--- Log opened Mon Feb 22 00:00:36 2021
00:09 -!- spaceangel [~spaceange@ip-94-112-205-34.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:37 -!- TMA [tma@twin.jikos.cz] has joined ##hplusroadmap
01:13 -!- darsie [~kvirc@84-113-55-200.cable.dynamic.surfer.at] has joined ##hplusroadmap
02:50 -!- Urchin[emacs] [~user@unaffiliated/urchin] has joined ##hplusroadmap
03:23 -!- Urchin[emacs] [~user@unaffiliated/urchin] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:25 -!- Urchin[emacs] [~user@unaffiliated/urchin] has joined ##hplusroadmap
03:28 -!- Urchin[emacs] [~user@unaffiliated/urchin] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:20 < kanzure> fun things https://www.reddit.com/r/retrogamedev/top/?sort=top&t=all
06:20 -!- midnight [~midnight@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has joined ##hplusroadmap
06:24 < fltrz> hum, so reading an article by JJ Thomson (on the discovery of the electron, and measurement of its mass), he refers to a text he authored / editored: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/notes-on-recent-researches-in-electricity-and-magnetism/0960D6C5D8A25072460A4F4C086399CD copying the DOI into scihub results in essentially the same page but with a twist! https://scihubtw.tw/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/notes-on-recent-researches-in-electric
06:24 < fltrz> ity-and-magnetism/0960D6C5D8A25072460A4F4C086399CD Observe the new DOI link: cambridge links to scihub!
06:24 < fltrz> broke second link: https://scihubtw.tw/https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/notes-on-recent-researches-in-electricity-and-magnetism/0960D6C5D8A25072460A4F4C086399CD
06:26 < fltrz> why is cambridge linking to scihub? and somehow in this infinite loop when the page is opened through sci-hub? whats going on?
06:26 < fltrz> and how am I supposed to read this 127 year old text near the foundation of physics?
06:29 < fltrz> I am authoring an insight that could have been made ~120y ago but wasn't, and I'm trying to locate the exact times certain things were known, by whom.
06:30 < fltrz> trying to find out if Maxwell was aware of the "quasi mass" calculations and Minkowski metric
06:31 < fltrz> I can't properly place my contribution in their proper context (which is drilled in when learning to write a paper), if I am prevented from reading that context...
06:33 < fltrz> ah ok this is one of the cases where sci-hub  libgen don't know its in archive.org
06:33 < fltrz> https://archive.org/details/notesonrecentre01thomgoog
06:49 -!- HumanG33k [~HumanG33k@82-64-99-84.subs.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:53 -!- HumanG33k [~HumanG33k@82-64-99-84.subs.proxad.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
07:11 -!- gigawatt [~gigawatt@unaffiliated/gigawatt] has joined ##hplusroadmap
07:28 < kanzure> fltrz: our resident physicist is bsm117532 and you should ask him insightful questions
07:28 < kanzure> talking with him later today actually
07:46 < fltrz> yeah Im reorganizing my notes from over the years intending to self publish on Zenodo platform
07:50 -!- gigawatt [~gigawatt@unaffiliated/gigawatt] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
08:45 < kanzure> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/amy-cayne-schwartz_engineeringbiology-synbio-genetics-activity-6766065915516735488-fny7/
08:45 < kanzure> "... seeks to develop a treatment for the debilitating Charcot Marie Tooth Disease Type 4B3 (CMT4B3) through editing/redesign of the gene mutation"
08:45 < kanzure> "funds are available for translational research to (i) create a mini gene to minimize its size to fit into an AAV9 vector, while still maintaining the functional components of the gene or (ii) to develop a split AAV and transplicing approach"
09:03 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b03:8f:7e45:612d:862b] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
09:08 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b77:aa73:2521:a7be:7f0f] has joined ##hplusroadmap
09:12 -!- preview_ [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::2] has joined ##hplusroadmap
09:14 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b77:aa73:2521:a7be:7f0f] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
09:28 -!- spaceangel [~spaceange@ip-94-112-205-34.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined ##hplusroadmap
09:34 -!- CryptoDavid [uid14990@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-vkdqwmadyzibiixi] has joined ##hplusroadmap
09:43 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
09:44 -!- thahxa [~thahxa@vlnsm7-toronto63-142-116-127-110.internet.virginmobile.ca] has joined ##hplusroadmap
10:13 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined ##hplusroadmap
10:45 -!- prometheus_1 [~root@88.230.139.51] has joined ##hplusroadmap
10:46 -!- prometheus_1 [~root@88.230.139.51] has quit [Client Quit]
11:09 -!- preview_ [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::2] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
11:10 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b11:52e5:77c6:425e:afdc] has joined ##hplusroadmap
11:45 -!- filipepe_ [uid362247@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-frkjvznxcmibddfi] has joined ##hplusroadmap
12:09 -!- bsm1175321 [~mcelrath@50-192-147-253-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
12:13 < bsm1175321> fltrz: It can be very difficult to know the mind from 127 year old texts. They occurred in a context of knowledge that is sometimes hard to understand from a modern perspective.
