freenode #wikipedia

2008-05-04 23:41 < Cyrius> quanticle: 1900
2008-05-04 23:42 < Cyrius> deadliest US natural disaster
2008-05-04 23:42 < Cyrius> after the hurricane
2008-05-04 23:42 < Cyrius> they built a bunch of dirt walls, then dredged out the bay and pumped the results into the spaces
2008-05-04 23:42 < Cyrius> and increased the island's height above sea level
2008-05-04 23:43 < Cyrius> it included lifting some of the surviving buildings
2008-05-04 23:44 < quanticle> Cyrius: Ah. Ok.
2008-05-04 23:44 < gwern> quanticle: the reviews describe revelation space as hard sf; how hard are we talking?
2008-05-04 23:44 < Lubaf> "Don't say it, Cartman." "Weeeellll...." "Don't do it, Cartman!" "Weeellll...." "I'm warning you, Cartman!"...
2008-05-04 23:45 < Cyrius> "The most massive structure raised was the 6 million pound, stone and brick, St. Patrick's Church, which was lifted five feet..."
2008-05-04 23:46 < gwern> wonder how many jacks that took
2008-05-04 23:46 < bbot> Only six megapounds?
2008-05-04 23:47 < quanticle> gwern: Well, lets just say that Reynolds was a practicing astrophysicist at the ESA when he wrote the book. So, he accepts certain things like nanotechnology, cryogenics, fusion power, etc. but he does not accept things that violate fundamental Einsteinian physics, like wormholes or faster-than-light travel.
2008-05-04 23:47 < gwern> quanticle: oh neat; I always enjoy seeing how people handle non-ftl travel universes
2008-05-04 23:47 < quanticle> gwern: However, he doesn't lay the science on too thick, so the book is quite accessible.
2008-05-04 23:47 < gwern> does he have good solutions?
2008-05-04 23:48 < quanticle> gwern: Cryogenic freezing, combined with fusion drives that accelerate starships to a fraction under c over a period of decades.
2008-05-04 23:49 < gwern> quanticle: reasonable. so I guess any innovation would be in societal structures
2008-05-04 23:49 * gwern thinks that non-ftl travel is sci fi's locked-room-murder equivalent
2008-05-04 23:50 < Fennec> mm? how's that?
2008-05-04 23:51 < quanticle> gwern: Yep. In Reynolds' universe, humanity has split into a variety of factions. The "Ultras", who run the starships, have heavily modified themselves with various gene based and nanotechnical modifications to significantly expand their lifespans and neural capacities.
2008-05-04 23:54 < quanticle> Hello dungodung.
2008-05-04 23:54 < dungodung> hi quanticle
2008-05-04 23:58 < The359> I don't recall Wormholes violating Einstein's model of the universe, just acting as a workaround for Einstein's model
2008-05-05 00:01 < Fennec> mmm; true, Einstein's model does not address wormholes.
2008-05-05 00:01 < Fennec> not per se, anyway
2008-05-05 00:12 < Mike_H> Santa Barbara began on an uneven foot, with one reviewer deeming the series "the worst program on television... maybe ever." [2]
2008-05-05 00:13 < quanticle> Fennec, The359: Well, you're both kind of correct. Its true that there's nothing ruling out wormholes. However, maintaining a wormhole would require things like "exotic matter" (matter which has negative mass) and other odd things. Also, wormholes might allow you to violate causality, by virtue of letting you travel faster than information carrying the effects of your actions, so Reynolds disallows it.
2008-05-05 00:13 < Fennec> quanticle: well, the exotic matter at least is a non-Einsteinian problem. >.>
2008-05-05 00:14 < quanticle> Fennec: True, but its far enough outside of "plausible science" that it would be a stretch for the sort of "hard space opera" that Reynolds writes. Exotic matter is the sort of crutch that Peter F. Hamilton would use.
2008-05-05 00:15 < Fennec> also, I'm a little bit wondering about the substantiality of the "causality" issue. So I shoot off some photons, or even some gravitons, then run ahead and intercept the beam. that's nice, but I'm unsure where the causality violation is.
2008-05-05 00:16 < Fennec> maybe it has something to do with extreme cases of the no-privelleged-frame-of-reference problems
2008-05-05 00:17 < uberpenguin> you've violated relativity; that's a problem
2008-05-05 00:17 < quanticle> Fennec: Because light is the fastest thing there is, the speed of light also defines the speed of time, to put it one way. Therefore, if you "race ahead" of you light beam, you'd arrive before you fired the light beam.
2008-05-05 00:18 < Fennec> in many ordinary frames of reference that need not be the case.
2008-05-05 00:18 < quanticle> Fennec: Well, I'm speaking of the case where you're on the other end of that light beam.
2008-05-05 00:20 < quanticle> Fennec: I'm also assuming we're talking about vacuum. Of course, if the light is inside a particularly dense substance, it'd propagate more slowly.
2008-05-05 00:20 < uberpenguin> only if you throw out special relativity
2008-05-05 00:21 < Fennec> So, as part of the wormhole process, light is emitted. I enter a wormhole and skip 10 light-minutes ahead of that light, and wait around and intercept it. While the view may certainly /look/ off, I'm not sure where that starts translating into an inconsistent state.
2008-05-05 00:21 < uberpenguin> the salient take-home point of special relativity is that the velocity of light is constant in all reference frames
2008-05-05 00:22 < quanticle> uberpenguin: What do you mean? The speed of light *in* *a* *vacuum* is always the same. If you're firing the light beam through a substance, the light will naturally slow down.
2008-05-05 00:23 < uberpenguin> naturally? why?
2008-05-05 00:23 < uberpenguin> the speed of light is constant regardless of inertial reference frame in a given medium
2008-05-05 00:23 < quanticle> uberpenguin: 23:20 < quanticle> Fennec: I'm also assuming we're talking about vacuum. Of course, if the light is inside a particularly dense substance, it'd propagate more slowly.
2008-05-05 00:23 < quanticle> 23:20 < uberpenguin> only if you throw out special relativity
2008-05-05 00:23 < Fennec> uberpenguin: Slowing down light in non-vacuum states is trivial. It's called a "lens". "Refraction".
2008-05-05 00:24 < uberpenguin> I never said it wasn't
2008-05-05 00:24 < uberpenguin> lag made that statement come out too late
2008-05-05 00:24 < Fennec> your timing must have been bad then
2008-05-05 00:24 < Fennec> ja
2008-05-05 00:24 < Fennec> anyway, I think at some level Special Relativity is more "there is an absolute maximum velocity that is constant in all reference frames" and it just so happens that light, unimpeded in a vacuum, will go that speed (and it a very handy medium to see the effects in too, the redshift/blueshift/energy-changing stuff)
2008-05-05 00:25 < Fennec> and there are, of course, other particles that go that fast
2008-05-05 00:25 < uberpenguin> any particle with exactly zero rest mass, sure
2008-05-05 00:26 < quanticle> Fennec: The main issue is that, according to special relativity, you can't go faster than the speed of light, since the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. Therefore, in order to maintain the speed of light, the rate of passage of time decreases as your velocity increases with respect to a fixed reference. In other words, the faster you go, the slower your clock appears to be running.
