--- Log opened Sun Jul 10 10:49:36 2011
10:49 -!- gnusha [~gnusha@131.252.130.248] has joined ##hplusroadmap
10:49 -!- Topic for ##hplusroadmap: http://gnusha.org/skdb/ http://groups.google.com/group/diybio http://bit.ly/diybionews http://gitduino.com/ http://gadaprize.org/ | logs: http://gnusha.org/logs/
10:49 -!- Topic set by kanzure [~kanzure@131.252.130.248] [Thu Jan 20 10:44:20 2011]
10:49 [Users ##hplusroadmap]
10:49 [ AlonzoTG] [ devrandom   ] [ Fiohnel     ] [ jrayhawk ] [ saurik     ] 
10:49 [ archels ] [ drazak      ] [ flamoot     ] [ kanzure  ] [ seanstickle] 
10:49 [ augur   ] [ elmom       ] [ foucist     ] [ mjr      ] [ streety    ] 
10:49 [ bkero   ] [ epitron     ] [ gnusha      ] [ nchaimov ] [ superkuh   ] 
10:49 [ CapNemo ] [ eridu       ] [ Helleshin   ] [ nuba     ] [ uniqanomaly] 
10:49 [ CIA-18  ] [ fenn        ] [ JaredWigmore] [ pasky    ] [ Utopiah    ] 
10:49 [ dbolser ] [ ferrouswheel] [ jmil        ] [ PixelScum] [ ybit       ] 
10:49 -!- Irssi: ##hplusroadmap: Total of 35 nicks [0 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 35 normal]
10:49 -!- Channel ##hplusroadmap created Thu Feb 25 23:40:30 2010
10:49 -!- Irssi: Join to ##hplusroadmap was synced in 5 secs
10:52 -!- Fiohnel [~r3idslash@111.94.200.53] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:53 -!- Fiohnel [~r3idslash@111.94.200.53] has joined ##hplusroadmap
12:25 -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap
12:50 -!- flamoot [42f18c6f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.66.241.140.111] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
13:02 < ybit> what's the process of blocking friends who spam on google+ like they do everywhere else?
13:03 < ybit> i'd hate to block them from messaging me because they are friends, their stream just sucks
13:03 < ybit> oooh
13:03 < ybit> i see
13:04 < ybit> hurpa durp
13:09 -!- lumos [~lumos@afbu181.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has joined ##hplusroadmap
13:21 < ybit> heathmatlock@gmail.com add me on google+ or spam me i don't care
13:22 -!- lumos [~lumos@afbu181.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:35 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has joined ##hplusroadmap
13:39 < ybit> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC5sbdvnvQM
13:40 < ybit> "1966 prediction of the home computer "
14:04 < uniqanomaly> is there some prediction of year when 100% humanity will be rational?
14:04 < Utopiah> +oo ?
14:04 < uniqanomaly> ;]
14:05 < mjr> nah, humanity will be destroyed before +oo
14:05 < Utopiah> by itself?
14:07 < seanstickle> By aliens
14:07 < seanstickle> Or super-intelligent cats
14:08 < mjr> super-intelligent cat aliens
14:08 < seanstickle> That is the 3rd option, yes
14:09 < seanstickle> We can refer to them as SICA
14:09 < Utopiah> sounds scientific enough
14:10 < uniqanomaly> I have question: can superstition minded religious people and more rational agnostics equally be called "humans"
14:10 < seanstickle> Yes
14:10 < seanstickle> Next question
14:10 < Utopiah> uniqanomaly: you might like #lesswrong
14:11 < uniqanomaly> i mean shouldn't be there different means to diversify
14:11 < uniqanomaly> Utopiah: I already do
14:11 < uniqanomaly> right
14:15 < kanzure> #lesswrong is banned in here
14:16 < uniqanomaly> kanzure: you mean like talking doesn't get anything done?
