2012-01-04 00:30 Guest74908 [Guest74908!~rafa@186.137.0.13] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 00:33 <zrafa> again
2012-01-04 00:33 <zrafa> hi
2012-01-04 00:50 <wolfspraul> hi
2012-01-04 00:51 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@9.95.112.78.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:05 rejon [rejon!~rejon@li382-141.members.linode.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:06 cladamw_ [cladamw_!~adamwang@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:06 cladamw [cladamw!~adamwang@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:16 xiangfu [xiangfu!~xiangfu@fidelio.qi-hardware.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:20 Openfree` [Openfree`!~Openfreer@116.228.88.131] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 01:50 viric_ [viric_!~viric@unaffiliated/viric] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 02:34 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@117.188.103.84.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 02:49 aw [aw!~Adam@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 02:51 cladamwa [cladamwa!~Adam@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 02:59 wej [wej!~j@m2.mullvad.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 03:24 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@178.53.192.77.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 04:36 pabspabspabs [pabspabspabs!~pabs@d175-38-179-37.per801.wa.optusnet.com.au] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 05:09 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@9.240.112.78.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 05:37 cladamw [cladamw!~Adam@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 06:03 DocScrutinizer [DocScrutinizer!~halley@openmoko/engineers/joerg] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 06:44 cladamw [cladamw!~Adam@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 06:48 valhalla [valhalla!~valhalla@81-174-22-51.dynamic.ngi.it] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 07:05 losinggeneration [losinggeneration!~quassel@71-34-161-176.desm.qwest.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 07:17 xiangfu [xiangfu!~xiangfu@fidelio.qi-hardware.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 07:21 cladamw [cladamw!~adamwang@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 07:41 blogic [blogic!~blogic@openwrt/developer/blogic] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 08:28 stefan_schmidt [stefan_schmidt!~stefan@guest232.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 08:33 jekhor [jekhor!~jek@vulture2-nat-43.telecom.by] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 10:41 <wolfspraul> Made in Optimistan
2012-01-04 10:41 <wolfspraul> Ben NanoNote and Milkymist One are Made in Optimistan
2012-01-04 10:41 <wolfspraul> http://optimistswithoutborders.org/ideas
2012-01-04 11:06 jivs [jivs!~jivs@193.63.24.97] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 11:09 <whitequark> so... pink
2012-01-04 11:10 <whitequark> *brain melts*
2012-01-04 11:58 cladamw_ [cladamw_!~adamwang@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 11:58 cladamw [cladamw!~adamwang@host-222.80-43-115.dynamic.totalbb.net.tw] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 12:08 <wpwrak> whitequark: so that's what happens when barbie goes to university, takes philosophy classes, and finds an HTML editor someone left open in a classroom PC
2012-01-04 12:16 <wolfspraul> I see - optimism unleashes its irresistible power :-)
2012-01-04 12:16 <wolfspraul> wpwrak: what space/tab convention do you prefer personally?
2012-01-04 12:16 <wolfspraul> in c sources
2012-01-04 12:20 <wpwrak> linux kernel style. one tab per indentation level. four spaces for wrapped lines. void *foo(int bar)\n{\tvars;\n\tbody;\n}  and  \tif (cond) {\n\t\t...\n\t}
2012-01-04 12:20 <blogic> wpwrak: \o/
2012-01-04 12:21 <wpwrak> max 80 characters per line. if you have to wrap anyway, make it < 80.
2012-01-04 12:21 <blogic> wpwrak: penalties for using spaces as indentation need to be imposed
2012-01-04 12:21 <wpwrak> blogic: oh, lots of editors auto-handle this. what's important is that it's 8 :)
2012-01-04 12:22 <wpwrak> i.e., there's a penalty in indenting. keeps you from writing ten levels deep nested madness - simply because there's no room for it :)
2012-01-04 12:22 <Ayla> what editor are you using?
2012-01-04 12:22 <wpwrak> vim
2012-01-04 12:22 <Ayla> hmm
2012-01-04 12:22 <wpwrak> (but any vi will do)
2012-01-04 12:23 <Ayla> here I get two spaces after a IF without brackets, instead of a real tab
2012-01-04 12:23 <Ayla> do you know how to change that?
