00:02:03 Who works with CSGs? 00:02:03 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 00:03:11 int-e: People who deal with Turing Machines 00:03:49 I've dealt with Turing Machines. I have not used CSGs for anything meaningful that I remember. 00:04:00 i'd imagine they mostly just work with SPACE(O(n)) if they care about the class 00:04:43 it's such an unwieldy model of computation 00:05:05 int-e: Turing Machines recognize the CSGs, IIRC 00:05:11 int-e: Also, I'm doing something eso with it 00:05:29 hppavilion[2]: turing machines recognize everything 00:05:37 that you can compute 00:05:42 oerjan: Oh, right 00:05:47 oerjan: Then what recognizes the CSGs? 00:05:54 linearly bounded TMs 00:06:07 Oh I've done some string rewriting which actually comes quite close. 00:06:27 oerjan: Really? I would think that you would need a TM For the CSGs 00:06:46 hppavilion[2]: i said TM 00:06:51 oerjan: OK, then what system generates the ECTs (Every Computable Things) 00:06:59 oerjan: Well yeah 00:07:04 TMs without restriction 00:07:15 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:07:33 oerjan: What thing analogous to BNF is used for the Unrestricted Grammars? 00:07:34 s/linearly bounded/linearly bounded memory/ 00:08:11 hppavilion[2]: unrestricted grammars _are_ analogous to BNF. 00:08:12 (but string rewriting will take you directly to Chomsky type 0) 00:08:29 oerjan: I thought BNF was the CFGs 00:08:49 (string rewriting = semi-Thue systems) 00:08:50 hppavilion[2]: ...are you incapable of understanding the word "analogous"? 00:08:58 oerjan: I think I might b 00:08:59 *be 00:09:16 * oerjan getting annoyed, sorry 00:09:59 oerjan: I thought that a and c are analogous (with some implicit connection b and d) if a:b::c:d 00:10:02 hppavilion[2]: i think unrestricted grammars have the same problem as int-e noted for CFG: no one _really_ uses them because they don't have nice properties for actual parsing 00:10:08 argh 00:10:11 *CSG 00:10:12 oerjan: Fair enough 00:10:45 oerjan: But if they the only thing at your disposal is grammars, it's better to have a URG than a CFG 00:11:07 well if you want to use it to describe computations, sure 00:11:41 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 00:11:43 oerjan: Yes, I do 00:11:56 it depends what you mean by "better". there is the usual duality where better at being powerful means worse at being analyzable 00:12:09 I suppose so 00:12:33 oerjan: Remember Thoof? I'm basically just doing that again, but trying to make it cleaner 00:13:54 Actually, I should use decidable grammars. That seems less stupid 00:13:59 hppavilion[2]: there are some who think that the real problem with answering the P vs. NP question is that no one has a real grip on how powerful P is. and CSG is almost as bad. 00:14:44 hppavilion[2]: the thing is, it's know that equivalence of context-sensitive grammars is undecidable. of course you can try to decide it for as many cases as possible, but to sell this, scientifically, you need a compelling reason why this question is of practical interest, I think, because theoreticians will not care much about methods that only work in some cases. 00:15:28 int-e: It's a proof assistant. Proving their equivalence is the job of the user, not of the program. I just want to know what tools to include. 00:16:01 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:16:24 hppavilion[2]: I bet you'll find publications on testing equivalence of CFGs, even though the problem is undecidable, precisely because there's some practical interest. In fact: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/sumitg/pubs/oopsla15-edu.pdf 00:16:40 OK, what I need is a concrete machine that is a decider (machine that always halts) 00:17:14 (concrete as in "some sort of metaphor that you can actually think about and manipulate") 00:18:15 esolang idea I had a while back: a language where the only data structure is strings, which are manipulated character-wise 00:18:31 except at all points, each variable has to contain a real English word or the program crashes 00:18:44 the problem is I can't see a way to make it TC without losing the spirit behind the language 00:19:32 ais523: Why make it TC? Why not make it Total? 00:20:29 well, "naturally" it ends up as a finite state machine 00:20:42 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 00:20:42 and those normally allow uninteresting translations of programs via hardcoding the output 00:20:54 -!- `^_^v has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep). 00:21:02 if you take input it's more interesting but even then I suspect you'd just use two similar words as 0 and 1 and have all your variables as booleans 00:22:16 -!- `^_^v has joined. 00:25:14 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:25:16 are there a lot of systems that we just don't know if they're turing complete yet? 00:26:44 like, systems that can loop finitely or infinitely (and where it's not trivial to determine how long it'll loop), and where the amount of info in it can increase infinitely or decrease, but there are no proofs of turing completeness or non-completeness 00:30:41 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds). 00:31:19 stuff like the collatz conjecture and the mandelbrot fractal and so forth 00:31:42 possibly some kinds of recursive equations or summation 00:33:45 and lychrel numbers 00:34:00 mad: probably. 00:34:26 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:35:16 I'm kinda wondering if most of them are turing machines but are just excessively hard to write a program in 00:36:16 or if it's possible to have a system that has most trappings that would make a turing machine (infinitely growable state, unpredictable halting) but are just too chaotic to be turing complete 00:37:11 ais523: obviously you cannot do it with a finite number of variables, which means you need some kind to structure an unbounded number of them. 00:37:23 *kind of way 00:37:33 oerjan: I've been wondering whether English actually has infinitely many words 00:37:40 but even if it did, they'd follow predictable patterns i think 00:37:45 in an uninteresting way 00:37:57 so yes, you need unboundedly many variables, but in an interesting way somehow 00:38:22 ais523: the first obvious idea is that arrays of variables need to be grammatically correct phrases 00:38:46 you'd need a better dictionary for that 00:38:49 just make it a crosswords thing 00:38:54 but fizzie probably has one, so that's not insurmountable 00:38:58 english doesn't meaningfully have infinite words 00:39:02 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 00:39:09 * ais523 imagines an array full entirely of "buffalo" 00:39:15 mostly because your morphemic construction is too limited 00:39:20 ais523: heh 00:39:53 though I guess you could do it in a polysynthetic language 00:40:19 mad: you can argue the case for tautonyms 00:40:21 zzzzzzzzzzzz, etc. 00:40:32 start with a verb -> nominalize -> incorporate into a verb -> nominalize -> incorporate into a verb -> nominalize -> etc... 00:40:37 but that's basically just unary that can't get shorter than three 00:41:12 -!- `^_^v has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep). 