← | Results 4001 ... 4250 found in all logged channels for 'f:diana' | →
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: ah, I see; and what/why the environment insane /more insane than you knew it as a student?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but this sort of "we'll make our local Lebanon" is something else; (then again, I suddenly recall there was some new-money-romanian in the '90s who made his "Eiffel tower" in the middle of the nowhere plains; perhaps it's just lucky that Romania is way smaller so even the nowhere plains are not that big).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, previously there was at least the decency of adding "new" (as in new york, new england, new fuck)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: what does "graduate coursework" mean?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (who the fuck comes up with names like Lebanon, Illinois; boggles the mind).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, could have been possibly worse - excel.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and although you seemed totally fine with hardware and routers and the sort, there's weird going on re programming.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I vaguely know you have a degree in something humanities-related (librarian?) but that's about it
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: what's your background actually?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-20#1018956 - nice! I will get today to that article too, only a bit later.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ... infuriating drivel really, by necessity.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what's missing in there is the underlying tree structure of the reasoning you are trying to write down; more fundamentally, until and unless you approach writing as what it should be - aka an exercise in *thinking and reflection* - rather than a "text production" process, you'll keep ending up with ...
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what are "goals" for you when writing?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: ah, the latin/southern style of "work" (that I apparently happily forgot about as soon as I didn't have to put up with it anymore); at any rate, there's no trouble with "took priority" as such, more a note that it would be better if it doesn't end up ~took over.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: rather basic stuff really.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the essential is that you do not *ignore* it and especially that you don't "guess" it and the use it or similar; whether asking on the spot or not depends on the exact situation & people/
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: for those cases where indeed you can't ask (maybe because you just overheard the word or whatever), you still go and look it up; essentially requesting unknown stuff is a duty not an option.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: spyked: comment in your modq
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: looking at that tmsr-os plan of yours, are you going to end up chasing yourself over it in the end? lolz.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: and more generally, when you meet/find/hear something you don't *know* - you *ask* what it is!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: cool, good we talked about it and got it unstuck.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: myeah; just don't do this sort of thing, playing words by how they sound - it's the sort of thing that disqualifies one from civilised conversation, do you realise?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: go for it then; do realise that it's first of all about what *you* consider useful, clear & sufficient.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: are you saying there that you can't quite decide as to what's the best level of detail essentially?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: yes, it can *in the general* case but that is not the point; for any specific, given article/text, you still need to pick one aim (or even several but a clear & well defined (sub)set of aims) and then USE that; and ugh @ "going off of his name" wtf!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: lolz, does the riddler even ...write? I confess I'm only vaguely aware of the character.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: do speak up though if you have a different view on this since hm, you know your process there way better ; I'm working on what you *said* about it and that's not much so if it doesn't fit...say more, please.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: maybe just jot them down in a separate file as "to do/laters/ideas/whatever" - it's a matter of efficiency at the end of the day, esp if it turns out otherwise that most of it still just gets discarded rather than distilled.
