lobbes: diana_coman: I just got those historical log dumps to MP now, but I need to head to bed. I'll aim to get my weekly review/plan tomorrow
BingoBoingo got some market research started
feedbot: http://younghands.club/2020/03/16/ar-review-march-9th-march-15th-and-plan-march-16th-22nd/ << Young Hands Club -- AR Review March 9th - March 15th And Plan March 16th - 22nd
jfw: missing my review deadline again here, which I guess makes the point about "hopefully".
jfw: trinque: is this sorta thing what you had in mind with http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-14#1021360 ? or was that finger pointing somewhere else
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-14 18:07:28 trinque: I've also seen some "I've been a very naughty boy and I must be punished"
jfw: I dunno, this time I'm finding an extra layer of not giving a damn on top of whatever usual hangups. dorion might have noticed, who's been trying to help push me along.
jfw: trinque: and I don't mean to be snide there, I'd appreciate the finger pointing if it were specific enough to be useful; diana_coman explicitly doesn't want us beating ourselves up.
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-15#1021857 - it's a very plain/concrete matter along those lines: on one hand, web wallets for all that they are otherwise have been *doing this service* (sure, together with ~everything else that comes with the way in which that doing is done, no argument there); on the other hand, you have *not* been doing this as a service (and that includes publicly, of course) and all your ...
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-15 21:42:13 jfw: diana_coman: I am no closer than this morning to enlightenment on - nevermind *why* he says it - how it could be that web wallets physically exist while the thing I offered does not.
diana_coman: ... knowledge of the matter and even any private experience you might have does not, can not work as a *replacement* for that; in other words, it's true that someone *could* choose to go with you on this, but they would not be using a service because you haven't *yet* built that service; you probably *can* build it and I'd say you are capable of building it, sure, but it's not there and so it can't be used.
diana_coman: jfw: does the above make sense?
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021899 - this is not "being stoical about it" btw, quite on the contrary; I hope you are around this evening and I get to hear what you make of it all too and of moving forwards.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 03:33:23 jfw: I dunno, this time I'm finding an extra layer of not giving a damn on top of whatever usual hangups. dorion might have noticed, who's been trying to help push me along.
jfw: Good morning diana_coman. My mind's pretty much been wandering all over; I have only notes from reviewing, and pretty tired now, going to call it for tonight and finish tomorrow. I think that's a first for me. I understand it may thus not get your feedback.
jfw: Re wallet, it makes sense it's not a built-out service; indeed it was a one-time offer.
jfw: And I could certainly understand "don't want or choose to use", but I still don't follow the jump to "can't be used". Anyway, turning in now but I will be around tomorrow.
jfw: well, this evening for you.
diana_coman: jfw: have some rest & we'll talk later, no worries.
jfw: because apparently I can't sleep until I say it: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021905 - yes; closer to nihilistic perhaps. The situation has been getting to me more as the days have progressed, and I seem to have a sampler of a little each of fight, flight, freeze.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 04:44:48 diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021899 - this is not "being stoical about it" btw, quite on the contrary; I hope you are around this evening and I get to hear what you make of it all too and of moving forwards.
dorion: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021901 - that was my reading of his response as well.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 04:42:52 diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-15#1021857 - it's a very plain/concrete matter along those lines: on one hand, web wallets for all that they are otherwise have been *doing this service* (sure, together with ~everything else that comes with the way in which that doing is done, no argument there); on the other hand, you have *not* been doing this as a service (and that includes publicly, of course)
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021894 - what is this exactly? you know, don't do "some X" - if you take the time to say it, then say something more concrete at least
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 01:32:11 BingoBoingo: got some market research started
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021909 - jfw, as you said it one line prior, there was no service but a "one-time offer"; now take it from there and follow it with me - if there's no service, than how could it be used? it's really as simple and straightforward at that (and the difficulty in seeing /accepting/working with this sort of very cutting, precise definitions is the "thinking too much" part)
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 04:59:06 jfw: And I could certainly understand "don't want or choose to use", but I still don't follow the jump to "can't be used". Anyway, turning in now but I will be around tomorrow.
diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021912 - fwiw, the initial reaction looked more like numb than anything else.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 05:49:11 jfw: because apparently I can't sleep until I say it: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021905 - yes; closer to nihilistic perhaps. The situation has been getting to me more as the days have progressed, and I seem to have a sampler of a little each of fight, flight, freeze.
diana_coman: dorion, jfw did you have some jwrd questions you wanted to ask?