00:41:47 * mad looks up tautonums 00:42:03 latin animal names that have the same name twice or more? 00:42:36 the word's basically been generalized to mean any word that contains a repeating section 00:42:51 how do you do that in english 00:43:20 hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 00:43:23 afaik it's like the language with the least reduplication morphemes in the world 00:43:40 mad: *MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA* 00:44:06 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:44:50 (ok that might have been a hyper-hyper-bole :3 ) 00:45:37 so following the crossword idea, what about this: There's an infinite grid, initially populate with an 'a' at the origin. There's an operation that takes an english word and tries to insert it into the crosswords; it would try to insert the word in some fixed order that moves out from the origin, and succeed if the word could be inserted (overlapping with at least one existing word, filling at... 00:45:43 ...least one space, and preserving the property that all vertical and horizontal words are proper english words... like scrabble). You get back one bit of information, namely whether the operation succeeded or not. 00:46:14 So it's an awkward write only storage... but not clearly insufficient to make things TC. 00:46:40 err, append only is what I wanted to say. 00:47:36 oerjan: that swat is for something in the distant past tdnh 00:48:44 shachaf: behold the long arm of the swatter 00:48:45 english is possibly on the bottom end of the scale for how modular its words are 00:48:59 actually I'm pretty sure it is 00:49:11 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds). 00:49:54 due to the combination of tons of loanwords and low complexity of the verb grammar and noun grammar 00:50:38 * oerjan sics augur on mad 00:50:51 * oerjan was just feeling evil 00:51:41 oerjan: isn't that how you normally feel? 00:52:32 ERM 00:53:00 -!- ent0nces has joined. 00:54:34 oh, foreshadowing (GG)... 00:54:48 o.o 00:55:47 i dont know what it means to say that a language's words are modular 00:56:26 as for infinitely many english words, english morphology allows cycles 00:56:40 so there are infinitely many words, but not in a hugely interesting way 00:57:02 BORING 00:57:04 Sprachbaukastenträume (dreams of construction kits for languages) 00:57:35 int-e: there's a language construction kit out there 00:58:00 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 00:58:17 that isn't quite the point I was trying to make 00:58:43 oh ok 00:58:48 -!- idris-bot has joined. 00:59:09 språkmeningsutvekslingskatastrofe 00:59:27 if the point is about german, dont be fooled. german "very long words" are actually multiple words, but the orthographic convention is to not use spaces 00:59:45 wat 00:59:50 grammatically, they're not single words, just compound words 01:00:12 english has them in abundance just like german but english orthography for compounding is to use spaces 01:00:42 augur: give me an example of english cycle 01:01:04 mad: -ish is Noun -> Adjective, -ness is Adjective -> Noun 01:01:59 int-e: i think my evil has gone too far. 01:02:12 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:02:24 oerjan: you could drive space ships with it, but I see that as a feature 01:02:38 is -nessish possible? 01:02:47 loch nessishness 01:02:49 it's not nearly as bad as the space ships driven by bad news (--> Hitchhiker) 01:02:54 mad: yes 01:03:42 mad: but the meanings of these are tricky, because -ness creates an abstract noun, so we get increasing fuzziness and it rapidly becomes weird 01:03:48 but grammatically its fine 01:04:19 oh, nessification 01:04:57 of course there's always anti- :) 01:05:10 augur: The point was that compound nouns are *very* modular. 01:05:12 anti^n-X is always fine, of course 01:05:27 int-e: i still dont know what modular means in this context :) 01:05:29 co-co-nuts. 01:06:08 modular things can be combined more or less freely, but also taken apart. 01:06:20 oh, agglutinative, then 01:06:26 or agglutinating 01:06:41 as opposed to fusional 01:06:58 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 01:07:23 english is on the agglutinating end of the spectrum but it has some places where fusional morphology is found 01:07:38 -!- centrinia has joined. 01:09:56 -!- ChanServ has set channel mode: +o oerjan. 01:09:59 eh, I'd call english analytic 01:10:18 and for the parts that aren't analytic, fusional 01:10:50 agglutinating generally implies that your compounding is relatively clean-cut 01:10:57 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: +b *!*earendel@unaffiliated/earendel. 01:10:57 -!- oerjan has kicked earendel. 01:11:15 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -o oerjan. 01:11:27 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:11:35 ... 01:11:46 which isn't really the case for english (or any european language really) 01:12:30 mad: before today, i'd _almost_ started thinking he'd changed his ways. 01:13:18 I don't think I know him anyways 01:14:32 mad: old channel troll who keeps coming back. this time it took longer before i noticed it was him (in fact i got tipped) 01:14:45 right 01:16:00 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 01:16:41 although that was a while ago... he was behaving so well i decided to stay silent. 01:20:43 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:25:00 makes sense 01:25:33 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 01:26:42 Hm, what happened today? 01:27:24 two unecessary outbursts using foul language, as far as I can tell. 01:27:32 yeah. 01:27:35 A 01:27:37 Ah* 01:27:48 (boily uses fowl language all the time and he's still allowed here, how fair is that) 01:27:58 * int-e runs. 01:28:02 * oerjan kickbans int-e 01:28:37 I speak clicks, whistles and clucks 01:28:44 to be fair boily only uses it when he quits 01:28:48 so you can't kick him anyway 01:28:53 tru dat 01:28:55 Three distinct bird languages 01:29:04 Each with their own grammar and syntax 01:29:05 foal language on the other hand... 01:29:10 fowl: no honks? 01:29:19 fowl: cow.org/csi 01:29:28 oerjan: nahh I don't associate with geese 01:29:40 My chicken friends are as low as I'll stoop 01:29:53 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:30:19 Huh. I seem to remember earendel participating in discussion at some point. 01:31:00 hppavilion[2]: I dont have flash plugins on my phone 01:31:12 fowl: Oh, that's flash? 01:31:16 fowl: I never noticed xD 01:31:23 fowl: It's the "Instant CSI button" 01:31:46 Hm... 01:32:05 What paradigms have never been used for golphing? 01:34:53 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 01:36:18 -!- ais523 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 01:37:10 <\oren\> I seem to remember hearing the word "entonces" in spanish 01:38:33 yes 01:38:47 I think it means something like "so then" 01:39:08 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:40:40 mad: english is analytic too. analytic is about syntax, agglutinating is about morphology 01:40:45 -!- ais523 has joined. 01:41:02 as for compounding, agglutinating generally isnt about compound words. its about affixes 01:41:26 and english affixes have very well-defined borders 01:41:48 not compared to, say, japanese 01:42:00 i'd say they're about the same on that 01:42:19 or I guess chinese which is hard to beat 01:42:27 chinese has basically no affixes 01:42:35 I'm working on a programming language but am afraid to show it off because it looks a lot like smalltalk 01:42:35 so chinese isnt a good comparison 01:42:55 english might be marginally more prone to morphophonological processes than japanese is, tho 01:43:11 at least standard japanese. i suspect dialects have more morphophonology going on 01:43:46 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 01:44:49 well, chinese has tons of compound words 01:44:57 which I guess isn't really the same as affixes 01:45:19 indeed 01:45:38 what about -zi words, does -zi count as an affix? 01:46:06 there are maybe a handful of affixes in chinese, but very few 01:46:26 or like, -ren compounds 01:46:34 i'd be surprised if there were more than affixes tho 01:47:02 .. 