(ossasepia) diana_coman braces for the round-the-corner "expressing yourself"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what does it mean "to be creative"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: do you often end up like this going on 1001 tangents? do you always follow everything that comes up or how/where do you even stop (if you stop)?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the fact that titles are generally shorter than the text itself does not mean that they are not text too or not written!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what do you want the title to serve as? because depending on that you can aim to actually...write a title rather than glue on whatever label came at hand.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: lolz, Fortuna is never wrong!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: seriously, I can see a case for reviewing Qntra matter but then done as a proper review and that's quite a different thing; atm I would also say that there really are more pressing matters to finish first.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: that IS "using mind as big-hat-to-pick-from" ; a sort of simple-association or what? lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: nothing wrong with reviewing early or even past Qntra either but I wouldn't base a review on what was revealed meanwhile to have caught a lot of attention - first of all because it comes with the exact risks of all other towards-purposing and as a second consideration, given how late the reveal came, it follows that there might be other pieces that caught even more attention, only longer term or whatevers.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: that "process for picking titles for articles" brought to mind instantly the "process"- pick stuff out of a big hat, lolz; anyways - how do you/did you pick titles so far ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: sounds productive in all sorts of unexpected ways, so no loss there at all; and no rush either.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: heh, so publish and *then* throw things at the command line if you must; and you're welcome.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyway, looking forward to reading your write-up there and we'll see afterwards.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: if anything, what strikes me after re-reading your blog is that you tend to go for a wide, far & high level view/vision of ~everything (which can and does btw deliver your best/signature style, that well-informed and right on target); but it's the closer to home that seems to be...less easily seen or noticed,somehow.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: ah, that sounds not bad at all, glad to hear it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: meanwhile I reviewed your blog's archive and there's quite a lot in there too; fwiw, I think it's not at all that clear case of one-trick pony as such.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyway, whatever is in there is what it is, not a problem; my question was re how much time&effort the review is eating up.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: do you mean that there wasn't much new attempted/discussed after that?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: how's the pms/logs/dig going time/effort-wise?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: but sure, do answer them, even as you did above if you want to; just do note that you can choose how you phrase your answer to basically inflame them further or not, it's quite up to you.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: myeah, as it usually happens, they read what they had in mind, not what you wrote and that's where it breaks down; fwiw the guy in #t yesterday clearly hadn't done more than scan&get-annoyed-at-bad-attitude your message really.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: and at any rate, it's precisely that change from "suspected deserts" to "known deserts" that matters and that is important; as it was said plainly, nobody really expected this to deliver in the sense of musl not going the unicode-way; nevertheless, it's only once attempted and experienced that it serves and can be pointed to as a fact.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what's the question? but at any rate, sure, reply and/or comment in there to your satisfaction that you said everything you wanted to have said.
(trilema) diana_coman: well, they are certainly stuck to "resolve" through pretense of one sort or another; whether that is the easiest pretense or not doesn't even matter all that much, it's more like a forced move really, what *else* are they going to do since they rule out entirely addressing the root cause?
(trilema) diana_coman: jfw: eh, that's the usual way socialism always goes - it's "the people's interests" except of course they get defined discarding any given individual's input if it does not match "what the interests should be" etc.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it's not about strange notions or about deeply held; it's about the consequence that ends up - then there's no help from those quarters and when that keeps adding up/repeating, it can be rather tiresome.
(trilema) diana_coman: it reads to me exactly no user matters and ~all reducing to "we wanted this anyway/for a long time", huh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (remembering from quite a few years back, there can be some added ...dread/would-rather-not associated with ~omg, those were the intelligent ones, it just can't be that they are nevertheless THAT stupid because then it *really* sucks)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: is it draining/tiresome on you otherwise?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ah, there's more to the drama!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so given their response and overall approach - what's your take on them?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: fwiw, you did fine otherwise, it's not like there was any clear trouble on your part as such; sure, practice & experience will help further but I wouldn't say there's much to worry there at all.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: was it re "seasoned engineers" aka you looking up to them? or just that "ugh, gotta tell them what they won't like to hear"? or both?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: exactly; and it waited so long, it can still wait a few days more
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: sounds like the log review is already starting to pay off; but do first finish the review and write-up, there's time afterwards to look at it all and use it properly, ok?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-19#1018855 - by the sounds of it you really need to do some proper outline and consider it as such; maybe ask for some feedback on it, one day?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-18#1018852 - so it would seem BingoBoingo would do indeed well to consider again the outreach of Qntra for readership too, huh.
(trilema) diana_coman: the things I still...know; lolz.
(trilema) diana_coman: I winced at cristian topescu recollection as I can still hear the descriptions of figure skaters' costumes, colours included, argghhh.
(trilema) diana_coman: it must be because she didn't use unicode.
(trilema) diana_coman: I honestly thought he meant whelp!
