IRC log started Fri Sep 24 00:00:01 1999
[msg(TUNES)] permlog 1999.0924
-:- core [core@mcp.suntech.fr] has joined #tunes
<core> ping
-:- hcf [nef@me-portland-us835.javanet.com] has joined #tunes
06:10am
<Crimson> core: hi
06:20am
<core> hey crimson :)
<Crimson> the work on chaos proceeds. Have you checked our updated pages?
<core> last time i did it was on 19990916 I think :) the left menu looked better
<core> what does www.delorie.com resolves to for you? :)
06:30am
<Crimson> what?
<Crimson> core: what browser are you using?
<Crimson> our pages don't work well in netscape.
06:40am
-:- BlackPhoenix [black-phoe@adm.univd.kharkov.ua] has joined #tunes
-:- SignOff BlackPhoenix: #TUNES (Leaving)
-:- NetSplit: forward.openprojects.net split from sterling.openprojects.net [07:27am]
-:- BitchX+Deb1an: Press Ctrl-F to see who left Ctrl-E to change to [forward.openprojects.net]
-:- Netjoined: forward.openprojects.net sterling.openprojects.net
-:- Fare [fare@quatramaran.ens.fr] has joined #Tunes
-:- NetSplit: heinlein.openprojects.net split from verne.openprojects.net [07:39am]
-:- BitchX+Deb1an: Press Ctrl-F to see who left Ctrl-E to change to [heinlein.openprojects.net]
-:- Netjoined: heinlein.openprojects.net verne.openprojects.net
-:- core [core@mcp.suntech.fr] has joined #Tunes
<Crimson> core: what browser are you using?
<Crimson> our pages don't work well in netscape.
<Crimson> netscape's css-support sux.
07:50am
<Zhivago> re
08:00am
<Zhivago> x86 asm is, I have to say, ugly
08:10am
-:- beagle [user9595@d7-58.dialup.zoo.co.uk] has joined #Tunes
-:- beagle [user9595@d7-58.dialup.zoo.co.uk] has left #Tunes []
-:- SignOff hcf: #TUNES (Leaving)
-:- NetSplit: forward.openprojects.net split from sterling.openprojects.net [09:20am]
-:- BitchX+Deb1an: Press Ctrl-F to see who left Ctrl-E to change to [forward.openprojects.net]
-:- Netjoined: forward.openprojects.net sterling.openprojects.net
-:- Fare [fare@quatramaran.ens.fr] has joined #Tunes
-:- SignOff Fare: #TUNES (Ping timeout for Fare[quatramaran.ens.fr])
-:- Fare [fare@quatramaran.ens.fr] has joined #Tunes
-:- hcf [nef@me-portland-us847.javanet.com] has joined #tunes
-:- binEng [Anders@j141.ryd.student.liu.se] has joined #tunes
!NickServ:*! netgod used GETPASS on amessyroom
-:- SignOff binEng: #TUNES (Ping timeout for binEng[j141.ryd.student.liu.se])
-:- binEng [Anders@j141.ryd.student.liu.se] has joined #tunes
-:- eihrul [eihrul@usr5-ppp161.lvdi.net] has joined #tunes
<eihrul> core: there?
12:50pm
-:- SignOff hcf: #TUNES (Leaving)
-:- eihrul has changed the topic on channel #Tunes to: Free Reflective Computing System <http://ww.qzx.com/bfe (NEW VERSION)
<eihrul> ack...
-:- eihrul has changed the topic on channel #Tunes to: Free Reflective Computing System <http://www.tunes.org> || http://www.aftersleeves.org/apostle/ || http://www.qzx.com/bfe (NEW VERSION)
01:10pm
-:- Beholder [beholder@ppp-131.m2-3.sub.ican.net] has joined #tunes
-:- hcf [nef@me-portland-us817.javanet.com] has joined #tunes
<Beholder> Hey hcf
<hcf> hoy beh
<binEng> hi hi
<Beholder> How goes things here?