12:13 < bsm1175321> In my experience, reviewing old papers like that is very frustrating, and most of the time, people that follow the original author summarize and clarify things in important ways.
12:14 < fltrz> I see what you mean, but at the same time many texts are written in a very clear sense
12:14 < bsm1175321> e.g. with today's literature, it's usually better to look for a review article than the original source, as different authors build on each other and while one paper may be credited as the source, it's often confused but later refined.
12:14 < bsm1175321> The best ones, yes. Einstein's papers are wonderful that way, but it's the exception rather than the rule.
12:15 < bsm1175321> Maxwell used the Minkowski metric in his equations, so he was well aware of it. But this is before Einstein, so was certainly not aware of "effective mass" in a gravitational sense, nor in the renormalization group running sense, which came later.
12:15 < fltrz> I agree its the papers that made progress / succeeded in convincing the rest that are most clearly written
12:15 < bsm1175321> Which "quasi mass" are you asking about here?
12:17 < fltrz> 1/5 e^2 / (mu a)
12:17 < fltrz> Thomson refers to "Recent Researches in Electricity and Magnetism"
12:19 < bsm1175321> Are you talking about screening?
12:19 < fltrz> written by himself 1893, which was intended as a follow up on Maxwells treatise
12:19 < fltrz> the self interaction of the electron, where part of the electron interacts with other parts of the electron
12:20 < bsm1175321> That was not properly formalized until Feynman.
12:20 < bsm1175321> And I believe is not contained in Maxwell's equations.
12:21 < fltrz> hehe, it was never properly formalized (although renormalization works)
12:21 < bsm1175321> Sure it was :-P
12:21 < fltrz> the inconsistencies remain in QFT
12:22 < bsm1175321> Maxwell's equations will give a divergent result for that calculation. I'd be surprised if there weren't numerous papers discussing the divergence though, before renormalization put a pin in it.
12:22 < fltrz> Feynman writes that himself in Vol II chapter 28 of the Feynman lectures
12:22 < fltrz> the renormalization works and gives correct results, but it results in inconsistencies
12:23 < bsm1175321> What are you trying to get at?
12:23 < bsm1175321> And what inconsistencies concern you?
12:23 < fltrz> well I resolved (or so I claim ...) the self interaction
12:23 < fltrz> even classically
12:24 < fltrz> I can explain with examples, and will in the text I am writing, but I want to give proper historical context...
12:24 < fltrz> Poincare stress etc
12:25 < fltrz> bsm1175321, in hindsight its so simple everyone will kick themselves in the head for not having derived / solved this themselves
12:25 < bsm1175321> I very strongly doubt that you did. :-P
12:25 < bsm1175321> Happy to take a look if you want.
12:26 < fltrz> bsm1175321, you may /msg me your email adress so I can send the link when I finish writing the text
12:26 < bsm1175321> sounds good.
12:27 < bsm1175321> It's well trod ground, FWIW. This question has been a bear for physicists for over 100 years, and many, many, many papers have been written about the nature of divergences in QFT and self-energy.
12:29 < bsm1175321> An alternative would likely come in the form of the ability to compute the electron mass from first principles, and would be lumped into the category of "Theories of Everything".
