← | Results 2501 ... 2750 found in all logged channels for 'f:diana' | →
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: do you mind saying how old are you
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: what I mean is that jwrd offer for a fee the sort of lessons you say you want so you should talk to them about that.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, #trilema & tmsr closed down and very recently at that; people are still what they have always been but time matters too.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: did you get in the end any actual results at all?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: lol, so what happened /how come you got back in exactly now anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: jwrd has a curriculum in place and the materials and everything else; so dunno, if you really are after learning the right thing + quick & productive, that IS currently the best option; if however you mean you are looking for something else on whatever coordinates (dunno - no payment?), then fine, but it's something else.
(ossasepia) diana_coman wonders if esthlos will pop back in too at some point.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: wanting to understand and to be productive sound all reasonable and fine, no problem there; how do those square with the 3 years since 2017?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: well, what's stopping you on doing something productive?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I was just typing to ask if you are in the uk, lo
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: right you are, it's from there indeed.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but seriously, for getting to grips with what you seem to want ie more re keeping your own bitcoins, just talk to jfw and dorion, possibly after they are back at some settled point I guess.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: and why do you want to switch from that to ...programming, anyway/
(ossasepia) diana_coman: huh, that sounds familiar for some reason.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: what do you do otherwise?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: eh, don't worry about the review now, you've got the travel prep to do properly; do that review when you are back home, what.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: well, jfw and dorion give that sort of lessons really; my YH is with a rather different scope as such.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: enthdegree: ok, this weekend then.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: don't be shy and don't get stuck, it's a question not a gun.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: enthdegree: are you around at all?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I know you've been around a bit since at least 2017, haven't you?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: why and how does that interest you?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hello cruciform , what brings you here?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: ok; good luck!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that's just to scratch the surface but from there on, yes; more space, probably your money goes further too because less of it around otherwise etc; anyways, I need to go away now, I'll be back in around 1 hour
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, if you do & want it, that is.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it's not about going "because it's good" but going because "I have more levarage to make it what I want it "
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: sure; the point is that you need however way less resources there to make your life way better, that's the thing
(ossasepia) diana_coman: heh, yeah, I'm not surprised he did.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: tbh I personally would not go to the us but then again, I wouldn't really go to panama-city either, so not of much help there.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: this goes into the a. what are the options
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ie maybe look at what you can make out of it, since you are there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: also, not sure, aren't there a lot others you can bring together?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I guess panama might have a weaker state perhaps
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dunno, you 2 think it through but again *worst* case scenarios and I'd say mid to long term, not short term only.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion, jfw re evaluation - a. what are the real options you can take currently b. what's the worst case scenario in each c. make a decision quickly because time is running out and then go for that decision 100%
(ossasepia) diana_coman: conversely, I suppose - what't the worst case scenario you see if you decide to hop on the next plane now?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: it's probably not by itself, no; the question is if you have more options to make it better for yourself there in such situation; again, kind of really late now but well, can't go back in time either
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: the trouble is more - what are your options in the town if/when a. lock downs/whatever similars b. breakdowns & shortages?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I suppose by this stage you should think also re internet connectivity and basic stuff in there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: since well, there isn't much else you can currently do, as far as I understand
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ie if your problem is the huge town of idiots and so on, just get out of their way
(ossasepia) diana_coman: panama is also not only panama-city perhaps but again - I have no idea there.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: whichever option you go, I doubt it will be "30 days only"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: at any rate, if you don't see any reason to stay there, then at least that part is clear; whether then you still have any other option re destination than going back home is a separate thing.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw, dorion huh, and when I was asking if those wealthy actual investors are really there, you were convinced they were and it's just hard to get to touch their wot at all; re evaluation, given that it's quite late, it's a matter of what options do you really have now so I can't really tell from here