(trilema) diana_coman: mircea_popescu: well, remember arsinel? lolz
(trilema) diana_coman: iirc he worked as an ok Wooster, seemed to fit fine.
(trilema) diana_coman: I am still shocked at the idea that ...uhm, was Laurie...hot? as in ..ever?
(trilema) diana_coman: mircea_popescu: you know, I was trying to not shock tecuane with this notion that it being a public chan there are actually *other* people reading and talking and generally participating.
(trilema) diana_coman: mircea_popescu: to my mind the "no one user matters more than another" means of course "no user matters at all" ; because it follows by necessity.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: neah, the bait to come here (where horrible things happen!!!!1!!)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but you know, even better than learning from when *you* are wrong, is when you learn from when someone *else* was wrong so that you don't ...repeat the same mistakes at least; just saying here.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: did he put it as ... a problem to solve?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: he didn't *want* to survive, what can one do.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I was rather surprised at the recent canada-based popularity, lolz.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: ahaha, is that the code-solver-from-under-the-bed?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: so you are utterly vulnerable to a ddos-by-stated-problems attack? lolz; the unreflecting wanna-solve-it can turn out very sour.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you know, this musl adventure of yours turned out quite instructive since there you go, that "no user matters more than another" thrown back at reflex-speed (and just as obviously ignoring all your carefully crafted message) is quite what seasoned engineers means by now.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-18#1018635 - btw, MrMeseekx why won't that friend come in, register a key and say hi? and all the others for that matter, as you can see, you survived unharmed.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: that I'm sure you do; did you notice the topic in #trilema? maybe figure out what it means, as it's basically speaking straight to you there.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: so listen, do yourself a favour for starters, trawl those pms or whatever and write up a summary with what you 2 tried and what worked and what didn't, in what way, etc; write up somewhere in clear also what your current script does and what/where you're stuck + why; I honestly couldn't quite follow at that level of detail from the chans only.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: there is no must in that sense, no; what you *must* do is to make sure your effort and time works for *you* and esp for you in the long term; the exact form of that however can never be a must in that way, no.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: aahhaha, do cite it in #t too, for the record if for nothing else.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: but you see, you do what you do what you'd have done anyway essentially and otherwise expect/hope it willl somehow be also what is needed/useful; that's a terribly poor strategy and one with documented horrible outcomes.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: did that ever translate in any contributors or at least enquiries in that vein?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: what sorts of things did you try at that time, anyway? (I wasn't even quite aware of specific attempts, huh)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: I meant more re the direction aka micro-management if you prefer.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: are you specifically looking atm for fine-grained direction on those scripts?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: I have to admit that the economics teacher entirely lost my attention the moment they re-arranged some formula and insisted that it was *a different formula*; but that aside, my quarrels there go deeper, lolz.
