to an individual program if it supports other programs it can call in the same memory. 05:41:27 madbr: I think it does and is important. 05:41:33 You don't have anything on a SOC except the instruction set and some special addresses or such that will control the GPIO states 05:41:41 like, it needs to get the system to boot, yes 05:41:46 but past that? 05:41:59 madbr, a SOC doesn't have a BIOS to boot it... 05:42:25 It just has an entry point into the executable NOR flash. And it is probably a Harvard architecture 05:42:26 Vorpal : true but it doesn't have to read the program off some mechanical drive :D 05:42:30 Think AVR or PIC 05:42:35 right 05:42:36 -!- SchrodingersCat has joined. 05:42:51 2 STRSTART 'H' 'E' 'L' 'L' 'O' ' ' 'W' 'O' 'R' 'L' 'D' '!' STREND 1 BEGIN 2 READCHAR OUTVAL 1 DROP END START !1 @ISINPUT WHILE END 05:43:02 madbr, Btw, have I ever mentioned how boring Harvard architectures are? 05:43:11 Esoteric enough for you? 05:43:12 Vorpal : no? 05:43:19 madbr: The BIOS would be used for some hardware access too, and you don't need to use operating system, just BIOS. 05:43:26 madbr, They pretty much prevent self-modifying code 05:43:33 Vorpal : true 05:43:55 Vorpal : but to do a fast cpu you need a separate instruction and data cache 05:44:01 like my pathetic attempt at code? 05:44:07 Vorpal: Yes, although a Restricted Harvard can be useful if you want to be able to convert into other instruction sets; a plain Harvard won't, though, so it isn't so useful. 05:44:38 SchrodingersCat: Can you explain it better then? 05:44:47 not yet 05:44:55 OK 05:45:02 madbr, true, but at least it still supports self-modification to some extent. And loading new code into memory 05:45:06 it's sorta pseudocode at the moment 05:45:15 Vorpal : oh, right 05:45:21 SchrodingersCat, what language is it? 05:45:30 my own 05:45:33 Ah 05:45:47 SchrodingersCat, some sort of stack based language? 05:46:09 Reminds me a bit of Forth 05:46:29 a stack-oriented language that exists only in a few sheets of a small notebook 05:46:53 zzo38 : anyhow, does it have multitasking? 05:47:13 based on RPN 05:47:49 bbl 05:48:33 if it doesn't have multitasking, you can live without an MMU. if it has multitasking... you probably need an MMU or else you will cry 05:49:20 like, windows 3.0 does it without (it runs on a 286 after all) but it's also well known for being a buggy POS 05:49:27 Restricted Harvard = a harvard architecture with the following restrictions: * You cannot set the program counter to arbitrary data; it has to be read from "program address registers" which are read from "program address memory" (or immediate operands) and no arithmetic is possible. * You cannot read/write program data; only execution is possible. Loading is only possible atomically to program code. 05:50:37 madbr: It doesn't have multitasking, although it has task saving (which is slower though). The software will have to implement its own multitasking if it requires it. 05:51:19 task saving? 05:51:42 as for FPUs 05:51:48 you can live without an FPU 05:51:55 after all ARM did it for years 05:52:28 they are just incredibly nice to have 05:54:29 take an architecture, add an MMU and a FPU 05:54:46 what's the nicest you can make such an architecture? 05:55:13 something like a MIPS 05:55:32 that's not very much less complex than ARM 05:56:16 For task saving, well, it mean the BIOS can save the entire state of the system to disk, and then it is turned off, the file is copied to a new hard disk, placed in a new system with the same or more RAM/speed/etc, ensure its permissions are set to the same level as before, attach all the same peripherals and turn it on and load the system image and the program will just continue where it left off as if nothing unusual has ever happened. 05:56:52 plus, once you start going out of order, all the architectures sorta become the same 05:57:34 I don't like out of order execution; it is a terrible idea. The compiler should make up the order, or the programmer if in assembly language. 05:58:24 I would have a supervisor and user mode; the user mode means that the top half of the address space is a mirror of the lower one instead of the actual top area, therefore the BIOS is protected in such a way. Any hardware accessible directly by user code is mapped in the low half. 05:59:12 does it really need that if it's not multitasking? 05:59:25 you're only running one program at the time 05:59:32 it's not like you need to protect the OS 06:00:53 out of order execution I'm not sure exactly how much speed difference it makes 06:01:22 but I think it essentially exists because you don't know which memory accesses are going to be fast and fall in ca 06:01:27 che 06:01:41 and which ones are going to miss and end up in slow RAM 06:01:59 Actually it does need to be protected. Therefore newer versions can emulate older versions precisely because the program cannot check. Also, the user with physical access can then program the BIOS to lie about whatever you want. 06:02:09 and all the art of the pentium2 and its zillion descendents is to keep the processor going once you have a cache miss 06:02:17 like hyperthreading 06:02:43 which on paper is a stupid idea 06:02:47 madbr: It is why you should instead make programming the cache explicitly. Such thing also ensures the same timing and everything with newer versions of the system. 06:03:09 and exists solely because if you have 2 threads on once core, you can swap in the other thread once you have a cache miss 06:04:33 Why can't you just use interrupts to time them instead? 