01:47:06 more than 20 affixes 01:47:41 I guess you could say that chinese affixes aren't pure affixes, they also have a vocabulary meaning 01:48:23 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:48:32 whether its an affix or not is determined entirely by whether its bound or not 01:48:44 and you could say that about a lot of chinese's grammar, most of its grammar words also have a vocabulary meaning 01:48:49 like how it does prepositions 01:49:53 well prepositions are words 01:50:05 by definition :) 01:50:22 yeah they're definitely free words in chinese 01:50:24 Huh. I seem to remember earendel participating in discussion at some point. <-- yes, he seemed to be making an effort a few times. 01:50:36 well, deciding whether stuff is bound in chinese is harder, because stuff doesn't really bind phonologically in phonological words 01:51:07 What paradigms have never been used for golphing? <-- . o O ( XML? ) 01:51:12 morphemes are really easy to split in chinese, words are hard 01:51:27 kindof the reverse situation of a typical european language 01:53:04 oerjan: Something more like... geometric? 01:53:26 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 01:54:07 I'm working on a programming language but am afraid to show it off because it looks a lot like smalltalk <-- ais523 has the same problem with Feather *ducks* 01:54:14 afk 01:54:58 oerjan: now you're using fowl language 01:55:12 hm, that might be ambiguous 01:55:12 mad: phonological fusion isnt a good indication of boundness 01:55:21 triple-biguous 01:55:32 english has lots of inter-word phonological processes (as do many, if not most, languages) 01:55:35 i was talking about "*ducks*" but in retrospect "Feather" is a fowl language and so is fowl's language 01:55:44 augur : I guess the case for english being agglutinating is helped by the fact that many of the typical european more messy morphemes have been dropped 01:55:45 boundness is a morphosyntactic issue 01:56:22 mad: indeed. english is mostly agglutinating. fusion and suppletion are (universally, i think) more common as the words are more common 01:56:22 most (but not all!) of the weird germanic plurals have been dropped 01:56:38 case is mostly gone 01:56:41 so english has lots of suppletive and fusional morphology but its in the highly common words 01:56:48 same is true of turkish, which is canonically agglutinating 01:56:50 well, 01:57:05 suppletive-anything argues against agglutinative 01:57:13 its not an either or 01:57:27 probably no language, or very few, is strictly one or the other 01:57:31 also english has a lot of irregular verbs 01:57:36 numerically 01:57:40 -!- ent0nces has joined. 01:57:43 they aren't very irregular 01:57:46 but there are lots of them 01:58:06 especially in the formation of the past and the past participle 01:58:09 there's some debate about whether they're truly irregular or not, actually 01:58:20 tho all of them are "irregular" in morphologically interesting ways 01:58:30 like using non-concatenative morphology, which is always fun 01:58:32 if english was really an agglutinative language it would have a lot fewer 01:58:36 like 01:58:47 japanese has like 3 irregular verbs overall 01:59:10 like i said, english is on the agglutinating end of the spectrum, not that it's uniformly agglutinating 01:59:22 non-concatenative = not agglutinative 01:59:42 that.. is also up for debate :) 01:59:49 I'd say compared to the world mean agglutinativeness, english isn't that agglutinative 02:00:07 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Quit: Leaving). 02:00:12 that might be true! 02:00:22 proportionally, english is majority agglutinating tho 02:00:25 mad: WMA is the best statistic 02:00:48 its hard to count, too, because many english words are partially fusional partially agglutinating 02:00:56 well, most english inflections are somewhat concatenative but that's also true of fusional languages 02:02:14 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 02:02:22 additionally, even in regular verbs, english is fusional, because like almost all indo-european languages, tense and person are coded in one morpheme 02:02:34 even if its a regular affix 02:02:51 i dont know if there's a good way to quantify these things, tbh 02:02:53 generally the average fusional language has tons of inflections that are basically concatenating something but there complications like suppletive etc 02:03:11 this is a good description of english 02:03:23 it just has less inflections than other european languages overall 02:03:37 but the inflections it does have aren't that regular 02:04:10 well, I see it as a 2d classification 02:04:21 one dimension is amount of inflection 02:04:31 and the other dimension is how regular that inflection is 02:04:42 no i understand, but i mean, it's hard to measure things 02:04:59 i mean, look, english has a lot of regular verbs, right 02:05:02 so amount of inflection goes: isolative - analytic - synthetic - polysynthetic 02:05:24 that use the -s affix for 3rd person present tense, yeah? 02:05:36 singular, in particular 02:05:41 -s = 3.sg.pres 02:05:48 and then agglutinative means that the inflections are very regular and concatenative, and fusional means that the inflections are not very regular and concatenative 02:06:12 so how do we measure the contribution of this affix, which is fusional? 02:06:21 augur : yes but it interacts with tense 02:06:27 its an affix, so it should contribute positively to an agglutination measure 02:06:37 but its fusional so it should contribute positively to a fusion measure 02:06:46 and it's suppletive for like 2 or 3 verbs (to be, to have...) 02:06:56 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:07:29 so i think defining these metrics is non-trivial. im sure it can be done, in various ways, but its hard to know how to compare languages beyond intuition 02:07:43 likewise, plural is -s but there are also some suppletive plurals 02:08:13 if english was agglutinative it wouldn't have the suppletive plurals 02:08:27 again, you cant just say "if english was agglutinative" 02:08:34 this is a spectrum 02:08:35 well 02:08:44 as agglutinative as turkish or japanese 02:09:05 or other languages typically called 'agglutinative' 02:09:12 sure, if english was as agglutinating as those languages it would be like those languages 02:09:48 anyway this is a silly conversation 02:10:41 english is agglutinating if you compare it to, say, german, but that's like calling trump 'poor' by comparing him to bill gates 02:11:09 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 02:11:29 i would say english is more like turkish and japanese than it is like french in terms of agglutination 02:11:29 like, I object to calling any european language agglutinative 02:11:48 but english is more isolating than turkish and japanese 02:12:08 english is also slightly more analytic than french 02:12:11 english nominal morphology is especially agglutinating 02:12:27 I don't think so 02:12:35 its highly agglutinating 02:12:51 derivationally, that is. the inflectional morphology is too but there's not much of that so 02:13:19 derivationally it has all sorts of kinks due to the fact that the derivations happened in many different languages 02:13:50 kinks are not an obstacle to being agglutinating 02:14:10 anyway, again, unless we have a measure of agglutination, there's only subjective intuition here 02:14:28 hmm, I've seen a classification of this 02:15:56 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:16:52 something like (group - word - morpheme) (syllable - phoneme - feature), figure out which units on the left side line up with borders of which unit on the right side 02:16:59 -!- jaboja64 has joined. 02:17:37 -!