(trilema) diana_coman: it stinks less!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: hm, re qntra at this stage the trouble seems to be deeper in that it's unclear to me to what extent you have made some plans - not as definitive "recipes" - but as "I know what I'm going to *do* and therefore it it turns out it's not working, what I'll change"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: at any rate, the thing that started this - do you see that remote job as the thing you lose ie your opportunity cost?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so it might well be that my definition for opportunity cost is not entirely fitting the classics or something.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: the above being said, I should mention that I ~always quarelled with economists-with-diploma (despite even helping at some point my father write his MBA thesis, huh).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I suppose the attraction to consider "the best choice" is that yes, it makes it neat; but my trouble with it is the implicit assumption that you actually can evaluate *upfront* the actual benefit.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: by choosing an apple, you gave up 3 pears; regardless of the fact that "oh, but I couldn't have gotten both the single pear and the pair of pears"; no matter.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: the opportunity cost is everything you didn't get so technically speaking, it's 3 pears really.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: sounds sensible as in wanting to grow into a full, healthy person, sure.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: putting it the simplest possible, if I ask you to choose between an apple and a pear, your opportunity cost if you choose the apple is that pear, not some "best fruit"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: the opportunity cost is the loss of *not choosing the other available options*; nothing to do with hypothetical (since it can't be anything other than hypothetical) "best"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: when you say you want to get out of this one-trick pony thing - do you mean generally or do you mean it Qntra-specific?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: looking at your blog archive, it does strike as very btc-oriented with only occasional excursions in any you-territory
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and anyway, since you can figure out what that best possible decision is, why the hell wouldn't you ...go for it? lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: how do you figure out what you'd have gained "for the best possible decision"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: what I don't quite see (or not yet) is where and why it breaks in those places for you, hm.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that sounds more likely and for that matter less to do with shyness, more to do with lack of ...practice with civilized, adult conversations, quite a different thing.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I mean: you talk & have been talking in the chans, relatively all right, kept that blog more or less; didn't seem to visibly shy away from conversation etc.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: back to the issue at hand - how/why do you say shyness applies there/in what way? as I don't quite get it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: how do you define opportunity cost?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: fwiw, it's not like I don't know what being shy means/how it works; but it's a rather...younger age thing, hm.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: eh, for starters do stop finding excuses for whatever it is; that has never ever helped anyone - and not for lack of being thoroughly tried, lol.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (and good god, what's with you and shyness people??)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: how does this shyness apply here?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: you know, that's actually an interesting bit - I can almost say more about what you do NOT like than I can say about what you DO like; and the trouble with not-likes is that they are indeed not productive by nature; they can work as a sort of productive only once-removed (aka destroy/clear up/make space/maybe even motivate others to rebuild but not directly).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: why is qntra such a great fit for you and why is ~nothing else able to fit the same?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: while you've been around and active (very visibly active, even!) for a long time really, I still can't quite put together a very clear picture of where you really are and why - in part possibly because of my relative lack of fit re journalism, in part because of the jumps/fits, not sure if there aren't any other parts too.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that list starts sounding more and more like the list-of-doom, huh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: well, each and every person is themselves for sure; what is this "special" supposed to be more than that?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: there is this striking disconnect in that when it comes to writing-for-qntra (and *strictly*, only that), you seem to be both productive and quite self-directed without any trouble; on other sides (like pizarro), it seemed more fitful/hit and miss (and with wide discrepancy too); on yet other parts it's like a huge block and/or going round about it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: why can they only grow?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: mind telling me (or perhaps writing it up if that's easier/clearer) in more detail what you figured out to be in your veins as you put it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: you around?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: got it, thanks; is there something you wanted to discuss ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: glad to hear the words; curious to see how the actions will match that too, heh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: do mind that troublesome second part.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: sure, finding out when you are wrong *and changing as a result* is exactly how one learns, certainly.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahaha, that focus on tools.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: eh, do read that modernism and traditionalism because you are sidestepping there entirely any being as such.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: you know, as an analogy - how do you find out if something shiny is gold or not? you ...test it, right?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: and no, that "clearly" is not at all clearly to me; I don't follow so maybe you explain to me what you mean there.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-18#1018737 - traditionally that is most obviously found out in crisis situations really; did you read modernism and traditionalism?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (not to mention why on Earth would you *want* it to be less than that - it's like wanting to chop off a leg)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: as you might have noticed, that doesn't mean people don't live in the real world or something; it simply means that it's all about who you are and that's always 100% indeed, in all places and at all times, how can it be less that that.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: well, tell me something, are you part of your marriage 30%? 50%? what %?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: more depth indeed; and yw, do come with whatever version of that outline you have, sooner rather than later, ok?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: anyways, then do the outline for that 2009-2010 so you can get started sooner rather than later, all right?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: possibly both really, it's essentially just another facet of that tendency to jump abruptly