jfw: diana_coman: the cutting definitions and their usage are at once enticing and confusing/surprising.
diana_coman: lobbes: what was the initial plan with the logbot and that server, I hadn't followed too closely and now I'm rather unclear on it.
diana_coman: jfw: it's a very...practical practicality, what can I say; also, pretty much the only one that really works for the best (ie most efficiently & effectively, so output vs expenditure, not "best" or whatevers)
jfw: diana_coman: for possibly-simpler analogy: if I offer to wash someone's car, just the once, it follows that the offer can't be taken because I don't do it as a regular service? hm, I guess I could see it as a higher-level strategy like that
diana_coman: jfw: it follows that it's at most a friendly /personal thing, not a service/business interaction, if that helps.
diana_coman: ie sure, you can offer to wash your friend's car and he may agree to it but that's no "washing car service" and it can't possibly work if you are not *already* friends.
diana_coman: jfw: btw, MP answered himself in quite clear terms the q re what was his role in TMSR
jfw: I think I see, yeah, or at least not seeing a way to dispute that.
dorion: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021922 - the biggest question right now is, without tmsr, what are the mid to long term prospects for bitcoin. is it still something we should focus on ?
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 16:24:06 diana_coman: dorion, jfw did you have some jwrd questions you wanted to ask?
dorion: I think so, but not sure if it's wishful thinking
diana_coman: dorion: now that's a very loaded question, heh
diana_coman: basically you'll have to break it down in less oracle-level questions, I don't feel quite that much of an oracle myself.
dorion: hey, I know and maybe one of the harder questions to answer. but it's been a cornerstone of the decisions I've made in my 20s.
jfw: diana_coman: thanks, yeah I saw that about "oracle of last resort"
diana_coman: dorion: but note that there's a bit in your question that I fully don't comprehend and it's that "should"; how does it come in there?
diana_coman: dorion: what was that decision based on ?
dorion: that fiat currencies are at risk of massive devaluation and bitcoin is better money than precious metals.
diana_coman: dorion: while I think I get what & where you are coming from there, you are passing the decision there rather than asking to clarify; it's a very poor question on several levels really.
diana_coman: dorion: so then, did any of *that* change meanwhile?
diana_coman: are fiat currencies at less risk of massive devaluation?
diana_coman: is bitcoin worse money than precious metals?
dorion: no, they're not and even moreso given the interventions the past week.
diana_coman: dorion: so then?
jfw: bitcoin however, like precious metals though in a different way, rests on political foundations, and those have shifted since last week
dorion: it seems like bitcoin requires human input and maintainence, which is what trb was trying to do. but on the other hand, I guess this shows I don't fully grasp [http://trilema.com/2016/thats-right-time-to-move-on-please-do-bitcoin-is-really-not-for-you/?b=Bitcoin%20is%20not%20a%20product#select][Bitcoin being a rule}
diana_coman: jfw: yes; what is the shift and what does it mean?
dorion: diana_coman the shift in my mind : the most important man in Bitcoin will be less public about it that he had been.
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"?
dorion: it requires people to run nodes and trb was trying to make better software to reduce the cost of operators.
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
jfw: diana_coman: (I'm being slow here apparently) that's the question indeed. I would guess that MP might still hold bitcoin, influence decisions behind the scenes, but isn't raising a banner in public or providing guidance.
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) ?
dorion: diana_coman good question.
jfw: I recall DNS vulnerabilities, but I see that protecting individual operators more than bitcoin as a whole
jfw: heartbleed predated trb if I recall
dorion: diana_coman none that immediately come to mind, no. the blocksize stayed, but I can't say with any certainty that trb had anything to do with that.
jfw: the bigger BIP fireworks though were resolved by miner decisions
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?
jfw: diana_coman: sure. and you say you're not a journalist!
diana_coman: ahaha, now I wonder if I should class that as an insult on par with "you want to make your own philosophy!!"
jfw: up to you I guess but was meant as compliment fwiw.
diana_coman: but no, jfw and dorion, you really need to learn to evaluate things properly
diana_coman: jfw: I was just having fun there, I got your meaning, don't worry :)
diana_coman: (but no, I still don't think I am a journalist, nevertheless)
dorion: diana_coman do you have recommened reading for starting at square one there. I'm ready to go back to kindergarten.
jfw not worried.
jfw: maybe we work with the example here?
dorion: diana_coman and it doesn't have to be in english, i'll learn the language I need to /should have long ago.
jfw: dorion: ahaha. might be more helpful to learn to evaluate things better this year though
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)
dorion: diana_coman ok. jfw what I'm after is actually gettting it right.