- jaboja has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:17:38 on an especially clean-cut language like chinese, the lining up happens on the smallest meaning unit (morpheme) and the largest phonetic unit (syllable) 02:18:28 so chinese can be said to have groups [ words [ morphemes=syllables [ phomemes [ features 02:19:03 a slightly less clean cut language like japanese has groups [words [ morphemes [ syllables [ phonemes [ features 02:20:38 you could say that as 02:21:23 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 02:21:35 (1) what's the smallest unit of meaning that syllables don't straddle (2) what's the smallest unit of pronounciation that morphemes don't straddle 02:22:07 japanese is (1) morphemes (2) syllables 02:24:36 http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=1238 :) 02:24:38 mongolian is less clean - syllables straddle morphemes but not word boundaries, morphemes straddle phonemes but not features 02:25:02 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:26:32 english is less clean still - syllable match word boundaries, morphemes straddle everything including features 02:27:06 french is the least clean and can have multiple words in a single syllable, and morpheme boundaries are hard to isolate 02:28:27 ...ok that sucked and didn't come across, sorry 02:29:13 plus it's not a very good classification for agglutinativeness anyways (which doesn't match very well with this and is much more accurately described as "irregularity" I think) 02:29:45 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 02:31:07 -!- hppavilion[2] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 02:34:32 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:39:19 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds). 02:43:26 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:44:52 -!- jaboja64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 02:47:21 ent0nces: you should fix your connection hth 02:48:03 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 02:48:13 oerjan: tdnh 02:48:15 well that was pretty good timing 02:49:01 also what happened to afk 02:49:09 shachaf: i was afk hth 02:49:37 this shockingly didn't last longer than until i'd made some food. 02:52:41 -!- ent0nces has joined. 02:53:21 ent0nces: you should fix your connection hth 02:53:34 . o O ( 3, 2, ... ) 02:57:24 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds). 03:00:01 afaict entonces automatically rejoins every 9 minutes, and then pings out as if eir client doesn't respond to pings at all. 03:00:37 -!- ChanServ has set channel mode: +o oerjan. 03:01:50 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: +b ent0nces!*@*$##fixyourconnection. 03:01:56 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -o oerjan. 03:06:56 -!- hppavilion[2] has joined. 03:08:11 oerjan: wow, your count was way off 03:11:20 wat 03:12:00 shachaf: note that this is after last rejoin, not after pinging out hth 03:12:10 oerjan: 3, 2, ... 03:12:13 oh 03:12:38 shachaf: YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LONG I CAN HOLD A 1 OKAY? 03:12:45 ent0nces doesn't respond to ctcp version 03:12:53 (he/she/it is online right now; I'm guessing it's a bot) 03:13:16 ais523: a bot not programmed to respond to pings? makes sense. 03:13:29 -!- MDude has changed nick to MDream. 03:14:01 ais523: btw i snapped and banned *!*canaima@* yesterday hth 03:14:20 i am starting to wonder if all of these canaimans are one troll. 03:14:56 hm wait 03:15:08 there have been canaimans who joined briefly, then left. 03:15:33 a man, a plan, a canaima 03:15:37 but anyway one of them (with several nicks) did get on our nerves. 03:15:49 am i an actor? rot, canaima 03:15:50 oerjan: I feel the ban is justified but a redirect would make sense 03:15:55 I just have no idea where to redirect to 03:16:13 -!- hppavilion[2] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 03:18:38 am i an ache, eh, canaima? 03:19:18 -!- lambda-11235 has joined. 03:24:45 -!- ent0nces_ has joined. 03:24:52 oerjan: foiled 03:25:07 -!- hppavilion[2] has joined. 03:25:52 argh 03:27:41 htf did that happen, e's not used a _ before... 03:27:47 -!- ChanServ has set channel mode: +o oerjan. 03:28:09 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -b ent0nces!*@*$##fixyourconnection. 03:28:13 this is also a different host 03:28:27 actually it looks like they're changing host regularly 03:28:35 this one was used before 03:28:37 well i didn't put in the host anyway 03:28:41 -!- tromp_ has joined. 03:28:52 well maybe you can help me make canaima palindromes twh 03:29:23 amianacorn.ro [canaima] 03:29:35 shachaf: i got as far as "am i an accordion, noid roc canaima?" 03:30:02 actually then i tried adding para and things went even more downhill 03:30:14 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -o oerjan. 03:32:16 -!- ais523 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 03:32:18 -!- ent0nces has joined. 03:32:31 wat 03:32:34 oerjan: you didn't reban hth 03:32:43 -!- sebbu has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 03:32:47 well i was hoping the connection issue had been fixed 03:33:01 why did you start hoping that now 03:33:26 well it hasn't pinged out 03:33:39 i guess it doesn't recognize that it's already on 03:34:55 -!- ent0nces_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 03:36:00 let's see if a new one arrives at :41 or so 03:36:35 ent0nces_ only started pinging out when ent0nces joined 03:37:03 no wait 03:37:49 it started a couple minutes earlier 03:37:54 am i an acronym? YNOR, canaima? 03:39:04 "am i an accumulator? rot, alum UC" -- canaima 03:39:53 am i an acrobat, a tab or canaima? 03:41:05 minute of truth 03:41:06 much better tdh 03:42:57 -!- ent0nces_ has joined. 03:45:26 -!- ChanServ has set channel mode: +o oerjan. 03:45:27 -!- ent0nces has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 03:45:28 -!- ent0nce__ has joined. 03:45:49 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: +b ent0nces*!*@*$##fixyourconnection. 03:45:57 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -o oerjan. 03:46:02 oops 03:46:04 ff 03:46:14 * oerjan feels trolled 03:46:19 -!- ChanServ has set channel mode: +o oerjan. 03:46:34 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -b ent0nces*!*@*$##fixyourconnection. 03:47:01 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: +b ent0*!*@*$##fixyourconnection. 03:47:13 -!- oerjan has set channel mode: -o oerjan. 03:48:38 -!- ent0nces_ has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds). 03:53:33 -!- ent0nce__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 04:22:13 -!- hppavilion[2] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 04:25:34 -!- tromp_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 04:30:32 <\oren\> why the hell is the government sending me so much money?! 04:31:13 <\oren\> I'm not unemployed or anything 04:31:50 <\oren\> tax refund of seven thousand dollars, what the hell?! 04:32:06 -!- tromp_ has joined. 04:33:44 sounds like a calculation mistake 04:34:38 <\oren\> well they sent me a check. I hope not everyone's taxes were calculated like that, our overnment would go bankrupt 04:35:55 -!- hppavilion[2] has joined. 04:37:51 [wiki] [[LOLCODE]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46846&oldid=44697 * 173.233.38.21 * (+76) 04:42:09 -!- tromp_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 04:42:42 <\oren\> Oh, never mind. apparently it's because I only worked from this fall this year, so my income was very low on an annual basis, or something... 04:42:58 oh 04:43:01 yeah that would do it 04:44:08 \oren\: how can your government go bankrupt if they can make more CAD whenever they want hth 04:45:16 <\oren\> shachaf: well they have to buy the aluminum the loonies are made of, lol 04:46:31 toonies > loonies 04:47:04 <\oren\> hmm why doesn't the US government pay off its debt by printing more money 04:47:29 <\oren\> we always hear about trillion dollars of national debt on tv 04:47:31 "The coin is manufactured using a patented distinctive bi-metallic coin-locking mechanism.