All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
03:14 libman joined #copyfree
08:48 libman Zing Zong Zbignie's Dead!
08:48 I read his books.
09:08 CMGauger joined #copyfree
11:00 zacts joined #copyfree
14:30 libman joined #copyfree
14:57 libman joined #copyfree
15:42 apotheon libman: Which Brzezinski books have you read?
15:44 libman The Grand Chessboard is the only one I clearly remember cover to cover.  I bought a huge quantity of books back then that I never got to reading and ultimately donated to libraries during my "Material Minimalism" phase.
15:44 Anyway, I am still working my way to answering your "Phoronix tests are irrelevant" claims...
15:44 *my way UP (or maybe DOWN?)
17:21 apotheon My responses in that reddit thread tend to try to provide two benefits:
17:21 1. help you figure out how to argue more effectively, so that you make allies out of fence-sitters rather than enemies out of allies
17:22 2. help other people in the thread see the positive aspects of your arguments, so that maybe they'll be more tractable at some later date if someone tries to convince them of similar things later, instead of making them stubbornly resistant to the ideas *specifically* because of how you argued them
17:25 libman: I don't know why you're so insistent on taking an ineffective approach to arguing your position.  The correct answer to "I don't want that much bloat in the base system!" is not to fall back on performance benchmarks, but to respond with something like "I understand that your priorities might differ from mine -- but do you object to the idea of a FUSE port for OpenBSD?"
17:27 libman: The correct answer to "UFS performs just fine for me, and Phoronix benchmarks are meaningless crap anyway!" is not to shit all over people for not having their own competitors to Phoronix, but to say "I don't know of any specific evidence or solid argument that there's anything wrong with these benchmarks [unless you do know of such evidence or argument, like my explanation of what is
17:27 actually wrong with some of them], but I suppose you might not need these particular performance benefits.  What about the other benefits of this filesystem?"
17:29 libman BAK.  Like I said, I am not a politician or a salesman.  There are points on which BSD culture deserves to be criticized.
17:29 apotheon libman: Look for excuses to believe people argue in good faith, and have different (valid and practical) priorities than you, then address those priorities.  Don't imply their priorities are wrong and their arguments are malicious or based solely on ignorant bias, unless you *want* to be a pariah who actually serves to *undermine* his own arguments.
17:29 Is this discussion meant to be about the value of TFS, or is it meant to be about ciriticizing what you see as "BSD culture"?
17:29 If the former, don't distract it from that purpose by turning it into the latter.
17:30 You don't have to be a politician or salesman.  You just have to refrain from being a salesman for the competition.
17:31 libman I didn't start that post with the intention of criticizing BSDs, but the degree of the response there (33 points for the "crap" thrower, 4 points for the whole post) warranted a response.
17:31 apotheon If you're incapable of making a good case for what you want, and only end up making a case for the converse based on people's associations of what you want with your abysmal performance in discussion, you're clearly doing something *very wrong* -- and despite all your talk about rationality and evidence and so on, you seem doggedly inclined to ignore that evidence and keep irrationally making
17:31 enemies for your ideas.
17:32 libman Speaking of "excuses", that's exactly the word that came to my mind when reading your negation of the benchmark evidence.
17:32 Bro, do you even `git clone https://github.com/phoronix-te[…]oronix-test-suite `?
17:32 apotheon Before people will accept your evidence and argument, you have to get people to listen to it.  If all you do is make them feel insulted, you're achieving the opposite of that.
17:33 17:32 < libman> Speaking of "excuses", that's exactly the word that came to my mind when reading your negation of the benchmark evidence.
17:33 This is exactly the kind of attitude I just addressed.
17:33 I'm going to try to remember that you just can't help yourself -- you insult people as a matter of course, without even understanding that you're doing everything exactly wrong.
17:34 libman If we were making a commercial for TFS, it could be an "I have a dream" theme.  What if there was a universal file-system that would work for everybody, on every operating system?  Imagine being able to boot any OS on a USB stick and have access to all your files...
