No argument
mircea_popescu There. Let's discuss it here, I'll publish it afterwards.
herbijudlestoids Kthx.
mircea_popescu Ok so here we go. Maddoff's balancesheet, before the collapse, showed some assets. Right ?
herbijudlestoids Nominally, yes, but it was easy for anyone who checked to see that the maths of the assets was completely bogus, and multiple fiduciaries did this and reported to the SEC (which dutifully ignored).
mircea_popescu But let me make the argument for what it is. Those assets that he had, they were in fact somehow valued. On one approach to valuation, they came out X. On another approach to valuation, they came out Y. There's little convergence between the series of Xs and Ys. These are all facts, these all happened. Now. What is the root cause ? How do we know they don't happen again ?
herbijudlestoids Well I have an answer, pretty straightforward and based in science.
mircea_popescu Aha ?
herbijudlestoids Let's say I take the universe of hedge funds and I also take the Fama/French asset factors (value, momentum, liquidity, smallcap, etc), and do a factor decomposition against them. I can see which factors explain the returns of which funds.
mircea_popescu No argument at all.
herbijudlestoids Even though I don't know exactly which assets they might be invested in.
mircea_popescu What if your unit of account is broken ? What if in fact, unbeknowst to you, all this is a pyramid scheme based on trading baseball cards ?
herbijudlestoids The factors are self funded, they do not use the unit of account such as USD. It's long one asset, short another. E.g. long the 10 cheapest and short the 10 most expensive stocks in an index.
mircea_popescu Right... So what if it's zeroes everywhere. Does your model remain coherent ? Ie, 10 cheapest are all really worth 0. 10 most expensive are all really worth... 0.
herbijudlestoids The actual value is not under consideration. What I am trying to do is determine where the returns posted by the fund come from. If I can determine, for example, they come 90% value and 10% liquidity factor, then I know probably what the fund is up to.
mircea_popescu Yes, but you base this on some presumptions. Which is what I'm trying to illustrate to you.
herbijudlestoids If the returns arent explained by any factor then I know the fund needs exploration. Since most funds returns are easily explained by common factors, I know that most funds are not Madoff funds.
mircea_popescu Only within the context in which your presumptions hold true. This is the problem here : it's not that you can't build models that measure things. It's that it's in principle impossible to know if you're measuring everything you need to.
herbijudlestoids The factors are proxies, right?
mircea_popescu I'm not sure what you're asking there ?
herbijudlestoids They're crude approximations of what one might do to capture a perceived given premium. You're saying I presume various things, but I really don't, except on the most relative basis. I'm not presuming that expensive stocks are worth $1 and cheap ones are worth $2, just that on a relative basis one is cheaper than the other.
mircea_popescu Ok, want to run me through a model and we can evaluate this claim ?
herbijudlestoids Sure, here is a simple one which has had good returns : take the universe of stocks, for example wilshire 5000.
mircea_popescu So taken.
herbijudlestoids Figure out the earnings of the avg stock and also the total dollar volume for the avg stock. Figure out the TDV/earnings ratio for the avg stock. Weight investments inversely to this proportion, so stocks that have a high TDV/earnings ratio receive low investment, low TDV/earnings ratio receive high investment. That is the "model". Alternatively to self fund I can short the high TDV/earnings and long the low TDV/earnings ratio.
mircea_popescu Ok. So what does this model presume ?
herbijudlestoids Basically it presumes only that low liquidity stocks as measured by the TDV/earnings ratio will outperform stocks with a high TDV/earnings ratio. So lets say I calculate the return path over the last 30 years for such a strategy, and compare it using linear regression to the return of all hedge funds, I can see which funds have used a strategy like this to earn their returns. I know emphatically they are not Madoff funds.
mircea_popescu But first and foremost you must be able to calculate a TDV. You must also be able to obtain earnings figures.
herbijudlestoids Yes, both your statements are correct. I need information about the assets im investing in to inform the decision.
mircea_popescu Well you see ? And now to your comparison : you know which funds have DECLARED to not be Maddoff funds. What if all the funds are in fact lieing on their return sheets ? You will get a selection of funds which randomly happen to meet a criteria you picked.
herbijudlestoids Then the information is bad and I've made an uninformed investment, failing my job for due diligence.
mircea_popescu Ok. Now we're on the same page here. The original argument, re the boat that has sailed, is fundamentally exactly this.
herbijudlestoids What, that all the hedge funds are lying on their SEC filings?
mircea_popescu Which is to say : that there is an economic reality, such as it is. That it is the job of everyone, from the lowliest accountant to the cleverest CEO, to try and follow this reality. And that people being faillible, they do in fact make mistakes. They have in the past made mistakes. We will in the future discover they have made mistakes today. Now let's leave this for a moment and consider the problem of the Atlantic Investor. Suppose you have a thousand kilograms of gold, in 1750.
herbijudlestoids So supposed ;)
mircea_popescu For these you expect returns, and you are immortal. If you invest it all in Europe, you shall have in 1850 a return, such as it is, whatever's left past Talleyrandi. If you invest it all in the US, you shall in 1850 have a different return. This fundamental difference the Atlantic made was NOT obvious at the time. People thought the Louisiana purchase was a fair deal, at the time it was made, and the Alaska similarly.
herbijudlestoids Sure, but if I waited until 1751 to invest in the US or even 1800, long run returns show that the boat definitely hasn't sailed.
mircea_popescu Definitely. However! All markets have maturities. 10k bitcoin cost a pizza in 2010, 10k pizzas will cost a bitcoin in 2020.
herbijudlestoids Do you mean maturities in the actual financial sense of the term? I tried to calculate the maturity of bitcoin and couldn't.
mircea_popescu This understates a major problem of people. Major actors in 2014 were sitting in 2012 around a table having a beer. You being the guy that buys them a drink in 2012 is one thing. You being the guy trying to hire them in 2015 is another thing. (No, im discussing HR now. The financial maturity issue is insanity on bread, god help us.)
herbijudlestoids What youre describing is a reference point. Bitcoin becoming a reference point
mircea_popescu I think that may work, yes.
herbijudlestoids The way it works today is the USD is a reference point, we don't know how much things worth but all people carry in their head an approximate conversion table of the various price of things and by which determine the value of the USD.
mircea_popescu A business will forever be a business. It will obey the context it's in. But a country is a country, and while in 1750 you can easily acquire its dogged loyalty by a grant of 10k pounds, in 1850 you can't buy it for all the gold in the world. It will buy you. Like it or not.
herbijudlestoids And bitcoin is a country?
mircea_popescu Bitcoin is more of a country than it is a currency. Which, yes, sounds absurd.
herbijudlestoids No. That makes more sense to me than "bitcoin just is".
mircea_popescu That's unrelated, incidentally. That statement holds bitcoin as pars-pro-toto "cryptocurrency", a transcendent, if you will. This discussion actually discusses Bitcoin as a thing of this world.
herbijudlestoids Ok on the country analogy, I can kind of understand where you are coming from for the idea the boat has sailed. At some point the entity becomes sovereign.
mircea_popescu Exactly. At some point you can go to the kids and say "here, do it this way because I am older and wiser and I say so". At some later point you can not, if you haven't done it earlier. Because...well... now THEY are old enough.
herbijudlestoids And you feel that the point of sovereignety has come and gone.
mircea_popescu What I said was the time's ticking out, and by now it's probably gone by. Not in the sense that a perfect agent, Baby Jesus On A Stick, couldn't still do it, but in the sense that by now the barriers are so high and the average agent so dumb, that it won't likely happen anymore.
herbijudlestoids Ok, I disagree with nothing you have said.
mircea_popescu Well so at least we understand each other.
herbijudlestoids I guess the question is whether Bitcoin country is the US in 1750, or another shitty country that becomes sovereign and goes nowhere.
mircea_popescu I disclaim any absolute word-of-god bs, I have no idea that things are exactly this way because I'm fucking Moses or something. But I do think it's quite persuasive. And yes, the question may well be that, but that question has pretty good answers from other sources.
* herbijudlestoids tries to think of failed nation states.
mircea_popescu See, this is where the state analogy breaks down. Bitcoin is 1) incredibly attractive, such as the US never was in its history ; 2) incredibly permeable, such as again (even if only on the grouns of fighting disease and w/e) and 3) incredibly selective. Such as yet again. These three make it the best calender in history.
herbijudlestoids But it depends wholly on the Internet.
mircea_popescu It does not.
herbijudlestoids And a free internet at that.
mircea_popescu I could have my slaves run Bitcoin on their own skins, with sharp objects.
herbijudlestoids It doesnt?
mircea_popescu It strictly depends on math. No more. The only way to meaningfully attack Bitcoin is to break math.
herbijudlestoids For any convenient use, it depends on computers and the Internet.
mircea_popescu "Convenient" presumes the conclusion. "For any use including the Internet it requires the Internet". Was nobody and nothing convenient in 1960 ?
herbijudlestoids I'm not proposing this as a real world example, but just hear me out.
mircea_popescu Sure.
herbijudlestoids Let's say some APT like China or the US decides they don't like Bitcoin, for whatever reason, and they decide to fragment the Bitcoin network.
mircea_popescu Okay.
herbijudlestoids New peers are redirected to malicious nodes, and existing peers have their connections constantly reset (or similar).
mircea_popescu Wait a second. How are peers "redirected" ?
herbijudlestoids Well right now my understanding is that peers seed themselves to the network through the use of a DNS seed. Like in all p2p systems you don't just go around scanning random IPs looking for a friend. You seed to the network.