12:31 < bsm1175321> Furthermore, self-energy is not the only source of divergences, and they arise in all physical constants like the fine structure constant too, so a solution to any one divergence isn't a solution and infects other divergences, which cancel against each other in larger calculations.
12:32 < bsm1175321> So again it comes down to a ToE since you'd by implication be able to calculate alpha_EM also, and by extension, all 19 physical constants in the Standard Model, as their divergences "infect" each other.
12:32 < fltrz> yes, there has been a lot written about it, the good news is we can bypass the divergences, the bad news is that we havent put it on solid foundations yet, if a system has 1 inconsistency the principle of explosion says that each provable sentence is also provably false.. so in *theory* there is the risk of ending up in a state where we think we derive / prove things, when we really only publish what works, hypothetically resulting in cherry picking
12:32 < fltrz> results (since each false statement can be proven true, and each true statement can be proven false). But thats not the interesting part of my contribution, its that by insisting on a consistent foundation, we learn something about the substructure of "fundamental" particles :)
12:36 < fltrz> it also results in a load of nice properties, where otherwise dynamical theories of electromagnetism and gravity can be reformulated in a strictly kinematic way
12:39 < fltrz> bsm1175321, do you consider the largest unification to have been done by Maxwell?
12:40 < fltrz> bsm1175321, btw I don't claim to calculate the masses of particles, historically thats what people were trying to calculate (divergently), but my fix tells us something else instead
12:41 < bsm1175321> I don't think there's any credible ToE on offer.
12:41 < bsm1175321> Anyway interested to read your proposed fix.
12:42 < fltrz> it will take time before I finish, but I will send it
12:42 < fltrz> (could be months)
12:44 < fltrz> we were trying to calculate mass (improperly), but a proper calculation tells us something else (and more beautiful)
12:46 < fltrz> nice to talk to you, going to make a walk in the night now
13:02 -!- Jayson_Virissimo [~Jayson@ip98-165-142-10.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
13:56 < bsm1175321> fltrz: good luck!
14:54 < lsneff> I wonder when gpu price and supply will come back to normal
15:00 < L29Ah> when people won't have to resort to strong cryptography instead of just trusting each other ;)
15:16 -!- spaceangel [~spaceange@ip-94-112-205-34.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:20 < lsneff> Are basically all new computing hardware advancements bust while crypto is proof of stake?
15:38 < bsm1175321> No, the market will realize that mining on commodity hardware is a ridiculous POS and so is PoS. But it will take them time.
15:39 < kanzure> you would need to produce a gpu that is bad at other forms of computation other than pushing triangles
15:39 < kanzure> and don't make it useful for machine learning either
15:39 < bsm1175321> There's little in the way of "computing hardware advancements" that can really help bitcoin. It's a very, very, very simple circuit. Your biggest problem is heat dissipation, and decreasing nm doesn't help you.
15:40 < bsm1175321> Yeah, think of a GPU: vector unit, texture unit, etc, etc. Remove all the unnecessary BS to optimize it for crypto mining. There is ALWAYS a way to remove stuff from a commodity device to make it more efficient for crypto mining.
15:41 < kanzure> yea but his question is whether gpu prices will go back to the prices they were at for eg primarily the gaming market
15:41 < bsm1175321> The idea of mining with your CPU or GPU alwas was and always will be a fantasy. When the market gets its head out of its ass, CPU prices will go back to normal.
15:41 < kanzure> so you'd have to build hardware that does not appeal to crypto mining or machine learning or other gpu-intensive programs
15:42 < bsm1175321> Hard to do. Someone will invent an algorithm that optimizes for your weird tweaks, and as long as people are buying shitcoins, this will compete with the market for other uses of that GPU.
15:42 < kanzure> part of the value of the modern gpu is how extensible it is, though, so you're shooting yourself in the foot
15:43 < L29Ah> 02:39:41]<kanzure> you would need to produce a gpu that is bad at other forms of computation other than pushing triangles
15:43 < L29Ah> why would anyone do that?
15:43 < kanzure> L29Ah: if they wanted to target just the gaming market
15:43 < L29Ah> and lose money
15:44 < kanzure> gamers rise up?
15:46 -!- dr_orlovsky [~dr-orlovs@31.14.40.19] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
15:46 < L29Ah> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_stake#Criticism is the consensus problem fixed btw?