02:10pm
-:- SignOff hcf: #TUNES (Leaving)
-:- SignOff Beholder: #TUNES (Read error to Beholder[ppp-131.m2-3.sub.ican.net]: EOF from client)
-:- binEng [Anders@j141.ryd.student.liu.se] has left #tunes []
-:- SignOff Zhivago: #TUNES (Ping timeout for Zhivago[th.merddin.com.au])
-:- ElGato` [no@209-68-229-141.dialup.cust.tfb.com] has joined #TUNES
<ElGato`> hi
<ElGato`> core!!!
04:40pm
<ElGato`> 'lo?
04:50pm
-:- liar [brand@p0wer.qzx.com] has joined #tunes
<ElGato`> hi
<liar> wow $499 for a 12 day trip to india
<ElGato`> i know a guy who got a 27 gig (mabye 22 i think) harddrive on ebay for $650 :D
<liar> Stay in Heritage "PALACES", forts & castles of former "MAHARAJAS".
<ElGato`> er
<ElGato`> oooops
<ElGato`> $6.50 i mean
05:00pm
!irq:*! ut oh
<liar> ElGato`: how long u been here?
<liar> today
<ElGato`> 20 minutes mabye
05:10pm
<liar> do u know where the log of this channel is at on tunes.org?
<liar> n/m
05:20pm
<ElGato`> oh
<ElGato`> www.tunes.org/files/irc
<liar> damn its been dead today
<ElGato`> yes
<liar> hmm i think i didnt explain tunes clearly enuf to zhivago
<ElGato`> heh
05:30pm
<liar> he is now thinking that tunes will be butt freakin slow cuz it has to recompile programs into a single stream
<liar> when it really just compiles small functions of the program
<ElGato`> each object?
<liar> eh?
<ElGato`> n/m
05:40pm
-:- SignOff ElGato`: #TUNES (Leaving)
-:- SignOff eihrul: #TUNES (Ping timeout for eihrul[usr5-ppp161.lvdi.net])
-:- eihrul [eihrul@usr5-ppp161.lvdi.net] has joined #tunes
-:- ElGato` [no@209-68-229-156.dialup.cust.tfb.com] has joined #tunes
<ElGato`> lo
-:- SignOff eihrul: #TUNES (Ping timeout for eihrul[usr5-ppp161.lvdi.net])
06:50pm
-:- eihrul [eihrul@usr5-ppp161.lvdi.net] has joined #tunes
<ElGato`> wb
07:10pm
-:- hcf [nef@me-portland-us205.javanet.com] has joined #tunes
-:- Kaufmann [Kaufmann@dial217.infolink.com.br] has joined #tunes
<Kaufmann> Does anybody know anything about copyright law, as applied to music? (Except that it's stupid - I already know that)
<eihrul> best to check the government sites, i would assume
<Kaufmann> I don't want any of that technical legal crap, I just want to know whether a hypothetical situation would be legal
<eihrul> check online still
<eihrul> i'm sure they have summaries of copyright law all over the place
<Kaufmann> These sites are useability zero. Besides, I'm in Brazil and this is an Internet setup so any country's specific legal details aren't relevant anyway. All I need to know is if it's generally considered OK not to pay royalties for a specific application of online music.
08:00pm
<eihrul> well, wouldn't that go more into patent law than copyright law?
<eihrul> as you can't copyright ideas
<Kaufmann> Music definitely falls under copyright law
<eihrul> but you're talking about the application of it...
<eihrul> copyright i thought can only cover specific implementations and the distribution/use rights of that implementation
08:10pm
-:- Zhivago [brian@th.merddin.com.au] has joined #tunes
<Kaufmann> Well, I'm really tired, so just give me an educated guess on this one. The situation is this: a net-zine, charging a monthly subscription rate for access to: 1) a web site with classical rock news, articles praising Eric or Jeff or whoever, etc.; 2) a RealAudio server that broadcasts classical rock 24/7; 3) the occasional video feed of a really cool show on RealVideo; 4) an FTP site holding a collection of classical rock songs in MP3 format.
<Kaufmann> For which of 2-4 do you think I'll be required to pay royalties?
<eihrul> 2-4 are all shady...
<eihrul> could be all cases for copyright ickies
<Kaufmann> Note that all songs are converted to MP3 and contributed to the repository by the members themselves.