mircea_popescu Your attack model doesn't work in practice. So do you mean an APT doesn't like bitcoin or god doesn't like bitcoin ?
herbijudlestoids You think it's hard for an apt to disrupt a small handful of DNS seeds?
mircea_popescu It is impossible to disrupt the node finding as implemented. This is a lengthy technical discussion for which I don't really feel inclined (and perhaps am not the best to carry it with anyway).
herbijudlestoids Well ok, you seem to think new nodes can find peers. So lets just assume the APT is resetting all connections for bitcoin traffic.
mircea_popescu How does it identify bitcoin traffic ? I can send it as vacation pictures. So can you. Perhaps you currently are and don't even know.
herbijudlestoids You can but you don't and the large pools certainly don't.
mircea_popescu Not at the moment. Cheaper to fix that than to get a global resetting infrastructure in place.
herbijudlestoids I think judging from the great firewall of China is pretty clear if an APT wants to defreedom the Internet they can. Not that hard.
mircea_popescu On the same basis I think the contrary.
herbijudlestoids So why does Tor bother to have a slowly updating obfsproxy list?
mircea_popescu Tor is a complex topic (not least because it is a honeypot, not a legitimate service). Perhaps best left aside
herbijudlestoids I guess it will be hard for me to convince you Bitcoin depends on the Internet if you don't believe its possible to disrupt Bitcoin communication at any meaningful level.
mircea_popescu I am not saying it is not possible to disrupt it. Disruptions happen all the time. I run a number of nodes, they lose peers and gain new peers all the time. The idea is that it's impossible to control that disruption for less cost than it'd be to evade it. It's an economic problem, in the end. But that said, surely the
US could keep the consumer off Bitcoin.
herbijudlestoids But if there was an active attempt to say, convince your nodes that they are operating on a global network when they aren't...
mircea_popescu But how do you know which are my nodes ? Maybe I start a new, secret one, just for the hell of it.
herbijudlestoids I don't and I don't really care, the goal is just to fragment the pools to disrupt the network. I don't care whos nodes are whos, I just find the big pools and disrupt them.
mircea_popescu Tsk. Hashing doesn't depend on pools. Actually, according to most people studying it, pools are moreover bad.
herbijudlestoids I agree the pools are bad.
mircea_popescu In this sense, disrupting pools would strengthen the chain.
herbijudlestoids But that is the Bitcoin catch 22 : people centralise their infrastructure in the end anyway. Mostly for convenience.
mircea_popescu To some degree. Thats the key. They centralise to some degree. Anyway. Suppose tomorrow the Earth goes through a singularity, a bizarre quantum absurdity which renders all cables inoperable for communication. All of them. What happens now ?
herbijudlestoids Well im not denying that you can still 'bitcoin', but it will be much harder to do things like verify transactions :P
mircea_popescu No, I mean to the world. Clearly you can't get your shit off your camera, unless it has bluetooth. And you will need IR keyboards and monitors.
herbijudlestoids Oh well... I usually discount all scenarios mad max and above.
mircea_popescu Now, once people get a few months/years to accomodate to the new situation, do you imagine human society would be meaningfully different ?
herbijudlestoids Sure.
mircea_popescu Like how ?
herbijudlestoids Lower aggregate cortisol due to lack of cabling issues? :P
mircea_popescu Lol exactly. Same shit with Bitcoin. No internet ? It'll go over ham radio. People don't change just because some shit breaks. They just... don't. Once they discovered cocaine, cocaine was in constant use. Permanently. Once they discovered jacking off, they've been jacking off. The only difference between the two is that the latter being also older actually CHANGED political structure, societal mores and the very laws of the state under its unyielding pressure. "Cause it's there", says George, and right he is. It's there, and it never is going away.
herbijudlestoids I don't disagree with the idea in principle, but likely in such an event it would result in a new blockchain etc.
mircea_popescu Maybe it will. I'm not really arguing any detail here, it'd be absurd to try.
herbijudlestoids Ye.
———Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord. If you enjoy reading history, follow the life of this fellow, it's instructive. [↩]
« Democracy and finance don't mix - the math involved
MPOE, January 2014 Statement »
Category: Trilterviuri
Friday, 31 January, Year 6 d.Tr.
Natural law, and the problem of definitions.
Let's work off a convenient intro prepared by one James A. Donald :
In this paper I have used several different definitions of natural law, often without indicating which definition I was using, often without knowing or caring which definition I was using. Among the definitions that I use are:
The medieval/legal definition: Natural law cannot be defined in the way that positive law is defined, and to attempt to do so plays into the hands of the enemies of freedom. Natural law is best defined by pointing at particular examples, as a biologist defines a species by pointing at a particular animal, a type specimen preserved in formalin. (This definition is the most widely used, and is probably the most useful definition for lawyers)
The historical state of nature definition: Natural law is that law which corresponds to a spontaneous order in the absence of a state and which is enforced, (in the absence of better methods), by individual unorganized violence, in particular the law that historically existed (in so far as any law existed) during the dark ages among the mingled barbarians that overran the Roman Empire.
The medieval / philosophical definition: Natural law is that law, which it is proper to uphold by unorganized individual violence, whether a state is present or absent, and for which, in the absence of orderly society, it is proper to punish violators by unorganized individual violence. Locke gives the example of Cain, in the absence of orderly society, and the example of a mugger, where the state exists, but is not present at the crime. Note Locke's important distinction between the state and society. For example trial by jury originated in places and times where there was no state power, or where the state was violently hostile to due process and the rule of law but was too weak and distant to entirely suppress it.
The scientific/ sociobiological/ game theoretic/ evolutionary definition: Natural law is, or follows from, an ESS for the use of force: Conduct which violates natural law is conduct such that, if a man were to use individual unorganized violence to prevent such conduct, or, in the absence of orderly society, use individual unorganized violence to punish such conduct, then such violence would not indicate that the person using such violence, (violence in accord with natural law) is a danger to a reasonable man. This definition is equivalent to the definition that comes from the game theory of iterated three or more player non zero sum games, applied to evolutionary theory. The idea of law, of actions being lawful or unlawful, has the emotional significance that it does have, because this ESS for the use of force is part of our nature.
You are perhaps rightfully suspicious of the introduction there. So am I. As far as I can see, something that "can not be defined" should never be spoken about. If the author readily concedes that the subject of his ruminations resists definition, then he should just as readily add the final punctuation mark of the entire thing right at the end of that sentence and go either ruminate some more, until whatever impediment in his own head prevents him from seeing a definition that otherwise may exist ; or else to propaganda by the deed that which can not be spoken upon. Either way, basic logic imperatively requires that silence follows such a statement.
Moreover, something that should not be definedi lest the enemies thus learn its weakness may be anything except good sense. Indeed, what'd you think of a cryptographic method that "is sound", for just as long of course as "the enemy" doesn't learn how it works ? What would you think of a cure for whatever disease that "works just fine", for as long of course as nobody employs it ? This is the stuff of nonsense, and a very poor excuse to keep talking of things one has no idea about.
That said, let's look at the variants proposed.
Natural law is best defined by pointing at particular examples, as a biologist defines a species by pointing at a particular animal, a type specimen preserved in formalin
This is not in fact how species are defined. Species were defined a while back through a process familiar from the definition of concepts generally : proximate genus and specific difference. Thus, "man is that living thing without feathers and with flat nails"ii. These days, with the sharpening of our understanding of genetics, species are mostly defined numerically.
More importantly, there is a fundamental distinction between nature and culture at work here. While we could point to members of a species to create the definition of a species (and for a plurality of endangered species this approach is in all likeliness the more economical), we couldn't point to say photographs of a highway taken from an overpass to define driving, or cars ; similarly we couldn't point to printouts of CPU registers to define a software program. Law is a cultural construct, and "natural law", necessarily a subset thereof, is then equally a cultural construct. The pretense for a matter of culture that it'd somehow magically be a matter of nature instead is pretty ludicrous, as far as that goes. In reality, natural law will always be akin the software and the driving, never akin the birds and bees.
Natural law is that law which corresponds to a spontaneous order in the absence of a state
This is nothing more than true scotmanism. "Natural law is that law which happens when nothing that I don't like happens". Derp.
and which is enforced, (in the absence of better methods), by individual unorganized violence
This begs a large number of questions. It may appear to the obviously untrained auctorial mind that if you conceive the positive, such as "organised", then you automatically also have available the negative, ie "unorganised". Nevertheless, this is factually incorrect.iii And what's all this morass of "enforced", "individual" and "order" supposed to mean. Is a corporation an individual under the (unstated) logic of this approach ? Is the state an individual too ? If not, why not, and what implications does that have ?
As the expression goes, "this needs more scholarship".
in particular the law that historically existed (in so far as any law existed) during the dark ages among the mingled barbarians that overran the Roman Empire.
The only reason this illusion persists is the lack of said scholarship. "Dark ages" aren't dark in that sense, and barbarians didn't "mingle" in the implied sense nor were they "lawless". Their laws were fundamentally tribal, recognisably similar to what today passes for law in Pashtuni territories say. Just as apt to be codified as the Imperial legislation, and in many places just as codified in fact.
Natural law is that law, which it is proper to uphold by unorganized individual violence, whether a state is present or absent, and for which, in the absence of orderly society, it is proper to punish violators by unorganized individual violence.
This collection of words isn't even a sentence! Consider :
The Carnot cycle is that cycle, which is proper to occur in gases, whether insulation is present or absent, and for which, in the absence of [the effects of] insulation it is proper to extract work through movement of heat.