2008-05-05 00:27 < Fennec> yep
2008-05-05 00:28 < Fennec> underneath it all the universe's probably just a big 280-dimensional variant of Conway's Game of Life. :P
2008-05-05 00:29 < Fennec> but anyway! So what happens when you bypass velocity limits by altering the topology of the place?
2008-05-05 00:29 < uberpenguin> untrue, the group velocity of a wave packet can exceed the speed of light
2008-05-05 00:29 < uberpenguin> and that's been demonstrated plenty of times
2008-05-05 00:29 < Fennec> uberpenguin: that's not a thing though
2008-05-05 00:29 < uberpenguin> how do you define 'a thing'?
2008-05-05 00:29 < uberpenguin> at quantum scales where indeterminacy is at play and everything is best defined by its wave function?
2008-05-05 00:29 < uberpenguin> special relativity does not mandate that "nothing can travel faster than c"
2008-05-05 00:30 < uberpenguin> a side effect of special relativity is that information cannot be transferred faster than c, however
2008-05-05 00:31 < Fennec> the "phase group" is an abstract concept. Photons, on the other hand, are real.
2008-05-05 00:31 < uberpenguin> that belies a misunderstanding of what a photon is
2008-05-05 00:32 < uberpenguin> you're making an arbitrary distinction where there is none
2008-05-05 00:32 < uberpenguin> also, the term I think you're getting at is "wave packet"
2008-05-05 00:32 < Fennec> probably
2008-05-05 00:32 < quanticle> uberpenguin: If you can resolve that distinction, you've just earned yourself a nobel prize in Physics...
2008-05-05 00:32 < uberpenguin> there are also related terms "phase velocity" and "group velocity"
2008-05-05 00:32 < Fennec> I'm aware.
2008-05-05 00:32 < uberpenguin> quanticle: no, this is quantum mechanics 101
2008-05-05 00:32 < uberpenguin> junior-level undergraduate physics stuff
2008-05-05 00:33 < uberpenguin> it's just wave mechanics and a basic understanding of QM
2008-05-05 00:33 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Right. That's what I'm saying. If you can resolve that bit of quantum mechanics with relativity's proscription of FTL information transmission, then you've achieved a significant breakthrough.
2008-05-05 00:34 < uberpenguin> "resolve"?
2008-05-05 00:34 < quanticle> uberpenguin: The conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics is often glossed over.
2008-05-05 00:34 < uberpenguin> special relativity and QM get along fine
2008-05-05 00:34 < uberpenguin> it's GR and QM which have issues
2008-05-05 00:34 < quanticle> Ah. Ok.
2008-05-05 00:34 < uberpenguin> but relativistic quantum mechanics is a pretty happy little field
2008-05-05 00:35 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Heh. That almost sounds like a contradiction in terms.
2008-05-05 00:35 < uberpenguin> not one that I'm proficient in, mind you, but I don't think there are incompatibilities between special relativity and QM
2008-05-05 00:37 < uberpenguin> look at the EPR paradox, for example
2008-05-05 00:37 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Yeah. I'm not a physicist, mind you. I've just read a lot of physics books.
2008-05-05 00:37 < Fennec> So. Imagine a universe with a very massive black hole somewhere. You could fire a beam of light just right, gets turned completely around by the black hole, and it comes back and hits a spot 3 feet from where it started, a million years later. Orr... you could just shoot a laser beam straight at that spot. Big deal.
2008-05-05 00:37 < uberpenguin> ... do you even understand what a black hole is and how it's defined in terms of GR?
2008-05-05 00:38 < Fennec> uberpenguin: It's a massive object with gravity.
2008-05-05 00:38 < uberpenguin> congrats, so is a moon
2008-05-05 00:38 < gwern> Yudkowsky just made an interesting point, I think. he pointed out that spooky action at a distance could be very useful - the random information being conveyed at FTL could be used as a shared crypto key
2008-05-05 00:38 < Fennec> okay. so, a series of - forget it. A mirror. :P
2008-05-05 00:39 < uberpenguin> gwern: I don't follow
2008-05-05 00:40 < quanticle> Fennec: What's the issue, then? One beam will arrive a million years after the other.
2008-05-05 00:40 < quanticle> Fennec: The issue only arises when you're moving, and there's a fixed observers.
2008-05-05 00:40 < Fennec> Right. So, what's so very different between that and a universe where there's some topological nonconformity such that the light doesn't need to get bounced back, but there's still a million-lightyear route and a 3-foot route to the same spot?
2008-05-05 00:41 < gwern> uberpenguin: you and I generate 100 pairs of entangled photons or whatever; we travel 100 lightyears in opposite directions, and measure the polarity of our 100. each polarity is 1 or 0, say; we know from entanglement that if I observe a 0 then you observe a 1. I flip all my bits, and I now have the same bit string you do. I can then encrypt stuff in a symmetric cipher, knowing you can use your unflipped 100-bit string to decrypt it
2008-05-05 00:41 < uberpenguin> NO information is conveyed by collapsing the wavefunction of two entangled, separated objects
2008-05-05 00:41 < uberpenguin> that's the solution to the EPR paradox and why QM doesn't conflict with special relativity
2008-05-05 00:42 < gwern> you may say, why not just generate 100 shared bits at the origin? but then the bits are with you the entire way, instead of being generated when you needed them
2008-05-05 00:42 < BoLServ`> I'm hitting the sack
2008-05-05 00:42 < Fennec> gwern: why not just generate a one-time pad before you go?
2008-05-05 00:42 < BoLServ`> night all
2008-05-05 00:42 < Fennec> don't you need the same number of photons anyway?
2008-05-05 00:42 < uberpenguin> gwern: if you observe a "1" then I observe a "1" as well, actually
2008-05-05 00:42 < gwern> uberpenguin: oh, was that how it worked? well, that makes it simpler
2008-05-05 00:42 < uberpenguin> gwern: the problem is, who initiates the wavefunction collapse, and how do you both know when that's done?
2008-05-05 00:42 * gwern thought it was opposites, but whatever
2008-05-05 00:43 < uberpenguin> you're a hundred light years away, you'd have to send a message
2008-05-05 00:43 < gwern> of course, there's the higher view where the 100 bits of info was with the two of you the entire time, just sort of obfuscated by being in an entangled form; I gather that Yudkowsky thinks that this is the 'correct' relativity-consistent view to take
2008-05-05 00:43 < uberpenguin> you can't synchronize it to make it useful, if you could you'd violate special relativity
2008-05-05 00:43 < quanticle> uberpenguin: What do you say to Fennec's question regarding the topologically quirky universe?
2008-05-05 00:44 < uberpenguin> I say that I have no idea what he is talking about nor where it's coming from
2008-05-05 00:45 < uberpenguin> gwern: can you try to rephrase that, because it sounds dangerously close to a hidden variable theory, which has been disproved
2008-05-05 00:45 < uberpenguin> Bell's theorem, you know
2008-05-05 00:45 < gwern> uberpenguin: iirc, doesn't that just say hidden variables come with nasty implications?
2008-05-05 00:45 < uberpenguin> it says that hidden variables are impossible within the constructs of QM
2008-05-05 00:46 < uberpenguin> so basically you have to throw out all of QM to introduce a hidden variable theory
2008-05-05 00:46 < quanticle> uberpenguin: What do you mean by "hidden variables".