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back tomorrow.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that's how it usually goes with questions in my experience too so yeah, possibly worth finishing first one read and then asking whatever questions are still standing.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: oh, I see; ok, I'll just ask him for a dump and sync with that when everything else is in place, not a problem.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: so what was with that custom reader you said you made/had? I'm confused now.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (because I'd really not "solve" stuff if there's no need for it; there's plenty to solve without adding to it things already solved)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: do I take it that your bot imports everything from 2012 on?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: ah; somehow I recall the raw archive and I'm pretty sure I have it; possibly there was some trouble at import and I never got around to sort it, nor really added it to the todo list.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: thanks for stating it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: from what you say as such, it sounds fine indeed; and sure, what problem you solve is part of what you do, obviously.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: iirc mine is also missing some part in the beginning and I guess it's that one (haven't looked at it in ages and I don't recall now)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: is that apr2012-oct2013 the only part currently missing from your logger's webpage?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: focus always and even start with the things you actually do/did, yes; even if it ends up as the middle in your article/draft, there's no problem and it helps to start with what you did because that's surely what you also know best, obviously.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: assuming you referenced there the what is art (which I don't dispute), I still don't see how you get from there to the personality cult
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I suppose it can be though.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: spyked: I confess I'm quite ignorant regarding dprk's ideology
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cool; laters then.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: I don't quite follow your full reasoning there and atm I need to go so - do you mind if we get back to this around 7pm UTC?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and otoh, if you talk to people from the proper soviets, it's pretty much a matter of timing.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: re soviet/dprk, on one hand the reality in Ro was quite different depending on whether industrial town or not (talk to some from each type of town and you'll notice - if no heavy industry, it was nowhere near as horrible in a day to day sense)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: this is pretty much the old "they whistle after her -> she's a whore!"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: spyked: do you realise that the "personality cult" is not the doing of the person at the centre of it? ie if everyone strived to *immitate* MP, it's *their doing*, not his, wtf.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I am even quite curious so if anyone cares to make a coherent case for #ossasepia being about my narcissism, I'd certainly read it; as already stated, I won't ask even for this but I'd certainly read and comment on it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: spyked: now I wonder if you imagine #trilema and #ossasepia as exercises in narcissism of the two respective owners; is that what you're saying?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: not sure how you link "uniform response" to "rational".
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-19#1022305 - lolz, I missed this but I have to say I disagree on both counts really.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: sure; still too late.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: thank you for the clear answer; and indeed re prototype of gossipd node, I can see it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: so why not *ask*, man? how the fuck am I supposed to guess what you read in it/can't read in it? I meant specifically that I won't ask people for stuff.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-19#1022318 - I can see this being infuriating (working with some guess as to "secret wrecker"); I have no idea though how does it relate to me; does it relate to me?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and what the fuck does stan have to do in this conversation?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: what's a secret wrecker?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-19#1022304 - btw, esp in the light of all my recent re-reading of past-tmsr stuff, this is particularly infuriating in its blindness and informed-by-own-feelings.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ok, but what's your plan with that or you know, why sink time into it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: what's the reason you are doing this deedbot update & roll out anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: no, I don't do implicit like that, aka "it's obvious", so no.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: where exactly did I bellow any demand from you? because the way it reads from here is that you gave in to your own brand of hubris and grand-words above with ex-soviets and all that.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: you know, if I meant to target you with that , I'd have pinged you; no, I mean it way more general as an approach and it rests on my incoming-review (that will still take some time because myeah, loads of work)
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back later.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (for the log, the ritualistic dance in this case goes like this: something is promised; naive person awaits for it; nothing happens; naive person asks about it and promise is reiterated; still nothing happens; on it goes)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so meanwhile consider the requirements slightly relaxed and take advantage of the situation while it lasts.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: re deedbot I suppose I'll have to roll my own too since I'll be damned if after all of it I'll just go about re-doing all the ritualic dances too.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hello enthdegree , what brings you here?