Nigga, say wut ? You can't even establish, on the basis of the proposed definitioniv, if the "state" -> "orderly society" relation is or is not correctly rendered as "insulation" -> "[the effects of] insulation" in the thermodynamics piece. What the shit!
For example trial by jury originated in places and times where there was no state power
This is not even wrong. For starters, how can one thing originate in places (plural) ? Was the author born in Wales and Connecticut ? Or does he imagine that because the collection of whores that contributed mitochondria to his current biological organisation came from all over the place this now means he "originated" all over the world ? But otherwise no, the trial by jury did not originate in unnamed "places". It originated in Athens, which had a very well functioning, quite present state at the time.
Natural law is, or follows from
Does this style of verbiage remind you of the classical treatises on medicine, cca Renaissance era ? Because that's exactly what this cluelesness masquerading as knowledge is. "Disease is, or follows from, an impurity of the soul."
Conduct which violates natural law is conduct such that, if a man were to use individual unorganized violence to prevent such conduct, or, in the absence of orderly society, use individual unorganized violence to punish such conduct, then such violence would not indicate that the person using such violence, (violence in accord with natural law) is a danger to a reasonable man.
This can't even stand. Suppose A together with B have a daughter C. Suppose D and C fall in love. Suppose later D beats C. Suppose D takes refuge with A. Suppose D comes to take C back. Suppose A kills D. E sees this and kills A. Now, is E "a danger to a reasonable man" ?
Myeah. Good luck, get back to me when you're done. (Again, we're not inquiring as to your own personal preferences and inclinations here). Note how I wasn't even forced to say whether E and D are related, or whether there's any patrimonial disputes involved, or anything whatsoever.
What sort of bullshit is this, people!
Anyway : natural law is that system of law that can be maintained without input from the outside. That's what it fucking is. If you don't need recourse to an exterior power, and your situation is stable, you're being governed by natural law. If you need such recourse, like Obama does, and like the Romans did, and like Africa did and does, then it's unnatural. Because that's what distinguishes nature from culture : nature stands on its own, forever has, forever will. Culture crumbles.
Much more importantly : stop fucking presuming. Giving definitons isn't for everyone. There's no shame in shining boots, for the man best fit to shining boots. Shame begins once the sutor looks above his crepidam. They're Latin words, I'm sure you're familiar with 'em.
———The orignal author moves, perhaps unaware of it, from one realm to the other. This jump is a big deal, and if he's unaware of it that paints an unflattering picture of the quality of his mental process. If he's aware of it, that puts his ethics in question. [↩]The flat nails were added after that asshole Diogenes threw a plucked chicken into the decorum of Plato's academia, screaming "here comes Plato's man". [↩]Consider the famous Minsky-Sussman koan for elucidation of this point, inter alia. [↩]This is imporant. Not, emphatically not, "on the basis of your own preference", that's not what's being sought here. Related. [↩]
« The two aspects of my urban negro.
King's Bounty, the iPad reboot »
Category: Gandesc, deci gandesc
Tuesday, 25 November, Year 6 d.Tr.
Namecheap goes off the deep end. Anyone know a decent domain registrar ?
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but the immediate reaction is worth ten thousand later narrations. So, here's my face seeing new namecheap :
mircea_popescu Jesus did namecheap redesign its site to look retarded ? Or is this some sort of webturd dns cache poisoning thing.i
Vexual You buy dour domains at namecheap, I can't deal with such disoulusion.
mircea_popescu What ?
Vexual I don't know.
mircea_popescu I can't even fucking use their site now.ii JESUS GOD! STOP MAKING EVERYTHING STUPID EVERYONE! holy shit
Vexual Sorry
mircea_popescu There is just no alternative, everyone under 30 will have to be butchered and we'll have to start over. We have failed with this generation.
Vexual Can we keep the 16s?
mircea_popescu Maybe.
Vexual Seems sensible.
mircea_popescu Hopefully seeing the gruesome fate their older redditard siblings meet will wake them the fuck up.
Vexual It's happened during history...
Apocalyptic Set it as everyone under 20.
punkman Wow, new namecheap design is horrible. They change the account management stuff to?
mircea_popescu Yeah see, this is why nothing ever gets done, all the individual cases ;/ Soon enough it'll be anyone under 35.00001 and over 34.99999, which fits some guy somewhere a politician didn't like personally. punkman I dunno dood, I can't even log in anymore. Anyone know a sane registrar ?
Vexual I get friendly with the aides annd put politician with emails.
mircea_popescu Like, you know, namecheap USED TO BE ? I can't put up with this GoDaddy bullshit.
Vexual Not familiar with namecheap.
mircea_popescu Vexual that's because you're on the Internet by accident.
punkman Gandi maybe?
mircea_popescu Punkman you use it ?
punkman Not yet, I have most of my domains on namecheap.
mircea_popescu Yeah, so do I.
punkman Oh it's beyond horrible after I signed in. "We continue to work on making changes to our website, refining and tuning to make things easier for you. Please bear with us during this time."
mircea_popescu I don't understand what the fuck is with people. Basically instead of pissing all over the eager public in the forums like I do, they take Fuckwit Q. Bitcointalker seriously and follow their advice. This is immoral, let alone stupid.
Vexual +1. Cant lern em tho. Ait, what, your pr is on fire.
punkman This mobile first, responsive shit is just the worst thing. And it's everywhere.
mircea_popescu Someone came by with "o, we'll improve your DATED design by making it all new and therefore better" and some shit-for-brains officer signed off on this. Namecheap design stood out in a sea of idiocy by not being quite as idiotic. Now it looks like i'm having my domains hosted by fucking Vice.
There you have it, that's pretty much what it is : Namecheap dropped the ball. I will be moving away from them, in spite of a decade of history in operational perfection.iii That's a lot of, you know, actual business, with actual money involved. As opposed to likes, voteups, reddits and whatever other meaningless, worthless drivel this move certainly brought them.
Here's a hint, if you're trying to run a business on the Internet : Likes don't pay your bills. Never have. Never will.iv
What pays your bills is the stuff I have, not the stuff this kid has.v Stop catering to him and people like him, start catering to me and people like me. Currently you might be slightly confused by the fact that we used to defer to the fucktarded kids on the grounds that well... idiocy is cocky whereas power, accomplishment, intelligence and wisdom are full of doubt. And the kids are "the future". And you shouldn't say things like "fuck the poor, nobody asked them anything" or "fuck the kids, that's the only thing they're (marginally) good for anyway". And other equally stupid nonthink.
Not anymore.
I warn you, and I'm not kidding. I am drawing a motherfucking line in the sand. Start catering to the powerful. Forget the powerless. Start catering to the smart. Forget the stupid. Forget the likes, forget the "social media" bullshit, forget the "mobile revolution" and whatever some derp may have said to you at some conference somewhere. There is not enough power in all of social media to slightly warm a lightbulb, let alone make it light upvi. There is not one person with any sort of power that ever deliberately went to one of your conference bullshits.vii There is just nothing in this "web 2.0" marketing gimmick, forget about it, nobody cares, nobody will notice once it's gone.
Forget all that meaningless bullshit and focus on catering to me instead, because if you don't I will by god fucking kill you, your business, your family, your hopes and aspirations. Everything you are and everything you thought you were or one day might become, all of it. By the time I'm done with you they won't even be able to find the crater.
All that out of the way : anyone know a sane registrar ? You know, like namecheap USED TO be ?
———I kid you not, the steps I went through were "1. Oh, let's log into namecheap. Here, we type "namecheap.com" into address bar. 2. Wait, what is this ?! 3. Googlesearch to see what google thinks the domain for namecheap should be, maybe it was really .org or something ?! 4. Stare in disbelief at the page. This can't possibly be it." [↩]Seriously. Their stupid "interactive" shit or whatever it is doesn't work in my browser, because my browser does not follow the trends in "interactive" bullshit. In most cases it doesn't even run javascript, so here's news to you : if you're employing one of those fuckwit "designer-in-his-own-mind" kids to fuck up your site and it becomes javascript dependent, you just lost me. And losing me might well mean the end of your project, unlike losing the entire legion of fuckwitted kids you're trying to cater to, who have no money and carry absolutely no importance in this world. Fuck you. [↩]Quite the accomplishment this, do all the hard parts just fine, lose your customers on the parts any college dropout / creative writing aspirant / teenage retard can do just fine if properly managed. [↩]Review the sad, sad history of the "investors" in the Groupon scam to better understand just how botomless that abyss is, between what you think likes are worth and what likes actually are worth. [↩]This may not be directly apparent to you, but opinions are just like assholes. They're only there for me to insert my penis, if I feel like it, or whatever other object I see fit. No other purpose than that, you hear ? [↩]Compare and contrast with the MegaWatts Bitcoin burns each second just so. Because it can. Because fuck you, no "useful" task as you define it can compete with the "useless" task of showing you just how more important, powerful and better we are than you could hope to become. That's the lion's mane, right there. Now hear it roar. [↩]They may have ended up there to get out of the rain, or because they were chasing a piece of tail, or for any other such reason. Maybe they went there to laugh at you all privately afterwards, in their actual social circle. [↩]
« Have you taken a horse ?
Inflation, deflation, economic regulation. »
Category: Meta psihoza
Monday, 27 January, Year 6 d.Tr.
My life is hard, but unfair. So is yours.
Master What is meant in there by "treat people like people" ?
slavegirl Use a reasonable set of expectations based on the assumption that people are responsible, capable agents rather than monkeys or mental patients etc.