2008-05-05 00:46 < Fennec> I'm trying to understand how a wormhole letting stuff go "faster than light" by providing a shortcut could violate causality. A wormhole functions a topological defect of some sort. (Assume that whatever freakish negative-energy-density material you need is available.)
2008-05-05 00:46 < gwern> Fennec: it seems straightforward enough to me
2008-05-05 00:46 < Fennec> (Or assume it's natural. Is it even possible for such a thing to be natural?)
2008-05-05 00:46 < uberpenguin> quanticle: some piece of information we don't have which would've let us predict a quantum-sized object's behavior with determinacy if we had it
2008-05-05 00:47 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Ah. Right. I can see why that'd be a problem.
2008-05-05 00:47 < gwern> uberpenguin: but if you want to see what he said himself: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/05/spooky-action-a.html
2008-05-05 00:47 < uberpenguin> in the first half of the 20th century, that was a major unresolved issue in physics
2008-05-05 00:47 < uberpenguin> you had people who subscribed to the Copenhagen "no hidden variables" interpretation
2008-05-05 00:47 < gwern> 'A common defense of the old theory was that Special Relativity was not violated, because no "information" was transmitted, because the superluminal influence was always "random". As some Hans de Vries fellow points out, information theory says that "random" data is the most expensive kind of data you can transmit. Nor is "random" information always useless: If you and I generate a million entangled particles, we can later measure them to obtain ...
2008-05-05 00:48 < gwern> ... a shared key for use in cryptography - a highly useful form of information which, by Bell's Theorem, could not have already been there before measuring.' <-- about three paragrpahs after this, I totally lsoe him
2008-05-05 00:48 < Leslie_S> i wonder how well this truck driving thing is going to work for me.. :o
2008-05-05 00:48 < gwern> somehow, the idea of Leslie_S driving a truck ineluctably brings to mind the Weird Al song about driving a truck
2008-05-05 00:49 < gwern> specifically, about a cross dressing truck driver
2008-05-05 00:49 < Leslie_S> lol
2008-05-05 00:49 < The359> it brings in mind an episode of Cops for me
2008-05-05 00:49 < Leslie_S> gwern everyone in real life thinks im a cross dresser too
2008-05-05 00:50 < quanticle> gwern: She's driving a truck with her high heels on...
2008-05-05 00:50 < gwern> Leslie_S: exactly
2008-05-05 00:50 < Leslie_S> i havent come out to the general public about being transgender, but ....i sorta let out the corss dressing thing.
2008-05-05 00:50 < Leslie_S> and it doesnt help much when i DO cross dress :P
2008-05-05 00:51 < Fennec> what doesn't help which?
2008-05-05 00:51 < Leslie_S> Fennec when people see me dressing as a woman, they assume that makes me a cross dresser.
2008-05-05 00:52 < Leslie_S> of course, ive only crossdressed to the gay club so far
2008-05-05 00:52 < Leslie_S> the former gay club :(
2008-05-05 00:52 < uberpenguin> gwern: I did not read all of it because I'm sleepy, but he doesn't seem to address the fact that practical synchronization of the system is still impossible without breaking special relativity
2008-05-05 00:52 < uberpenguin> but there are certainly applications of entangled states to cryptology
2008-05-05 00:52 < uberpenguin> I don't fully understand them, though
2008-05-05 00:52 < gwern> Fennec: anyway, does [[Wormhole#Wormholes_and_time_travel]] not explain to your satisfaction?
2008-05-05 00:53 < gwern> uberpenguin: well, debating yudkowsky is always entertaining at least, so maybe bookmark it for non-sleepy time
2008-05-05 00:53 < uberpenguin> no thanks
2008-05-05 00:53 < uberpenguin> debating on the internet is retarded
2008-05-05 00:53 < uberpenguin> and I'm not a physicist, so my knowledge here is limited anyway
2008-05-05 00:53 < uberpenguin> I have physicist friends to go to if I need questions answered
2008-05-05 00:55 < uberpenguin> this guy seems bent on mixing science and philosophy, though, which is something I don't even touch
2008-05-05 00:55 < uberpenguin> science + philosophy = BAAAAADD juju in my experience
2008-05-05 00:55 < gwern> science + philosophy is awesome, imo
2008-05-05 00:55 < quanticle> The other thing with wormholes is that its unclear whether they're even theoretically possible.
2008-05-05 00:56 < gwern> that's one of the reasons I like Daniel Dennet so much, he's one of the few philosophers who takes seriously all the relevant science
2008-05-05 00:56 < gwern> *Dennett
2008-05-05 00:57 < uberpenguin> quanticle: that's partially because nobody knows what the nature of one would be, and nobody has observed one or any suggestions of one
2008-05-05 00:57 < gwern> (and then there are folks like Searle... but let's not talk about him, poor Godel's incompleteness theorems are still in therapy)
2008-05-05 00:57 < uberpenguin> it's a concept invented by science fiction which is sufficiently ill-defined as to be nearly unfalsifiable
2008-05-05 00:58 < uberpenguin> sort of like string theory
2008-05-05 00:58 < quanticle> gwern: Huh? What did Searle do to refute Goedel?
2008-05-05 00:58 < gwern> zing
2008-05-05 00:58 < gwern> quanticle: no, searle misused godel's results
2008-05-05 00:58 < gwern> hence my joke about therapy (abuse, etc.)
2008-05-05 00:59 < gwern> I've noticed in recent years there seems to've been a real backlash against string theory
2008-05-05 01:00 < Fennec> true
2008-05-05 01:00 < uberpenguin> not really
2008-05-05 01:01 < quanticle> gwern: That's because no one has been able to make a prediction using the mathematics of string theory.
2008-05-05 01:01 < uberpenguin> there aren't a whole lot of people who endorse string theory
2008-05-05 01:01 < uberpenguin> it's just there... it doesn't do much other than make for good faerie tales
2008-05-05 01:01 < uberpenguin> as yet there's no basis upon which to say whether it's wrong or right
2008-05-05 01:01 < gwern> no, I mean in the '90s and early '00s, I saw quite a bit of popularization of string theory, and *no one* made jokes about it being unfalsifiable, but these days...
2008-05-05 01:02 < gwern> these days, what uberpenguin is saying seems to be conventional wisdom
2008-05-05 01:02 < uberpenguin> I think any perceived 'backlash' is just from people who think that string theorists could be doing something more productive, but then again, string theorists practically live off their celebrity
2008-05-05 01:03 < uberpenguin> truth be told, there's not a lot of room in the world for theoretical astrophysicists
2008-05-05 01:03 < uberpenguin> being a GR expert doesn't pay the bills unless you're already famous
2008-05-05 01:03 < uberpenguin> I think in our entire physics department there's only one GR expert
2008-05-05 01:03 < quanticle> gwern: Also, lets not forget that, back then, people were still optimistic that the breakthrough rquired to make string theory viable was "just around the corner". 8 years without progress must be pretty discouraging.
2008-05-05 01:03 < Fennec> IMO the best thing you can hope to get out of string theory and friends is a good graviton gun. >.>
2008-05-05 01:04 < Fennec> cuz that'd be awesome
2008-05-05 01:04 < quanticle> Fennec: What the hell are you talking about?
2008-05-05 01:04 < Fennec> not that it's going to happen, mind you
2008-05-05 01:05 < Fennec> quanticle: Theoretically-not-completely-impossible practical applications of string theory.