06:05:09 like, windows 3.0 does it without (it runs on a 286 after all) but it's also well known for being a buggy POS 06:05:18 Don't forget the classic Mac OS 06:05:43 It was buggy too, and it did multi-tasking without using the MMU 06:05:56 I'm not too familiar with that one 06:06:04 didn't it have like... memory compacting :O 06:06:20 Yes it did 06:06:25 You had handles and what not 06:06:43 Cooperative multi-tasking too 06:07:50 also no 320x200 and no hardware scrolling 06:07:57 good luck making a game :( 06:08:09 madbr, Anyway each program had a contiguous memory block. If they were awkwardly spaced, you could sometimes not start a program even if enough free memory existed 06:08:11 Hm? 06:08:27 My old iBook running classic MacOS used 800x600 for resolution 06:08:46 And had an early ATI GPU 06:09:05 that's much later no? 06:09:06 32 MB RAM (upgraded to a massive 64 MB!) 06:09:17 like, the windows 95 of MACs :D 06:09:20 madbr, that is about 2000. Remember those brightly coloured iMacs and such? 06:09:26 That era 06:09:27 PPC 06:09:31 300 MHz CPU 06:09:33 yes 06:09:49 madbr, this was the brightly coloured iBook 06:10:58 madbr, it still didn't use the MMU that actually existed 06:11:06 :O 06:11:08 crazy 06:11:18 Backwards compatibility 06:11:41 That thing can still run 68k programs through some sort of emulation layer built into the system 06:11:50 That is programs from the Motorola age 06:12:14 but then it can leave that in crazy land and use the mmu for actual ppc programs no? 06:12:26 Well it could, but it doesn't 06:12:27 kindof like how windows 9x handles DOS programs 06:12:30 bbl food 06:24:07 I happen to like the 6502 so I still write programs for it. A lot of people still write programs for 6502, I expect. 06:26:17 6502 doesn't try to do multithreading 06:26:32 except the 65816 on appleIIgs 06:26:40 which is kinda scary tbh :D 06:26:49 it looks like a low resolution version of mac os 06:29:23 I have used a Apple IIgs computer once, although without any GUI functions. 06:32:40 -!- ^v has changed nick to ^0. 06:41:34 bbl, going out of town for a few days 06:41:48 -!- Vorpal has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net). 06:44:51 part 06:44:55 -!- SchrodingersCat has left. 06:48:36 -!- Tritonio has joined. 06:58:27 -!- madbr has quit (Quit: Rouringu de hajikunda!). 07:16:00 -!- MindlessDrone has joined. 07:24:32 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined. 07:27:32 -!- conehead has joined. 07:34:45 -!- vravn has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 07:53:31 -!- brrr has quit (Quit: Cya!). 07:56:59 Is there a musical notation for the 1 to 32 undertone scale? 07:57:44 the Magic 2015 rules update bulletin is out: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/magic-2015-update-bulletin-2014-07-17 07:57:54 it says conspire comes with a rules change too, not just a reminder text change 07:57:58 sorry 07:57:59 s/conspire/convoke 08:02:21 b_jonas: How did Angel of Fury work previously? 08:02:49 If you were the controller but not the owner, and it died, nothing would happen? 08:02:55 shachaf: I believe yes 08:03:21 shachaf: that card is strange, how can a Portal card have such an ability in first place? 08:03:30 A card can't ever go into a graveyard or library of someone other than its owner, right? 08:03:42 shachaf: yes 08:03:49 (hand too) 08:09:15 This game is too complicated. 08:15:01 shachaf: Yes, and the rules are too klugy too and not very mathematically elegant. 08:15:10 zzo38: Yes. 08:15:44 How would you make a game with the same general benefits but with rules that are mathematically elegant? 08:15:51 (Whatever that means.) 08:16:23 I do have several ideas about such a variant of Magic: the Gathering actually. 08:19:05 One thing I would do is to remove the rules about auras that are also creatures being discarded. I would add back mana burn for strategic reasons. Card types would share subtypes, and none of them having special effects by default. The rule where tokens cease to exist out of play would be replaced with one dealing with initial state of objects. Rules for how different card types are played would differ. Many other things too. 08:21:00 That seems awfully specific. 08:22:04 I also don't like the rule where +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters remove each other, so that would also be removed. 08:22:29 Yes, that rule seems like a scow. 08:23:41 Especially with e.g. +0/+1 counters and -0/-1 counters not behaving the same way. 08:23:47 -!- Patashu has joined. 08:24:01 zzo38: that rule with +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters is very practical even if not nice 08:24:25 if there's one rule I'd like to drop, it's the lost all targets spell fizzle rule. 08:24:36 b_jonas: Yes I know, but you should just use two different colors 08:24:59 b_jonas: It's particularly annoying when that rule applies even for a spell that says "up to one target". 08:26:06 and some rules, specifically the land type change rule, could be helped a great deal with reminder text: in particular I think it was a mistake to print Spreading Seas without a reminder text, as they should have known this from previous cards 08:26:39 -!- Patashu_ has joined. 08:26:39 -!- Patashu has quit (Disconnected by services). 08:26:56 notice 9th edition Sea's Claim that has two lines of reminder text for "Enchant land" but nothing about the "is and Island" magic 08:27:13 at least it has a great piece of flavor text 08:30:49 I would instead use the following rules for playing a card from your hand: One rule simply gives all instants flash. One says how any card with a mana cost can be played onto the stack. One rule says how lands can also be played at particular types directly into play without paying their mana cost. Furthermore, when the top object of the stack resolves, it goes into play when it finishes resolving; if it didn't go anywhere, it is discarded. 08:32:28 "gives all instants flash" is like that joke for giving all creatures without first strike the new ability "strike" so they can deal combat damage 08:32:29 -!- conehead has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep). 08:33:49 if a creature with first strike didn't deal combat damage in the first strike combat damage step, it deals damage in the main combat damage step 08:33:56 i found out 08:35:02 wait, maybe that wording isn't precisely true 08:36:18 -!- impomatic_ has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [Firefox 30.0/20140605174243]). 08:36:20 shachaf: no, I think that's only the old rule 08:36:23 haven't they changed that? 08:36:41