14:17 < kanzure> and various other reasons
14:19 -!- uniqanomaly [~ua@dynamic-78-8-91-216.ssp.dialog.net.pl] has quit [Quit: uniqanomaly]
14:19 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: nchaimov]
14:21 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
14:22 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has left ##hplusroadmap []
14:22 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
14:29 < jrayhawk> kanzure do you have a list of entities and topics of discussion that infuriate you somewhere
14:30 < jrayhawk> i ask for completely legitimate reasons and not just for fodder to troll you with
14:32 < kanzure> keeping a file like that doesn't sound healthy
14:32 < kanzure> 'angerfile'
14:33 < jrayhawk> ah, so you're saying self-quantification and analysis is unhealthy. interesting. perhaps i can interest you in this website, lesswrong.org?
14:33 < kanzure> why not a happyfile instead
14:33 < kanzure> i'm sorry but i've sort of given up against lesswrong, i don't know what to do to stop them
14:33 < jrayhawk> would it be filled with dancing kirbys
14:33 < mjr> I think it's .com though
14:34 < mjr> (which is too bad if the US some day decide to get someone extradited over it)
14:34 < jrayhawk> and also is subject to Verisign fuckery like SiteFinder
14:35 < seanstickle> "stop" lesswrong? Are they actually doing anything beyond writing articles that get submitted to HN?
14:35 < kanzure> seanstickle: http://siai.org/
14:36 < kanzure> what i fail
14:36 < kanzure> fail fail fail
14:36 < kanzure> i clearly meant singinst.org
14:36 < seanstickle> That seems to be pretty much the same thing
14:36 < kanzure> no
14:36 < seanstickle> Except they all gather together to talk about the articles
14:36 < kanzure> lesswrong claims to just be about educating people about rationality
14:37 < kanzure> but in reality they are made up of singularitarians trying to rationalize their rationalizations about risk rationalization or something dangerous to that effect
14:37 < jrayhawk> not quite
14:37 < kanzure> yeah i botched that
14:37 < seanstickle> wha?
14:37 < kanzure> if i was more eloquent about this it wouldn't be as much of a problem
14:38 < jrayhawk> heehee
14:38 < seanstickle> Aren't they just Raelians, except with HAL standing in for the Space Aliens?
14:38 < kanzure> everything's religious with you.. :p
14:39 < kanzure> well
14:39 < kanzure> no, based on my experience they are more sophisticated
14:39 < seanstickle> religion is just a manifestation of a tribal culture
14:39 < kanzure> i am not interested in hearing your views on religion (sorry)
14:39 < seanstickle> So?
14:39 < seanstickle> Then don't bring it up
14:39 < seanstickle> Easy enough
14:39 < jrayhawk> so, SIAI has a problem in that hard AI takeoff is such an intractible problem that they lack good means of thinking about it, so they're hoping to generate more mindshare for the problem using a sort of rationalist religion to recruit people.
14:39 < kanzure> well boiling everything down to religion doesn't make for much of a conversation
14:40 < kanzure> jrayhawk: there's a lot of pieces missing in there.. like,
14:40 < kanzure> well i guess "rationalist religion" covers the fearmongering aspects and FUD
14:40 < seanstickle> I'm not sure "trying to rationalize their rationalizations about risk rationalization" leads to much of a better conversation
14:41 < kanzure> but their assumptions on actors/agents/decision theory/representation seems a little off somewhere
14:41 < kanzure> whcih again i guess can be grouped under religion
14:41 < kanzure> ok nevermind jrayhawk
14:42 < jrayhawk> Well, the religious part is that they think the sort of 'rationalist singularity' they're trying to jumpstart will be revolutionary and amazing
14:42 < seanstickle> rapture of the geeks indeed
14:43 < kanzure> heh their version of the precautionary principle is sorta extreme.. it's a proactionary-precautionary principle ("kill all the other AIs that are emerging")
14:43 < jrayhawk> (if you get a bunch of rationalists together discussing rationalism, they will be able to make themselves more rational faster and better, etc.)
14:43 < seanstickle> genocide of the AIs be damned, apparently
14:44 < jrayhawk> so, in a way, they're trying to combat AI singularity with human rationalist singularity, and that just seems dumb to me considering that rationalism isn't really all that empowering.