2008-05-05 01:05 < quanticle> Fennec: Not least because gravitons are predicted by quantum mechanics, not string theory.
2008-05-05 01:05 < gwern> quanticle: perhaps that's the best explanation; it'd explain the sudden (from my outside perspective) shift
2008-05-05 01:05 < uberpenguin> you could go into science fiction writing the way you're able to toss around terminology :)
2008-05-05 01:05 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Who, Fennec?
2008-05-05 01:05 < uberpenguin> yes
2008-05-05 01:05 < uberpenguin> sorry, I'm not trying to be demeaning, I'm just tired and crabby and bemused
2008-05-05 01:05 < quanticle> gwern: Yeah. Its my working hypothesis at any rate.
2008-05-05 01:06 < quanticle> gwern: After 8 years of "it'll be ready any day now", the scientific community is finally losing patience.
2008-05-05 01:06 * uberpenguin prefers the more established territory of physics
2008-05-05 01:06 < uberpenguin> for example, this: http://mattb.alwayssleeping.com/images/theremin/theremin_30.jpg
2008-05-05 01:07 < uberpenguin> THE DEVICE
2008-05-05 01:07 < uberpenguin> doomsday machines are well-known, good 'ol fashioned science
2008-05-05 01:07 < quanticle> gwern: Of course this doesn't mean that string theory is wrong. It just means that it'll be left as a backwater for another twenty years before someone young and brave picks it up again. Just like chaos theory.
2008-05-05 01:07 < uberpenguin> quanticle: sir, chaos theory has some important and useful results
2008-05-05 01:07 < Fennec> quanticle: that too.
2008-05-05 01:08 < uberpenguin> nonlinear dynamics is an entire fascinating field of mathematics
2008-05-05 01:08 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Right, but it didn't in the late 1800s, when Kock and Cantor drew their pretty pictures.
2008-05-05 01:08 < gwern> quanticle: things like that make me wish I could stick all my money into some diversified investments, and hop into a hibernation chamber for 50 years or so
2008-05-05 01:08 * gwern doesn't want to travel to the future the slow way!
2008-05-05 01:08 < FastLizard4|Food> Lucifer_Cat: Make your move on Soviet map already!
2008-05-05 01:08 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Er, Koch, not Kock
2008-05-05 01:08 < Fennec> ha
2008-05-05 01:08 < Fennec> and it's back to Risk etc
2008-05-05 01:09 < gwern> 'Electronics companies here are obsessed with keeping their profit margins high, and keeping everything as expensive as possible. They even lobbied to pass a law that would make it illegal for second hand shops to sell electronics more than 5 years old, so that people would be forced to keep buying new stuff. They came very close to passing it, too. The general public was passive about it. The only thing that stopped them was musicians that wouldn't ...
2008-05-05 01:09 < gwern> ... have been able to buy vintage amps and guitar pedals, and gaming freaks that wouldn't have been able to buy old Nintendo games.'
2008-05-05 01:09 < uberpenguin> quanticle: that's a slightly different matter; those mathematicians were just finding patterns in classes of differential equations... that didn't require the fleshed-out study of them which came later
2008-05-05 01:11 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Well, that, and when they tried to apply those equations to physics, they were told, "Nature doesn't behave this way; chaotic motions are damped out over the long run," an assumption that looks pretty foolish in retrospect.
2008-05-05 01:11 < uberpenguin> here, a very useful application of chaos theory: http://lanoswww.epfl.ch/studinfo/courses/cours_nonlinear_de/extras/De_Feo(2003)_Bifurcations%20in%20the%20Colpitts%20Oscillator_From%20Theory%20to%20Practice.pdf
2008-05-05 01:11 < Fennec> eekpdf :)
2008-05-05 01:11 < gwern> a little odd; didn't the three-body problem get proven to be chaotic in the 1890s or so?
2008-05-05 01:12 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Right. However, that sort of application wasn't discovered until the 1960s or so. Chaos theory had been relegated to the mathematical backwaters a century beforehand.
2008-05-05 01:13 < uberpenguin> because nobody could think of a use for it... it didn't mean it wasn't valid mathematics
2008-05-05 01:13 < uberpenguin> sort of like modern abstract algebras structures
2008-05-05 01:13 < uberpenguin> not many uses for them, but they are real mathematics
2008-05-05 01:13 < quanticle> uberpenguin: Yeah. I guess that'd be a better analogy than string theory, which may or may not be valid math.
2008-05-05 01:13 < uberpenguin> string theory doesn't lead us to any predictions or conclusions, nor is it clear whether we could ever test it
2008-05-05 01:14 < uberpenguin> that's different from GR, which makes good predictions and gives us some insight, even if its actual applications are admittedly limited
2008-05-05 01:14 < quanticle> gwern: Regarding the electronics law, which locality was that?
2008-05-05 01:14 * Ceiling_Cat returns from rubbing lotion into his skin
2008-05-05 01:15 < quanticle> It puts the lotion on its back?
2008-05-05 01:15 < gwern> quanticle: japan
2008-05-05 01:15 < Ceiling_Cat> quanticle - for my sunburn
2008-05-05 01:16 * gwern goes to bed
2008-05-05 01:16 < CatServ`> 'night gwern
2008-05-05 01:16 * quanticle is off for bed as well
2008-05-05 01:16 < CatServ`> 'night quanticle
2008-05-05 01:16 < quanticle|away> 'Night CatServ`
2008-05-05 01:17 * uberpenguin demands that japan mandate all devices be based on thermionic technology from now on
2008-05-05 01:17 * Ceiling_Cat wonders why [[Anal-oral sex]] is always at the top of his watchlist
2008-05-05 01:17 < Ceiling_Cat> seriously, it gets like 5 edits per day
2008-05-05 01:17 < CatServ`> :O
2008-05-05 01:19 < CatServ`> uberpenguin: When does the world explode?
2008-05-05 01:21 < uberpenguin> CatServ`: when you turn on THE DEVICE
2008-05-05 01:21 * CatServ` does a stupid thing and turns on THE DEVICE
2008-05-05 01:27 < Ceiling_Cat> http://www.epinions.com/review/Hawaiian_Tropic_Cool_Aloe_Ice_with_Lidocaine_Burn_Relief_Gel/content_247250259588
2008-05-05 01:27 < Ceiling_Cat> That stuff is a life-saver
2008-05-05 01:35 * CatServ` is now going to bed, good night!
2008-05-05 02:27 < denelson83> Riddle: What is a dermatologist's favourite dinner?
2008-05-05 02:28 < Flo_1> hi
2008-05-05 02:28 < denelson83> yo
2008-05-05 02:38 < piksi> wooo, never seen this page before :-)
2008-05-05 02:38 < piksi> technical problems at wikipedia
2008-05-05 03:12 < denelson83> Uh... meow?
2008-05-05 03:34 * Lady_Aleena wanders in and plops on the sofa.
2008-05-05 03:35 < denelson83> Okay that didn't work, how 'bout... woof?
2008-05-05 03:35 < denelson83> No, that neither
2008-05-05 03:36 * Lady_Aleena puts her feet in clean socks on the coffee table.
2008-05-05 03:46 < Arox> hello
2008-05-05 03:46 < denelson83> yo
2008-05-05 03:46 < Arox> hi
2008-05-05 03:46 < Arox> so what is going on in here
2008-05-05 03:46 < denelson83> what'up?
