8h 38m21h 4m31d 16h 4d 10h 20m5h 4m

Show Idle (>14 d.) Chans

BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Supplying links to support the observations has taken more time than I thought it would. I'm going to have to freshen the eyes and re-read. I seem to have escaped the problem scope in the writeup and going to have to pin down where I left the rails.
whaack: diana_coman: alright tomorrow I'll publish the outline I produce.
whaack: diana_coman: EOD Report: G: TheFleet is looking stable. I removed the general "try catch" and now I instead have the various errors enumerated. The main issue I have now is with running out of memory. Being connected to 30 networks takes 1GB of RAM. WTI: Figure out exactly what is taking up all the memory. B: I wasn't so happy with the title of my most recent article. WTI: Develop a process for
whaack: picking titles for articles.
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: sounds productive in all sorts of unexpected ways, so no loss there at all; and no rush either.
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 ?
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: The ancient PM logs lead to re-reading early Qntra pieces, in particular the "Hard Fork Missile Crisis" that the show of hands here revealed caught a lot of attention, even if not all readers showed up at the same speed or time.
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.
whaack: diana_coman: I wait until I'm finished with my article and then I pick the first title that comes to mind. I try to keep it simple and to the point
diana_coman: whaack: that IS "using mind as big-hat-to-pick-from" ; a sort of simple-association or what? lolz
whaack: yeah so many there is nothing wrong with my process and I just grabbed the wrong slip of paper yesterday
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.
diana_coman: whaack: lolz, Fortuna is never wrong!
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.
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!
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)?
whaack: Well I see titles as a nice opportunity to be creative. I don't think they always need to serve as the same thing. Sometimes they can be a hook, sometimes they can be used to foreshadow, etc.
diana_coman: whaack: what does it mean "to be creative"?
diana_coman braces for the round-the-corner "expressing yourself"
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Usually when assembling a piece to write I do hit on a number of these tangents that end up on the cutting room floor later. I'm better than I used to be at catching myself and stopping, but when writing longer form on the blog rather than short form on Qntra, I do tend to leave more text on the floor.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: I'll try to keep the scope in this review narrow and set aside the clipping to maybe come back to later.
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.
whaack: diana_coman: lol. It means to write like The Riddler.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Ok
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.
diana_coman: whaack: lolz, does the riddler even ...write? I confess I'm only vaguely aware of the character.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: As part of how I've been trying to cover all the edges when doing long for deep dives on the blog, I tend to read wide and deep. On the scope of what cazalla and I did differently in the early days... The core could live in bullet points, and while that simplicity fits the scope, there's a part of me wondering if presenting a few bullet point and going over a few couple practical examples (Mostly the GAW Miners case) is
BingoBoingo: going to appear too glib of a treatment.
whaack: idk the character at all heh, I am going off of his name. I mean to say that since the title is not necessarily part of the path that guides the reader from point A to point B, it can take many different forms that the author can pick from.
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!
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: are you saying there that you can't quite decide as to what's the best level of detail essentially?
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: I was stuck on it, but now I'm inclined to use the single example of the "GAW miners" case to illustrate the different level of aggression and leave the rest of the bits I'd started on to the side for potentially revisiting later.
BingoBoingo: Bullet points for what I found different above the narrative of the GAW miners vase for illustration.
BingoBoingo: *case
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: go for it then; do realise that it's first of all about what *you* consider useful, clear & sufficient.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Alright, this narrows things quite a bit.
whaack: diana_coman: sorry for the mega stupid. I did not know of the character *at all* i just read The Riddler as someone who writes in riddles. But it is obvious The Riddler most likely refers to a literary/movie character and I should not have jumped to using his name in an explanation when I didn't know the reference
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?
diana_coman: BingoBoingo: cool, good we talked about it and got it unstuck.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: I'm glad as well.
whaack: diana_coman: Yes I understand that "playing words by how they sound" leads one to transmit packets of junk information.
diana_coman: whaack: and more generally, when you meet/find/hear something you don't *know* - you *ask* what it is!
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.
diana_coman: spyked: comment in your modq
whaack: diana_coman: okay. i've noticed i have a bad habit of not asking for clarification when I hear a Spanish word/sentence that I don't understand. It comes from a misguided attempt to not frustrate the person i'm speaking with / keep the conversation flowing. It's annoying to have to pause and ask for an explanation when someone tells a joke for example. But it's *way* worse, and even rude, to nod
whaack: along without understanding.
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.
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/
diana_coman: rather basic stuff really.
dorion: - if that's what it takes. a reason jwrd activities/client meetings took priority this week was because carnivales starts this weekend and the city will be dead until ~wednesday. I have a follow up tomorrow, but after that I'll have more space to deliver on that plan.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-02-20 15:30:27 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.
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.
BingoBoingo: diana_coman: Exercise accomplished
BingoBoingo: << Open problem in my statement of problems solved by reading docs for more tools
whaack: diana_coman: I have not yet read all the context required for that comment, but ack that one can't always get clarification immediately and that one should never guess (using i.e. "context clues") what something means.
whaack: diana_coman: My outline for tomorrow's article
jfw: And the Scheme wallet spits out babby's first signed raw transaction.
dorion: w00t, congrats.

Random(ossasepia) | Download hourly DB snapshot | Get Source Code