2012-01-04 12:24 <wpwrak> dunno. i don't use auto-indentation :)
2012-01-04 12:24 <wpwrak> after a while, your fingers learn to do this on their own :)
2012-01-04 12:31 <Ayla> well, then there's litle point to use VIM instead of gedit for instance
2012-01-04 12:32 <wolfspraul> wpwrak: 8 or 4? (first you say "4 spaces for wrapped lines" then "important is that it's 8"
2012-01-04 12:32 <wpwrak> don't know gedit. i like the compact and logical UI of vi
2012-01-04 12:33 <wpwrak> wolfspraul: 8 per indentation level. +4 for wrapping. e.g., \tfoo = very_long_identifier(\n\t    argument, argument,\n\t    still_more);
2012-01-04 12:34 <wolfspraul> ok, got it
2012-01-04 12:41 jekhor [jekhor!~jek@mx2.promwad.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 12:42 <wpwrak> let's see what else ... spaces around operators except for unary and basic arithmetic (+, -, *, /)
2012-01-04 12:43 <wpwrak> sizeof(foo) looks like a function. return foo; doesn't. switch and case at the same level (that's a bit of a compromise - otherwise, switch gets too messy to use)
2012-01-04 12:44 <wpwrak> space between cast and thing being cast. no pascal parentheses in boolean expressions. (i.e., a == b && c == d and not (a == b) && (c == d) )
2012-01-04 12:46 <wpwrak> yeah, i think that's most of it. many more small details, of course )
2012-01-04 12:47 <wpwrak> ah, also if .. else follows kernel style. so if (foo) bar; else blah; or if (foo) { bar; ...; } else { blah; ...; } or even if (foo) bar; else { blah; ...; } but not if (foo) { bar; ...; } else blah; instead, use if (foo) {bar; ...; } else { blah; }
2012-01-04 12:48 <Ayla> I don't agree with switch/case
2012-01-04 12:49 <Ayla> and the kernel guidelines forbid if (foo) bar; else { blah; ...; }
2012-01-04 12:49 <Ayla> it should always be if (foo) { bar; } else { blah; ...; }
2012-01-04 12:49 <Ayla> when there's a "else", that is
2012-01-04 12:49 <Ayla> and even if "bar" is a single line of code
2012-01-04 12:52 wolfspraul [wolfspraul!~wolfsprau@p5B0AE0A9.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 12:55 kuribas [kuribas!~user@d54C432B2.access.telenet.be] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 13:07 <wpwrak> Ayla: this was discussed sometime ago on lkml and the verdict was that if (cond) one; else { one; two; } is okay
2012-01-04 13:07 kristianpaul [kristianpaul!~kristianp@unaffiliated/kristianpaul] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 13:07 <wpwrak> the example in CodingStyle is is (cond) { one; two; } else { one; }
2012-01-04 13:07 <wpwrak> s/is is/is if/
2012-01-04 13:07 <qi-bot> wpwrak meant: "the example in CodingStyle is if (cond) { one; two; } else { one; }"
2012-01-04 13:08 <wpwrak> but that was a long long time ago :)
2012-01-04 13:08 <wpwrak> anyway, gotta run. dentist is waiting
2012-01-04 13:13 <Ayla> ok
2012-01-04 13:13 <DocScrutinizer51> wpwrak: which direction are you running?
2012-01-04 13:13 <DocScrutinizer51> toward or away from dentist?
2012-01-04 13:20 mth_ [mth_!oqqatgas@c74072.upc-c.chello.nl] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 13:31 antoniodariush [antoniodariush!~antonioda@nat-sta-smtc2.tvu.ac.uk] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 13:35 jivs [jivs!~jivs@nat-sta-smtc2.tvu.ac.uk] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 13:44 <lars_> wpwrak: just wanted to ask, when "sometime ago" was. CodingStyle is very explicit about that if one part has brackets the other part should have brackets two.