[2] The coins are estimated to last 20 years." 04:47:32 because that would probably trigger hyperinflation 04:47:40 i.e. longer than the patents 04:47:53 \oren\: well, what's wrong with having debt 04:49:12 -!- bb010g has joined. 04:50:50 I dunno if US's problem is really that much debt 04:51:18 <\oren\> shachaf: it's better to pay for things up front than to borrow money 04:51:29 it's mostly a canard from the republicans specifically in the US case 04:51:39 like, I'm not saying that debt is good 04:51:40 \oren\: why? 04:51:41 but 04:52:24 slashing tax rates on the rich and starting a trillion dollar war on Iraq then complaining about debt..... 04:52:59 "look at this we're having deficits we have to slash education and welfare! 04:53:00 <\oren\> shachaf: borrowing money is like stealing bread from your future sel 04:53:18 well 04:53:32 if you borrow money and then spend it on infrastructure 04:53:56 then you have, say, 1 billion in debt but also 1 billion in infrastructure 04:54:36 <\oren\> right whereas the us spent trillions destroying other countries' infrastructure 04:57:44 what I don't understand 04:58:02 is how people who tried to get us into yet an other war in Iran 04:58:18 can live without any guilt over that 05:06:03 \oren\: but a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow 05:08:48 <\oren\> shachaf: no it's not 05:09:12 well, a dollar today is worth more than a dollar in ten years 05:09:34 -!- tromp_ has joined. 05:10:33 <\oren\> that seriously depends on what happens in the next ten years 05:12:36 <\oren\> if you borrow money for ten years you are taking a large risk that you may become unemployed, etc and be unable to pay the intest, then get charged large fees by evil rich people, and end up destitute 05:12:41 -!- cnr has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in). 05:13:21 -!- cnr has joined. 05:14:36 <\oren\> better to pay today and be a free man, than to promise payment and be reduced to a slave 05:15:14 who said anything about interest 05:20:37 <\oren\> uhhh, evryone I've ever seen offering me some loan? 05:21:47 i said a dollar today is worth more than a dollar in ten years 05:21:56 not 99 cents today 05:25:06 Hm... 05:25:21 A programming language based on request-response rather than a single entity 05:25:31 <\oren\> right but a dollar is worth more if you have $1000 than if you have $100,000 05:28:16 maybe? what does that have to do with it? 05:29:59 -!- sebbu has joined. 05:30:25 <\oren\> so you'd better be sure that you'll still have the money in 10 years, 05:31:26 <\oren\> or else the $100 loan you took out 10 years ago may be making you lose your home 05:32:02 -!- tromp_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 05:34:04 -!- impomatic has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 05:34:41 -!- impomatic has joined. 05:35:08 <\oren\> iow, a dollar today is only *likely* to be worth more. it's encumbered by great risk 05:35:39 what's the risk 05:35:58 <\oren\> that you'll lose your ability to pay it 05:37:34 -!- Caesura has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 05:39:25 <\oren\> specifically, lose your ability to pay it and still pay for rent, food and transport 05:41:19 if you think borrowing money is such a bad deal then you should get into the business of lending money 05:45:43 <\oren\> I prefer to make money by honest and moral means 05:47:21 i thought your job involved writing software? 05:50:08 <\oren\> yup. 05:51:17 <\oren\> it doesn't involve exploiting my position as a holder of substantial money to extract more money from people who have less of it than me 05:53:06 but you get to wear a fancy hat 05:53:57 <\oren\> I wear an ushanka in cold weather does that count? 06:06:59 -!- hppavilion[2] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds). 06:23:09 -!- j-bot has joined. 06:32:31 -!- lambda-11235 has quit (Quit: Bye). 06:32:41 -!- tromp_ has joined. 06:32:42 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 06:37:29 -!- Elronnd has changed nick to b1ackpenguin. 06:37:29 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 06:39:14 -!- b1ackpenguin has changed nick to Elronnd. 06:49:38 can you ping arin.ga ? 06:50:48 nope 06:51:06 22 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 20999ms 06:51:38 then i messed up something because apache is up but i can't ping it 06:51:52 thanks for the test 06:51:59 you're welcome 06:58:40 oerjan: maybe the 23rd packet would've made it 06:59:15 WE WILL NEVER KNOW 07:13:24 -!- J_Arcane has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 07:17:54 -!- rdococ has joined. 07:34:10 -!- tromp_ has joined. 07:38:33 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 07:45:10 -!- hppavilion[1] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 07:52:14 -!- centrinia has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 08:20:12 -!- oerjan has quit (Quit: Nite). 09:34:13 -!- tromp_ has joined. 09:38:15 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 10:40:09 I wonder, does jq count as an esoteric language when used for something besides its intended purpose? 10:40:50 Thinking about it, the raw input/output and null input options argue against that. 11:25:03 -!- rdococ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 11:32:24 -!- boily has joined. 11:34:56 -!- tromp_ has joined. 11:39:26 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 11:52:44 -!- gniourf has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 11:58:44 -!- gniourf has joined. 12:06:01 -!- ais523 has joined. 12:12:27 -!- AnotherTest has joined. 12:17:19 -!- boily has quit (Quit: WAITING CHICKEN). 12:53:50 -!- AnotherTest has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 13:07:58 -!- ais523 has quit. 13:14:48 -!- MDream has changed nick to MDude. 13:36:17 -!- tromp_ has joined. 13:40:46 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 14:10:34 -!- Sgeo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds). 14:19:03 -!- Sgeo has joined. 14:23:30 -!- Sgeo has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 14:32:33 -!- `^_^v has joined. 14:35:22 `seen gregor 14:35:59 ls: cannot access /var/irclogs/_esoteric/????-??-??.txt: No such file or directory \ not lately; try `seen gregor ever 14:36:21 :-( 14:44:36 -!- Kaynato has joined. 14:52:44 -!- tromp_ has joined. 14:57:03 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 15:11:04 -!- AnotherTest has joined. 15:15:03 There's a Core War tournament at DEF CON this year http://silverwingedseraph.net/def-con-24-0x20th-anniversary-core-war-competition 15:30:39 -!- spiette has joined. 15:31:43 -!- centrinia has joined. 15:48:59 Do we have an RFC 1345 encoder script in HackEgo? It would be sufficiently eso. 15:53:02 `` jq -n '0 | recurse(. + 1)' 15:53:20 ​/hackenv/bin/`: line 4: jq: command not found 15:59:26 -!- rdococ has joined. 15:59:34 `uname -p 15:59:41 unknown 16:01:09 `file /bin/bash 16:01:29 ​/bin/bash: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, BuildID[sha1]=0x5bb332752cc304fa7fbb838bdf7d7766ffc7a8a1, stripped 16:03:17 `help 16:03:17 Runs arbitrary code in GNU/Linux. Type "`", or "`run " for full shell commands. "`fetch " downloads files. Files saved to $PWD are persistent, and $PWD/bin is in $PATH. $PWD is a mercurial repository, "`revert " can be used to revert to a revision. See http://codu.org/projects/hackbot/fshg/ 16:03:52 `fetch https://github.com/stedolan/jq/releases/download/jq-1.5/jq-linux64 16:05:41 No output. 16:06:04 `` mv jq-linux64 bin/jq 16:06:14 No output. 