2008-05-05 03:46 < denelson83> Channel's idle
2008-05-05 03:46 < Arox> yea what is with that
2008-05-05 03:47 < denelson83> Must be where the sunlight is
2008-05-05 03:47 < Arox> irc seems to be a place to for people to idle
2008-05-05 03:47 < Arox> why does everyone on irc idle
2008-05-05 03:47 < denelson83> IRC never stood for "idling, resting and crashing"
2008-05-05 03:47 < Arox> i don't get it
2008-05-05 03:47 < Arox> haha
2008-05-05 03:47 < denelson83> Perhaps all these people are away from their comps?
2008-05-05 03:48 < Arox> yea but why come on irc
2008-05-05 03:48 < denelson83> beats me (shrugs)
2008-05-05 03:48 < Arox> it seems like everyone just comes on and then just walks away or does not wanna communicate
2008-05-05 03:48 < Arox> maybe it is like AIM for them
2008-05-05 03:48 < denelson83> without the branding
2008-05-05 03:49 < Arox> maybe it feels cool to use irc cept for AIM
2008-05-05 03:49 < denelson83> eh?
2008-05-05 03:49 < Arox> and just idle the night away
2008-05-05 03:50 * Lady_Aleena plays cat's cradle.
2008-05-05 03:50 * denelson83 did not understand this statement -> [00:49:24] <Arox> maybe it feels cool to use irc cept for AIM
2008-05-05 03:50 < Arox> people to good for aim or icq use irc as their msging service
2008-05-05 03:50 < denelson83> Ah, how true
2008-05-05 03:51 < Arox> makes them seem better than the rest
2008-05-05 03:51 < denelson83> Well, ICQ == AIM nowadays
2008-05-05 03:51 < denelson83> and MSN is more popular, but still branded
2008-05-05 03:51 < denelson83> IRC is the "hang loose" way
2008-05-05 03:51 < Arox> i think they use the same protocal right
2008-05-05 03:51 < denelson83> yes, protocol
2008-05-05 03:51 < denelson83> And they're both owned by A-O-Smell
2008-05-05 03:52 < Arox> ohh that sux
2008-05-05 03:52 < denelson83> Or is that A-Hole-Smell?
2008-05-05 03:52 < Arox> well i better get to bet
2008-05-05 03:52 < Arox> gnight
2008-05-05 03:52 < Arox> bed
2008-05-05 03:52 < denelson83> okay
2008-05-05 03:52 < denelson83> later...
2008-05-05 03:55 < AdamBishop> people still use ICQ?
2008-05-05 03:55 < denelson83> Back so soon, Wile_E_Coyote?
2008-05-05 03:55 < Wile_E_Coyote> i meant to do that.
2008-05-05 03:55 < denelson83> AdamBishop: Apparently
2008-05-05 03:56 < denelson83> Oh, hopping
2008-05-05 03:56 < denelson83> I still have my UIN
2008-05-05 03:56 < Lady_Aleena> AdamBishop: Only when I open Trillian and someone messages me through it.
2008-05-05 03:56 < AdamBishop> last time I used it it was filled with pornbots
2008-05-05 03:56 < denelson83> XD
2008-05-05 03:56 < denelson83> Yeah, from the Czech Republic
2008-05-05 03:57 < denelson83> Rearrange the letters in "porn bots" and you get "spot Brno"
2008-05-05 03:58 < Wile_E_Coyote> people DO still use icq... they just released irc chat too...
2008-05-05 03:58 < denelson83> Yeah, IRCq
2008-05-05 03:58 < Wile_E_Coyote> well probably not 'just'
2008-05-05 04:05 < RobJ1981> hi
2008-05-05 04:06 < bbot> hey
2008-05-05 04:06 < denelson83> yo
2008-05-05 04:06 < RobJ1981> whats up
2008-05-05 04:06 < bbot> blogging
2008-05-05 04:06 < bbot> thinking about going to bed
2008-05-05 04:08 < bbot> http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=18927
2008-05-05 04:08 < bbot> Global helicopter shortage!
2008-05-05 04:09 < hardtodrink> hello!
2008-05-05 04:19 < The359> Better rush out to Sam's Club and stock up, bbot
2008-05-05 04:19 * Sponge - WinXP - 4wks 1day 22hrs 57mins 58secs - Record: 6wks 6hrs 53mins 59secs
2008-05-05 04:31 < bumm13> hiya NoPegs
2008-05-05 04:46 < JessicaTaylor> Hey everybody
2008-05-05 04:46 < RobJ1981> hi
2008-05-05 04:47 < JessicaTaylor> Hi Rob
2008-05-05 04:47 < RobJ1981> whats up
2008-05-05 04:47 < JessicaTaylor> Rob: Nothing much
2008-05-05 04:47 < JessicaTaylor> I was bored.
2008-05-05 04:48 < RobJ1981> Edit Wikipedia?
2008-05-05 04:48 < JessicaTaylor> Haha vandalism
2008-05-05 04:48 < JessicaTaylor> Thats fun too
2008-05-05 04:48 < JessicaTaylor> *cough*
2008-05-05 04:48 < JessicaTaylor> I mean, helping improve wikipedia
2008-05-05 04:49 < RobJ1981> Being a vandal is immature and not needed.
2008-05-05 04:49 < JessicaTaylor> I know :|
2008-05-05 04:49 < JessicaTaylor> I get enough "immature" lectures from my mum
2008-05-05 04:50 < RobJ1981> Iron Man looks great, has anyone seen it yet?
2008-05-05 04:51 < RobJ1981> I have no doubt it will be #1 at the theaters until at least Indiana Jones comes out.
2008-05-05 04:51 < RobJ1981> I don't think Speed Racer could knock it off.
2008-05-05 04:53 < JessicaTaylor> I haven't seen any of those :P
2008-05-05 04:53 < RobJ1981> Well only Iron Man is out now. The others come out later. It's the start of the big movies now. Then there is Dark Knight, Prince Caspian and many more in the year.
2008-05-05 04:54 < AdamBishop> I have no interest in seeing any movies until Star Trek XI
2008-05-05 04:54 < RobJ1981> When's that coming?
2008-05-05 04:55 < The359> Prince Caspian?
2008-05-05 04:55 < The359> Fucking children's movie
2008-05-05 04:55 < JessicaTaylor> ¿Que?
2008-05-05 04:55 < JessicaTaylor> Why haven't I heard of any of these
2008-05-05 04:55 < RobJ1981> No it's not. So don't swear about it. Narnia is just like Harry Potter: for just about any age.
2008-05-05 04:56 < RobJ1981> Keep your opinions to yourself, if you are just going to be rude about it The359.
2008-05-05 04:56 < The359> You mean if you don't like them
2008-05-05 04:56 * Lady_Aleena is waiting for Repo the Genetic Opera!
2008-05-05 04:56 < The359> and it is a children's movie
2008-05-05 04:56 < RobJ1981> The new Star Trek isn't until 2009, you are going to wait a year to see a new movie, Adam?
2008-05-05 04:56 < The359> they teach those books in Sunday school
2008-05-05 04:57 * Lady_Aleena giggles and wants to hear Tony Head sing again.