15:54 < bsm1175321> I can build a mining algorithm that will target your triangle mangler. I'm surprised no one has done it yet (that I know of).
15:55 < L29Ah> because everyone's into GPGPU today, no need to kludge around various sorts of triangle manglers?
15:55 < bsm1175321> But it doesn't matter. There are only two numbers in mining: capex and opex. Using the "wrong" device with a bunch of extra cruft you don't need just increases your initial capex and increases barriers to mining entry. What we want is LOW device cost and HIGH operating cost.
15:56 < bsm1175321> L29Ah: yes, GPGPU is a thing, so GPU vendors have optimized for general (parallelized) compute. It's hard to imagine a way to hinder mining without hindering GPGPU.
15:57 < bsm1175321> But that said, there's a ton of silicon on modern GPUs that is not used by mining.
15:57 < L29Ah> btw nvidia already does this: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2021/02/18/geforce-cmp/
15:57 < L29Ah> no idea how effectively
15:57 < bsm1175321> That extra silicon is just an expensive form of heat sink for miners.
15:57 < lsneff> GPGPU is essential for graphics these days anyhow.
15:58 < L29Ah> > RTX 3060 software drivers are designed to detect
15:58 < L29Ah> lol
15:58 < bsm1175321> L29Ah: they've attempted to optimize for (certain kinds) of mining by removing cruft, and maybe detecting mining software by code fingerprint in their drivers. This is a game of whack-a-mole that miners will get around if it's in their interest.
16:00 < bsm1175321> Exactly. Driver detection. Let me just flip this bit in my mining code and the detection won't work. Malware peddlers have been doing it for decades to get around virus fingerprint scanners. This is not a game you can win or want to play at all.
16:00 < bsm1175321> Miners will just refuse to upgrade the drivers.
16:01 < kanzure> https://leung-btc.medium.com/len-sassaman-and-satoshi-e483c85c2b10
16:02 < kanzure> i remember meeting len in person (through the diybio community)... if anyone knows then it's maraydd but i think she has denied it extensively.
16:03 < L29Ah> https://vc.gg/blog/goodshitposter.html
16:04 -!- filipepe_ [uid362247@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-frkjvznxcmibddfi] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
16:05 < kanzure> er, maradydd
16:06 < kanzure> .tw https://twitter.com/maradydd/status/329997506597515267
16:06 < saxo> Let's just say if the sixth of these were true, I'd own a lot more bitcoin. Cool story though. (h/t @csassaman) http://www.bitcointrading.com/forum/talk-bitcoin/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-thread-of-theories!/msg4572/ (@maradydd)
16:07 < kanzure> referring to http://web.archive.org/web/20150924025648/http://www.bitcointrading.com/forum/talk-bitcoin/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-thread-of-theories!/msg4572/
16:08 < bsm1175321> I just love the fact that that there are dozens of plausible candidates for Satoshi. The best thing for bitcoin is if Satoshi has passed, unfortunately.
16:08 < L29Ah> why?
16:08 < L29Ah> well, best for the bitcoin price probably, yes
16:09 < L29Ah> but satoshi could have made bitcoin a lil more innovative
16:09 < bsm1175321> I don't think the notion of "lone genius who had to know these 4 people" is required, though plausible. Personally, I knew of all of the involved technology and wrote software extensively, but my attention was elsewhere. There are hundreds or thousands of people who fit the same description as me.
16:09 < bsm1175321> L29Ah: No, I don't think he could have. To communicate the idea, it had to be as simple as possible. "More innovative" would have lost the audience.
16:10 < kanzure> i remember knowing len online but meeting him in person was a different experience, he was very very kind and had the million light-year stare
16:10 < L29Ah> i mean after it conquered the world
16:10 < L29Ah> (like increasing the damn block size!)
16:11 < kanzure> in person his personality is best analogized as the fragility that luke-jr used to exude
16:11 < kanzure> (or maybe still does, but who knows since the pandemic)
16:11 < bsm1175321> L29Ah: I've done quite a bit of study on the block size. The size Satoshi chose is basically exactly what you'd get if you targeted a 1% orphan rate, a global network, and the gossip network he designed with a ~6s latency to reach most nodes.
