Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Adam Borowski-3
Hrm, looks like I have a problem with a ftpmaster being in denial.

#                  Cat Supremacy License, version √-1
#
# Everyone who recognizes the superiority of the species Felis catus over
# mere Homo sapiens is hereby gladly granted the right to use, modify,
# distribute, sell, borrow, give, steal, pee on, print out and use as a
# kindle, deface, scribble on, give less, more or same respect as $PRESIDENT
# of $YOUR_COUNTRY gives to the Constitution, etc, and so on, this software;
# with or without modifications, in either a preferred or unpreferred form
# for modification, with or without a fee of any kind.
#
# Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways are also given all of
# the above rights, albeit grudgingly.

Obviously, the two above sets are not complementary: for example, you may
still be in an unrelated error while admitting the superiority of the Master
Species.  An example might be trying to give "Kitty" brand food by Mispol SA
to your master -- it has been declared as inedible by a local expert in
these matters.

On the other hand, it is clear that all humans belong to at least one of
these sets, at least at present and in foreseable future.

Thus, I'm trying to find out what's wrong.  If someone gene-splices humans
with cats to create something even more glorious, the result won't be a
human anymore -- if you put little enough of cat to remain a Homo Sapiens,
you won't be superior or equal.

The only scenario I managed to think of is, if the Earth is to be destroyed
and a group of humans manage to escape while not having their priorities
straight (ie, not rescuing a single pair of cats), then obviously an
existant species, no matter how bad, will be superior to one that's not
there.


On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 08:00:09PM +0000, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
>
> Hi Adam,
>
> I don't think that cats are superior and given the behaviour of my cats
> I know that this is not erroneous. Why may I not print out your software?

The worst part of denial about being in error is that you believe you don't
need to take any steps to rectify it.

As Wikipedia says:

# Denial of denial
#
# This can be a difficult concept for many people to identify with in
# themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful behaviors.  Denial
# of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster
# confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one's personal behavior.
# This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of
# denial, but involves more self-delusion.

>
> ===
>
> Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
> your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
> concerns.

Not sure how to fix this.  I can't fix the ftpmaster, thus replacing the
license is probably easiest.  The default choice, GPL, doesn't fit here
as the program is too easy to recreate, thus it'd result merely in those
with different beliefs about licensing to waste a bit of time.  And as for
non-copyleft licenses, there's way too many of them to rationally choose.

Alas, I have a problem:
* I can't seem to find a single die
* I have no ChaosKey or similar true random generator
* my CPU has no rdrand so I can't even let Intel rig my choice


Thus, could anyone help, and pick a license that would get accepted?  Either
a pull request at https://github.com/kilobyte/braillegraph or a mail would
be swell.

--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ preimage for double rot13!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Gunnar Wolf via nm
Adam Borowski dijo [Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:20:15PM +0100]:
> (...) And as for non-copyleft licenses, there's way too many of them
> to rationally choose.
>
> Alas, I have a problem:
> * I can't seem to find a single die
> * I have no ChaosKey or similar true random generator
> * my CPU has no rdrand so I can't even let Intel rig my choice

Here you have a notarized-legal, perefectly randomly produced number
"Four". Use it as will.

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Joerg Jaspert
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3
On 14605 March 1977, Adam Borowski wrote:

> And as for non-copyleft licenses, there's way too many of them to
> rationally choose.

There are too many licenses, lets make one more.
https://xkcd.com/927/

Good it didn't work out.

> Thus, could anyone help, and pick a license that would get accepted?  Either
> a pull request at https://github.com/kilobyte/braillegraph or a mail would
> be swell.

When in doubt, take MIT.

--
bye, Joerg

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Elena ``of Valhalla''-3
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3
On 2017-03-08 at 22:20:15 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Hrm, looks like I have a problem with a ftpmaster being in denial.
> [...]
> # Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways are also given all of
> # the above rights, albeit grudgingly.
> [...]
> Thus, could anyone help, and pick a license that would get accepted?  Either
> a pull request at https://github.com/kilobyte/braillegraph or a mail would
> be swell.

What about changing the above phrase so that it is more evident that we
are talking of the complementary set?

Maybe something like:

# Those, human or otherwise, who don't recognise the above as truth are
# also etc.

It's hard to get people out of denial, but you can't expect perfection
out of members of an inferior species, and I suspect that a license is
not the right place to insist on it.

(Now, I suspect that the FTP masters won't be very happy to accept even
this patched version, but one could hope...)

also: meow!

--
Elena ``of Valhalla''

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Thomas Harding-5
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3
That's obviously a useless use of cat, as licensing orthogonally on any concept of superior species would be better replaced by a cut of tee.