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.
dorion: diana_coman ok, fair enough.
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.
dorion: diana_coman it's that easy ?!
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 ?
dorion: loljk
diana_coman: dorion: yes, mountains of easy abound!
dorion: diana_coman good point about the reading and it occurs now it's an example of the overthinking.
jfw: this recalls how I tried to clarify up front what MP's expectations were for the wallet meeting, he said to skip the prequel, then I found out clear enough what I shoulda known, heh.
jfw: even if still needing diana_coman to spell it out afterward.
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.
jfw: shouldn't one strive to learn from the past to reduce the odds on the 'death' branch though?
dorion: reminds me of athletics, how do you raise your "court iq" in basketball ? play a whole fucking lot with the older kids, get beat up and keep going rather than running home to mommy.
jfw: or from my world, you learn to write good code by writing lots of bad code
diana_coman: jfw: there's no should anywhere anyway.
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.
jfw: diana_coman: gazing in wonder at how deep that might go... but, better put "reading is one strategy with its advantages and limitations" ?
dorion: for sure, the sandlot was the best lot and plenty of fights broke out.
diana_coman: jfw: better put, "reading can help if you are smart but it's an extra really"
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.
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.
dorion: diana_coman it seems to me that it was more manaloning and dreaming.
diana_coman: dorion: perhaps.
jfw: those seem related though. we saw the rough&tumble environment in #b-a but stayed in a safe bubble
dorion: e.g. coinapult wasn't a school room and I wasn't relaxed and watched it fall. which from there I did a 180 and let jfw carry on with wanting to perfect things before publishing.
dorion: i didn't watch it fall, but I was there working while it fell.
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.
dorion: probably, yeah.
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.
diana_coman: dorion: and the trouble with "wasn't relaxed" is that tense but disoriented is not helping, no.
diana_coman: anyways, this was not meant as some evaluation of any past as such, it's not that the point.
jfw: There was one big wall-hitting experience early in my summer jobs, of the "too little too late" sort; I never ended up liking the manager in question but certainly learned from the experience and lesser followups. But I could see that was more the exception than the rule.
jfw: hm, similar with undergrad thesis advisor now that I think of it.
dorion: diana_coman good point on the tense and disoriented, that is exactly what it was.
dorion: diana_coman ok, so coming here and being more open and using the wall I can do for sure.
diana_coman: dorion: see, easy!
diana_coman: jfw: liking is not mandatory for that matter, no
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.
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?
dorion: diana_coman sure.
jfw: was just about to say; http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021956 for example.
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 16:44:20 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) ?
jfw: (not that I don't enjoy storytimes.)
jfw: one crisis point that stands out for my not mentioning because "obvious" was the proposed block size fork
dorion: for jwrd, I think showing clients how to run trb and gbw should remain an anchor of the business. we never said bitcoin was to save them and always said it has it's own risks that nevertheless are worth bearing for the long-term upside.
jfw: Gavin was pushing for that, while MP rejected it, holding the line that he'd defeat the fork in the market if it happened, and everyone following it would lose their shirt.
dorion allowed a should to leak back in.
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;
diana_coman: look, you asked this question
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 16:30:51 dorion: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021922 - the biggest question right now is, without tmsr, what are the mid to long term prospects for bitcoin. is it still something we should focus on ?
diana_coman: that already linked tmsr to jwrd's focus on bitcoin
diana_coman: for no clear reason really other than the association tmsr-bitcoin I gather
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
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
dorion: I mean with the save by that we're not and have never been overpromising.
diana_coman: dorion: but what *are* you exactly promising because by now it got all muddled up
dorion: diana_coman the focus and promise is security through transparency and understanding, i.e. education.
diana_coman: dorion: ok, so stick to that; what does no-tmsr change in that?
diana_coman: or how does it even come in there, I don't se it
diana_coman: see*
dorion: the tmsr-bitcoin association.
jfw: on that, I took "I'm sure it's just a coincidence." as insinuation that yes, such association exists
diana_coman: jfw: association between what and what though, do go there all the way.
diana_coman: dorion: "security through transparency and understanding, i.e. education" - where in this is tmsr??
diana_coman: there isn't even bitcoin in there for that matter
dorion: e.g. trb and V came from the context of tmsr. e.g. the declaration of sovereignty
jfw: Between the viability of a political structure that can support bitcoin and the value of bitcoin
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?