2008-05-05 04:58 < The359> Hollywood is out of ideas, they're bound to use that for a movie, Lady_Aleena
2008-05-05 04:59 < Lady_Aleena> The359: [[Repo! The Genetic Opera]]
2008-05-05 04:59 < RobJ1981> Repo looks interesting.
2008-05-05 04:59 < The359> se
2008-05-05 04:59 < The359> e
2008-05-05 04:59 < Lady_Aleena> OMG! I can't wait. Tony Head looks so evil in the promo I have seen.
2008-05-05 04:59 < The359> sounds like it comes from Troma
2008-05-05 05:00 < Lady_Aleena> He sounds evil in the promo. (Just ignoring the fact that a certain female celeb is in it.)
2008-05-05 05:01 < Lady_Aleena> Paul Sorvino is also in it.
2008-05-05 05:02 * The359 yawns
2008-05-05 05:02 < Lady_Aleena> Also, Hellboy 2 is coming out this year. (Yummy)
2008-05-05 05:02 < RobJ1981> The original Hellboy was alright, but I don't think it deserved a sequel.
2008-05-05 05:04 < Lady_Aleena> I don't care, I love Ron Perlman. His voice alone is enough to get me to buy the DVD.
2008-05-05 05:04 < RobJ1981> Yeah, that's a great attitude to have. I love this person, so I buy whatever crap they are in.
2008-05-05 05:04 < The359> Better than your "I'm better than everyone else" attitude, I'd say
2008-05-05 05:05 < Lady_Aleena> I bought The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen just because Sean Connery was in it.
2008-05-05 05:05 < RobJ1981> League was another below average movie.
2008-05-05 05:05 * The359 is sure RobJ1981 isn't listening anymore
2008-05-05 05:05 < AdamBishop> RobJ1981, yes, I will probably wait that long
2008-05-05 05:06 < AdamBishop> I will probably rent movies but I have no interest in going to a theater to watch some crap
2008-05-05 05:06 < AdamBishop> unless it is Star Trek. I will go watch that even though it is sure to enrage me
2008-05-05 05:07 < Lady_Aleena> I watched Finding Forrester because I saw Sean Connery. When I saw that F. Murray Abraham was in it, I had a flashback of The Name of the Rose, which also brings us back to Ron Perlman. :)
2008-05-05 05:08 < AdamBishop> YOU'RE THE MAN etc.
2008-05-05 05:09 < The359> dog?
2008-05-05 05:09 < Lady_Aleena> Hey, I didn't initially bring up TLoEG just to get the the circle back to Hellboy. :)
2008-05-05 05:11 < Lady_Aleena> I have Van Helsing just because of Hugh Jackman. Then there was my fascination with Jeff Goldblum at one time which prompted me to buy Earth Girls are Easy. :S
2008-05-05 05:11 < RobJ1981> Van Helsing was decent.
2008-05-05 05:11 < AdamBishop> I bought the last Smashing Pumpkins album just because they used to be great
2008-05-05 05:12 < AdamBishop> it was a terrible album though. Oh well.
2008-05-05 05:12 < The359> had you heard it before though?
2008-05-05 05:12 < AdamBishop> no
2008-05-05 05:12 < Lady_Aleena> Adam: When were they big?
2008-05-05 05:12 < The359> nothing wrong with that then
2008-05-05 05:12 < AdamBishop> mid-90s
2008-05-05 05:12 < The359> When they came out with Mellen Collie and the Infinite Sadness
2008-05-05 05:12 < Lady_Aleena> I don't know them then, I blanked after the 80s.
2008-05-05 05:13 < bumm13> hiya AdamBishop
2008-05-05 05:13 < AdamBishop> actually I guess I got it as a birthday present, so I am exonerated from all blame
2008-05-05 05:13 < AdamBishop> hey bumm
2008-05-05 05:16 < bumm13> yeah, Smashing Pumpkins haven't done anything real good since 1995
2008-05-05 05:16 < bumm13> (1997 if you stretch it)
2008-05-05 05:17 < bumm13> they broke up in 2000 but apparently got back together since then
2008-05-05 05:17 < StayTuned> :)
2008-05-05 05:17 < AdamBishop> in hindsight I kind of like Adore and Machine
2008-05-05 05:17 * bumm13 watches old B-movies
2008-05-05 05:17 < StayTuned> hey - you are talking music
2008-05-05 05:17 < bumm13> ah, those are their later albums (pre-2001)
2008-05-05 05:17 < StayTuned> why wasn't I alerted!
2008-05-05 05:18 * Lady_Aleena misses 80s music a lot.
2008-05-05 05:18 < StayTuned> hi bumm13
2008-05-05 05:18 < StayTuned> I'm listening to a band now that is much like the Smithereens
2008-05-05 05:18 < AdamBishop> Mellon Collie probably wouldn't have suffered if it was just one disc
2008-05-05 05:18 < bumm13> suffered?
2008-05-05 05:18 < AdamBishop> I mean, it's one of my favourite albums ever, but there is a lot of crap on it
2008-05-05 05:18 < bumm13> some crap anyway
2008-05-05 05:19 < StayTuned> every CD has its good and bad moments
2008-05-05 05:19 < bumm13> some albums have almost no bad moments
2008-05-05 05:19 < StayTuned> look at Filter 300
2008-05-05 05:19 < Lady_Aleena> Never heard of them.
2008-05-05 05:19 < StayTuned> "Hey Man Nice Shot" rocked out
2008-05-05 05:20 < bumm13> (heh, this movie has a 2.6/10 IMDb rating)
2008-05-05 05:20 < StayTuned> but the rest of the CD....Oh god...
2008-05-05 05:20 * bumm13 can already see why
2008-05-05 05:20 < bumm13> well, Filter wasn't exactly a legendary band
2008-05-05 05:20 < StayTuned> They will make a comeback....
2008-05-05 05:20 < bumm13> uh, right ;)
2008-05-05 05:20 < StayTuned> they did that killer cover of "One is the Loneliest Number..."
2008-05-05 05:21 < RobJ1981> Filter wont succeed in a comeback.
2008-05-05 05:21 < AdamBishop> that was not a good cover
2008-05-05 05:21 < bumm13> (woman) "I saw a giant!"
2008-05-05 05:21 < RobJ1981> About 95 % of covers are crap.
2008-05-05 05:21 < StayTuned> that was an awesome cover
2008-05-05 05:21 < piksi> why aren't all the units in wikipedia articles in SI system (except for those articles that specifically talk about non-SI units)?
2008-05-05 05:21 < AdamBishop> this probably has something to do with the fact that Filter is horrible
2008-05-05 05:21 < Lady_Aleena> Marilyn Manson's cover of Tainted Love was okay.
2008-05-05 05:22 * Lady_Aleena hopes she spelled his name right.
2008-05-05 05:22 < bumm13> Stone Temple Pilots did a surprisingly-decent cover of "Dancing Days" by Led Zeppelin in 1995
2008-05-05 05:22 < bumm13> oh gawd, Marilyn Manson
2008-05-05 05:22 < StayTuned> There are some Covers coming out soon of Corey Hart's Sunglasses at Night that are promising
2008-05-05 05:22 < RobJ1981> Manson's cover was decent, I'll give him that. Other than that, his songs are crap.