Master Yes, exactly. There's a whole lot to be said fori "risky behaviour". If the family lives at sea, the kid who is allowed to capsize the boat will not. The kid who isn't allowed however, will.
slavegirl Mhm, makes sense.
Master Do you know why ? Because the owner is he who can destroy, that's why. In acquiring the capacity to capsize it, he becomes an owner of it. So you know... go ahead. This is kind of why elitism and anti-inclusivenessii are absolutely essential for a healthy environment.
slavegirl Well, that speaks to intent. I'm not sure how much it speaks to ability.
Master But he doesn't have to mess with it. He only messes with it in capsizeable manners if it's not his.
slavegirl I'd say the value of risky behaviour would be that it allows people to play with their environment and get better bearings so that (if they don't want to, as in your ownership), they can in fact avoid it.iii
Master This is false. The value of risky behaviour is that it creates ownership and investment. Which is why a woman is only interesting to me if I could kill her.
slavegirl Wait though, what do you mean he doesn't have to mess with it? He's in the boat. His family lives at sea.
Master Sure. But not all activity is liable to capsize the boat.
slavegirl People exist in their environment, suggesting they can just "not mess with it" because they own it and don't want to fuck it up is a little short sighted.
Master How would you know ?
slavegirl because I've had a lot of accidents ;p
Master I do not mean "people" as in anyone who draws breath. I mean "people" as in, anyone left standing after I'm done killing all the shitheads. This, again, isn't an inclusive a worldview. Not everyone is welcome to exist.
slavegirl Okay, but this begins to be absurd. Are you just going to shoot anyone who passed the "person" test but then makes some mistake later on because he has no idea of the properties and functionality of the stuff around him, having refused to interact with it in a litany of ways in order to try and not fuck it up because he owns it?
Master Yup. Well either that or rape them, depends.
slavegirl You could just get an ant colony, yknow.
Master Nah. The ant colony is already builtiv. They call it the US and it bites bad wind.
slavegirl This doesn't seem like people-making, or people-treating, or whatever. This seems like splinter-making, a kind of fashioning of humans that are uninformed, unskilled, and unhappy.
Master On the basis of what ? Like, you go to the market, you pick some mushrooms. Have you now obtained a bunch of unmushroomy unhappy mushrooms ?v
slavegirl On the basis of their having no desire to interact with the world around them on fear of being shot.
Master If they're that cowardly fuck them, they don't belong here anyway.
slavegirl Well I'm left uncertain if you want to guide or to get guillotined.
Master The notion that it's "the whole family or hell" is utter feminine thinking bullshit. The whole family is only relevant to she who laboured with each of them equally. They're not equal in any of-them approach, and the of-her approach is irrelevant to them, and generally the world. So, no. the world's not for everyone. The world's for the well tempered ingenious.
slavegirl I'd agree with you except that I don't think "well tempered ingenious" means polite children who will spend their lives sitting in a boat with their hands under their buttocks.
Master Definitely not.
slavegirl Well that's what you suggest is required when you say that he who is an owner won't "mess with it".
Master It means exactly that : ingenious, ie, liable to surprise you, that's tempered, ie, not likely to unpleasantly surprise you. Which is the point of having children and making friends since the dawn of children and friends.
slavegirl Eh this sounds like a bunch of spiritual froufrou. Nobody will ever surprise you all the time and never during that time unpleasantly surprise you.
Master So nobody will live forever. (And it's not about me, really. Nature has its ways.)
slavegirl Well nature has its ways, sure. It's about you though inasmuch as you seem to demand and expect this from people to the degree that they're no longer deemed people if they fail.
Master I merely am pointing out that inasmuch as they want to be people, this is the only way they can be. But otherwise, ant colony is sort-of taking immigrants.
slavegirl And I'm pointing out that your "person" as such does not exist.
Master Sure it does. I'm one, for one.
slavegirl Nope.
Master You wanna come here an' prove it ? :D
slavegirl Lol. Seriously though, everybody makes mistakes. It's not a cliche, it's a fact.
Master Not all mistakes mean their head.
slavegirl So then how are you deciding which qualify?
Master I am not. Naaaaaaatureee has its waaaayssss. Is the boat still uncapsized ? Fine than.
slavegirl But you were saying earlier that you are going to shoot anyone who "makes some mistake because he has no idea of the properties and functionality of the stuff around him"
Master Well like I shot Andreas Derpopowhateverhisnameis.
slavegirl I thought you meant like you shot the sheriff.
Master I however did not shot no sheriff. I merely shot the derpopooty.
slavegirl Haha.
Master And now I have an article. Shit my life's hard but unfair.
———Generally, education in the harem works on this scheme : slavegirl is asked a basic foundational question, to establish her general grasp of the prerequisites for what will be imparted. It may seem like a trivial thing, here, because she succeeded in answering perfectly. Nevertheless the test is often failed, because there are just a few correct answers and they may as well be strict string matches - you can't really move words around. So the odds of stumbling on a correct answer by accident, or just on the strength of one's preconceived notions is vanishingly small, one in a million or less. To most girls in training, those odds definitely seem one in a billion, mostly because preconceptions have this incredible property of being harder to break than any steel bar.
Anyway, once the gate is satisfied, the discussion proceeds towards whatever particular topic. Having answered the gatekeeper is already a major intellectual achievement however, and so rarely the ensuing conversation is unworthy of being published - a circumstance I have little complaint with. Think, o ye labourer of the pen and keyboard, staring at the blank sheet : I'm usually throwing out nine tenths or more because I simply can't be bothered with the dressing required to publish. Such fair fate. [↩]This is not merely the absence of any effort directed towards making things more "even", "fairer" or having any arbitrarily defined groups better represented. This is quite the exact opposite : significant effort directed against everyone, and the more trouble they have, the more they get piled on.
You don't want to narrow the breadth of performance disparity between people, so they all have and get about the same. You want to expand it as much as possible, because as you expand it the people themselves don't fill it equally, but group, and then those groups can be discriminated, which is the entire point of the exercise : discriminating people from the rest. For this reason the Gini index is very useful : it is the measure of failure. [↩]This is the classical, and perfectly erroneous, reinterpretation of risky behaviour from the socialist utopian point of view.
This is funny, because it retraces a very similar problem the christian utopia had. Many, many years ago, it became logically unavoidable to observe that, should one accept the authority of the church, sex should not happen at all. This does not work in any sort of social practice, obviously, so sex had to be christianly-reinterpreted, which it has been. The charade didn't fool large numbers of people however, resulting in monasteries, abbeys and things like the Russian skoptsy. The problem is unresolvable, and so by the 13th century pretty much everyone thinking on the matter was in agreement that well... this'll just have to be a case of the noble lie, there's no way out of it. Which, if you're curious, is exactly why and how the Reformation happened - you may imagine it as an external force, but in fact it's about as internal as it gets.
Whenever a major tradition reaches the logical wall of the ultimate failure of its core watch out, for it's going away. It may still cling for power (aka, social relevance) for a little while longer, but once it's lost the attention of the intellectual elite, it's lost. Which, to belabour a well established point, is quite exactly how and why Bitcoin has won. It has relatively little to do with the technology, about as much as your orgasm has to do with the silicon manufacturing technology that created the condom you're using. It has everything to do with the intellecual bankruptcy of the fiat system, which I make sport of chronicling here among chortles for your benefit.
So yes, the reinterpretation of risky behaviour from the socialist-utopian point of view is to deny any moral implication, and only admit the educational results. Much like, if you're following, the christian utopian view reinterpreted sex to deny the pleasure but admit the procreation. Because yes, christianity is the original utopia, and as upset as the socialists are about this inconvenient fact, and as much as they'd like to kill their mother so they may be somehow taken seriously as you know, an intellectual thing standing on itself, rather than a minor implication of larger things, it ain't going away. They're trying to go to heaven, mostly because they're idiots, the sort of idiots that'd fall for christianity.
Now obviously, this reinterpretation does not work, and to show it doesn't work we really don't need more intellectual heavy lifting than merely retracing the actual reasons socialism was a minor footnote for christianity (which is exacly what it was, and in the history of idea forever remains) : agency requires the moral aspect of risk. Without it, there can be no agency, and even if the socialists of today are struggling with more pedestrian problems their doomed reinterpretative attempt creates - such as, if risk should have no moral component then women walking around naked on the docks are raped just as much and in the same way as some poor soul abducted and beaten to death with lengths of pipe, because "all rape is rape" and "no means no", a point of view that proves a rather tough sale before any jury with any sort of actual life experience - nevertheless this is what ultimately sinks them : in a world of free risk, there can be no agents, and a world devoid of agency can not be said to exist, but merely to await, in a Rapunzel-like trance, the appearance of the man that'll make it go. [↩]It's strange how from the socialist point of view things are exactly inversed : up is down, down is up, black is white, what have you. This, to get back to our extensive readings of patristics (well... "our") for a quick lol, is actually a well established diabolic attribute. Poor Satan, sitting in Hell, actually imagines himself on a throne. And he (as you may be familiar from Pacino's memorable reading) actually thinks himself a benefactor of mankind, because really, what is divinity if not tyranny ?
And so it goes, I've always believed that atheism based on a deeply entrenched refusal to read the holy texts is intellectual simpletonism at best. You're missing out a whole metric fuckton of lulz, yo!