16:12 < bsm1175321> So given the environment he worked in, it was the right choice. Block latency has gone way down since then and we could easily tolerate a 10x block size increase due to relay networks, but that's not the universe he lived in.
16:12 < L29Ah> yes, and if he still lived, he would have probably adjusted it
16:13 < bsm1175321> Past a certain point, adjusting it is impossible, hence soft forks, which basically all bitcoin devs have reluctantly accepted as necessary and even desirable.
16:13  * L29Ah is still puzzled about what to do with the symmetric gigabit internets for $15y/mo
16:14 < bsm1175321> L29Ah: Satoshi could/would only have adjusted it if someone had invented improved relay and decreased block arrival time, during the time frame he was working. No one did.
16:14  * bsm1175321 envies L29Ah.
16:14  * bsm1175321 orders Starlink.
16:15 < kanzure> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/security/pynchon/pynchon-spec.txt
16:15 < bsm1175321> Point is, you're in the upper 1% of internet users with symmetric gigabit. Satoshi didn't want to exclude those with less.
16:16 < bsm1175321> Oooooh kanzure!
16:17 < bsm1175321> TBH I'm surprised no one has accused Bram of being Satoshi.
16:17 < kanzure> well we're all pretty sure it's someone who knew zooko/bramc/finney/etc
16:18 < kanzure> "a biopunk manifesto" https://maradydd.livejournal.com/496085.html
16:20 < bsm1175321> I actively don't want to know. Having met all of the accused or their correspondents/accomplices. I think you're right kanzure, but I really don't want to know. If they are so good at keeping secrets, more power to them, but it's really best for bitcoin if it remains a mystery.
16:20 -!- sanehatter [~sanehatte@141.98.255.149] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:20 < bsm1175321> Humans are utter crap at keeping secrets, so I think a lone wolf is just as plausible as someone who knows that obvious set of people.
16:22 -!- sanehatter [sanehatter@gateway/vpn/mullvad/sanehatter] has joined ##hplusroadmap
16:24 < kanzure> was he in here? trying to remember
16:27 < kanzure> i mean... it would explain why satoshi knew about p2pfoundation; i was spamming the diybio mailing list with cross-posts from p2pfoundation
16:34 < bsm1175321> Stop trying to doxx him :-P
17:09 < nmz787_> fltrz: I thought scihub edits links after it redirects, so I sort of doubt cambridge is linking to scihub
17:33 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b11:52e5:77c6:425e:afdc] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
17:54 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has joined ##hplusroadmap
17:59 -!- filipepe_ [uid362247@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nujkbgsuvonvptwt] has joined ##hplusroadmap
18:37 -!- darsie [~kvirc@84-113-55-200.cable.dynamic.surfer.at] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
19:04 -!- sanehatter [sanehatter@gateway/vpn/mullvad/sanehatter] has quit [Quit: sanehatter]
19:04 -!- sanehatter [sanehatter@gateway/vpn/mullvad/sanehatter] has joined ##hplusroadmap
19:44 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
20:15 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has joined ##hplusroadmap
20:16 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has quit [Client Quit]
20:18 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has joined ##hplusroadmap
20:34 -!- CryptoDavid [uid14990@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-vkdqwmadyzibiixi] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
20:40 -!- scherazada [~scherazad@2001:4451:758:ce00:2c5f:81e9:4bb2:18b5] has joined ##hplusroadmap
20:54 -!- filipepe_ [uid362247@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nujkbgsuvonvptwt] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
20:54 -!- scherazada [~scherazad@2001:4451:758:ce00:2c5f:81e9:4bb2:18b5] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
21:37 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:38 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined ##hplusroadmap
22:23 -!- Jayson_Virissimo [~Jayson@ip98-165-142-10.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit []
22:35 -!- preview [~quassel@2407:7000:8423:b00::4] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
23:51 -!- dr-orlovsky [~dr-orlovs@31.14.40.19] has joined ##hplusroadmap
23:57 -!- thahxa [~thahxa@vlnsm7-toronto63-142-116-127-110.internet.virginmobile.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
--- Log closed Tue Feb 23 00:00:37 2021