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: all right, so by the sounds of it you are aiming for something reasonable, except your statement of it got out of hand entirely ie you do need to either pay more attention to what words like "discuss the deeds of" really mean or otherwise generally to tone down the *description* of what you plan to do.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: another way of putting this is that whether you are part of tmsr or not starts from *who you are* in everything you do and as such, when you are coming from a long history of purposefully staying *outside* of it, it usually involves/requires a lot of self-change aka learning at its most...radical, let's say.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: understand that I'm not trying to hold you back from enjoyable work there; I'm only trying to hold you back from overshooting without even quite realising it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: all right; so do you /were you planning to do something in addition to that? (if yes, what?) or just more of that ie more details/events/articles?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: is that a question? apparently outside tmsr it's even question marks that are difficult to ...find? at any rate, for one quick and clear answer, here: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/trilema/2019-03-04#1900385
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: tmsr is anyway a republic so not exactly much to do with "how a nation is defined nowadays"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: to the extent you want/have comments, you can of course also add those comments in there, it's your article and all that; but that doesn't quite amount to "discussing the deeds etc"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: the choice/selection is of course entirely yours and personal and as such inevitably "the important history" as *you* understand it, of course.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: trouble is that it's *also* not "being part of it" through the act of ..coding as such, that is also pure nonsense.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: it's not even possible to be part of it as a "refugee under welfare", what nonsense is that
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: if you are aiming to provide that "coherent entry point", your goal is to collect & structure, not to discuss; does this distinction make sense to you?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (those that will bring people out of ...hm, out of what, even?)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: that being built on identity doesn't strike you at all at odds with your proposed approach to be "part of it" by ...fulfilling contracts on the side in between "making own nation", marriage and building those amazing tools?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: you know, for one thing one might correctly ask you what and how exactly qualifies you for that sort of discussion; what are you going to answer exactly?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: yes but it's one thing to set out to document and it's another thing to set out to "Discuss the deeds of the major actors in Bitcoin on technological, financial and political fronts."
(ossasepia) diana_coman: with added bonus that there are some amazing tools (that you'll make because since it's tools you are used to make then and therefore it follows that it's exactly *tools* that happen - how conveniently! - to be the actual core and crux and *everything* most needed and most important otherwise, right?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: so you followed the logs since 2017 and you got this idea that tmsr is like a corporation that you might fulfill some contracts for and therefore become "part of it"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: now that sounds like a History of TMSR from its pre-history to the present but I can't quite tell yet if you are aiming style-wise for Xenophon, Herodotus, Gibbon or who else!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: because no pile of tools is ever worth anything by itself; it's always people that make things progress (or regress) and you can give/have the most amazing of tools and you'll still not get anywhere without the people capable and willing to get somewhere; is this news?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: what's your idea of "being part of tmsr"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: dunno, I thought you'd rather made your own thing than be part of anything, admirable or not, as it might be.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: we'll talk for sure some more but at a time when it's a bit more...peaceful.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: what does this admirable mean concretely from your point of view? that you want to be part of this admirable thing? or that you'd rather not be part of it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: understand that I'm not against help but help is what is actually needed, not what one finds convenient to give at one time or another, that's the rub; and if I get correctly that "voluntaryism" to mean the sort of "tourism where you volunteer aka get to feel virtuous while seeing others that have it worse than you", there is some serious mismatch.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: is that the nation of shiny tools you are planning there?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: do you think it's tools that make anything progress and thrive?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: you know, re scripts and that, nobody can stop you making and publishing it anyway.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: not even that far, way closer - I mean first of all why do you think you "make" a... nation; well, as a side hobby, too, by the sounds of it; nothing wrong with your own plan and your own way but exactly what is this your own way?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: for the getting married I can imagine why a bit more easily.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I mean why still in the plans, lol?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: and....why?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: I'm sure he will but that's separate anyway; so did you do that ancapia-nation-thing? lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: the best bday present is where he learns how to script, really; that doesn't mean necessarily you can't do anything, but you know, helping people is a tricky thing to get right.