2012-01-04 13:51 mstevens [mstevens!~mstevens@fsf/member/pdpc.active.mstevens] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 14:01 DocScrutinizer51 [DocScrutinizer51!~lagrange@openmoko/engineers/joerg] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 14:08 stefan_schmidt [stefan_schmidt!~stefan@guest232.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 14:12 stefan_schmidt [stefan_schmidt!~stefan@guest232.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 15:06 antoniodariush [antoniodariush!~antonioda@193.63.24.97] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 15:17 jivs [jivs!~jivs@193.63.24.97] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 15:28 <wpwrak> DocScrutinizer: toward :) it's the fitting of a crown. the nasty bits are already done.
2012-01-04 15:29 <wpwrak> lars_: hmm, maybe ~6 years ago. lemme see if there are still any traces around
2012-01-04 15:50 <wpwrak> hmm, some old wisdom i found while searching: http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linux-kernel/2001-03/0260.html
2012-01-04 16:01 <wpwrak> found the thread. was only a bit more than two years ago. and i mis-remembered:  if (foo) x; else { y; z; }  is still considered objectionable. just  if (foo) x; else y;  isn't.
2012-01-04 16:01 <wpwrak> here's the thread; http://openmoko-public-mailinglists.1958.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-ASoC-Clean-up-coding-style-issues-in-GTA02-td2580184.html
2012-01-04 16:12 urandom__ [urandom__!~user@p548A462A.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 16:22 emeb [emeb!~ericb@ip72-223-81-94.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 17:16 antoniodariush [antoniodariush!~antonioda@nat-sta-smtc2.tvu.ac.uk] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 18:05 wej [wej!~j@m2.mullvad.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 18:12 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@117.188.103.84.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 18:21 skynet-2000 [skynet-2000!~skynet-20@unaffiliated/skynet2000] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 19:01 <DocScrutinizer> EEEEW!  (i.e., a == b && c == d and not (a == b) && (c == d) )
2012-01-04 19:02 <wpwrak> unlearn your pascal :)
2012-01-04 19:03 <DocScrutinizer> nevaaar
2012-01-04 19:03 <wpwrak> all those redundant parentheses just make the code hard to read
2012-01-04 19:03 <DocScrutinizer> haha
2012-01-04 19:04 <wpwrak> C has a very thoughtfully designed precedence system. there's no need to pretend it's the mess wirth has created in pascal.
2012-01-04 19:04 <DocScrutinizer> a == b && c == d || a == b & c == d | a = b & c == d && a |= b & c == d 
2012-01-04 19:05 <DocScrutinizer> indeed, every thoughtful
2012-01-04 19:05 <DocScrutinizer> ;-P
2012-01-04 19:06 <wpwrak> that's why the great gnu has created compiler warnings :)
2012-01-04 19:09 <qi-bot> [commit] Jiri Brozovsky: Compiler from (limited) C to language used by HP48 calculators (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/openwrt-packages/5edbd6c
2012-01-04 19:18 <whitequark> I think that C's operator system can be improved
2012-01-04 19:18 <whitequark> greatly
2012-01-04 19:18 <whitequark> just borrow from perl
2012-01-04 19:19 <DocScrutinizer> yeah, they tried to fix C compilers that way. The first C 'compilers' were actually bloated macro assemblers for a simple reason of hw not allowing anything better. So C isn't designed for coders but for optimal RAM footprint and CPU usage of the compiler itself, and no compiler warnings level will turn C into a decent coding language. Actually the fewer the syntactic alternatives to code one semantic chunk, the better for readability
2012-01-04 19:22 <wpwrak> DocScrutinizer: please go on, while millions of happy C programmers productively ignore your ranting ;-)
2012-01-04 19:23 <DocScrutinizer> which ranting? I'm just stating age old known facts
2012-01-04 19:23 <DocScrutinizer> and I'm happy with assembler even
2012-01-04 19:26 <DocScrutinizer> if you want to to start ranting, ask me about my notion regarding redundancy of ms-basic constructs: while 'condition' do bla blub enddo.  vs repeat bla blub until not 'condition'.
2012-01-04 19:26 <DocScrutinizer> s/to to/me to/
2012-01-04 19:26 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "if you want me to start ranting, ask me about my notion regarding redundancy of ms-basic constructs: while 'condition' do bla blub enddo.  vs repeat bla blub until not 'condition'."