16:06:23 `` jq -n '0 | recurse(. + 1)' 16:06:24 ​/hackenv/bin/`: line 4: /hackenv/bin/jq: Permission denied 16:06:38 `` chmod +x bin/jq 16:06:45 No output. 16:06:48 `` jq -n '0 | recurse(. + 1)' 16:06:50 0 \ 1 \ 2 \ 3 \ 4 \ 5 \ 6 \ 7 \ 8 \ 9 \ 10 \ 11 \ 12 \ 13 \ 14 \ 15 \ 16 \ 17 \ 18 \ 19 \ 20 \ 21 \ 22 \ 23 \ 24 \ 25 \ 26 \ 27 \ 28 \ 29 \ 30 \ 31 \ 32 \ 33 \ 34 \ 35 \ 36 \ 37 \ 38 \ 39 \ 40 \ 41 \ 42 \ 43 \ 44 \ 45 \ 46 \ 47 \ 48 \ 49 \ 50 \ 51 \ 52 \ 53 \ 54 \ 55 \ 56 \ 57 \ 58 \ 59 \ 60 \ 61 \ 62 \ 63 \ 64 \ 65 \ 66 \ 67 \ 68 \ 69 \ 70 \ 71 \ 16:06:58 \o/ 16:08:05 what's jq? 16:08:25 oh 16:08:31 A json transforming language. 16:09:07 Which is neat because it feels so functional, like an arrow combinator dsl. 16:10:14 Or, as others I think have put it, “grep, sed, awk for JSON”. 16:15:08 `` findmnt -J | jq 'recurse(.children[]) | select(.source | startswith("/")) | del(.children)' 16:15:19 findmnt: invalid option -- 'J' \ \ Usage: \ findmnt [options] \ findmnt [options] | \ findmnt [options] \ findmnt [options] [--source ] [--target ] \ \ Options: \ -s, --fstab search in static table of filesystems \ -m, --mtab search in table of mounted fi 16:15:27 … oh. 16:19:58 <\oren\> i use jq a lot in my work... for some reason all my datasets are json 16:21:29 <\oren\> for automation i use python however 16:32:33 -!- spiette has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 16:35:13 \oren\: ok 16:35:15 `? jq 16:35:21 jq? ¯\(°​_o)/¯ 16:37:03 -!- centrinia has quit (Quit: Leaving). 16:40:33 -!- Kaynato has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 16:41:35 -!- spiette has joined. 16:45:16 -!- Reece` has joined. 16:53:35 -!- Kaynato has joined. 17:25:30 -!- Kaynato has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 17:29:25 -!- MoALTz has joined. 17:29:28 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined. 17:33:48 -!- Nithogg has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 17:34:21 -!- MoALTz has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds). 17:34:42 -!- Nithogg has joined. 17:36:40 -!- MoALTz has joined. 17:47:14 -!- impomatic has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 17:52:18 <\oren\> what if you had two push down automata that could send signals to each other 17:53:39 <\oren\> the resulting system would be turing complete even though each component isn't 17:54:45 <\oren\> yes... i think that will be my next esolang 18:27:34 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 18:42:14 -!- Kaynato has joined. 18:51:58 what's the trope you get when an enemy loses all their HP but doesn't die? 18:54:16 -!- tromp_ has joined. 18:58:33 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 18:59:22 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 19:05:43 Last Chance Hit Point, if you mean TV Tropes? 19:08:03 this is literally the worst tragedy ever happened to me http://i.imgur.com/qyxpDKi.png 19:08:42 spam in a manga 19:08:48 i'm going to die 19:08:50 There is no link, how you will follow it... 19:08:57 That's the worst thing ever. 19:12:05 i'm gonna find the uploader and sue them 19:14:38 xfix: that only means an attack can only kill it if it's already at 1 hp 19:14:55 I meant, when their HP is at 0 (or negative!) but they still attack 19:15:08 I wonder what negative hit points even mean 19:15:30 rdococ: Yes? 19:15:48 hppavilion[1], in a video game, what do you think negative hit points would mean 19:16:22 rdococ: No, you said "hp", so now I'm here 19:16:26 LOL 19:16:34 oh my god I can't help but laugh at that 19:16:44 rdococ: But it would mean purgatory. You have to play a stupid part of the game to get back to the main game 19:17:09 not necessarily, I mean if I were to make one, it'd mean, um 19:20:30 rdococ: complex hitpoints are waaaaaaaaaaay more interesting 19:20:38 ik 19:20:56 rdococ: Also, quantum combinatory logic 19:21:03 quantum what 19:21:20 rdococ: Combinatory Logic 19:21:42 what does that mean? I mean, I kinda barely sort of ish understand what combinatory logic means, but quantum combinatory logic? 19:21:54 rdococ: Well, QCL isn't established yet 19:22:12 rdococ: But probabilistic combinatory logic is 19:22:30 rdococ: It's SK with the additional τ combinator, which takes two arguments and returns one with 50/50 probability 19:22:40 oh 19:22:47 how would that improve hit points? 19:23:19 rdococ: It wouldn't; it's completely unrelated 19:23:26 oh 19:23:53 what about every hit is an instant KO and you just have to dodge a lot? 19:24:09 rdococ: Sounds too unforgiving 19:24:18 nah, it wouldn't be a random chance 19:24:44 avoiding damage would mean solving little minigames to survive... actually, Undertale is a perfect example 19:25:09 well, not perfect 19:25:24 I had the idea of it being like a dance match, you would have to time the moves right to avoid attack 19:26:57 rdococ: My biggest difficulty with QCL is that I can't find the bits in CCL 19:27:22 what's the difference between quantum and probabilistic? 19:27:36 rdococ: Quantum is more confusing 19:27:49 rdococ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing 19:28:29 rdococ: In QC, you have superpositions (and entanglement). That means a qubit can be in a superposition of 1 and 0. PC doesn't allow superpositions. 19:28:46 oh 19:29:00 but couldn't τ return a superposition? 19:29:56 rdococ: It could, but I think that some other combinator should do that 19:30:01 rdococ: Probably the Q combinator 19:30:09 true 19:30:22 OK, Q takes two expressions and returns a superposition between them. 19:30:37 (curried, duh) 19:30:45 -!- J_Arcane_ has joined. 19:31:27 rdococ: O takes a quantum state and observes it. 19:31:33 I still don't fully understand S :p 19:31:35 rdococ: Wait, I think this system supports cloning ATM 19:31:53 rdococ: Sxyz = xz(yz) 19:32:04 what does substituting z into x and y even mean 19:32:05 rdococ: It's a generalized application operator 19:32:11 rdococ: ? 19:32:23 what does xz even mean 19:32:25 rdococ: xz means "apply x to the argument z" 19:32:31 oh 19:32:34 rdococ: It's curried 19:32:39 I get it now 19:32:44 rdococ: It's like x(z) in classical notation, but it's more general 19:32:56 ((x z) (y z)), right...? 19:33:04 or x(z, y(z))? 19:33:51 rdococ: Kind of like both 19:33:59 okay... 19:34:22 rdococ: The cool thing about curried functions is that they only take one argument, but they can return other functions that take more arguments 19:34:30 ik 19:34:43 K x y = x 19:34:56 In a curried representation, those two are effectively the same thing. 19:34:59 rdococ: So if foo(x, y, z) = x+y+z, then if bar = curry(foo) then bar(x)(y)(z) = x+y+z 19:35:11 I know 19:35:16 rdococ: OK, good 19:35:29 rdococ: So in classical notation (still curried, xz(yz) = x(z)(y(z)) 19:35:36 s/curried/curried)/ 19:36:08 hmm 19:36:23 rdococ: Do you see why SKK = I? 19:36:29 yes 19:36:33 rdococ: OK, excellent 19:37:05 S K K x = K x (K x) = x 19:37:08 Yep 19:37:31 rdococ: So the problem with SKQO is that you can clone a quantum state and observe it multiple times 19:37:48 Something like... SOO(Qxy) 19:38:02 is observing like the tau operator? 19:38:04 And real quantum computing bans cloning of values 19:38:10 rdococ: I guess? 19:38:16 rdococ: But it uses a superposition 19:38:22 like O (Q x y) is equivalent to t x y? 19:38:24 rdococ: Rather than 2 separate arguments 19:38:35 rdococ: They're similar, yes, but not identical 19:38:46 rdococ: I think 19:38:48 equivalent 19:38:57 I'm not very good at QC yet 19:39:58 rdococ: identical is also mathspeak 19:40:09 how would you clone something? 19:40:11 * hppavilion[1] needs to go in 8 minutes 19:40:16 rdococ: You can't. It's banned. 19:40:50 rdococ: Or are you asking how you clone something in SKOQ despite it being banned in reality? 