<eihrul> as in 2, you have to get the music somewhere... in 3, carriers might have to license it or something, and in 4, gotta get music somewhere
<Zhivago> kau: it is an issue of broadcast/distribution
<Kaufmann> So officially we're just charging for the maintainance of the system
<eihrul> maybe if you put some kind of disclaimer that you are not responsible for the content on the server of MP3's
<eihrul> and that all users agree that they are completely liable for any material they put on it
<eihrul> so if they rip some CD illegaly, it's there problem
<Zhivago> you'll need stat decs to the effect that this music is not illegal
<ElGato`> who wants some intellectual reading boys and girls?!
<Zhivago> and then they'll get you for lack of due diligence
<Kaufmann> ElGato, me! me! me! :)
<Zhivago> either way you're in trouble
<eihrul> ElGato`: wha?
<Zhivago> what flavour reading?
<Kaufmann> Zhivago, "they"? Who? My shareholders? :)
<ElGato`> a mathematical proof of determinism
<Zhivago> kau: anyone who you irritate in any way possible
<Zhivago> el: can't do it wihout revealed axioms
<ElGato`> the only thing i assume is that the universe in infinite :(
<Zhivago> el: and since we can't prove that we have revealed the axioms, we can't give a mathematical proof, in the real world
<ElGato`> in  y proof
<Kaufmann> Zhivago, but how will they sue me, me being in Brazil and all?
<Zhivago> el: how do you account for this possibility...
<Zhivago> el: we have a bunch of guys, they make a set of relations which predict the universe perfectly for 15 billion years
<ElGato`> it's a proof under current mathematical axioms silly
<Zhivago> el: the next year, their prediction fails.
<Zhivago> el: well, it can't be a proof about the universe then :)
<ElGato`> we can get darn close :P
<Zhivago> el: since we don't have access to its axioms
<Zhivago> el: we can approach them in a lawful universe
<Zhivago> el: but we can never know if the universe is lawful
<ElGato`> zhivago i agree with you completely
<ElGato`> but for now enjoy
<Kaufmann> Zhivago, so?
<eihrul> hrmm, core been here lately?
08:20pm
<ElGato`> kaufmann: whatah you think?
<Zhivago> oops, this proof is broken
<Zhivago> ok lets look at the initial setting
<Zhivago> we have a universe with how many objects in it?
<Kaufmann> El, haven't read it yet... doesn't seem like I'll have to either, according to Zhi
<ElGato`> one hypothitically if you please
<Zhivago> el: then there is one location
<Zhivago> el: even if its random
<Zhivago> el: so the chance of being there is 100%
<ElGato`> ...
<ElGato`> possible locations
<Zhivago> no, if there's one only object then there is no way to tell where you are
<Zhivago> there's only one effective location :)
<Zhivago> you need more objects in your universe in order to have more location
<Kaufmann> In fact, it'll probably be a sure bet in any case that you have found a mathematical proof of determinism
<ElGato`> ok pretend you have a reference point
<Zhivago> we do, its the object
<Kaufmann> "... that you haven't...", even
<Kaufmann> Sorry
<Zhivago> that's the only reference point we can possible have in a one-element universe
<ElGato`> fine two then
<Zhivago> which means that the object is at the origin at all points
<Zhivago> ok, with two objects we now have a _relationship_ betwen the objects
<ElGato`> yes
<Zhivago> which gives us _distance_
<Zhivago> but not direction
<ElGato`> thankyou :D
<Zhivago> we have effectively a one-dimensional universe here
<Zhivago> now, our non-deterministic universe still works
<ElGato`> better yet four objects
<Zhivago> four objects gets better, now we can start to talk about 3-dpsace
<ElGato`> continue
<Zhivago> now, lets look at the range of causal systems we are interested in
<Zhivago> we can have undetermined, in which case we have no relationships
<Zhivago> that's obviously out, since we have relationships
<ElGato`> just 3d space please i didn't include time for simplicity
<Zhivago> we can have partially determined, in which case we have probable relationships
<Zhivago> and we can have absolutely determined, in which case we have absolute relationships
<Zhivago> the second case has the most evidence for it at present, but that's not relevent here
<ElGato`> nothing is absolute :D
<Zhivago> then determinism is a dangerous word to use
<ElGato`> no it isn't :P
<Zhivago> you'd better clarify what you mean by it
<ElGato`> yes
<eihrul> ElGato`: you going to be in here for awhile?