(ossasepia) diana_coman reads the ancient history of 2017, lmao; have a bit of patience.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: BingoBoingo: hey, first of all - happy birthday!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: did you talk to Hannah at all ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: eh, dunno if we are that much in the showbusiness, lolz; what came of that previous introduction before losing your key, anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-18#1018612 - jfw, it looks at your most reasonable self; the only bit that I think it's perhaps better set differently would be that "urge" - seriously, I have yet to see anyone do or even seriously consider something because of being urged by someone they didn't know; so maybe just set that as as a question and/or state that there is no reason for the added complexity?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: oh, huh; but why just..watch? are we...entertaining? lolz.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: well done on registering your key with deedbot; do you know someone around here or how did you find your way in here now?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: MrMeseekx: so how/where did you hear of that ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hello MrMeseekx ; what brings you here?
(trilema) diana_coman: bvt: cool, I'll give it another spin, hopefully soon.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: or in other words, don't pleasure yourself with thoughts!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that "what I might like to think" [of myself] is one of the deadliest tools your own best enemy - that one that has always slept in the same bed as you - has; so yeah, burn that part with fire.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: seriously, more programming is not that much leisure when your non-leisure is also programming; no matter what you might like to think.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you know, I quite wish that was the case; I did even write it already in two languages even but sadly it seems meanwhile there's very little of even proper enemies left to go around or something; one gets those sad excuses of "bully!!!" instead, sigh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: lolz, are you quite sure you are letting leisure be leisure rather than using it as "spare time to do more of the same"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: eh, how you use a tool is different from the tool, sure; that's more purposeful use rather than any rubbing off of it though; and heh, enemies is not all that far away from friends, you know?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: at any rate, I don't quite see why it would need rubbing off but possibly that's just me.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: meant to say that at least they weren't old dears, lol; and now I wonder at the exact difference between sincereley sarcastic and sarcastically sincere.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: your own fun is not something coming from outside of you, perhaps that's the less obvious part.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: sure it is optional in that wide sense mentioned above - it's not *productive* in the long term but it is...optional in the sense that yeah, you can insist on not having it, what.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: to have fun you need to ...organise it ! or otherwise put: you need to know how to have fun!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: otherwise put you can glum your way through leisure just as much as you can - as surprisingly as that might sound - fun your way through mountains of work, really
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that sounds very confused, let's try again: work is that which is NOT optional (in whatever way you define optional because otherwise at the extreme, *everything* is optional, breathing included); leisure is by definition that which is entirely optional; then fun is a layer on top and you get to apply it (or not) to whatever you want & whenever you want.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: a series sounds more sensible for sure and most likely to fit better anyway; you made me laugh with the dear readers though - did you mean it as sarcastically as it sounds?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: basically the distinction work/leisure is based on optionality not on fun.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: work is that which *needs to be done*; the fun or not fun is most of the times a matter of how you approach the doing, anyway.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: no wonder you drag your feet
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what a lousy definition of work, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: it is also the *largest* part as such, esp if you aim for the full thing in one go; anyways, go ahead with it then, but do come with whatever/how much you have by tomorrow as it might be enough for one article anyway even if you haven't finished the full thing; that's the trouble with going based on momentum alone - sure it makes it easier/faster but it's not always fitting/considering all the context around all that well.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: there's no need to cheat yourself out of leisure OR work; and if you do one, it will of course backfire as it did there; so acknowledge and allow yourself proper leisure too, do enjoy work as work as well but don't allow one to pretend to be another.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: atm there's quite the list of articles/pages in your queue so - which of them do you plan to focus on first?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: how was that - you are not easily fooled, right? except by...self, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: thing is: overall it starts to add up to some quite successful self-tripping you got yourself there, heh; on one hand you are all "this is what needs to be done so will - glumly if need be - do it" + "there is not that much time nor need for leisure" and on the other hand - not all that surprisingly either - at any chance there is, you steal the leisure only marking it as "work", pretty much.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: tbh reading your latest, I could see bits and pieces of additional research, but it didn't strike me like a lot of added content, more like added reading out of interest - is that a fair description ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: that works; I had a look at your presentation slides, not bad; I gather you want first to get some outline(s) based on them+the full research, right?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: ah, should be all right then; the point is that asking can help to get some idea/answer re why ban but anyway, it can wait.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: or whatevers, one of the networks that banned you
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: I suppose you can of course simply contact dronebl and ask them to remove you because you are not a bot/did nothing wrong; alternatively, let them come out with what exactly did you do "wrong"
(trilema) diana_coman: maybe I'm not fully getting the idea of the manifest file here but my current understanding is that it's a record of the history and as such I really don't see any case where something gets deleted from it - at most it gets branched from a previous version but that's still an added line to (a previous version of) the manifest file.