Then when you're done with that move on to Marx and see. [↩]Right ? Because collectivism is the only way to individually exist. So say the collectivists. [↩]
« La Serenissima and personal sovereignty
The great post of rebuttals »
Category: Trilterviuri
Friday, 15 August, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPOE, May 2014 and June 2014 Combined Statement
Revenue : 283.38624101 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 93.38624101 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 190 BTC
Expenditure : 13.516836952 BTC, of which :
Advertising, 0.2 BTC
Tech, 13.316836952 BTC
Profit : 269.869404058 BTC
Miscellaneous
S.WOL listed, the D category introduced, D.BPAY, D.BTGO listed, F.DERP coming soon, other projects also in the pipeline. Business as usual.
———Total trade : 46`693.12050523 BTC [↩]
« The femfanon
3! 3 things! »
Category: MPEx
Thursday, 03 July, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPOE, March 2014 Statement
Revenue : 180.37141356 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 60.37141356 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 120 BTC
Expenditure : 8.262335 BTC, of which :
PR, 2.875 BTC.ii
Advertising, 0.1 BTCiii
Tech, 5.287335 BTCiv
Profit : 172.10907856 BTC
Miscellaneous
Since we no longer have the weight of the options book oppressing us, S.MPOE can report after the month, like every other asset. Going forward, expect a report before the 5th of the next month. Conveniently enough, last month's last Friday was also its last day, so it all works out neatly. Funny how that works, wouldn't you say.
———Total trade : 30`185.70678207 BTC [↩]This will be the last month of MPOE-PR salary. The Bitcointalk forum moderators finally took exception to her public naming and shaming of their favourite scams, and banned her. I suppose in a sense this is best for all those involved. [↩]Currently this means BitBet. [↩]As described in March 2013. Fortunately the exchange rate took most of the edge off it. [↩]
« Spam and malware, let's be cool together.
BitBet, March 2014 Statement »
Category: MPEx
Tuesday, 01 April, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPOE, April 2014 Statement
Revenue : 208.36526851 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 38.36526851 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 170 BTC
Expenditure : 8.81040724 BTC, of which :
Advertising, 0.1 BTC
Tech, 8.71040724 BTCii
Profit : 199.55486127 BTC
Miscellaneous
We're talking about perhaps acquiring an ambassador. F.MPIF seems to be doing ok, a few more listings lined up, you know, business as usual.
———Total trade : 19`182.63425523 BTC [↩]As described in March 2013. Fortunately the exchange rate took most of the edge off it. [↩]
« S.NSA, April 2014 Statement
Why exactly reusing Bitcoin addresses strengthens Bitcoin user anonimity »
Category: MPEx
Monday, 05 May, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPIF (F.MPIF) October 2014 Statement
F.MPIF incoming and outgoing
Incoming
Outgoing
Description
Value
Description
Value
PC1 close-out
14.85930845
--
Total
14.85930845
Total
0
F.MPIF assets
Account
01.10.2014
Net change
31.10.2014
Cash
428.28671408
1.86932734
430.15604142i
Tangibles
44.88181238
7.74726928
37.13454310ii
Intangibles and goodwill
0
0
0
Total assets
467.29058452
F.MPIF liabilities
Account
01.10.2014
Net change
31.10.2014
Shareholder equity
473.16852646
5.87794194
467.29058452
Total liabilities
467.29058452
F.MPIF has a total of 2`186`753 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021638 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021369 BTC.
Miscellaneous
And another one gone... Still looking for more managers, and more ideas. If you know of a good investment opportunity that meets the F.MPIF goals, bring it over in -assets.
———38.13762441 PC4 + 21.39913032 PC5 + 355.75997824 unallocated reserve. [↩]10 BTC in bets made by PC4 ; 27.13454310 BTC PC5. [↩]
« The #bitcoin-assets deed system
No Such lAbs (S.NSA), October 2014 Statement »
Category: F.MPIF
Tuesday, 04 November, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPIF (F.MPIF) November 2014 Statement
F.MPIF incoming and outgoing
Incoming
Outgoing
Description
Value
Description
Value
--
--
Total
0
Total
0
F.MPIF assets
Account
01.11.2014
Net change
30.11.2014
Cash
430.15604142
0.51812209
430.67416351i
Tangibles
37.13454310
0.2959131
36.83863ii
Intangibles and goodwill
0
0
0
Total assets
467.51279351
F.MPIF liabilities
Account
01.11.2014
Net change
30.11.2014
Shareholder equity
467.29058452
0.22220899
467.51279351
Total liabilities
467.51279351
F.MPIF has a total of 2`186`753 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021379 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021379 BTC.
Miscellaneous
Business as usual.
———38.6557465 PC4 + 21.39913032 PC5 + 370.61928669 unallocated reserve. [↩]10 BTC in bets made by PC4 ; 26.83863 BTC PC5. [↩]
« The Romanian language for other people.
F.DERP November 2014 Statement »
Category: F.MPIF
Friday, 05 December, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPIF (F.MPIF) July 2014 Statement
F.MPIF incoming and outgoing
Incoming
Outgoing
Description
Value
Description
Value
BitBeti
5.09344757
--
--
WoLii
0.00050963
Total
5.09395720
Total
--
F.MPIF assets
Account
01.07.2014
Net change
31.07.2014
Cash
82.19395329
5.43607525
76.75787804iii
Tangibles
393.087661397
4.674960001
397.762621398iv
Intangibles and goodwill
0
0
0
Total assets
474.520499438
F.MPIF liabilities
Account
01.07.2014
Net change
31.07.2014
Shareholder equity
475.281614687
0.761115249
474.520499438
Total liabilities
474.520499438
F.MPIF has a total of 2`186`753 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021699 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021699 BTC.
Miscellanea :
So this month we made a loss overall. For shame.
———Partial loan repayment in sum of 5.024715922 BTC and interest in sum of 0.068731648 BTC. [↩]Interest payment over 200 BTC principal. They're poor over there apparently. [↩]15.91940733 PC 1 + 35.59704351 PC4 + 20.14747 PC5 + 5.09395720 unallocated reserve. [↩]2.11321271 in ATC in PC1 ; 149.58191 BTC in PC2 ; 200.00000000 deposited with WoL ; 14 BTC in bets made by PC4 ; 29.616433 BTC PC5 + 2.451065688 BitBet credit line. [↩]
« WarOfLife (S.WOL), July 2014 Statement
No Such lAbs (S.NSA), July 2014 Statement »
Category: F.MPIF
Tuesday, 05 August, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPIF (F.MPIF) August 2014 Statement
F.MPIF incoming and outgoing
Incoming
Outgoing
Description
Value
Description
Value
BitBeti
0.55940635
ATC miningii
2.00000000
WoLiii
201.83878160
Panaceaiv
149.58191
Total
351.98009795
Total
2.00000000
F.MPIF assets
Account
01.08.2014
Net change
31.08.2014
Cash
76.75787804
351.31451612
428.07239416v
Tangibles
397.76262139
352.03853488
45.72408651vi
Intangibles and goodwill
0
0
0
Total assets
473.79648067
F.MPIF liabilities
Account
01.08.2014
Net change
31.08.2014
Shareholder equity
474.520499438
0.724018768
473.79648067
Total liabilities
473.79648067
F.MPIF has a total of 2`186`753 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021666 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00021666 BTC.
Miscellaneous
Nominally F.MPIF has made a loss this month. However, considering that the 2 BTC charge for mining represents a commitment now that will deliver most of its fruits in the future (to the tune of about 1.5 BTC of that total 2, seeing how I only paid for two weeks in August, 0.24 and 0.22 respectively) we could just as well say we're ahead 3/4 BTC.
Of major concern is the sudden cash-heavy position F.MPIF finds itself in - we are now 90.3% cash and cash equivalents. This situation is certainly not by design, nor is it deliberate. It does not reflect a decision made by management, at any level, to decouple from the Bitcoin marketplace. This situation is moreover the result of the incredible fragility of the ecosystem - we used to have a significant portion of our capital invested with Just-Dice. A couple of months after our investment, the site closed. This exercise month Panacea closed as well, S.WOL is not yet developed sufficiently to be able to put our coins to very good use, and suddenly we're left without any real investment anchors. This is a very serious problem - without investments one can't realise profits.
No matter how serious a problem the foregoing, F.MPIF was designed and sold as a safe investment. Consequently I will not chase investments for the sake of being invested ; our selection process will remain as rigorous as it has always been, and if that means a large cash position then that's what we hold. Had F.MPIF balancesheet been significantly larger, this month would have also resulted in a significant capital distribution back to holders in the form of a dividend. As it is, I judge the size of F.MPIF too small for its sudden move to cash to significantly impact macro equilibriums, and since our own PC5 handles share repurchase and maintains the price reasonably alligned with intrinsic worth, there's no real micro consideration pushing for a distribution of capital.
This call on my part opens the door for an interesting exercise in pitting man versus market : if indeed my judgement is correct, and F.MPIF's position simply reflects yet another nuclear Autumn in Bitcoin financevii there will be no great demand to unwind private F.MPIF investments. If on the contrary the call is wrong, and there exist better investments to be made than what F.MPIF is holding then people will simply unwind, selling their shares into PC5's bids, and I will simply supplement the capital allocation to that unit qs. Time will tell either way.
Meanwhile, it must be said that F.MPIF has managed to attract some quite respectable management talent, and on the score of creating documented track records for their evolution it is doing exceedingly well. I am for this reason very pleased - because making money is always nice, but the people who can make money are quite priceless and in any case preferable.