Le 8 mars 2017 22:20:15 GMT+01:00, Adam Borowski <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Hrm, looks like I have a problem with a ftpmaster being in denial.

# Cat Supremacy License, version √-1
#
# Everyone who recognizes the superiority of the species Felis catus over
# mere Homo sapiens is hereby gladly granted the right to use, modify,
# distribute, sell, borrow, give, steal, pee on, print out and use as a
# kindle, deface, scribble on, give less, more or same respect as $PRESIDENT
# of $YOUR_COUNTRY gives to the Constitution, etc, and so on, this software;
# with or without modifications, in either a preferred or unpreferred form
# for modification, with or without a fee of any kind.
#
# Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways are also given all of
# the above rights, albeit grudgingly.

Obviously, the two above sets are not complementary: for example, you may
still be in an unrelated error while admitting the superiority of the Master
Species. An example might be trying to give "Kitty" brand food by Mispol SA
to your master -- it has been declared as inedible by a local expert in
these matters.

On the other hand, it is clear that all humans belong to at least one of
these sets, at least at present and in foreseable future.

Thus, I'm trying to find out what's wrong. If someone gene-splices humans
with cats to create something even more glorious, the result won't be a
human anymore -- if you put little enough of cat to remain a Homo Sapiens,
you won't be superior or equal.

The only scenario I managed to think of is, if the Earth is to be destroyed
and a group of humans manage to escape while not having their priorities
straight (ie, not rescuing a single pair of cats), then obviously an
existant species, no matter how bad, will be superior to one that's not
there.


On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 08:00:09PM +0000, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:

Hi Adam,

I don't think that cats are superior and given the behaviour of my cats
I know that this is not erroneous. Why may I not print out your software?

The worst part of denial about being in error is that you believe you don't
need to take any steps to rectify it.

As Wikipedia says:

# Denial of denial
#
# This can be a difficult concept for many people to identify with in
# themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful behaviors. Denial
# of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster
# confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one's personal behavior.
# This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of
# denial, but involves more self-delusion.


===

Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.

Not sure how to fix this. I can't fix the ftpmaster, thus replacing the
license is probably easiest. The default choice, GPL, doesn't fit here
as the program is too easy to recreate, thus it'd result merely in those
with different beliefs about licensing to waste a bit of time. And as for
non-copyleft licenses, there's way too many of them to rationally choose.

Alas, I have a problem:
* I can't seem to find a single die
* I have no ChaosKey or similar true random generator
* my CPU has no rdrand so I can't even let Intel rig my choice


Thus, could anyone help, and pick a license that would get accepted? Either
a pull request at https://github.com/kilobyte/braillegraph or a mail would
be swell.

--
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Robin Tarsiger
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3
On 2017-03-08, Adam Borowski wrote:
> # Everyone who recognizes the superiority of the species Felis catus over
> # mere Homo sapiens
[...]
> # Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways
[...]
> On the other hand, it is clear that all humans belong to at least one of
> these sets, at least at present and in foreseable future.

I cannot speak for "all humans", but as a robin, I hereby claim my right
to not be in either of these sets. After all, cats and humans are _both_
obviously inferior to glorious birds! Cheep!

-RTT

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Enrico Zini
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 12:14:52PM -0600, Robin Tarsiger wrote:

> I cannot speak for "all humans", but as a robin, I hereby claim my right
> to not be in either of these sets. After all, cats and humans are _both_
> obviously inferior to glorious birds! Cheep!

I, for one, welcome our new dinosaur overlords.


Enrico

--
GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <[hidden email]>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Adam Borowski-3
In reply to this post by Robin Tarsiger
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 12:14:52PM -0600, Robin Tarsiger wrote:

> On 2017-03-08, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > # Everyone who recognizes the superiority of the species Felis catus over
> > # mere Homo sapiens
> [...]
> > # Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways
> [...]
> > On the other hand, it is clear that all humans belong to at least one of
> > these sets, at least at present and in foreseable future.
>
> I cannot speak for "all humans", but as a robin, I hereby claim my right
> to not be in either of these sets. After all, cats and humans are _both_
> obviously inferior to glorious birds! Cheep!

The license grant is to "Everyone who recognizes ..." and to "Those who have
yet to mend the error of their ways".  It doesn't say a word about a
relationship between robins and humans, robins and cats, nor any other pair
of species other than specifically named "Felis catus" vs "Homo sapiens".

Neither are robins, sentient AIs, the Elder Gods or any other possible
recipient excluded from the license grant -- it talks merely about their
opinion about cats vs humans, which might be either:
* cats>humans
* wrong



Also, while your delusion about superiority of _robins_ is irrelevant to
freeness of the license, I'd like to present a rebuttal.