(trilema) diana_coman: bvt: why does your vpatch cancel a line from the manifest? To my mind this doesn't quite make sense - if you want to revert to a previous point, that means simply branching the tree from a previous node so using *that* manifest, doesn't it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: hm, what are you doing to yourself there with the schedule?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what caused that ban exactly? I don't quite follow how/based on what do they ban; re talks - surely you can just find a better time for them, even accounting for the different time zones.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (and for the possibly not-obvious to the naive: none of those thus helped will "have time" to get you out of that sinking either).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: if you sink, you won't be in any position to help anyone else at any time, anyway; for the obvious.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: yes; essentially you can't quite afford that "nice guy" carelesness about yourself that is, btw, pretty much the way you get trained to fuck yourself over.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: if it works better mixed then simply plan it over leisure+writing time, that's all.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: all right.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: for that matter, if you tell them privately that you *have to go* and they have a problem with that because oh noez their own ass, then I really don't see the point in all this "gotta not let their ass down"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I really don't see why and how that has to do with the work there; talk to them and let them know that you are available for *them*, sure; after all, you can't have a sane relationship with an institution.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: well, that sort of training though sounds precisely the type you do over lunch/dinner/social meeting with those people though and at their asking you nicely; because it's one thing to not let *them* being fucked over and another thing entirely to not let high and dry the biz that is otherwise draining you.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: that sounds more like enjoying the photos/details/topic so ...not bad in itself at all, why not, but why does it have to be instead of writing rather than part of your leisure reading or similar?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: how do you plan to escape though? esp since you say you'd rather not go on this sort of things without a plan, no matter what.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: what's the status with the irc project? in between all the details, the elephant got rather lost or so it seems?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: no masterpieces required anyway, as you well know; but what's exactly stopping you from going faster anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: trouble is that "can focus more in the 2nd half" of every month and then tired from the first half and so on, and next you know a year passed and you barely moved otherwise; it sounds rather life draining to me, tbh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: making your own fun there! heh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: do you want/prefer to set explicitly some standing meeting too?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: you know, in general lines you should have at least some idea over the longer term too
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: so at the current rate/plan, when do you estimate you get around to focus on that or how do you see it?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: are you happy otherwise with the balance saltmines/you work there?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: anyways, if you pack them both in one place, then change the title accordingly or something, not like it's forbidden.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: ah, the additional stuff fallen by the wayside for you was from previous week even, huh.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: how's the blog writing/review/plan ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: see q above.
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be awk for ~1 hour
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: are you happy with how this week turned out? looking at your previous review and hm, no plan, it doesn't seem all that great - the q is: do you have a clear idea what you'll change so that next week improves at least?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: sounds sensible.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-16#1018474 - reading/looking at the plan sounds like a basic requirement, lolz; the detailed schedule/assignment of tasks afterwards is entirely up to you - it sounds a bit overkill to me but if it works for you, then fine.
← | →
Download hourly DB snapshot | Get Source Code