19:40:55 yeah 19:41:14 SOO is the "clone and self-apply" combinator 19:41:22 SOO? 19:41:30 SOO(Qxy) = O(Qxy)(O(Qxy)) 19:41:32 rdococ: Yes 19:41:35 oh 19:41:43 rdococ: SOO like SKK; that's a combinator expression 19:41:45 Not a name 19:41:57 S O O x = Ox(Ox) 19:41:59 right...? 19:42:04 rdococ: Correct 19:42:06 why do you need O? 19:42:12 myname: To observe things 19:42:17 just collapse on applying Q 19:42:17 myname: Oh, good point I guess 19:42:29 collapse...? 19:42:31 myname: Huh? Like, as soon as Q is applied? 19:42:38 rdococ: It's a quantum physics thing 19:42:41 or do you mean Q x y z? 19:43:00 myname: Ah, that works, actually 19:43:02 SKQ 19:43:04 yeah, Q x y z = (Q x y) z = either x z or y z 19:43:04 (((Q x) y) z) 19:43:37 myname: That works better, I suppose. But how do we prevent cloning? 19:44:01 myname: Unless the Q "object" collapses all at once 19:44:25 well, i would make it so, i.e. S entangles states 19:44:28 myname: So when the expression is collapsed once, it collapses everywhere 19:44:31 myname: OK 19:44:33 $? 19:44:44 but you actually cannot define how they entangle 19:44:48 $ looks tanglier 19:44:51 myname: OK... 19:44:59 myname: Also, e.g. 19:45:15 myname: e.g. is "for example", i.e. is "in other words" 19:45:24 ...huh? 19:45:27 like, how do you make a state out of Q x y that collapses to y when Q x y collapses to x? 19:45:55 myname: Well, probabilistically speaking, you just need a combinator like M 19:46:02 Mx = xx 19:46:15 S (K Qxy z) a b? 19:46:30 ugh, my brain 19:46:35 M(Qxy) = Qxy(Qxy), and unless we have the global collapse protection, that could be x(y) 19:46:42 rdococ: Welcome to quantum physics 19:46:48 you could actually make both S and $ where S entangles a Q as is and $ entangles it reversed 19:46:53 rdococ: Here's your eigenharp 19:47:05 myname: Perhaps 19:47:06 it's not the quantum stuff that hurts, it's the absense of parentheses 19:47:11 rdococ: Ah xD 19:47:14 rdococ: You get used to it 19:47:25 rdococ: Remember that application is left-associative and you'll be fine 19:47:55 are we trying to find out an equivalent to O? 19:48:04 rdococ: We already decided on an equivalent to O 19:48:08 i do think there is no need for O 19:48:19 hppavilion[1], do you mean M, or SKQ? 19:48:29 rdococ: ? 19:48:41 rdococ: Qxyz = xz|yz, because Qxy creates a superposition between x and y and applying a superposition collapses it 19:48:46 * hppavilion[1] has to leave 19:48:53 oooooooooh 19:49:02 * rdococ gets it a little bit 19:49:08 so it's like observing it? 19:49:28 yeah 19:50:40 I guess K (Q x y) z = Q x y, right? 19:52:17 yeah 19:53:22 -!- hppavilion[1] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 19:53:44 my proposal: S a b (Q x y) = a (Q x y) (b (Q x y)) and $ a b (Q x y) = a (Q x y) (b (Q y x)) 19:54:52 Q (K x) (K y) z = K x z | K y z = x|y, right? 19:55:32 = Q x y 19:55:51 ? 19:56:02 ? 19:56:12 Q x y is x|y 19:56:23 but isn't Q a superposition? 19:56:29 or am I using | wrong 19:56:31 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 19:56:45 Q (K x) (K y) z = K x z or K y z = x or y, right? 19:56:50 what do you say x|y should be? 19:56:55 -!- jaboja has joined. 19:56:55 myname: Wait, shouldn't applying a superposition to something yield another superposition? 19:57:03 So Qxyz = Q(xz)(yz) 19:57:19 it does so 19:57:36 myname: Did you change it while I was offline? 19:57:42 no 19:57:49 that makes more sense 19:57:52 i defined S and $ 19:58:22 what about 19:58:43 R (X y) Z = Z y? 19:59:00 what is R? 19:59:09 that's my definition..? 19:59:13 R (Qxy) T = Txy? 19:59:22 where T is probabilistic x or y 19:59:25 gtg 19:59:27 -!- rdococ has quit (Quit: gtg). 20:00:12 so it is \x.\y.yKx? 20:00:15 R sounds like fmap from Haskell... 20:01:01 myname: Doesn't it? 20:01:53 Wait, no, it's the opposite 20:02:18 i don't get why it ignores X completely 20:03:42 myname: It extracts the argument and applies it to something else, it appears 20:03:48 myname: X is a combinator 20:04:03 myname: So R (SK) K would be KK 20:04:24 * hppavilion[1] realizes that "X is a combinator" was a stupid thing to say 20:04:33 as i said, that'd be \y.\y.yKx 20:05:06 * hppavilion[1] analyzes 20:05:18 * hppavilion[1] doesn't get it 20:05:52 λy → λy → yKx... 20:06:07 \x.\y 20:06:08 sorry 20:06:14 the first one was right 20:06:16 myname: Oh, that makes thing easier 20:06:38 myname: But I have a feeling R is impossible, because it allows you to undo Q which could be used for cloning 20:07:04 Cq = Q(Rq) 20:07:16 Or something along those lines 20:07:21 I think you'd need an anti-R for it 20:07:34 AR (X y) = X 20:09:52 So... 20:10:23 Cq = Q (R (AR q)) (R q) 20:39:29 \oren\: Something that'd be nice for neoletters is if arrows 20:39:35 Whoops, premature enter 20:39:47 \oren\: ...if arrows properly connected with boxdrawing characters 20:40:03 "help me, premature ejaculation man" "i'm cuming!" 20:42:11 "just call me a premature ejaculation, because I'm coming early" 20:44:33 -!- jaboja has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 20:45:37 -!- Kaynato has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 20:48:21 [wiki] [[Special:Log/newusers]] create * Python invader * New user account 20:51:02 -!- hppavilion[1] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 20:51:26 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 20:53:03 -!- Reece` has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 20:53:35 <\oren\> hppavilion[1]: ill look into the arrow problem. i thought they already did connect 20:54:11 \oren\: Maybe it's just the particular renderer 20:54:19 \oren\: The corner arrows connect, I found 20:54:31 \oren\: But the vertical arrows do not connect with vertical boxdrawers 20:55:40 -!- tromp_ has joined. 20:56:14 <\oren\> noted. 21:00:03 -!- tromp_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds). 21:10:31 -!- idris-bot has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 21:11:04 [wiki] [[Brainfuck algorithms]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46847&oldid=46620 * Python invader * (+2091) 21:17:54 -!- augur has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 21:22:32 [wiki] [[Brainfuck algorithms]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46848&oldid=46847 * Python invader * (-2092) /* See also */ 21:25:15 -!- jaboja has joined. 21:34:18 -!- augur has joined. 21:35:07 -!- hppavilion[1] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 21:47:44 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 21:56:53 [wiki] [[Talk:Brainfuck]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46849&oldid=46769 * IAM * (+218) /* Last Half—Or Is It? */ new section 22:02:36 [wiki] [[User:IAM]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46850&oldid=46835 * IAM * (-173) 22:02:38 -!- centrinia has joined. 22:03:59 [wiki] [[Talk:Brainfuck]] https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=46851&oldid=46849 * Quintopia * (+266) /* Last Half—Or Is It? */ 22:13:09 `wizard 22:13:13 `wisdo 22:13:14 `wisdom 22:13:15 um 22:13:18 `pirate 22:13:20 `? pirate 22:13:40 `? glass 22:14:42 ​/home/hackbot/hackbot.hg/multibot_cmds/lib/limits: line 5: exec: wizard: not found 22:14:42 ​/home/hackbot/hackbot.hg/multibot_cmds/lib/limits: line 5: exec: pirate: not found 22:14:51 ​/home/hackbot/hackbot.hg/multibot_cmds/lib/limits: line 5: exec: wisdo: not found 22:14:51 pirate? ¯\(°​_o)/¯ 22:14:52 char/Char is a prominent component of charcoal. 22:14:52 glass? ¯\(°​_o)/¯ 22:16:02 `slashlearn glass/I can eat glass and it doesn't hurt me. 22:16:09 Learned «glass» 22:16:59 why do you slashlearn 22:22:07 Right 22:22:22 If I wanted a ticker tape printer for like amusing retro computing purposes 22:22:27 How would I go about looking for one 22:23:14 -!