2012-01-04 19:27 jekhor [jekhor!~jek@vulture2-nat-43.telecom.by] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 19:29 wej [wej!~j@m2.mullvad.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 19:29 <wpwrak> rants against ms-basic are about as relevant as placing dinosaur traps ;-)
2012-01-04 19:32 <blogic> is ranting about gw-basic ok ? :D
2012-01-04 19:34 <DocScrutinizer> whatever, on a human logic level your arguments about readability due to precedence system conflict with your recourse to compiler warnings which for sure weren't invented because nobody ever is messing up a term like a == b && c == d by leaving out one char
2012-01-04 19:36 <DocScrutinizer> or put simpler: I don't agree on a == b && c == d being ANY readable
2012-01-04 19:38 <DocScrutinizer> a && b << 3 | c == d
2012-01-04 19:38 <DocScrutinizer> a & b < 3 || c = d
2012-01-04 19:39 <DocScrutinizer> a && b < 3 || c == d
2012-01-04 19:40 <DocScrutinizer> a && b < 3 | c == d
2012-01-04 19:41 <viric> gcc managed to compile C without any optimal ram footprint
2012-01-04 19:41 <viric> does that turn C more decent?
2012-01-04 19:42 <DocScrutinizer> neither you nor gcc existed when the compilers were built according to my above rationale
2012-01-04 19:42 <DocScrutinizer> C however existed already
2012-01-04 19:43 <DocScrutinizer> C is an extremely powerful macroassembler, nothing beyond. A lot of experienced coders will agree on that
2012-01-04 19:44 <viric> and what new exactly does your idea bring?
2012-01-04 19:45 <DocScrutinizer> eh?
2012-01-04 19:45 <viric> :)
2012-01-04 19:45 <DocScrutinizer> and what new does your question introduce to the topic?
2012-01-04 19:45 <viric> :)
2012-01-04 19:45 <blogic> i thinkt the answer is "the above rational" or not ?
2012-01-04 19:45 <blogic> +e
2012-01-04 19:46 <DocScrutinizer> I think you lost me
2012-01-04 19:46 <blogic> s/rational/rationale/g
2012-01-04 19:46 <blogic> where is the sed bot ß
2012-01-04 19:46 <DocScrutinizer> and the answer is 42, always been
2012-01-04 19:47 <viric> Maybe it is me who got lost :)
2012-01-04 19:48 <viric> I find C ok for its job
2012-01-04 19:49 <DocScrutinizer> another undeniable fact is that *read*ability increases with redundancy, until it crosses a certain threshold. It maybe *write*ability that's better without "redundant" parentheses etc
2012-01-04 19:50 <viric> do you like lisp? :)
2012-01-04 19:51 <viric> C is quite a good balance between the complexity to write/read and the complexity of writing a compiler for it.
2012-01-04 19:52 <viric> giving enough granularity to the programmer to achieve code that runs fast
2012-01-04 19:58 pabspabspabs [pabspabspabs!~pabs@d122-109-114-89.per801.wa.optusnet.com.au] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 19:59 Ayla [Ayla!~paul@11.241.112.78.rev.sfr.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 20:01 Textmode [Textmode!~boneidle@adsl-syd-2-209.ozonline.com.au] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 20:05 kuribas [kuribas!~user@d54C43316.access.telenet.be] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 20:15 <DocScrutinizer> nonsense, nowadays no high level procedural language lacks the opportunity to allow coders to write fast code
2012-01-04 20:24 <whitequark> blogic: sed bot is too stupid to understand perl syntax. just s///, nothing more.
2012-01-04 20:25 kudkudyak [kudkudyak!~sun@94.72.137.135] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 20:25 <whitequark> btw, this rant is funny
2012-01-04 20:26 <whitequark> (note that I'm not saying any of the above is not true. just funny a bit.)
2012-01-04 20:34 <blogic> s/rational/rationale/
2012-01-04 20:34 <blogic> i thinkt the answer is "the above rational" or not ?
2012-01-04 20:34 <blogic> s/rational/rationale/
2012-01-04 20:34 <qi-bot> blogic meant: "i thinkt the answer is "the above rationale" or not ?"