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back tomorrow
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cool, getting to grips with those question-tools!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: jfw is right above; you can still give a very brief background but usually that's a bit to the side ie a sort of short bio for each at the bottom or something
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: iirc from yesterday there was the idea of having a clear statement of the problem you are solving there, so hopefully it fits in your outline above; other than that sure, go ahead and write it so that there's something to look at and talk about; there's not all that much to say just on an outline at that level.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: np; what are you working on this week anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: take the time it takes.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hi dorion, how's the draft coming along?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-18#1022242 - lolz, blame it on cassandra nao? jfw, anyways, roll it now together into the one at the end of this week and just review both; only do it by Friday better and be done with it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: thanks & will do.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that being said, when I get around to do all updates, I'll see.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I still have #trilema feeds in PM; now that the log dump is finished I don't expect it will be any trouble as it is, really
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hi spyked , long time no see
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: ahaha, might be the glasses!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: I am certainly not jfw! lolz; but no, nothing further than I can see - I mean, I already tore apart your ~whole current draft, so I'm done.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the problem statement IS part of the "what we've done", anyway.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: sure,that means start with the problem you are solving, yes; but the actual problem, not a reader's profile
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: sounds like a plan
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyway, getting back to the main point: if you aim to write for martians, you'll write *in martian*, not in usual English except with an intro paragraph "if you are a martian, then this is for you"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: this being said, again, if face to face you found out that for those "investors" you need to tell them what they supposedly know they know etc, do tell them, sure; face to face you can adjust precisely to who is in front of you, after all; (but hm, do think also if it's worth it anyway; still.)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: and as a rule, if your business does not do anything *better* ie by necessity different in at least some way that matters, why are you doing it in the first place, it's more of a fashion then than a business.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: what you want is to talk the *language* of those you want to reach; that's way more fundamental than the usual approach of "and now I'll tell you who you are so you know and continue reading"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I know it flies in the face of ~all "sales training and practice etc" and believe me that I recognize in there the usual pattern, not like I don't know it; but further ask yourself, even if you ignore everything above, just this simple thing - how exactly are you supposed to stand out while ...following the very pattern, you know?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: do realise that anyway, saying "I'm writing for those with 2 heads and 3 brains" does not *do* anything as such.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: you establish who you are writing to for yourself; let the reader establish himself if what you say is of interest for him or not,
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: this being said, nothing stops you I suppose from printing that sort of material and giving it to specific-known-"investors" if you think it's what they need to read in order to move but mhm.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: ahaha, you are clearly feeling better than yesterday :P
(ossasepia) diana_coman: you *have done* things and you are doing things, so why not say what you did and talk of what you are doing ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: why not going directly for a clear, concise and with-examples/projections/all thing? ie why all the telling-of-the-things-you-say-you-know-they-know? in a nutshell, the trouble that I see with your approach there is that it's so standard & geared to exactly the "investors", that if ever an actual investor sees it, he brands you as "security"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: re title, both versions sound a bit long to me, but I prefer the first (or maybe even directly from "protect what ..."); details though.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: just hm, there are some choices you make and I'm not even sure you fully realise you are making them
(ossasepia) diana_coman: nothing wrong with helping them or targeting them, of course
(ossasepia) diana_coman: heh; what dorion says and at the root of that it's the fact that I can just about imagine the sort of investment and decision-making behind it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: yeah, well, I'm sure they do.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: mhm; "investors" as in they got to get some btc and so far keep it, isn't it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion, jfw would you class your clients so far in that category?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and I admit I have quite the trouble imagining one of those reading you *before* he knows who you are, huh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: meant to ask actually - are those high net worth smart etc individuals really in Panama?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (not that it can't still make one)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: and that would have made - even as written in here, no need to fuss over it and polish it for hours - a great blog post too!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahahah, dorion has a point!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cool, /me is out for the day.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you should better look forward to grow jwrd, you know? what fix computing, that takes back seat to the burning grow-or-die, ok?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: cool; there's possibly better ahead; and from the statistics-you-don't-know, there's the good news that whatever may be said statistically of a population /group/anything, that does NOT directly say anything as mandatory about a given individual (ie don't kill yourself over statistical results)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: are you still feeling totally down?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but it's possibly quite a lot for today anywya.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: the outreach sounds good; the "what you've created" needs to remember for the future the part with "don't do your own of everything just so it's always of your own making"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: basically the tmsr experiment makes for a great exhibits-of-fail, poster, huh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and I'll add since I might as well: don't waste the available resources, don't fail to make use of them (as tmsr failed to make use of the MP oracle)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: aim precisely for the opposite
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so: don't do your own of everything, don't fragment resources
(ossasepia) diana_coman: "same stupid " = "every man alone is doing his own" + "resources are fragmented"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: all right.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: that it does, indeed.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw, dorion to summarise: 1. tmsr failed 2. bitcoin has been anyway supported by MP, not by the not-effective-tmsr 3. to the extent that your decision was based on the characteristics of bitcoin, nothing changed there and if you don't want to live with it changing, you'll aim to increase gradually your leverage so you can help it doesn't