———Partial loan repayment in sum of 0.53687148 BTC and interest in sum of 0.02253487 BTC. [↩]We've cut a deal to support ATC with some rented hashpower. Reading references : 1, 2, 3. While the commitment is spread out over the weeks, I'm just going to book it here upfront. The guy seems credible enough, if it needs renegotiation I'll just get more hashes rather than ask for BTC back. If he splits I'll do an income for the remainder then and that's that. [↩]Interest and principal. S.WOL doesn't really need to hold on to 200 BTC currently ; we've made an arrangement where the loan is replaced with a line of credit, which they can draw as needed. [↩]It closed down early this month. You know, just in time for the mega FOREX volatility yesterday. [↩]13.85084467 BTC PC 1 + 37.51316402 PC4 + 21.63433032 PC5 + 355.07405515 unallocated reserve. [↩]4.024047766738874 BTC (take that jurov!!1) in ATC in PC1 ; 11 BTC in bets made by PC4 ; 30.01411566 BTC PC5 + 0.68592309 BitBet credit line. [↩]These happen with some regularity by now, Bitcoin is really incredibly seasonal for some yet ununderstood reasons. A similar freeze-up in August-September 2011 for instance completely disrupted S.DICE trading (at the time a major asset in some months successfully rivaling S.MPOE in market cap) and perhaps was one of the contributing factors to its ultimate demise. [↩]
« WarOfLife (S.WOL), August 2014 Statement
F.DERP July - August 2014 Combined Statement »
Category: F.MPIF
Friday, 05 September, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPEx.RFC.1
So I had some changes made to the way MPEx works. Unexpectedly, inexplainably and mindbogglingly ; and also in complete breach with both practice and tradition in Bitcoin space up to this point, I have not
written out the code myself, preferably while drunk, directly on the production servers ;
forced protocol level changes that make previous tools malfunction without telling anyone in advance.
How about that!
The code is written, and tested already, but MPEx does not work this way yet. Such luxuria allows me to establish (at least to some degree of confidence) that what I'm about to propose can actually be done and would work in practice, so I avoid the unpleasant edge case where we have a discussion, we agree on some steps forward and then a few weeks later either I say "you know what ? can't be done after all" or, even worse, simply don't say anything, jus'... nothing happens. Like you know, all the idiots.i
In this light, the proposed changes are as follows :
The introduction of an order counter for your orders, to be displayed in your STAT/STATJSON.
This would allow you to directly verify that no extra orders have been introduced since you last talked to MPEx. If your bookkeeping shows your last order was 15`835 and MPEx STAT says your last order was 15`835 all is well. If not, there's a problem somewhere.
This would also require a re-write of manuals and client-side scripts to take advantage of the new feature. It would not, however, break backwards compatibility, at least not for properly written scriptsii
The introduction of a counter prefix, to be included for all orders.
This would allow narrower control on the client side of signed ordersiii and also would allow stronger timestamping of ordersiv.
This would also break backwards compatibility. Client scripts currently working on MPEx would work no longer. Perhaps more importantly, particular edge usecases may become intractablev.
In closing, let me point out that the RFC process is not exactly a vote, but moreover an opportunity for good arguments to be madevi. This matter will stay open for a couple of months, and will be publicised during that interval, after which it will be closed in some manner and we take it from there.
Please contribute your comments below in the comments section rather than directing them at me in other public venuesvii so we can keep track of the discussion to some degree.
———Let me restate the related point that everyone in Bitcoin, without exception, is doing corporate communication (which they mostly call PR, except there's scarcely a "public" yet) wrong. Please re-read the Strategic superiority article many, many, many times. [↩]I suppose if someone were scrapping STAT rather than parsing STATJSON and doing a sufficiently inflexible job of it this'd render STAT reading inoperable. [↩]Currently, as far as an order has been signed by the client, it can be introduced and will be accepted by MPEx at any future point, period. The only way to invalidate a signed order is by it having been seen by MPEx and thus executed (or discarded for some reason). [↩]Because of inherited weakness from pgp's own timestamping, there is currently no reliable way to resolve time disputes : the client can very well present his own version (as included in the signed material), MPEx will present its own version (as reflected by when it has seen the order) and no further progress can be made (for which reason MPEx' determination is final). [↩]Of particular interest here is the lost-key-safeguard as discussed multiple places including #bitcoin-assets. As it stands right now a sufficiently paranoid user could :
Generate and keep safe a spare gpg key ;
On each STAT call to MPEx, automatically generate PUSH orders for all held symbols, towards the spare key (in the case of symbols held in the book, CANCEL orders followed by PUSH orders).
Should his MPEx key ever become lost through whatever process, introduce the spare key as his key, introduce all the pushing and recover.
Thus a potentially disastrous "lost my MPEx key and with it all my assets" reduces to a "lost my MPEx key now I have to pay for a new one". There's obviously no limit of chaining, in principle the spare key could have a spare key which in turn could have a spare key, and in a string of however many keys, unless ALL are lost, a sufficiently long succession of pushes would eventually result in a usable account. Alternatively, one could include the key of a trusted broker or two in his safety chain, and so should his MPEx key become compromised, he could just ask that broker to take push delivery and reallocate shares. Turns out MPEx' apparent simplicity actually belies a lot of depth, whodda thunk it. [↩]The difference between practical and theoretical discussions is that in the case of the former, the participants are always qualified (ie, you don't get a vote unless you're a party to the discussion) and for better or worse, what they vote for is right and everything else wrong, irrespective of any rational considerations. Voting is not anything else nor was it ever anything else than a recourse ad baculum, the sovereign aristocrats of yore gathering together to see what they'd have to do in order to not have to crack each other's skulls open. Meanwhile in the case of the later the participants are not qualified, and they also have absolutely no authority (ie, no matter how many armored divisions you have, nobody cares, your word counts exactly as much as the Pope's). [↩]And absolutely no private messages dear God! [↩]
« Filantropica
Anonymous derpage »
Category: MPEx
Thursday, 10 April, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPEx status update
As you probably know, MPEx went down yesterday. Let's get up to date with an IRC summary :
July 9
13:35:37 davout mpex.co down for everyonei ?
13:36:12 fluffypony http://isup.me/mpex.co
13:41:07 davout isup.me is down for me :D
17:48:54 mircea_popescu so as a mpex update : all 8 drives + the raid controller are going to be cut up. replacements are going in. mpex won't be back today, but i expect it to be back tomorrow.
20:12:14 jurov wow is this second longest mpex downtime ever?ii
July 10
04:18:42 mike_c once a year the mpex raid array goes on summer vacation.
05:57:49 mircea_popescu as an aside, mpex update : hardware changed and tested, os installed and failed. os reinstalled and failed. hardware retested and failed (!!!). hardware rechanged. tested, passed, tested, passed, os resintalled, tested.
05:57:57 mircea_popescu things are progressing smothly in the manner of fml.
06:00:54 decimation re: upgrades http://xkcd.com/349/
Affected was the core of MPEx, ie the trade engine. Out of the eight drives involvediii six are currently bricked, two garbled. The server in question is currently available, and has been since the early morning, on spare gear. However...
However it doesn't really happen that a large number of new, premium quality drives just brick together of their own accord. There's no such thing as a HDD union, blessfully. There are a few main angles which I can see that'd explain the situation. One is that someone tried to do something or the other to the server - I mean, in physical proximity - and unaware of the particular arrangements in placeiv manged to brick the drives. This could be anything from a confused tech lockpicking the wrong box to some nefarious agent lockpicking the right box, inept handling of RF surveillance equipment and so on and so forth. The other is some obscure bug we're not aware of. I very much doubt this is the case, but then again the very definition of "obscure bug" is that I would. Or whatever, maybe Kali squirted her tits the wrong way, who's to know.
At any rate this circumstance has soured the relationship with the datacenter in question, and it looks like we'll be seeing each other in court so as to get to the bottom of the matter, or at least as reasonably close to a bottom as at all possible. I remain generally unconvinced by the "it just so happened" theory. If my admittedly paranoidv suspicion is correct Bitcoin is yet again ahead of schedule, as is by now customaryvi - I was expecting something like this (and even said in chan I'm expecting something like this) eventually, but not quite July 2014.
In any case, I am escalating MPEx infrastructure to a significantly larger, better, hardier and consequently significantly more expensive arrangement. This will take a little time to deploy and check, which is how it works when things take the initiative out of your hand. I expect a fully functional, significantly more powerful and reliable MPEx back online no later than Monday, July 14th.
Owing to specific countermeasures implemented after the unpleasant experience last year it is not conceivable that any data has been recovered or will be recovered from the drives in question. That notwithstanding, we do have full backups (and obviously, so do you). No Bitcoin is or was at risk throughout this situation, nor has any key material been compromised. Nevertheless, I will probably generate new keys for MPEx on the new system just for the sake of clarity (and after all, there's nothing wrong with changing keys once a year anyway). If you require emergency BTC withdrawals, please get in touch here or on irc, I can and will process your request.
Other than that... whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger, as they say. That'd be all.
———It had just happened, minutes prior. This is not exceptional either, IRC is on the ball. [↩]It is, yes. Or rather, was. [↩]4+4 in a Raid 1+0 array [↩]Such as custom firmware. [↩]Just because they're after you doesn't mean you're paranoid, or how did the ditty go ? [↩]For what it's worth, the first conference was supposed to happen just before, not just after the climb to 100. [↩]
« The anti-True Romance
The Wife of Wanda Wiamonds »
Category: MPEx
Thursday, 10 July, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPEx (S.MPOE) September 2014 Statement
Revenue : 137.82297108 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 27.82297108 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 110 BTC
Expenditure : 24.97832294 BTC, of which :
Advertising, 0.1 BTCii
Tech, 24.87832294iii BTC
Profit : 112.84464814 BTC
Miscellaneous
Business as usual.