- jaboja has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 22:24:54 Taneb: they're usually built into teletype or telex machines, not separate 22:25:17 Taneb: there's a working one on display in Andrássy út here if you want to try it 22:25:27 in a museum 22:25:52 b_jonas, I have 14 hours to apply on behalf of my uni's CS society for a grant 22:25:56 And I have no idea what to get 22:26:33 Taneb: more beefy servers? or hard disks? they're always useful 22:26:42 A storage server perhaps? 22:26:48 We have more servers than we have places to put servers 22:26:57 Taneb: um, then apply for more place? 22:27:12 That's normally done as an ongoing thing and this is a one-time thing grant 22:31:19 Or done as an arrangement between us and the uni, which is a different thing againb 22:31:34 -!- AnotherTest has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in). 22:33:28 I'd like to get something cool we can display and do fun and pretty looking things with 22:35:01 Get a Cray XT5, I think they print those fancy panels on it as part of the deal. 22:35:09 At least I assume so, because they always seem to have some. 22:35:30 (s/XT5/whatever number is current/) 22:35:53 Admittedly that would also need a place to put it in. 22:37:38 Hey, the CSC upgraded Sisu (a Cray XC40) actually has pretty front tiles, unlike the previous CSC ones. 22:37:59 https://research.csc.fi/documents/48467/84606/sisu_phase2_1b.jpg <- see 22:38:25 Northern lights, even though the machine is in a place where you can see those maybe once a year if that. 22:38:42 fizzie, that looks a little above our price range I'm afraid 22:39:36 Compare to CSC's previous (XT4/XT5) one: https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-geo-images/296fd8fd-0303-4b26-b5e0-ce6d3368b0c0_l.jpg 22:39:39 That's so square. 22:41:10 -!- `^_^v has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 22:41:19 It's not really a "CS" thing, but if you can't think of anything, you could always get a fancy 3D printer, since then you can print whatever. 22:43:48 Second vote for 3d printer 22:44:42 Oh, you could get a steno machine. Some of those have ticker tape 22:45:02 And you could teach people steno, which is always fun 22:45:41 -!- boily has joined. 22:46:47 Someone -- I forget who -- got one of the http://formlabs.com/ printers at their office. It does the thing where you have some liquid that's hardened by a laser, instead of squeezing melty stuff out through a nozzle. 22:47:21 That was one of those things that I wanted to back on KS, but I didn't have the money :( 22:49:12 -!- jaboja has joined. 22:53:17 b_jonas: b_jellonas. interesting reference you slashlearned there. 22:53:43 Helloily. What was it? 22:54:03 prooftechellonique. 22:54:06 `? glass 22:54:31 I can eat glass and it doesn't hurt me. 22:54:43 ↑ it's used as a minimal translateable sentence to showcase different languages and their grammatical features. 22:54:53 Oh, that's very cool 22:55:07 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Can_Eat_Glass 22:55:34 boily: http://www.columbia.edu/~fdc/utf8/ 22:55:48 also, Harvard students were involved. 22:55:50 Jag kan äta glas utan att skada mig. 22:55:51 boily: I think I learned that one from someone on this channel recently 22:56:38 prooftechnique: inget jag skulle rekommendera 22:57:43 J'peux manger d'la vitre, ça m'fait pas mal. 22:59:27 Hm... 22:59:31 What goes with logic? 22:59:42 Axioms and red wine 22:59:51 I currently have Logic, Approximation, and Insanity, but Approximation doesn't feel right 23:00:07 Eeeh... construction works 23:00:10 Unless it's modal logic. That's more of a rosé type of thing 23:00:19 Constructivist Insanity. 23:00:38 boily: ouch, that's too many apostrophes for me 23:02:12 mwah ah ah ^^ 23:03:12 spoken French drops schwas, clustering consonants together with great disrespect to phonotactics hth 23:03:19 Amusingly, most of the ensuing dialogue after such a demonstration would likely also be apostrophe 23:03:36 boily: well sure, but you don't write that by dropping the e usually 23:05:19 -!- hppavilion[1] has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 23:05:28 b_jonas: it is the case. 23:05:43 https://clyp.it/fdgndqrn 23:07:15 There weren't even any vowels in there. 23:07:53 eh? 23:08:20 A joke about French, and also almost that URL 23:09:14 we have vowels! we're just stingy about spending them all in one go :P 23:09:14 -!- jix_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 23:10:39 For a language with 17 vowels, that economy seems unnecessary 23:11:21 -!- Sgeo has joined. 23:12:38 Also, doesn't what you said mean "I can eat the window"? 23:13:06 -!- jix has joined. 23:13:16 I only remember french from high school, but I thought glass was le verre 23:13:27 prooftechnique: no, window is “la fenêtre” I think 23:13:33 Oh, right, duh 23:13:52 Ah, vitre is a pane of glass 23:14:17 boily: don't the French leave some of their schwas in? 23:14:25 coppro: yes, they do 23:14:43 quebec is' just like j'pns 23:15:36 c'ppr'll'. 23:16:30 bonjroily 23:16:55 -!- adu has joined. 23:33:35 -!- oerjan has joined. 23:38:06 -!- boily has quit (Quit: DIAMOND CHICKEN). 23:41:51 -!- hppavilion[1] has joined. 23:42:06 Hm... 23:42:14 Here's a model for a processor 23:42:56 It has absurd startup times, but after that is identical to a Harvard Architecture 23:44:03 Okay 23:44:56 It's basically a Harvard architecture- a control unit, an ALU, data memory, instruction memory, and I/O with buses between the CU and all other components 23:45:20 I'm waiting for the part where it's not a Harvard architecture with a fatal flaw 23:46:36 In addition, however, there's a unit called the "Boot Unit" or "Memory Unit" with one or more read buses from the Data Memory, an equal number of buses to the instruction memory, and a read bus/receiver bus from the Control Unit 23:47:02 s/"Memory Unit"/"Memory Transfer Unit"/ 23:48:35 On boot, the CU boots a small script from the data memory, sends a message to the BU to transfer a much larger block to the instruction memory (the BU is specially designed for transferring large amounts of data quickly) and awaits its completion, then continues like a normal Harvard Arhcitecture 23:51:03 This really only works efficiently if the OS itself executes programs that run on the OS, as opposed to the hardware. Which may or may not be how things work anyway; I don't really know. 23:51:55 Not to break the cardinal rule of improv, but why? 23:52:18 Or is this just Modified Harvard Architecture? I didn't think it was, but a part of the wikipedia page on normal Harvard Architecture suggests it might be 23:52:29 It sounds like it could be. 23:52:49 prooftechnique: Harvard Architectures are much faster than Von Neumann architectures 23:53:18 prooftechnique: But they suffer from the fatal flaw of not being able to, well, boot (without an external operator) 23:54:38 prooftechnique: The original Harvard Architecture needed someone to physically load programs which were COMPLETELY separate from the data memory. 23:54:47 Aha 23:55:07 Brainfuck is a Harvard architecture; it has a program and data, and they are entirely separate 23:55:42 Brainfuck where the first len(prog) bytes of the tape hold the program itself (and you can modify it at runtime) are a Von Neumann architecture 23:56:32 Brainfuck with an instruction that writes the current byte of memory to a particular part of the program is a Modified Harvard Architecture by my understanding 23:56:43 -!- spiette has quit (Quit: :qa!). 23:57:43 Brainfuck with an instruction to transfer a large quantity of memory into the program at a specified location (something like K, which appends the tape to the program) would be whatever this thing is called 23:58:30 prooftechnique: So what was "Aha"?