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: yeah, it's getting very late indeed; there's way too much confusion you are working in, no wonder you feel overwhelmed, btw.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: learn also from what was available but not used - while the whole thing is not still available, MP kept some door open for non-stupid, there's still his blog, there's still mpex last I looked
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: sure, that's part of why and how it failed; so learn from it and don't do the same stupid *ever, anywhere*
(ossasepia) diana_coman: for the "discouraging" (bwahaha) part, as you said it - MP, not TMSR.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: mirror the thing, done
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: for the cleaned up and ensuring it remains available, it's at any rate something you can most easily do, no?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: it pretty much failed to even materialise really but yes
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: the ensuring it'd remain available did exactly 0; sure, it's available; so what?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anything could be, for all you know rsa will be broken tomorrow; not useful to waste time on that.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: this is not an exercise of imagination "what could be"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: it's not about "what could be", you can't know that anyway; it's about what IS; and at most what *changed* aka what was but now isn't + what wasn't but now is.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you unstated assumption in there is that it's tmsr-as-an-institution that *ensured* the nodes were not centralized; in which case you'll have to answer: HOW did it do that?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: "was working towards" is worth 0; for the same money you can consider that *you* are working towards that, what's there to stop you, there's no difference.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw, dorion do you have clear answers for the above?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the other avenue that you still have to explore anyway is to go directly from the change: so tmsr ended, ok; what does that *change* re bitcoin? as jfw said, there's no more political structure aiming to support and promote btc; this begs the question - how much did this tmsr-as-political-structure *actually* supported and promoted btc in the first place?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so let's say "perhaps it does"; why/how ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: you can assume the worst and look at that
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the second part - does the end of tmsr make bitcoin worse money than precious metals?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the first part still stands clearly, if not even stronger, you said, so nothing to change from there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so that seems to be the basis for your decision process, that's what you go with.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the clearest was this
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: let's try to reconstruct this so perhaps it makes more sense as an example than as a failed attempt to come up with a previously implicit decision process
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: death comes from weak/problem points as always; you probably know enough of both technicals and history to identify plenty; you look at what/how/who handled them and then you can at least say whether you have any evidence re viability of btc and what it may be linked to
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: that's way too late to claim a "change of decision", you see? at that point it's not that *you* changed your decision, there's no question left to require a decision anymore
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion, jfw did you have other, more specific questions beyond this overall "does it still make sense to have anything to do with btc"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyways, it seems what got uncovered today is more the fact that you aren't at all that clear on your own aim there, huh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: not only that, but there's known history there ie you can go and actually look at each wave of appreciation/depreciation and study it if you want to say something based on it
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: it doesn't and moreover, if you take early appreciation as an indicative of anything, you pretty much disqualify yourself from ~any discussion of bitcoin really, wtf.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: working with what you said - all those qualities/characteristics of bitcoin are basically from its very definition; so in as much as your decision was based on that, what can change so that you have to change your decision?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: well, even closer at home - intelligence = potential wealth, why not.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: if your hypothesis is in fact that the viability of bitcoin depends on the viability of tmsr, the alternative hypothesis is at its simplest, the negation: the viability of bitcoin has nothing to do with the viability of tmsr (at which point you can look - what could it then have to do with?)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: potential is cheap and worth ~0 by itself
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but look at this that there's been already 4 layers of questions and still didn't get to some clear decision that you can re-evaluate
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: economics-based, like everything else, not specifically "money"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: yeah, and this "an association" is also quite weak - at that level there's an association between anything and everything
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: logically speaking that begs the question "why and how is it the soundest known money"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so, your hypothesis was that there's an association between the viability of tmsr and the value of bitcoin
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: ahaha, that's not testing, lolz; but ok, I didn't realise you didn't have that background, not a problem
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: why did you think it was worth supporting? why "bitcoin is important"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: are you aware of how you do statistical tests?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (never have only ONE hypothesis - that's no hypothesis but belief)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what's the alternative hypothesis anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: eh, short term it fell, ofc.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (just like with your original question "should I x?" *always* means you need to go back to how you decided to X in the first place and *re-evaluate* but from there not whatever free association comes to mind)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: ok; what was the choice of those based on?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: of his announcement, I mean
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: ok, what was the visible effect of that (if any)?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw, dorion are you aware of the time when MP announced publicly that he divests from bitcoin
(ossasepia) diana_coman: yeah, look already as in where/what do you even need to consider for finding relevant evidence
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: full marks at theory, 0 at practice there;
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but for that to make any sense, you do need to work with clear and unchanging definitions + accurately expressed hypotheses because otherwise you'll just bounce all over the place and get nowhere /anywhere
(ossasepia) diana_coman: this is pretty much how it goes from *that* end: you look at stuff; formulate the best hypothesis that fits *everything*; then you look for anything that does *NOT* fit, in the slightest (because it's both more important and easier to reject stuff than to "prove it")
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that is a reasonable working hypothesis; what would you need to look at in order to evaluate if it's not totally wrong at least?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: there isn't even bitcoin in there for that matter
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: "security through transparency and understanding, i.e. education" - where in this is tmsr??