14:44 < seanstickle> Oh, the manichean dialectic is powerful with this one
14:44 < kanzure> jrayhawk: i feel that saying "they are just promoting rationality, and not actively doing XYZ" is somewhat dishonest.. because most of them, given some rationalization, *will* follow through with it and convince themselves that "oh, therefore we should make an ai that kills everything that's a potential threat to its global dominance" (etc.)
14:46 < mjr> that's rather disingenuous (or merely dumb)
14:46 < kanzure> nop it's "rational"
14:47 < kanzure> (okay maybe that's unfair :))
14:47 < mjr> I was talking about your strawman
14:47 < jrayhawk> Or, I guess I should say, empowerement from rationalism has diminishing returns
14:47 < seanstickle> I like how all the visiting fellows are white guys, with the exception of 2 women and 1 asian.
14:47 < seanstickle> Cute.
14:48 < jrayhawk> And the places where the highest returns are being made are the places lesswrong is specifically unbelievably hostile towards.
14:48 < kanzure> mjr: i'm p. sure a particular person has published a lot on that scheme
14:48 < kanzure> jrayhawk: elaborate?
14:48 < kanzure> what is lesswrong hostile to, anyway?
14:49 < mjr> I'm pretty sure you're (possibly willfully) misreading said publications
14:49 < jrayhawk> Irrationalist religion.
14:49 < kanzure> mjr: that's possible, but i've spent a lot of time talking with these friends and i'm not convinced i'm misreading
14:50 -!- QuantumG [~qg@rtfm.insomnia.org] has joined ##hplusroadmap
14:51 < mjr> *shrug* "killing" is a blunt instrument that you just presume to be the one to use on possible competitor singleton-wannabes
14:51 < kanzure> okay, retarding them
14:51 < kanzure> might as well kill 'em
14:52 < mjr> there is sandboxing, if it can be shown to be effective in that scope (if not, well, we're screwed anyway *shrug*)
14:52 < kanzure> yeah i wouldn't let you sandbox me..
14:53 < mjr> rather irrelevant if you would or wouldn't
14:53 < seanstickle> Ethical issues involved in killing AIs are not yet settled
14:53 < mjr> you'll be sandboxed too, or we're screwed ;)
14:53 < seanstickle> But I imagine there will be some
14:53 < kanzure> "my gun is bigger than yours! nuh-uh! times 1000! times infinity!"
14:54 < mjr> seanstickle, yeah. Meanwhile, AI's are especially easy not to kill, merely chuck away somewhere until they can be run safely
14:54 < kanzure> it doesn't matter if you are talking about ai.. might as well be talking about uploads
14:54 < seanstickle> mjr: I don't see that we have AIs yet, so I have no idea how easy it is to just chuck them away
14:54 < mjr> of course, but now we were talking about AIs
14:54 < mjr> seanstickle, ...
14:55 < kanzure> well you can shoot someone and they die
14:55 < mjr> They're data.
14:55 < kanzure> (they're running on biology and nucleic acids)
14:55 < kanzure> so there's your start.
14:55 < seanstickle> mjr: you're data too
14:56 < mjr> seanstickle, if you mean that you'll first have to _stop_ them running (along with any failsafes), yeah, that's the harder part, but it was pretty much presumed that there was the ability to kill. Ability to store while you're at it, well, okay, it's slightly harder in some circumstances, but a lot easier than with humans.
14:56 < kanzure> jrayhawk: i'm a little surprised "proactionary principle" isn't mentioned on lesswrong
14:57 < kanzure> aw crud
14:57 < kanzure> and the only mention of 'precautionary principle' is bgoertzel's article
14:57 < seanstickle> mjr: I have no idea how hard it is, and since we don't have any AIs yet, I'm not sure anyone else knows how hard it is either
14:57 < mjr> ...