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")
jfw: falsifiability comes to mind, so, looking for contrary evidence
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
diana_coman: jfw: full marks at theory, 0 at practice there;
jfw: yep.
diana_coman: yeah, look already as in where/what do you even need to consider for finding relevant evidence
diana_coman: jfw, dorion are you aware of the time when MP announced publicly that he divests from bitcoin
diana_coman: ?
jfw: yes
dorion: diana_coman right now the core product/service is Coreboot supported hardware, Gales build, install configuration, command line training (if needed), gpg usage across airgap, fg reflashing and usage, bitcoin build, install and operation, gbw build/install and usage.
dorion: diana_coman the miner problem.
diana_coman: jfw: ok, what was the visible effect of that (if any)?
diana_coman: of his announcement, I mean
diana_coman: dorion: ok; what was the choice of those based on?
jfw: I don't recall short-term (a failing) but longer term the price continued upward
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)
diana_coman: jfw: eh, short term it fell, ofc.
diana_coman: jfw: what's the alternative hypothesis anyway?
diana_coman: (never have only ONE hypothesis - that's no hypothesis but belief)
jfw: wait, alternative to which now?
diana_coman: jfw: are you aware of how you do statistical tests?
dorion: diana_coman the decision was based on what we have and can support and what we think is worth supporting. we were building tools for ourselves and the business we were working on which involved custodying bitcoin and having clients we train to use gpg for trading bitcoin. which were based on security and bitcoin are important.
jfw: diana_coman: by gathering a lot of samples, at the most basic
dorion: s/are/being/
diana_coman: dorion: why did you think it was worth supporting? why "bitcoin is important"?
diana_coman: jfw: ahaha, that's not testing, lolz; but ok, I didn't realise you didn't have that background, not a problem
dorion: diana_coman because bitcoin is the soundest known money.
jfw: diana_coman: aha, I'm weak on stats.
dorion: and money is important because humans are, arguably, money based organisms.
diana_coman: so, your hypothesis was that there's an association between the viability of tmsr and the value of bitcoin
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 17:40:57 jfw: on that, I took "I'm sure it's just a coincidence." as insinuation that yes, such association exists
jfw: diana_coman: right, though "value" is a bit vague as stated there.
diana_coman: dorion: logically speaking that begs the question "why and how is it the soundest known money"?
jfw: e.g. there's short-term price movement and where it ends up in a year or decade which can be totally different
diana_coman: jfw: yeah, and this "an association" is also quite weak - at that level there's an association between anything and everything
diana_coman: dorion: economics-based, like everything else, not specifically "money"
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
dorion: diana_coman most fungible, most transferable and probably most accountable (both total supply and that it's implemented in counting machines), which give it the potential to become the most marketable as volatility dampens and it's cheaper to price other goods in.
diana_coman: potential is cheap and worth ~0 by itself
jfw: "man and woman in room together = potential grandkids!!"
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?)
diana_coman: jfw: well, even closer at home - intelligence = potential wealth, why not.
jfw: ah thanks for cleaning that up, in particular I see the associated -> depends
jfw: indeed.
jfw: well, I could look that the first waves of bitcoin appreciation predated any explicit formulation of TMSR; but not sure that says anything about viability.
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?
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.
jfw: sure, anything can be a bubble.
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
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
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"?
dorion: diana_coman bitcoin ceasing to exist is what comes to mind.
dorion: diana_coman we will, but basically we're re-evaluating as much as makes sense and this was where we were at.
jfw: I'm grasping at straws because I don't know I'd look for evidence of viability or not.
jfw: *don't know how
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
dorion: I think we go on with what we already have and continue to expand the noncore.
dorion: diana_coman I see.
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
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
dorion: diana_coman ok.
diana_coman: the clearest was this
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 16:34:36 dorion: that fiat currencies are at risk of massive devaluation and bitcoin is better money than precious metals.
diana_coman: so that seems to be the basis for your decision process, that's what you go with.
diana_coman: the first part still stands clearly, if not even stronger, you said, so nothing to change from there
diana_coman: the second part - does the end of tmsr make bitcoin worse money than precious metals?
diana_coman: you can assume the worst and look at that
diana_coman: so let's say "perhaps it does"; why/how ?
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?
diana_coman: jfw, dorion do you have clear answers for the above?
dorion: one way could be if cryptographically safe hardware runs out, or we lack the capacity to source it, then we're giving clients a false sense of security. tmsr was working towards cryptographically safe hardware.
jfw: why/how: if nodes became centralized, they'd eventually be taken over by one or more states, which would make it just a less efficient fiat currency.
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.
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?