2008-05-05 05:23 < Lady_Aleena> I only found out about it when I was browsing YouTube for Angel related videos and found one that is now gone. *pouts*
2008-05-05 05:23 < AdamBishop> Feist's cover of Nina Simone's Sea Lion is pretty good
2008-05-05 05:23 * bumm13 has no idea who Corey Hart is
2008-05-05 05:23 < RobJ1981> Isn't Corey Hart that actor from the 70s or 80s? Maybe I'm thinking of Corey Feldman
2008-05-05 05:23 < Lady_Aleena> OMG! *puts on sunglasses and grins*
2008-05-05 05:23 < piksi> for example in display sizes i understand they're referred to as inches (since all displays are sold in inches)
2008-05-05 05:23 < bumm13> probably the latter (80s)
2008-05-05 05:24 * Lady_Aleena wears her sunglasses at night.
2008-05-05 05:24 < RobJ1981> There was 2 famous Corey actors from the 70s/80s I think.
2008-05-05 05:24 < bumm13> I can't think of any from the 70s
2008-05-05 05:24 < Lady_Aleena> Cory Feldman and Cory Haim.
2008-05-05 05:24 < bumm13> those are both 80s
2008-05-05 05:24 < Lady_Aleena> They were in The Lost Boys.
2008-05-05 05:24 < piksi> but in some scientific articles it's stupid to use non-SI units even in brackets simply because it encourages to use other nonstandard units in other articles too
2008-05-05 05:24 < StayTuned> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehSBfq7xfgY
2008-05-05 05:24 < RobJ1981> Yes, those are it. I guess I thought they acted longer.
2008-05-05 05:24 < bumm13> piksi: it's a non-issue
2008-05-05 05:24 < bumm13> if such an article lacks SI units, then add them
2008-05-05 05:25 < bumm13> RobJ1981: they were born in the early 70s, IIRC
2008-05-05 05:25 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: What is that a link to? I am on dial-up so I am picky about what I spend time downloading.
2008-05-05 05:25 < StayTuned> that is a link to a Cover of Sunglasses at Night by some foreign group that rocks
2008-05-05 05:25 < piksi> bumm13: no, i mean articles where it might say 6000 pascals (0.87 PSI)
2008-05-05 05:25 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: Ah, okay.
2008-05-05 05:26 < bumm13> piksi: what's your point?
2008-05-05 05:26 < bumm13> if having the PSI number in parentheses helps some people understand, then that's fine
2008-05-05 05:26 < bumm13> Wikipedia isn't a scientific governing body
2008-05-05 05:27 < StayTuned> Lady_Aleena - I am able to look them up quick because I have it in my playlist
2008-05-05 05:28 < StayTuned> wave of the future - web 2.0 and all that
2008-05-05 05:28 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: If I had a faster connection, I would probably have a larger playlist, but even searching takes forever.
2008-05-05 05:28 < StayTuned> jk
2008-05-05 05:28 < StayTuned> I know what you mean - the tube is not nice to dial up
2008-05-05 05:28 < piksi> bumm13: true, but i'm suggesting SI units should always be the major way of representing values, not non-SI units. in many articles it's the opposite (SI units in parentheses), imo we should encourage people to use the most standard representation as the primary one
2008-05-05 05:29 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: My fiance and I are thinking about dropping our land line to get cable internet access to the internet.
2008-05-05 05:29 < piksi> bumm13: i know it's not an big issue (even to me)
2008-05-05 05:29 < bumm13> piksi: you won't get very far with that, believe me
2008-05-05 05:29 < piksi> bumm13: ?
2008-05-05 05:29 < bumm13> all that would do is end up stirring up shit over the SI/imperial units issue
2008-05-05 05:29 < StayTuned> Lady_Aleena - it makes monetary sense if you use the internet all the time
2008-05-05 05:30 < Werdna> Lady_Aleena has a fiance?
2008-05-05 05:30 < bumm13> Sir_Aleen
2008-05-05 05:30 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: I know, but I am not sure of how big a headache it would be since we have out land line and cell phones all on one bill.
2008-05-05 05:30 < Lady_Aleena> Werdna: It even says so on my user page.
2008-05-05 05:31 < p858snake> hmm i surpised theres no wikiproject for typography
2008-05-05 05:31 < StayTuned> I know - the way the CLECS and ILECs manage internet is evil
2008-05-05 05:31 < Werdna> Lady_Aleena: you imply that I read your userpage :P
2008-05-05 05:31 < Lady_Aleena> bumm13: He would not like that.
2008-05-05 05:31 < StayTuned> Telecommunications Bill of 1996
2008-05-05 05:31 < Lady_Aleena> Werdna: Well, I always point to it when people ask me about myself. It is basically all there.
2008-05-05 05:32 < StayTuned> Lady_Aleena - mind if I take a look at your userpage?
2008-05-05 05:32 < piksi> bumm13: yeah, you're right, it's almost as fierce and neverending fight as with creationism vs. evolution. it just annoys the hell out of me when some articles are filled with imperial units and i have to convert them to understand ;-)
2008-05-05 05:33 < Lady_Aleena> p858snake: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Grammar]]
2008-05-05 05:33 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: I couldn't stop you if I did. :)
2008-05-05 05:33 < StayTuned> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChrisBradley
2008-05-05 05:33 < StayTuned> hang on a second
2008-05-05 05:33 < Lady_Aleena> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lady_Aleena
2008-05-05 05:36 * Lady_Aleena gets twitchy fingers to correct links on that user page.
2008-05-05 05:38 < Lady_Aleena> brb...going to feed my cat.
2008-05-05 05:40 < bumm13> =^o.o^=
2008-05-05 05:40 < Lady_Aleena> back
2008-05-05 05:40 < bumm13> piksi: oh, I understand
2008-05-05 05:42 < StayTuned> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lady_Aleena#Getting_to_Know_Me_as_StayTuned
2008-05-05 05:43 * Lady_Aleena ponders reopening an earring hole that she allowed to close.
2008-05-05 05:44 < Lady_Aleena> Wow, another night owl. :)
2008-05-05 05:44 < StayTuned> :)
2008-05-05 05:45 < bumm13> `o,o`
2008-05-05 05:45 < StayTuned> o_o
2008-05-05 05:46 < bumm13> heh
2008-05-05 05:46 < Lady_Aleena> Also, StayTuned may be able to related to me a bit, being nearly my age. :)
2008-05-05 05:46 < Lady_Aleena> If I can type that is.
2008-05-05 05:46 * Lady_Aleena blurbles.
2008-05-05 05:46 < StayTuned> Might be able to
2008-05-05 05:47 < StayTuned> I'm definitely not into the online games
2008-05-05 05:47 < bumm13> this movie is MST3K material, it seems
2008-05-05 05:47 < StayTuned> but otherwise
2008-05-05 05:47 < StayTuned> I understand
2008-05-05 05:47 < StayTuned> I have a friend who plays online games constantly
2008-05-05 05:47 < Lady_Aleena> Which ones?
2008-05-05 05:48 < StayTuned> weird stuff - she calls them "Sims"
2008-05-05 05:48 < StayTuned> like simulated D&D
2008-05-05 05:48 < StayTuned> and Star Trek
2008-05-05 05:48 < Lady_Aleena> Ah, the spin off to SimCity.