<ElGato`> not
<ElGato`> no rather
<eihrul> anyone else then?
<ElGato`> i have cross country meet tommorrow
<Zhivago> probably
<eihrul> if core comes back, ask him about the new synchronization primitive he was supposedly supposed to hear of today, for me
<ElGato`> i wrote that proof up quite quickly zhivago
<ElGato`> i could have been more concise
<Zhivago> el: ok, well, yo ustill havent' said what you think determinism means
* eihrul/#tunes goes afk.
<ElGato`> hrm
<Kaufmann> So I'm working on a GA to solve Rubik's Cubes
<ElGato`> nothing is random :D
<ElGato`> the opposite of random
<Zhivago> el: repetition does not substitute for truth
<Zhivago> el: ok, you have no justification for that :)
08:30pm
<Zhivago> el: and you cannot prove that either in any case
<ElGato`> hhow so?
<Zhivago> el: its simple 'lack of evidence is not evidence of lack'
<Zhivago> el: which is why you can never prove a determinism
<ElGato`> are you going back to the axiom thing?
<Zhivago> el: no, this is a problem with being in an ill defined system
<ElGato`> yes
<Zhivago> el: we can only infer things about it though prediction
<ElGato`> well
<Zhivago> el: prediction cannot be certain if we don't know the fundamnetals of the systems
<Zhivago> and since we don't know the fundamentals, we can't use prediction to get 'em because we can't be certain, since we don't know them
<ElGato`> all im trying to prove is that if you looked at the current state of the universe you could predict it's future state
<Zhivago> your proof has nothing to do with that
<ElGato`> oh
<ElGato`> now that i think about it...
<Zhivago> and in any case that proof is really about _relationships_ which is why it fails at the degenerate case you've presented
<ElGato`> :)
<ElGato`> actually the original idea was about god and whatnot and i sorta exaturated it
<Zhivago> hmm :) sounds a little vague
<Zhivago> its not a bad exercise though
<ElGato`> which?
<Zhivago> starting with god-arguments
<ElGato`> well think of this theologically
<ElGato`> can it be adapted to say nothing started out randomly
<ElGato`> ?
<Zhivago> well, except that it can't justify that
<Zhivago> there's no difference between random and deterministic in that degenerate case
<Zhivago> at least wrt location
<Zhivago> since there is only one location so it doesn't matter why you're there
<ElGato`> :(
<ElGato`> so um...
<ElGato`> what do you think it proves or gives evidence of?
<Zhivago> um, nothing :)
<Zhivago> but its a good start
<ElGato`> well if i changed it then?
<Zhivago> well, I think that argument is fundamentally flawed.
<ElGato`> where specically?
<Zhivago> but the problem could be that I've looked, and have never found any decent argument for determinism
<Zhivago> apart from 'god doesn't throw dice'
<Zhivago> well, the problem is in the 'universe with one object with more than one location'
<Zhivago> location in a universe is a relationship between objects
<Zhivago> so with only one object we don't have such a relationship
<ElGato`> no no no
<Zhivago> in the same sense the earth is the center of the universe
<ElGato`> assuming that i added some objects :D
<Zhivago> well, once you add objects, what happens to your proof?
<Zhivago> about them being no-where?
<ElGato`> i just add the objects as reference points
<Zhivago> your proof rules out completely-randomness
<Zhivago> since completely-random things don't have relationships
08:40pm
<Zhivago> but there's a simple proof for that
<ElGato`> oh :(
<ElGato`> i was not aware of that
<Zhivago> what it doesn't address is probabilistic determinism
<Zhivago> well, the key is in the definition of random, and how causal chains work
<Zhivago> if I have a grid of random numbers, what is their interrelationship?
<ElGato`> nothing
<Zhivago> right
<Zhivago> so how can they affect one another?
<ElGato`> no way at all
<Zhivago> so, random things are causally isolated
<Zhivago> they cannot have properties, or relationships, or even effectively exist at all
<ElGato`> that is more elegant than mine :(
<Zhivago> but lets consider quasi-random numbers
<Zhivago> I have this grid, now I apply a local averaging function
<Zhivago> so we average a point with its neighbours
<Zhivago> so, we have a relationship between these elements now
<Zhivago> but its a weak relationship, a probabilistic one
<Zhivago> but it gives them properties, and they're causally interacting now
<Zhivago> but they're not strictly deterministic
<ElGato`> you lost me at probabilistic...