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: association between what and what though, do go there all the way.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: or how does it even come in there, I don't se it
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: ok, so stick to that; what does no-tmsr change in that?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: but what *are* you exactly promising because by now it got all muddled up
(ossasepia) diana_coman: at which point I'm totally baffled because from everything else until now and reading your jwrd business plan such as it was published and ~everything else, there was never any mention of any saving or of any "focus on bitcoin" even; your offering was a security solution essentially
(ossasepia) diana_coman: now above it sounds like there's yet another jump ie from jwrd's focus on bitcoin to clients' being saved by it
(ossasepia) diana_coman: for no clear reason really other than the association tmsr-bitcoin I gather
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that already linked tmsr to jwrd's focus on bitcoin
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: let's unroll this back to the beginning because that's the stuff required in the first place for any proper evaluations - knowing what the fuck you are even evaluating there in the first place;
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw, dorion anyways, we started from jwrd and we got to my year 1 programming prof so hm, how about we circle back now?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: fwiw, I had a programming prof in year 1 that I totally disliked; that's not to say I didn't appreciate his insistence on matters including "format properly the darned output, you idiots" and the like.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: liking is not mandatory for that matter, no
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: see, easy!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyways, this was not meant as some evaluation of any past as such, it's not that the point.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: and the trouble with "wasn't relaxed" is that tense but disoriented is not helping, no.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: I know what you mean and that is why I even said it anyway helped you, even as such; as did the athletics, possibly even more than if you paid attention in class for that matter and to settle that part once and for all; but it's still not covering fully what I mean because even though it seemed & felt rough, I'm sure, it wasn't... enough.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it's possibly even more exactly that lack of any walls of any sort - anything "goes", there's nothing truly pushing back meaningfully.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: perhaps.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: not sure how to put that in terms that make more sense to you but I've seen it before, ie it's not just you.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: well, the trouble is that in many ways both of you seem to have only ever played this decision and business and whatnots only in the schoolroom, relaxed atmosphere with supportive etc.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: better put, "reading can help if you are smart but it's an extra really"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: pretty much; and moreover, I suspect there's a clear difference between those who only ever played school-room "matches in a relaxed atmosphere with peers" vs those who learnt with the older, certainly not-school and not "supportive" older kids.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: there's no should anywhere anyway.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: for that matter, if I were to recommend "how to learn to make better decisions", I'd recommend practice - the sort that is guaranteed to result in either learning or death; but for one thing, where the fuck is that nowadays like that to just be had for the asking and for the other thing, it's still not reading, heh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: yes, mountains of easy abound!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: and you know, let's say I tell you re management - go better and read Moltke and Clausewitz because there's way more and more useful than the packaged drucker; and you go and dutifully read - does that mean you got it "right"? does it even mean you got out of it what and why I recommended it ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: be after getting it first clear (ie look at what and how you do) and then gradually better; that comes with getting it plenty of times horribly wrong, yes; so maybe make sure you get those wrongs in here where they don't hurt you as much as outside/directly in your business interactions or something, that's pretty much it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: I do appreciate your dedication there but use it better for making the most of what you have direct access too as there's neither some book-packaged solution that can get you fully there, nor the time to fix it all (language included!) in one go like that.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: indeed; dorion it's something you'll probably learn faster through practice and observation ie paying attention to what makes a better evaluation and why and how, this sort of thing; re square one, the trouble there is that it likely depends on which and what parts you are missing and I can't fully tell like that (there seem to be quite a few fundamentals but sheesh)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (but no, I still don't think I am a journalist, nevertheless)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: I was just having fun there, I got your meaning, don't worry :)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but no, jfw and dorion, you really need to learn to evaluate things properly
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahaha, now I wonder if I should class that as an insult on par with "you want to make your own philosophy!!"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: do mind that you look not only at "event + when" but specifically at "who and what did they do that had effect", ok?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: let me ask this from a different side - do you consider it was some /any of the activity/products such as they were coming out of public-tmsr that saved btc at crisis points (I'll assume you are aware of at least a few of those) ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: that much seems quite a reasonable description indeed; what does that do/mean for a. bitcoin vs precious metals b. your decision on whether focus or not on btc
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: where do you get the Bitcoin requires human input and maintenance and moreover the next jump to "which is what trb was trying to do"?
← | →
Download hourly DB snapshot | Get Source Code