2008-05-05 05:48 < StayTuned> she's real big into the Star Trek ones
2008-05-05 05:48 < StayTuned> not really - its mostly run through AOL chats
2008-05-05 05:49 < StayTuned> I don't understand the appeal
2008-05-05 05:49 * Lady_Aleena shudders.
2008-05-05 05:49 < StayTuned> I can't base the friendship on tech level
2008-05-05 05:49 * Lady_Aleena smiles.
2008-05-05 05:49 < StayTuned> I've known her for 5 years now
2008-05-05 05:50 < Lady_Aleena> LDR?
2008-05-05 05:50 < StayTuned> we met in a greek restaurant that I just used to sit around
2008-05-05 05:50 < StayTuned> this was about a year before Linux
2008-05-05 05:51 < StayTuned> actually its closer to 2002 - 2003 which makes it 6 years
2008-05-05 05:51 < StayTuned> I was really bummed out about losing my job with the cable company
2008-05-05 05:52 < StayTuned> she and a bunch of her friends cheered me up
2008-05-05 05:52 < StayTuned> I started going places like Wal-Mart and actually enjoying it
2008-05-05 05:52 < Lady_Aleena> I stopped hanging out in resteraunts when they banned smoking from most of them.
2008-05-05 05:53 < StayTuned> it was only a few steps outside - to take a break
2008-05-05 05:53 < StayTuned> and they used to serve the coffee to me anyway
2008-05-05 05:53 < Lady_Aleena> I met my fiance, initially, when he came into the resteraunt I worked at back in the stone age. Then I met him again in the local pool hall.
2008-05-05 05:53 < StayTuned> I wrote my second book while I was hanging out there
2008-05-05 05:54 < StayTuned> that's really cool
2008-05-05 05:54 < StayTuned> My girlfriend - is currently out of the country
2008-05-05 05:54 < StayTuned> she will be back in NYC soon
2008-05-05 05:54 < Lady_Aleena> I don't remember the first meeting because he was one of my customers. :(
2008-05-05 05:54 < StayTuned> I've been spending a lot of time in OpenSolaris learning about how it works
2008-05-05 05:55 < StayTuned> Ah -
2008-05-05 05:55 < StayTuned> I remember my first meeting sort of with that group
2008-05-05 05:56 < StayTuned> I actually sort of dated both she and her friend at different times -
2008-05-05 05:56 < StayTuned> I took the one to Toronto to go dancing
2008-05-05 05:56 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: Sounds like a friend of mine who bounced between two women for a few years.
2008-05-05 05:56 < StayTuned> and the one with the video games - I took to see movies mostly
2008-05-05 05:57 < StayTuned> well - neither one was particularly up for a mariage based relationship
2008-05-05 05:57 < StayTuned> and to be honest that's what I have been looking for for years
2008-05-05 05:57 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: I have been engaged for 17 years.
2008-05-05 05:58 < StayTuned> sounds like its about time for you
2008-05-05 05:58 < Lady_Aleena> Give it another 2, so it will be half my life. :)
2008-05-05 05:58 < RobJ1981> That makes me think of this guy that's been in college for like 20 years. He changes his major and just doesn't want to graduate. He was on Letterman and some other shows.
2008-05-05 05:58 < StayTuned> you should be demanding
2008-05-05 05:59 < RobJ1981> Well, maybe not quite 20. I think it's 12 or so now.
2008-05-05 05:59 < Lady_Aleena> RobJ1981: There was a character like that in the TV film The Librarian.
2008-05-05 05:59 < StayTuned> I spent almost 12 years in college
2008-05-05 05:59 < StayTuned> not 20 tho
2008-05-05 05:59 < Lady_Aleena> StayTuned: I'm in no hurry.
2008-05-05 06:00 < StayTuned> Ended up with only a 2 year degree in CS
2008-05-05 06:00 < StayTuned> but with a ton of other disciplines after that
2008-05-05 06:00 < StayTuned> Marketing / Poli - Sci / Math / English
2008-05-05 06:01 < StayTuned> People are waking up
2008-05-05 06:02 < StayTuned> time for me to drop into the "smoking lounge" and then meet up with them for breakfast
2008-05-05 06:03 < StayTuned> see you tomorrow night probably
2008-05-05 06:03 * Lady_Aleena gets a bruise from colliding with services.
2008-05-05 06:03 < StayTuned> ouch
2008-05-05 06:04 < StayTuned> yep - 6:12 AM
2008-05-05 06:04 < StayTuned> time to go
2008-05-05 06:04 < StayTuned> be back later
2008-05-05 06:04 < Lady_Aleena> Yes, it can be a pain, I really wish that I could have a script that would do the three things that are needed to be done when my connection drops.
2008-05-05 06:04 < Lady_Aleena> See you StayTuned.
2008-05-05 06:04 < StayTuned> :)
2008-05-05 06:10 < Werdna> Lady_Aleena: careful what you ask for
2008-05-05 06:10 < Lady_Aleena> Werdna: Um, what was I asking for?
2008-05-05 06:11 < RobJ1981> Something about a script.
2008-05-05 06:11 < Lady_Aleena> Hmmm, right, a script that would help me get things sorted after an unintended disconnect.
2008-05-05 06:12 < p858snake> theres already scripts to reconnect you a under a differnt name|ghost/recover your main name|change your nickname to the main one|id yourself
2008-05-05 06:13 < Lady_Aleena> p858: I am still getting used to mIRC, so I really don't know what I am doing.
2008-05-05 06:28 * JessicaTaylor comes back from Funk class
2008-05-05 06:29 < JessicaTaylor> Well nothing much happened
2008-05-05 06:33 * soufron hello
2008-05-05 06:37 < StayTuned> hello again
2008-05-05 06:41 < HumayunMirzajr> Hya
2008-05-05 06:41 < StayTuned> hello
2008-05-05 06:42 < HumayunMirzajr> Me eating
2008-05-05 06:43 < HumayunMirzajr> Left over last night KFC aint that bad
2008-05-05 06:45 < StayTuned> :)
2008-05-05 06:47 < RambutanWP> Bored - bye
2008-05-05 06:52 < HumayunMirzajr> StayTuned you ve been playing poker havnt you :P
2008-05-05 06:52 < StayTuned> not this month
2008-05-05 06:52 < HumayunMirzajr> I lost a lot last night
2008-05-05 06:53 < StayTuned> sorry to hear that
2008-05-05 06:53 < HumayunMirzajr> It cool I ll get it back anyway was my gf lol
2008-05-05 06:53 < StayTuned> I know how it feels - I went thru April with no cash
2008-05-05 06:54 < StayTuned> you lost your girlfriend? Yikes
2008-05-05 06:54 < HumayunMirzajr> no
2008-05-05 06:54 < HumayunMirzajr> I lost my cash to her
2008-05-05 06:54 < HumayunMirzajr> Thank god she aint Russian
2008-05-05 06:54 < StayTuned> that can be trouble in and of itself
2008-05-05 06:55 < HumayunMirzajr> Well me go for a bath I be back in 15 minutes I hope.
2008-05-05 06:55 < StayTuned> what planet am I on?
2008-05-05 07:02 < {BATHING}> StayTuned: Planet Bob
2008-05-05 07:05 < ex1stenz> http://www.colectionarul.com/existenz1.html
2008-05-05 07:06 < bumm13> Jerry and Superman?
2008-05-05 07:11 < ex1stenz> http://www.colectionarul.com/existenz1.html