14:57 < mjr> okay, be that way
14:57 < kanzure> http://lesswrong.com/lw/2zg/ben_goertzel_the_singularity_institutes_scary/
14:57 < jrayhawk> haha
14:57 < kanzure> http://multiverseaccordingtoben.blogspot.com/2010/10/singularity-institutes-scary-idea-and.html
14:58 < seanstickle> mjr: submarines aren't fish
14:58 < mjr> computer programs are computer programs
14:58 < seanstickle> AI != computer program
14:58 < seanstickle> At least, this has not yet been demonstrated to be the case
14:58 < mjr> true, because not all computer programs are AI
14:59 < seanstickle> I don't know how to type a subset symbol
14:59 < seanstickle> But you know what I mean
14:59 < kanzure> \subset{}
14:59 < seanstickle> Ha
15:00 < kanzure> jrayhawk: "provably non-dangerous AGI" is exactly the signs of a precautionary principle
15:00 < kanzure> "SIAI's leaders and community members have a lot of beliefs and opinions, many of which I share and many not, but the key difference between our perspectives lies in what I'll call SIAI's "Scary Idea", which is the idea that:"
15:01 < kanzure> "progressing toward advanced AGI without a design for "provably non-dangerous AGI" (or something closely analogous, often called "Friendly AI" in SIAI lingo) is highly likely to lead to an involuntary end for the human race."
15:01 < mjr> Fine, if you do an AI using squishy goo, it'll also be somewhat more harder to store than to kill. Here in the relevant world, we're talking mostly software, possibly some custom hardware but turingy anyway
15:02 < kanzure> "But SIAI's Scary Idea goes way beyond the mere statement that there are risks as well as benefits associated with advanced AGI, and that AGI is a potential existential risk."
15:03 < seanstickle> mjr: we may be talking about software now, but there's no convincing evidence that a super-intelligent AI is possible with just mostly software.
15:03 < kanzure> "provably non-dangerous AGI 'is highly likely to lead to an involuntary end for the human race'" is sort of cheating, since they can claim "well it's only a 99.9999% chance"
15:03 < kanzure> in reality i do think that they are some who think it's a 100% chance
15:03 < seanstickle> mjr: although, to be fair, there's no evidence that it's not possible either
15:04 < mjr> it's trivially possible via church-turing thesis
15:04 < kanzure> i feel that my issues with lesswrong are mostly because of siai.. the rationalist religion stuff is just funny and wouldn't be of concern otherwise
15:04 < seanstickle> mjr: really?
15:04 < jrayhawk> Do you object to the Scary Idea, or what they're doing about the Scary Idea?
15:05 < mjr> (though said thesis is not formally provable, it's strength as a null hypothesis takes a lot to budge it)
15:06 < kanzure> jrayhawk: yes
15:06 < kanzure> i don't object to rationalist development but there is too much sickness in that particular community
15:06 < jrayhawk> Do you object to the Scary Idea because you think it's implausible, or because you're a misanthrope?
15:07 < kanzure> false dichotomy?
15:07 < jrayhawk> I mean the "unacceptably high probability of human extinction" being implausible
15:07 < kanzure> there's a number of reasons and i don't think i have one single biggest one
15:07 < kanzure> but
15:07 < mjr> apropos I don't object to the scary idea, but don't really find it scary because I'm a misanthrope ;)
15:08 < jrayhawk> Yeah, I'm a misanthrope, too.
15:08 < kanzure> "provably non-dangerous GI" is something i strongly object to
15:08 < kanzure> didn't someone do an existence proof of provably-non-dangerous-GI that totally failed?
15:08 < mjr> um, does that tell us something?
15:08 < jrayhawk> I don't see how that would be evidence of anything, yeah.
15:09 < kanzure> well it's evidence of a lack of foundation
15:09 < mjr> Anyway, sure provably non-dangerous GI may turn out to be a pipe dream. Good that there are people smoking that pipe, though, 'cause if so, we're toast ;)
15:09 < kanzure> including their inabilities to define intelligence in anything other than AIXI or whatever
15:10 < jrayhawk> Uh, risks are always speculative. That's what makes them risks.