<Zhivago> this is the case that you're going to want to address, since it is entirely adequate for explaining the universe we live in
<Zhivago> well, it's like this
<Zhivago> say I make up a grid like this, and apply my filter without looking
<Zhivago> now I look at a random point on it
<Zhivago> I can now make a prediction about the values of its neighbours
<Zhivago> with _some_ success
<ElGato`> how is it random?
<Zhivago> well, I got a grid of random numbers, unrelated
<ElGato`> ok
<Zhivago> then I applied an local average filter over it
<Zhivago> without looking at the numbers yet
<ElGato`> oh
<ElGato`> so you kinda know where they are
<Zhivago> now I look at one, and I can guess about its neighbours
<Zhivago> yeah, so I can guess with some predictive power
<ElGato`> continue
<Zhivago> depending on the harshness of the filter
<Zhivago> this is a non-deterministic system with predictive power
<Zhivago> or rather a causal deterministic system
<Zhivago> er causal non-deterministic
<Zhivago> we have properties, and relationships, we can make predictions with varying levels of success
<Zhivago> at some point our predictions will stop getting better however
<Zhivago> as we hit the fundamental randomness
<Zhivago> the question here is, where is that point?
<Zhivago> as this point approaches absolute prediction we get closer to a deterministic system
<Zhivago> we can infact construct a system from almost-completely-random elements
<Zhivago> and have the causality emerge from the flaws in the randomness
<Zhivago> emergent behaviour from an unpredictable system can be highly predictable, and vice verse
<Zhivago> which fits nicely with QM for a RL interjection
<ElGato`> so where does my idea fit in?
08:50pm
<Zhivago> hmm, oh, it just dismisses the trivial case, or would if the relationship fit
<Zhivago> the case of complete-randomness
<Zhivago> but I'd restate that as
<Zhivago> 'we have relationships, completely-random things don't .: we don't have complete randominity'
<ElGato`> hmmm
<ElGato`> well i am sorta getting you
<ElGato`> i have little mathematical backgroung compared to you
<ElGato`> how does  at some point our predictions will stop getting better however?
<Zhivago> oh, I'm not a math person
<Zhivago> well, lets look at the filtered grid
<Zhivago> our filter pulls the values towards each other
<Zhivago> so we know they're more likely to be close than far
<Zhivago> its the degree of pull that we can predict up to
<Zhivago> after we've effectively worked out how this filter works, then we're guessing
<Zhivago> so if the universe is like this, we'll run into the same barriers
<Zhivago> as we hit the fundamentally random subtrate
<Zhivago> basically the filter adds information to the system
<Zhivago> we can only predict up to the level of information there
<Zhivago> random doesn't hold information, so we hit an edge there if that makes sense
<ElGato`> ok
<ElGato`> oh well
<ElGato`> i'll work on this later
-:- SignOff Kaufmann: #TUNES ("So when someone tells you that you were made in the image of God, (...) take a look of pity and reply, 'Why, that poor deity!'" - Paul & Cox, "Beyond Humanity")
<Zhivago> these thigns are good exercises :)
<ElGato`> im glad i recruited you zhivago :D
<ElGato`> you're a fine contribution to the tunes project 
<Zhivago> I've had a lot of practice shreding them, so don't feel bad about it
<ElGato`> :)
<ElGato`> ok
<Zhivago> hmm, I'm not really inveoled with tunes, except to the extent of ripping off retro as much as possible :)
<Zhivago> I was doing tunes-like stuff before I heard about tunes though, and tunes has made so little progress |
<ElGato`> by contributing in this channel you are contributing to tunes
<Zhivago> heheh
09:00pm
<eihrul> Zhivago: why are you ripping retro?
<Zhivago> drivers mostly
<Zhivago> it is doing pretty much exactly what I need there and in a sane fashion
<ElGato`> im still deciding whether to have lengua be stack based or let all objects be free with a little added syntax :\
<Zhivago> lengua?
<ElGato`> my programming language idea
<ElGato`> brb
<Zhivago> imho its dangerous to bind a design idea to an implementation
<ElGato`> ...