———Total trade : 13`911.48554391 BTC. [↩]This is still the spots we're buying on BitBet. [↩]See prev. report. [↩]
« BitBet (S.BBET) September 2014 Statement
Life's lemons, a list of steps »
Category: MPEx
Wednesday, 01 October, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPEx (S.MPOE) November 2014 Statement
Revenue : 195.75548913 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 25.75548913 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 170 BTC
Expenditure : 24.97832294 BTC, of which :
Advertising, 0.1 BTCii
Tech, 24.87832294 BTC
Taxiii, 0.17077716 BTC
Profit : 170.77716619 170.606389024 BTC
Miscellaneous
Business as usual.
———Total trade : 12`877.74456909 BTC. [↩]This is still the spots we're buying on BitBet. [↩]Owed to Bitcoin's Sovereign. [↩]
« BitBet (S.BBET) November 2014 Statement
iPad King's Bounty, the strategy guide »
Category: MPEx
Monday, 01 December, Year 6 d.Tr.
MPEx (S.MPOE) August 2014 Statement
Revenue : 357.11887540 BTC, of which :
Revenue from sales fee : 27.11887540 BTCi
Revenue from new accounts : 330 BTC
Expenditure : 25.07832294 BTC, of which :
Advertising, 0.2 BTCii
Tech, 24.87832294iii BTC
Profit : 332.04055246 BTC
Miscellaneous
We are continuing.
The original MP's Options Emporium, for which the MPEx stock symbol is still named todayiv, ran its first exercise in a very different August : the August of 2011. I have no idea who can believe that's only been three years ago. Certainly not I.
They say that all other investments one may find for his resources and his time are vanity and illusion except children ; they say no thing made by man can outshine the phenomenal growth of the thing made by woman. This is generally true, but here particularly false : no three year old can compete with this thing, and certainly not I.
And so... we continue.
———Total trade : 13`559.43770361 BTC. [↩]This is still the spots we're buying on BitBet. [↩]See prev. report. [↩]MPEx was actually acquired by MPOE, so technically, that's the parent. Meanwhile however the son seems to have eated the father. [↩]
« BitBet (S.BBET) August 2014 Statement
Let me tell you a few words about this usability business »
Category: MPEx
Tuesday, 02 September, Year 6 d.Tr.
MP, what do you like about Argentina ?
undata mircea_popescu: what makes you like Argentina? Things like wealth taxes don't convey a sense of respect for private property, though I can see how that'd be irrelevant to BTC wealth.
mircea_popescu Da fuck do I care about their taxes. But I like everything. I suppose i should spell it out huh.
So... let's see.
I. Buenos Aires is a large city. I'm a city person, I like big cities. It's not just that it's big, tho. It's big the right way, it's pre-Giulianii New York-big city. I'm a New Yorker at heart, always have been. Of course I like it.
II. The beef is fabulous. People who have shared a steak with me here know exactly what I'm talking about. People who haven't... well, let's just hope they will eventually, for the sake of their eternal soul.
III. The government is powerless. This isn't some play pretend Internet toughmanship. The government is powerless. More than half of the people employed are employed under the table. Most transactions are cash based, which means nobody is paying VAT. You can regularly go into a shop and ask for a discount, if you pay cash, because the owner won't report the transaction.ii The official exchange rate is 8-something, the actual rate is 14-something. The street is fucking the Ministry of Finance right in the ass, which is exactly as it should be.
III.b. Because the government is powerless, the crime rate is abysmal. Buenos Aires is easily safer than any place in the US. Any. It's safer than a gated community, it's probably safer than hiking through the woods, 50 miles from the closest human settlement. That's how shit works : government breeds crime, and then under the guise of "being tough on crime" it breeds even more crime. There can not exist human happiness inside a place with a strong government. You may think this through, and agree with it, and nod your head. Once you walk the streets with me here, and observe the policemen going solo in the squad cars you'll understand what it actually means. Think about it, they don't perceive the need to team up the troopers. It's not violent enough to require it, out here. Hm ?
IV. The chicks look european (southern rather than northern) and are poor. It's basically the Ukraine, and we all love the Ukraine, for exactly that reason. So yeah, dinner and a show will run you fifty bucks provided you go to a top shelf theatre and drink champagne with your dinner. It will also be a rare experience for whatever chick you deign pick off the street, one she's not enjoyed in a decade and might never enjoy again.
V. It's about to go to shit. The Argentine economy is sorely mismanaged, and while the dollar will continue to collapse against the Bitcoin, the peso will take some major tumbles against the dollar.
VI. They actually know how to live. Strega, for instance, and I don't have to order it through who knows what elite deli. There's good coffee. While pot's not really my thing, people pass blunts around and you can scarcely go for ten blocks without smelling it. There's a party every night. Where ? Everywhere lol.
VII. The air. The air is actually sweet, it never got really cold, it doesn't seem to get really hot (people here think otherwise, fuck them, they have no fucking clue - they also think "the insecurity" is a problem).
There are, of course, a lot of things not to like. I won't bother with all of that. Suffice to say that of all the places I've been, over five continents, Buenos Aires is by a large margin the best choice. And so here I am, and here I'll stay. Probably, forever.
———Yeah, "tough on crime" big government is bad news. Whodda thunk it. [↩]Yes, old idiots are using credit cards. We mock them for it, yet. We'll probably hang them for it, before it's all done. [↩]
« USGavin, the lolcow
Whore Street and prospective holocaust. »
Category: La pas prin lume
Tuesday, 21 October, Year 6 d.Tr.
Modern medicine and the benefits of democracy
There's a lot of pseudo-knowledge and pop-nonsense accepted as factual and imagined valuable by the sort of readers of summaries of summaries of summaries of summaries that the English language produces these days. Like this idiot. Let's endeavour to dispel a couple of the more egregious tenets of this cult of intellectual laziness, and then see perhaps to some conclusions.
Modern medicine and quality of life. People, intelligent or otherwise, who've not bothered to think about the matter, readily imagine that life expectancy means something it doesn't, simply because statistics are so god damned easy to get wrong and so god damned hard to get right. On this fundamental misunderstanding the impression is then built (mostly by niggers) that "modern medicine" or "science" has made it so that instead of living to be 35, people live to be 70.
This is patently false. For one thing, longevity is not a modern phenomenon. It is an ancient phenomenon. Seneca lived to be 94. You won't live to be 94. The reason the "life expectancy" of the people of antiquity seems to be significantly lower than the "life expectancy" of the people of modernity is simple statistical fraud : the figure includes all the idiotic children that shouldn't live to maturity in any case. In the antique period, they did not. In contemporaneity they unfortunately do, much to the detriment of everyone's quality of life. So yes, it's true that on average someone living twenty five centuries ago lived to be 35. This is because out of a crop of 10 people, one lived to be ninety, two more lived to be seventy, and seven died on average at age 17 : about half close to birth, about half in the early maturity, as war fodder. Which is to say, idiots got cut very short, back then, which further means all the idiocy they could have produced over a full lifetime never happened. Meanwhile today, every last fucktard is happily churning away, expanding wikipedia, reddit and every other collection of contemporaneous braindamage. Perhaps this is easy to ignore, thanks the Internets. But their stupidity being easy to ignore does not actually make it go away. You know what else is easy to ignore ? Garbage. So do you take it out or don't you ? Garbage feeds cockroaches (the very niggers in question above) so ignoring it is not really all that smart a strategy. You'll get sick if you do, and then suffer. Better take the garbage out.
For another thing, "modern medicine" properly understood is moreover detrimental to human life. It's how we ended up with patent nonsense like the DSM-V, and the DSM-IV before that. It's how we ended up with margarine and JIT process, and synthetic fibers to cheaply replace linen and so on and so forth. The contribution of "modern medicine" or "science" to your life is to take something good out of your hands and give you a replacement, that is allegedly "just as good", but yet somehow cheaper more affordable. Guess what! The point of your life isn't to make it easier for other idiots to get the stuff you get. The point of your life is for you to get good stuff. There's a complete disconnect between the interests of humanity, as composed out of the interests of individual, live humans, and the interests of "humanity" as depicted by niggers and "modern science".
For the final thing : the significant lowering of mortality was achieved through sanitation, which is neither modern (the Romans used it) nor "science", in the bullshit touchy-feely pseudoscientific sense niggers use that term. It is engineering, a different matter altogether.
So : no, "modern medicine" and "modern science" did not in fact extend your life or improve its quality. Quite the contrary : they actually and significantly lowered the quality of your life.
The benefits of democracy. This is perhaps the most amusing case of Stockholm syndrome in the history of victimising idiots. For one thing, the bloodiest wars in the history of humanity, and the only wars to ever rival the destruction wrought by pandemics, were fought by and among democratically elected governments. Sure, some of those democratically elected governments (the victors) conveniently claim that some others of those democratically elected governments "didn't count". And you're buying this, right ? Well done.