15:10 < jrayhawk> They're saying "we don't know enough about this and it could kill us", and you appear to be saying "they don't know enough to say they don't know enough"?
15:11 < kanzure> so why would i waste my risk tolerance or risk points on a precautionist stance
15:12 < jrayhawk> So it seems to be more what they're doing about the scary idea that you object to, then.
15:13 < kanzure> really?
15:13 < kanzure> i'd definitely say that there's some probability between 0 and 1 non-inclusive that any ai could totally eliminate humanity.. sure
15:15 < mjr> and I'd say you just seem to grossly underestimate said risk, but I'll just presume you've read enough of the relevant material to not bother to try recalibrating you
15:18 < kanzure> mjr: maybe it would be helpful for you if i just assume that ai will destroy everything, and continue this discussion on that premise
15:19 < jrayhawk> The more interesting part is that a transhumanism singularity is far more likely to result in a sort of "humanity" that has some prayer of managing and surviving an AI takeoff as it happens than a rationalism singularity.
15:19 < jrayhawk> So what Kanzure does every day is already a good risk-management practice.
15:19 < mjr> nah, I'm going to be so helpful that I'm gonna fall asleep soon, thereby ending this waste of time for now
15:19 < kanzure> jrayhawk: where "a rationalism singularity" would be something abuot making people more aware of risks and decisions that may or may not cause an ai to launch paperclips
15:19 < kanzure> ?
15:19 < fenn> i wonder if a hardware project would qualify (i.e. pipetbot)
15:19 < fenn> for the diybio grant
15:20 < kanzure> fenn: i'm still trying to figure out if it's "business-only"
15:20 < kanzure> fenn: did you see L001?
15:20 < kanzure> er, LH001
15:20 < QuantumG> I still haven't seen anyone with a hope in hell of making a human-level intelligence
15:20 < kanzure> QuantumG: your mom and dad
15:20 < jrayhawk> haha
15:20 < kanzure> unless you're just a .. oh my god
15:20 < QuantumG> you haven't met my brothers
15:21 < kanzure> i've met jrayhawk's brothers O_o
15:21 < jrayhawk> Both of them?
15:22 < kanzure> well
15:22 -!- seanstickle [~seanstick@c-98-218-2-48.hsd1.dc.comcast.net] has left ##hplusroadmap []
15:22 < kanzure> there's still this non-neglible chance that you are all the same person
15:22 < kanzure> but no i've only met steve i guess
15:22 < jrayhawk> cunning disguises
15:22 < kanzure> master of them?
15:23 < QuantumG> in any case, I think people who make cakes from a box mix have a greater claim to have "made" that cake than most parents do to their children.
15:23 < kanzure> i can't stop listening to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HSj-2shbqY :(
15:23 < kanzure> bbl.. bbq
15:23 < jrayhawk> a "rationalism singularity" being one where getting smarter to help eachother get smarter results in in smarter people faster (even though rationalism is more the art of doing 'less wrong', which, again, involves diminishing returns)
15:25 < kanzure> jrayhawk: oh there's also all the control-of-control-of-control stuff i forgot to consolidate here
15:25 < kanzure> jrayhawk: "resulting in smarter people".. so.. at least some aspect of transhumanism?
15:26 < jrayhawk> It's not really transformative, though, it's just making the best of what we've got.
15:27 < jrayhawk> While I'm sure transhuman elements will be drawn into it, they obviously aren't the primary focus.
15:27 < kanzure> bbl for realz
15:30 < QuantumG> and then there's this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUQG9PhDNnk
15:34 < jrayhawk> this guy says a lot of words
15:34 < jrayhawk> i wish he would say fewer
15:39 -!- flamoot [42f18c6f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.66.241.140.111] has joined ##hplusroadmap
15:40 < flamoot> anyone
15:40 < jrayhawk> hello
15:45 < QuantumG> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VBPM67ddY0 is gold too
15:45 -!- nsh [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has joined ##hplusroadmap
15:51 < fenn> mmmm.. sandwich clamps *drool*
15:52 < fenn> you can use a CD-ROM laser  for the pulsed laser microfluidics pump
15:52 < fenn> so basically free
15:53 < fenn> also that's interesting for DIY bubble-jet perhaps
15:56 < nsh> sandwich clamps?