<ElGato`> you're tearing me apart zhivago!!!
<Zhivago> oops ;)
<ElGato`> don't you like this channel much more than #c on efnet?
<Zhivago> not particularly
<Zhivago> this channel tends to be dead
<Zhivago> I prefer #lisp on efnet
<ElGato`> ture
<ElGato`> er
<ElGato`> true
<ElGato`> im there ocasionally
<Zhivago> #c's problem is popularity
<ElGato`> i like to talk poetry with aliensex
<ElGato`> and frame ;)
<Zhivago> oh, well, we recently banned aliensex
<ElGato`> D:
<eihrul> #tunes has that problem solved
<Zhivago> which problem?
-:- SignOff hcf: #TUNES (Leaving)
<eihrul> popularity
<Zhivago> el: wouldn't have been a problem but he was constantly flooding the channel with sex talk
<Zhivago> el: and he wouldn't change, so, there wasn't much option
<ElGato`> or when he gets drunk :D
<Zhivago> yeah, I don't mind him in small doses
<ElGato`> mabye you should unban him in a couple days so he learns his lesson and can come back
<Zhivago> if he decides to change, its not a problem
<Zhivago> but otherwise, well, this is the second time
<Zhivago> it was getting to the point of having a lower signal/noise ratio than #c
09:10pm
-:- SignOff Zhivago: #TUNES (Ping timeout for Zhivago[th.merddin.com.au])
-:- Zhivago [brian@th.merddin.com.au] has joined #tunes
-:- SignOff ElGato`: #TUNES (Ping timeout for ElGato`[209-68-229-156.dialup.cust.tfb.com])
-:- BlackPhoenix [black-phoe@adm.univd.kharkov.ua] has joined #tunes
-:- SignOff BlackPhoenix: #TUNES (Leaving)
<liar> any1 awake?
<eihrul> yah
<liar> int  get_physical       ( struct segment_t *segment, unsigned offset , unsigned *physical );
<liar> pointer.h:4: warning: `struct segment_t' declared inside parameter list
<liar> how do i pass structure pointers?
10:30pm
<eihrul> like that
<eihrul> is segment_t a typedef?
<liar> no
<eihrul> make sure you're including the definition of struct segment_t into that file
<liar> i do
<eihrul> send me the file
<eihrul> you're not... apparently
<eihrul> even though you hink you are :)
<eihrul> that's what the compiler is saying
<liar> its decalred in globals.h
<liar> and i included it
<eihrul> somehow it's not getting included
<eihrul> or for some reason the compiler can't see the definition of segment_t
<liar> ill just do what i did with the memwin_struct structure
<eihrul> try putting this line above the prototype: struct segmen_t;
<eihrul> er: struct segment_t;
<eihrul> although you shouldn't have to
<liar> it compiled
<eihrul> probably something to do with your obscure use of header files
10:40pm
<liar> hmm
<liar> my code isnt working for the first instruction
<liar> ah
11:00pm
-:- cleartape [pudin@ptp47.wanweb.net] has joined #tunes
-:- cleartape [pudin@ptp47.wanweb.net] has left #tunes []
<liar> eihrul: u here?
11:30pm
<eihrul> i guess
<liar> <bochs:1> x /1bx 0
<liar> [bochs]:
<liar> 0x0 <bogus+0>:  0x00
<liar> fscanf(readpipe, "%*s %*s 0x%X ", &val);
<liar> how do i make that skip the [bochs]: line
<eihrul> just stick it in the pattern string
11:40pm
<liar> with a \n?
<eihrul> no
<liar> fscanf(readpipe, "[bochs]: %*s %*s 0x%X ", &val);?
<eihrul> yes
<liar> still aint working
<eihrul> so figure it out yourself :)
<liar> i hate kevin
<liar> had it workin and he goes and changes bochs
<liar> wtf is the purpose of that [bochs]:
<eihrul> how am i supposed to know?
<eihrul> am i kevin?
<liar> crap, im going to bed this is stressing me out 
<eihrul> good idea
11:50pm
<Zhivago> heh, should have used fgets() :)
[msg(TUNES)] newlog 1999.0925
IRC log ended Sat Sep 25 00:00:00 1999