2012-01-04 20:34 <blogic> *magic*
2012-01-04 20:35 wej [wej!~j@m2.mullvad.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 20:57 <DocScrutinizer> xxxxxxxxx
2012-01-04 20:57 <DocScrutinizer> s/x/ABC/g
2012-01-04 20:57 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "ABCABCABCABCABCABCABCABCABC"
2012-01-04 20:57 <wolfspraul> people surely love that feature ;-)
2012-01-04 20:57 <DocScrutinizer> yes
2012-01-04 20:57 <wolfspraul> we should get some of those interactive fiction bots into the channel...
2012-01-04 20:57 <DocScrutinizer> luckily buffer size is limited
2012-01-04 20:59 <DocScrutinizer> what annoys way more is you can't fix 2 typos with sedbot
2012-01-04 20:59 <DocScrutinizer> unless they are identical
2012-01-04 21:00 <DocScrutinizer> tis sucks somtimes
2012-01-04 21:00 <DocScrutinizer> s/tis/this/;s/somt/somet/
2012-01-04 21:00 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "this sucks sometimes"
2012-01-04 21:00 <DocScrutinizer> duh
2012-01-04 21:01 <DocScrutinizer> :-D
2012-01-04 21:17 <DocScrutinizer> actually it's probably not exactly the buffersize that's limited, rather the max length of a single post as defined by freenode
2012-01-04 21:20 <DocScrutinizer> xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#xxxxx#
2012-01-04 21:20 <DocScrutinizer> s/x/0123456789/g
2012-01-04 21:20 <DocScrutinizer> hah
2012-01-04 21:20 <DocScrutinizer> xxxxx#
2012-01-04 21:21 <DocScrutinizer> s/x/0123456789/g
2012-01-04 21:21 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "01234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789#"
2012-01-04 21:33 <DocScrutinizer> whitequark: sedbot it just not editing anything but the least post - blogic's last post was >>[2012-01-04 20:45:57] <blogic> +e<<
2012-01-04 21:33 <DocScrutinizer> and even /g parameter isn't meant to change that
2012-01-04 21:35 <DocScrutinizer> a funny idea though: s/x/y/G edits *all* posts ever posted by the user since last /join ;-D
2012-01-04 21:35 <DocScrutinizer> wolfspraul: what do you think, will users love *that*? ;-)
2012-01-04 21:49 <wolfspraul> ;-)
2012-01-04 21:53 <whitequark> hmm
2012-01-04 21:53 <whitequark> s,hmm,hm,
2012-01-04 21:53 <whitequark> :/
2012-01-04 21:59 <DocScrutinizer> sillii idea to think sedbot would act on all lines starting with "s" ;-D
2012-01-04 22:01 <DocScrutinizer> s/illii/illy/;some illegal command
2012-01-04 22:01 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "silly idea to think sedbot would act on all lines starting with "s" ;-D"
2012-01-04 22:01 <DocScrutinizer> hahaha
2012-01-04 22:01 <DocScrutinizer> ok
2012-01-04 22:02 <DocScrutinizer> s/ok/OK/;!seen DocScrutinizer51 
2012-01-04 22:02 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "OK"
2012-01-04 22:03 jluis [jluis!~jluis@80.31.92.21] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 22:04 <DocScrutinizer> in fact, I think: not even that will work
2012-01-04 22:04 <DocScrutinizer> s/,//;s/://
2012-01-04 22:04 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "in fact I think not even that will work"
2012-01-04 22:04 <DocScrutinizer> ooh
2012-01-04 22:05 <DocScrutinizer> s/o/(/
2012-01-04 22:05 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "((h"
2012-01-04 22:05 <DocScrutinizer> MEH!!
2012-01-04 22:05 <DocScrutinizer> thete's not been any /g
2012-01-04 22:05 <DocScrutinizer> there*
2012-01-04 22:06 <DocScrutinizer> I I wonder
2012-01-04 22:06 <DocScrutinizer> s/I //
2012-01-04 22:06 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "wonder"
2012-01-04 22:07 <DocScrutinizer> now THAT is *BAD*
2012-01-04 22:08 <DocScrutinizer> ibot/infobot/apt obeys /g
2012-01-04 22:08 <DocScrutinizer> qi-bot has a bug
2012-01-04 22:11 <DocScrutinizer> am I right in thinking qi.bot has a fine bug in this regex-sustition function?