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.
diana_coman: this is not an exercise of imagination "what could be"
diana_coman: anything could be, for all you know rsa will be broken tomorrow; not useful to waste time on that.
dorion: diana_coman I think I'm getting to the point tmsr is dead because tmsr failed to exist.
jfw: diana_coman: the part that tmsr did was getting an old implementation somewhat cleaned up and ensuring it'd remain available to install / run. The part that MP possibly along with other wealthy holders did was discouraging forks in the field.
dorion: it was tried, the plans were put in place and structures created, but it's closed because it failed to stand on its feet.
diana_coman: jfw: the ensuring it'd remain available did exactly 0; sure, it's available; so what?
diana_coman: dorion: it pretty much failed to even materialise really but yes
diana_coman: jfw: for the cleaned up and ensuring it remains available, it's at any rate something you can most easily do, no?
diana_coman: mirror the thing, done
jfw: diana_coman: this is so.
diana_coman: for the "discouraging" (bwahaha) part, as you said it - MP, not TMSR.
jfw: but if every man alone is doing his own cleanup, resources are fragmented. But yeah, I can see where the unification attempt didn't amount to much.
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*
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
dorion: diana_coman I think having my imagination bashed against your wall was quite helpful today. thank you.
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.
dorion: this also ties back to the discussion with trinque about skypies.
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
diana_coman: dorion: that it does, indeed.
dorion: diana_coman I'll come back with new questions tomorrow. as you said, it's all going to take time.
diana_coman: dorion: all right.
jfw: diana_coman: I was a bit embarassed to say it but I'm not quite seeing what "the same stupid" is here. That's a larger question of why tmsr failed, isn't it?
diana_coman: jfw: link?
jfw: of which one noted reason was lack of outreach to bring in external resources / new people
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 18:31:09 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*
diana_coman: ah, you said right before that: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1022130
ossabot: Logged on 2020-03-16 18:30:26 jfw: but if every man alone is doing his own cleanup, resources are fragmented. But yeah, I can see where the unification attempt didn't amount to much.
diana_coman: "same stupid " = "every man alone is doing his own" + "resources are fragmented"
jfw: I had trb in mind as non-fragmentation though
diana_coman: so: don't do your own of everything, don't fragment resources
diana_coman: aim precisely for the opposite
jfw: good then.
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)
diana_coman: basically the tmsr experiment makes for a great exhibits-of-fail, poster, huh.
dorion: jfw we're also specifically aimed at outreach and will only survive if we're effective. we also have what you're created and are continuing to refine, but that has to be sustained by effective outreach.
dorion: s/you're/you've/
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"
diana_coman: but it's possibly quite a lot for today anywya.
diana_coman: jfw: are you still feeling totally down?
jfw: diana_coman: I'm sated for today and definitely feeling better than yest.
dorion: diana_coman thanks, I think it's fine to be restated and does tie in to all the expressed interest on continuing with OS work.
jfw: I did conclude it wasn't "nihilism" btw, more just bouncing around wondering what next
jfw: I certainly look forward to continuing to fix computing if at all possible, while keen to keep it sustainable.
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)
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?
jfw: diana_coman: yeah, gotta remember to have fun with that too. Thanks.
diana_coman: cool, /me is out for the day.
whaack: dorion: I am pretty sure I am going to cancel my trip actually. Looks like Panama just closed its borders.
dorion: whaack, yea you beat me to it.
feedbot: http://younghands.club/2020/03/17/ejb-review-of-mar-9-mar-15-plan-for-mar-16-mar-22/ << Young Hands Club -- ejb review of Mar 9-Mar 15 ; plan for Mar 16-Mar 22
lobbes: http://logs.ericbenevides.com/log/ossasepia/2020-03-16#1021909 << the server entered into it because MP was going to have a clone of trilema.com on there (trilema.net). The logbot would be logging to that clone.
ericbot: Logged on 2020-03-16 19:14:47 diana_coman: lobbes: what was the initial plan with the logbot and that server, I hadn't followed too closely and now I'm rather unclear on it.
lobbes: http://logs.ericbenevides.com/log/trilema/2020-03-11#1959422 << related thread re: how he was planning to sync the two
ericbot: (trilema) 2020-03-11 mp_en_viaje: honestly i think what i'll go for will be : (using trilema.com for current trilema and trilema.net for pizdi's box), hve a mysql server run on both, have t.com update both rather than just its own, and have it read the day's logs at some point tomorrow. this way people can use t.net for any purpose except write a comment.
dorion: lobbes congrats on getting the job done.