First, one example cat, one who's currently occupying my bed, has confirmed
kills (as in, delivered home) of at least tits, sparrows, pigeons and two
bigass jackdaws[1].  Robins don't live inside a town but I don't see how
they differ from the above list enough to avoid being turned into a meal.

Second, Enrico mentioned dinosaurs.  While the above cat deals with
dinosaurs I listed just fine, let's consider what an ordinary person would
understand by this word: the big extinct type.  Let's assume they're
revived, "Jurassic Park" style.  And here comes the real secret of cat
superiority: they delegate.  Why would they fight a dangerous opponent
themselves when they suborned an inferior species (humans) who are extremely
good at hunting big prey (and wannabe predators)?  That T-Rex would serve
well as contents of a can; they're presumed to taste like chicken.


[1]. How he managed to get the jackdaws over a windowsill that's
human-chest-high when he was barely able to drag them over flat ground is
beyond me -- but then, I'm a mere human, I'm not privy to cat ways.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ preimage for double rot13!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Enrico Zini
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 10:36:27PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:

> Also, while your delusion about superiority of _robins_ is irrelevant to
> freeness of the license, I'd like to present a rebuttal.

Robins.

Because quantum.

https://phys.org/news/2011-01-quantum-robins.html
http://physicscentral.com/explore/action/pia-entanglement.cfm
http://richannel.org/jim-al-khalili-and-the-quantum-robin


Enrico

--
GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <[hidden email]>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Thomas Harding-5
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3
I wish you licence that text under cat licence, or, at option, above. While nested cat is unclear as licenced or not.

I ensure my cat is not reproductible, with any warranty based on Free Speech. Having a binary form which need some debugging (including severe bits), and an insurance I wouldn't pay in order to chare it.

Le 9 mars 2017 22:36:27 GMT+01:00, Adam Borowski <[hidden email]> a écrit :
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 12:14:52PM -0600, Robin Tarsiger wrote:
On 2017-03-08, Adam Borowski wrote:
# Everyone who recognizes the superiority of the species Felis catus over
# mere Homo sapiens
[...]
# Those who have yet to mend the error of their ways
[...]
On the other hand, it is clear that all humans belong to at least one of
these sets, at least at present and in foreseable future.

I cannot speak for "all humans", but as a robin, I hereby claim my right
to not be in either of these sets. After all, cats and humans are _both_
obviously inferior to glorious birds! Cheep!

The license grant is to "Everyone who recognizes ..." and to "Those who have
yet to mend the error of their ways". It doesn't say a word about a
relationship between robins and humans, robins and cats, nor any other pair
of species other than specifically named "Felis catus" vs "Homo sapiens".

Neither are robins, sentient AIs, the Elder Gods or any other possible
recipient excluded from the license grant -- it talks merely about their
opinion about cats vs humans, which might be either:
* cats>humans
* wrong



Also, while your delusion about superiority of _robins_ is irrelevant to
freeness of the license, I'd like to present a rebuttal.

First, one example cat, one who's currently occupying my bed, has confirmed
kills (as in, delivered home) of at least tits, sparrows, pigeons and two
bigass jackdaws[1]. Robins don't live inside a town but I don't see how
they differ from the above list enough to avoid being turned into a meal.

Second, Enrico mentioned dinosaurs. While the above cat deals with
dinosaurs I listed just fine, let's consider what an ordinary person would
understand by this word: the big extinct type. Let's assume they're
revived, "Jurassic Park" style. And here comes the real secret of cat
superiority: they delegate. Why would they fight a dangerous opponent
themselves when they suborned an inferior species (humans) who are extremely
good at hunting big prey (and wannabe predators)? That T-Rex would serve
well as contents of a can; they're presumed to taste like chicken.


[1]. How he managed to get the jackdaws over a windowsill that's
human-chest-high when he was barely able to drag them over flat ground is
beyond me -- but then, I'm a mere human, I'm not privy to cat ways.

--
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: braillegraph_0.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

Arnt Karlsen
In reply to this post by Enrico Zini
On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 20:31:46 +0100, Enrico wrote in message
<[hidden email]>:

> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 12:14:52PM -0600, Robin Tarsiger wrote:
>
> > I cannot speak for "all humans", but as a robin, I hereby claim my
> > right to not be in either of these sets. After all, cats and humans
> > are _both_ obviously inferior to glorious birds! Cheep!
>
> I, for one, welcome our new dinosaur overlords.
>
>
> Enrico
>

..careful on what you wish for, you might have it your way...
https://guymcpherson.com/climate-chaos/climate-change-summary-and-update/

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three:
  best case, worst case, and just in case.