For the other thing, the alleged benefits of "democracy" are entirely illusory, and strictly flow from the latter day changes introduced by monarchy. Specifically : as the Louis dynasty was coming to an end in France, France itself was a patchwork of dozens of different little states, which ran on their own private legal systems, which had actual customs checkpoints between each other, which in point of fact used different units of measure. Not entirely, but not predictably either. Imagine the job of a merchant, getting salt from Germany and fish from Sweden, then mixing the two and delivering the salted fish to London for England to feed its navy. Why, that's at least five hundred different jurisdictions his supply chains cross over about as many miles. Many of these actually require measurement conversions, many of which are not even specified. You are better off going by fish count, and swallowing nature's variation as to what it means to be a "fish" than going by weight, volume or any other objective measurement! Because errors compound!
Louis' ministers started the mindblowing process of getting rid of all that shit, over everyone's rabid objections. Single people, these, arbitrary powerful, based on absolute authority with no justification. That's, incidentally, how Blackstone's law dictionary came to be, too, and Napoleon's code, and fucking Linux. Everything worth the mention, and usable, and good in this world comes exactly the same way : out of the unilateral, absolute and unjustified authority of a single person. A sovereign of some sort.
Sure, the "revolution" continued these movements, while at the same time wrecking everything in sighti. But mere continuation of something they were too dumb to even notice does not constitute any sort of grounds to claim it as their own, exactly like should a roam of buffalo overrun a settler's homestead, trample everything (including the settler and his family) underfoot and shit everywhere, should they somehow neglect to destroy one begonia forgotten in a pot out of the way they don't get the title of "best florists in the midwest" on account of the accidentally overlooked plant finally flowering. Things just don't work that way.
So, no. The "benefits" of democracy, such as they actually are : Stalin, Hitler and Obama. And Bush jr. And Bush Sr. And the supreme imam of Iran, and the idiot clan of Best Korea. And so on and so forth. Meanwhile what you misrepresent as the benefits of democracy are the benefits of cardinal Mazarin. Nothing absolutely to do with democracy.
In conclusion : get off the idiotic demokick. It's not that democracy is "the worst system except for all the other ones we've tried". Democracy is absolutely the worst system conceivable, and in point of fact worse than absolutely any alternative, without exception in each and every single implementation, at all points in time. Alleged proof to the contrary comes from wilful or ignorant misunderstanding as to what a begonia is, and who planted it.
Put those two together, sprinkle some fake "global warming" pseudo-"consensus" arrived at by bureaucrats posing as "scientists" because some other people who weren't the bureaucratic results of democracy built up a lot of prestige for that particular termii and you get a pretty decent idea of why Bitcoin's not going to either empower or actually tolerate any of that crap.
Yes, over the rabid objections of everyone. So ?
———Hey, the third largest loss of life was... also caused by "democracy", and the fourth largest too, and so on and so forth. [↩]Think about it, if the men in question had called themselves soup cooks, then the grant-chasing nobodies of today would also be trying to convince the world they're certified, cereally and for reals soup cooks. That never even as much as tasted soup in their life, but what's that matter when there's paperwork. [↩]
« Caged Tit
The tok o' capercaillie or the herd of harts ? »
Category: Politica si Prostie
Friday, 24 October, Year 6 d.Tr.
Moar haxxing, moar haxxing, have a look an' here we go...
Other than the usual farei, here's some even lulzier stuff :
Now the acunetix string would seem to suggest this is automated, but the selection of articles (a few random hits, a lot of repeats) as well as the almighty Trilema antispam filters pretty much guarantee this was done by hand.
Think of it, yesterday, while I was busy with Kitty and you were busy with whatever it was you were doing, some kid somewhere with an OVH shared server was spending his time hand typing into his terminal things to be put into my comment section.
It probably took him hours to figure out all the barbs, hours which he could have used much more pleasantly and much more satisfactorily, and much more humanely in the end doing what I was doing, or what you were doing. Or, at the very least, learning how to do either - which isn't what he's been doing, in any case.
But no, instead of petting a kitten or reading a book or darning his own socks our leet haxxor "mircea popescu is an asshole" boi was busy figuring out cookie sessions for a vm, and copy-pasting strings off acunetix into bash. This isn't just him, by the way. During the coupla hours at the brunch the two dozen or so "alpha male dominant" kids in attendance spent their time fidgeting too.
Fidgeting. It's a horrible disease, this. Stop motherfucking fidgeting and go live your life already. Yes, I know fidgeters can never get hurt while they stick to fidgeting. Try and guess why the fuck that is.
———The disruption due to that DDOS lasted all of five minutes. Find people with similar results, why don't you. [↩]
« Con Alma De Tango
Supplemental visual aids as well as images, pictures, photographs and instagrams. Y con queso. »
Category: Meta psihoza
Saturday, 21 June, Year 6 d.Tr.
MIRCEA POPESCU IS AN ASSHOLE!
This is sort-of lulzy, so here you go :
Subject: ddos attack
From: "Mitar Seselj" (I'll omit his email out of pure assholery)
Date: Sat, June 7, 2014 4:05 pm
To:
Hello,
Your site (mpex.co) is extremely vulnerable to ddos attacks.
I have just tested it and find out that I can even dos it from my
personal computer with low upload.
I have prove it to you, like to dos it for a minute while you are online.
I can help you to fix it for 0.15 btc. (I won't touch your server, I
will just give you explanation what to do).
If interested, please reply.
btw. Don't get me wrong, this is not a blackmailing. I'm not
threatening you :) but if you don't get that fixed you might have a
problem (most certainly you are)
Well so what's one to do ? Obviously Read Teh Flamboyant Trilema is too much to ask, so let's start with something light.
Subject: Re: ddos attack
From:
Date: Sat, June 7, 2014 4:38 pm
To: "Mitar Seselj"
Suppose you get on #bitcoin-assets on Freenode like all the other noobs
aspiring to matter in Bitcoin and follow the established path, instead of
derping around with delusions of individuality or whatever it is you're
on.
All the best,
Mircea Popescu
What'd you suppose the effects of these three brief lines would be ? Well, I'm in a position to tell you, and so tell you I will. First :
Jun 07 23:47:47 FabianB ;;isitdown mpex.co
Jun 07 23:47:51 gribble mpex.co is down
Jun 07 23:48:26 mircea_popescu it pings...
Jun 07 23:48:56 mircea_popescu but it dun web anymoar!
Jun 07 23:49:02 FabianB hm, coinbr proxy works for me
Jun 07 23:49:59 mircea_popescu a, smartass ddos kid.
Jun 07 23:50:54 FabianB lol, why are they even still trying?
Jun 07 23:51:03 fluffypony boredom I suppose
Meanwhile some other place, on Jun 07 '14 5:49pm
Hello Mircea,
Found $1 connections to :80 from $2
=-=-=
217 185.45.193.121
236 212.117.180.93
[xxx]# netstat -n | grep :80 |wc -l
348
=-=-=
Blocked. Are they yours? Say if block should be removed.
Thank You
Meanwhile back at the ranch,
Subject: Re: ddos attack
From: "Mitar Seselj"
Date: Sat, June 7, 2014 4:38 pm
Subject: Re: ddos attack
From: "Mitar Seselj"
Date: Sat, June 7, 2014 4:38 pm
I'm sorry, but what are you trying to say?i
What exactly is the reason for those insults?ii
and soon thereafter
Subject: Re: ddos attack
From: "Mitar Seselj"
Date: Sat, June 7, 2014 4:45 pm
Did you even read my email before answering you dumb fuck?!
I have find out that your site has bad security and offered to help.
If you were not interested, fine, just ignore my email...
And furthermore,
Jun 07 23:52:39 * TarMi (~3d3d@5.79.71.195) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Jun 07 23:52:46 mircea_popescu !up TarMi
Jun 07 23:52:48 * assbot gives voice to TarMi
Jun 08 00:14:32 * TarMi has quit (Quit: MIRCEA POPESCU IS AN ASSHOLE!)
Jun 08 00:15:43 pankkake TarMi!~3d3d@5.79.71.195 has quit: Quit: MIRCEA POPESCU IS AN ASSHOLE! < for those who hide quits
Jun 08 00:20:56 * TarMi (~TarMi@5.79.71.195) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Jun 08 00:21:05 * TarMi has quit (Client Quit)
Jun 08 00:21:50 * TarMi (~TarMi@5.79.71.195) has joined #bitcoin-assets
Jun 08 00:22:04 mircea_popescu !up TarMi
Jun 08 00:22:06 -assbot- You voiced TarMi for 30 minutes.
Jun 08 00:22:06 * assbot gives voice to TarMi
Jun 08 00:22:13 mircea_popescu Dude what's your major dysfunction.
Jun 08 00:22:18 TarMi Mircea is an asshole!
Jun 08 00:22:27 * TarMi has quit (Client Quit)
Jun 08 00:22:30 fluffypony TarMi: I know, right, he's a real cock head.
Jun 08 00:22:50 mircea_popescu You'd think he caught me while I was doing his mom or something.
So now, seeing how that name seems Croatian or something, which one of you BFFs knows him irl ? Tell him to stop being silly and srsly, just lurk in chan for a year or so like any other noob.
Or whatever, tell his mom or older sister to tell him ; or whoever you're doing.
———As it was previously observed, one needs a special degree to understand what the fuck I'm saying. A common symptom of the sore absence of such qualification is the mistaken notion that I were trying to say something. [↩]As a general rule, the easier it is to insult the other party, the closer they are to a young male. Mentally speaking.
On one end of the scale, a grown woman (also known as an old whore) can't actually be insulted. Boys trying to pretend like they're men however, and little girls trying to become boys... god help you. [↩]
« I'm fresh out of titles, try again tomorrow.
"I saw, and was saddened." »
Category: Meta psihoza
Sunday, 08 June, Year 6 d.Tr.