2012-01-04 22:11 <DocScrutinizer> s/in/with/
2012-01-04 22:11 <qi-bot> DocScrutinizer meant: "am I right with thwithkwithg qi.bot has a fwithe bug with this regex-sustition function?"
2012-01-04 22:12 <DocScrutinizer> :-/
2012-01-04 22:15 <DocScrutinizer> who's qi-bot's master?
2012-01-04 22:19 mstevens [mstevens!~mstevens@fsf/member/pdpc.active.mstevens] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 22:19 FrankBlues [FrankBlues!~alex@c-67-182-230-190.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 22:49 <qi-bot> Ron K Jeffries: @qihardware  ( 154695765929897984@RonKJeffries - 22s ago via web )
2012-01-04 22:49 <qi-bot> Ron K Jeffries: Private key only bitcoin wallet. Zero trust, Easy Export, No split keys. http://t.co/yjuyx32b [via @zootreeves Ben Reeves]
2012-01-04 22:49 xiangfu [xiangfu!~xiangfu@fidelio.qi-hardware.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 22:49 erikkugel [erikkugel!~erik@206-248-184-96.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #qi-hardware
2012-01-04 22:59 <jow_laptop> yay, Bitcoin spam via twitter relayed to IRC
2012-01-04 23:00 <wolfspraul> yay well
2012-01-04 23:00 <wolfspraul> I actually clicked on the link to see whether there is open hardware there, but couldn't find it right away
2012-01-04 23:00 <jow_laptop> ;)
2012-01-04 23:08 <wolfspraul> jow_laptop: what do you think about bitcoins?
2012-01-04 23:08 <wolfspraul> seems at some point a technology like that begs for dedicated secure hardware
2012-01-04 23:08 <wolfspraul> which should be open to be secure imho
2012-01-04 23:18 <roh> wolfspraul: bc arent the answer to the question for digital money. they are an experiment stirring stuff up to see whats possible.
2012-01-04 23:19 <wolfspraul> yes, roughly my thinking too. but as a transaction medium they work today, I would sell nanos and milkys for bitcoins, no problem.
2012-01-04 23:20 <wolfspraul> also the combination of cryptography and networking is so interesting, maybe it can be used for other applications
2012-01-04 23:20 <wolfspraul> from a hardware side, I think this stuff cannot work unless there is secure hardware
2012-01-04 23:21 <roh> in the end it boils down to a technical issue. how to make sure its an exchange currency and not a currency imploding as the real ones right now due to speculation
2012-01-04 23:31 <DocScrutinizer> bitcoin, a chain letter philosophy concept
2012-01-04 23:36 <wolfspraul> well I'm a small business man, and I am struggling with payment systems every day
2012-01-04 23:36 <wolfspraul> every time I struggle, I think of bitcoin now and there is *hope* :-)
2012-01-04 23:36 <wolfspraul> thank you bitcoin!
2012-01-04 23:37 <wolfspraul> so I definitely sell hardware for bitcoins, no problem
2012-01-04 23:37 <wolfspraul> DocScrutinizer: you send me some bitcoins, I send you a Milkymist One ;-)
2012-01-04 23:38 <wolfspraul> I do not believe in the revolutionary part of bitcoins though, they will not replace other currencies etc.
2012-01-04 23:38 <wolfspraul> but maybe a small little payment system, for geeks first? right now it seems to work...
2012-01-04 23:39 <wolfspraul> unless someone breaks through the crypto part right away and makes an infinite number of them, I think they will continue to stay around
2012-01-04 23:40 <DocScrutinizer> I found nobody who was able to convince 9 others and me about bitcoins being a thing worth looking into
2012-01-04 23:40 <DocScrutinizer> and tbh I'm not looking for somebody
2012-01-04 23:41 <erikkugel> everything has it's merits, but bitcoin's main advantage currently is hiding illegal activity. Once it had OTHER advantages, popularity might grow.