16:13 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:50 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has joined ##hplusroadmap
16:55 -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
16:59 -!- dbolser [~dmb@bioinformatics.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:07 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:08 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has joined ##hplusroadmap
17:24 -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
17:26 < fenn>  
17:26 -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has joined ##hplusroadmap
17:27 < fenn> i can make a business around pipetbot
17:27 < fenn> might have to redesign it from scratch though; ultimaker might not be happy if i used their files for commercial gain
17:30 < fenn> lets make a blog called "more right"
17:30 < fenn> mistakes are the best way to learn
17:53 -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has joined ##hplusroadmap
18:07 -!- flamoot [42f18c6f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.66.241.140.111] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
18:13 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r190-135-39-218.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined ##hplusroadmap
18:22 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r190-135-39-218.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:30 -!- JayDugger [~duggerj@pool-173-74-79-43.dllstx.fios.verizon.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
18:43 < fenn> "LH001" is a poor name choice
18:44 < fenn> also, if that was in reply to me talking about pipetbot, they do different things
18:50 -!- JayDugger [~duggerj@pool-173-74-79-43.dllstx.fios.verizon.net] has left ##hplusroadmap ["Leaving."]
18:59 < nsh> who are you talking to?
19:00 < QuantumG> fenn don't need anyone else to talk "to"
19:09 -!- lumos [~lumos@adqb198.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
19:17 -!- klafka [~textual@cpe-69-205-70-55.rochester.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
19:25 < nsh> right
19:30 < foucist> kanzure: so are you a startuper
19:31 < nsh> just an upstart
19:41 -!- eridu [~eridu@gateway/tor-sasl/eridu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
20:15 -!- jmil [~jmil@2001:468:1802:e148:223:32ff:feb1:9dfc] has quit [Quit: jmil]
20:28 < augur> happy tesla day! :D
20:32 < kanzure> foucist: i have a few projects :p
20:32 < kanzure> and i've been around the block i guess..
20:33 < kanzure> fenn: what's the difference between liquid handling and liquid pipetting?
20:37 < foucist> augur: let's commemorate tesla day by pumping electricity into the ground and using that to power all sorts of devices all over the world!
20:38 < kanzure> let's use the earth to electrocute the moon
20:38 < foucist> ?
20:38 < kanzure> you have to think like tesla: grand scale shit
20:39 < augur> GRAND SCALE YEAH
20:39 < augur> FUCK YOU, MOON
20:48 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:49 -!- nchaimov [~nchaimov@c-24-20-202-138.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
21:05 -!- nsh [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:11 -!- jmil [~jmil@c-68-81-252-40.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
21:12 -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
22:16 < kanzure> fenn: well, joe delivered on alex kiselev getting the money
22:17 < kanzure> so when he says he can get this he's probably right.. but likely not on his idea
22:17 < kanzure> it'll be easy to line up aubrey to "advise" or whatever to throw some names on board.. of.. uh, whatever it is
22:17 < kanzure> i don't see why a pipetbot would be of particular interest though?
22:18 < kanzure> like if it's straight business, the obvious thing to do would be to copy some old business that already works
22:19 < kanzure> if it's something that's supposed to be achievable, useful, not-necessarily-turned-into-a-company-or-else, i think you or even i would have much better ideas?
22:39 < kanzure> heh now i am getting ads for "ePCR" or "electronic patient care reporting"
22:40 -!- mayko [~mayko@71-22-217-151.gar.clearwire-wmx.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:40 < kanzure> why would they choose the same acronym
22:47 -!- BaldimerBrandybo [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined ##hplusroadmap
22:51 -!- PixelScum [~PixelScum@ip98-177-175-88.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
23:18 -!- jmil [~jmil@c-68-81-252-40.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: jmil]
--- Log closed Mon Jul 11 00:00:37 2011