17:34 apotheon These "advanced filesystems" are poor choices for USB flash storage.
17:35 libman (I meant having a desktop with many fancy storage drives, but being able to boot any OS from a small drive and access all your storage natively.)
17:36 apotheon USB flash storage tends to be more space-restricted, more throughput-restricted, more performance-restricted, more prone to being worn out by high-frequency writes, and far less well served by the features particular to such filesystems.
17:38 libman We would then ask: why don't we already have an open standard FS that works for everybody?  Any modern OS can connect to the same TCP/IP network, many programs are available on all major OSes, etc - but filesystems continue to divide us, and make switching between operating systems more difficult.
17:38 apotheon Even features of extN filesystems and their rough equivalents are problematic.  Buffered writes are much more prone to data loss with USB flash storage because of relatively slow (hardware) write speed, unreliability of file write "guarantees" on various systems, failure to unmount cleanly, and the ease of accidental (or incautious) disconnection.
17:39 Thus, the best (generally usable) filesystem for portable USB flash drive storage is still FAT32, and the best when portability is not a conern appears to be . . .
17:39 . . . wait for it . . .
17:39 . . . UFS!
17:39 libman And then we go over the common reasons why other FSes fell short.  FAT and UFS are available on most OSes, but no one uses them due to their shortcomings (let's see how you navigate that landmine).  ZFS, BtrFS, etc fell short due to being restrictively licensed.
17:40 apotheon The reason we don't already have an open standard FS that works for everyone is the epidemic of a disease known as NIH.
17:41 libman You went off on a tangent about something I didn't even say.  I am not talking about the modern equivalent of a boot floppy (a USB stick that you can use to switch bare metal OSes with maximum ease), I'm talking about the rest of your storage.
17:41 apotheon . . . and the answer to your question depends on the definition of "works for everybody".
17:41 "Imagine being able to boot any OS on a USB stick and have access to all your files..."
17:41 I responded to what *you* said.
17:42 You seem to do this a lot.  You say something, then when I respond to it you criticize me for responding to what you said.
17:43 . . . but you characterize it as me talking about something you didn't say.
17:43 libman I think different people only read different bits and branches of that 87+ comment discussion, and I've already presented solid arguments for why scalability limitations of UFS will become an increasing problem.
17:43 apotheon It's a big discussion.  Not everyone has time to read everything.
17:44 Can you link me to a specific comment where you address UFS "scalability"?
17:44 . . . unless you mean the IPFS thing.
17:45 libman I am promoting copyfree as the solution for NIH.  If Microsoft copied the TCP/IP stack from BSD, it would have copied a copyfree FS as well if it had been sufficient for its needs.
17:46 apotheon The fact you want to promote copyfree licensing as part of the solution to NIH doesn't change the fact that NIH is an ongoing problem that is a significant factor in the lack of good "universal" filesystems.
17:46 libman IPFS is an example of an emerging trend in how apps store every URL of huge content bases (ex. Wikipedia) as a pile of files on your hard drive.
17:46 Git does the same thing, and Microsoft had to create an FS to make git scale to its needs.
17:47 apotheon . . . and you didn't really make NIH central to your argument in that discussion.  It's much harder to find any references to that idea in the discussion than to your reliance on Phoronix benchmarks.
17:47 libman I don't rely on Phoronix benchmarks, Phoronix benchmarks dominate the industry (and its BSD critics don't have an answer).
17:47 apotheon Version control would have been a much more effective point to bring up than IPFS.
17:48 If you want to sneak in some advertisement for IPFS, slip it into a list of things people in your current target audience are more likely to care about.
17:48 libman I'm letting you be the "good cop" and move forward with the best arguments.
17:48 apotheon You do rely on Phoronix benchmarks, every time you mention performance.
17:48 I'm not being "good cop", I'm trying to salvage something from this disaster area.
17:49 I'm about out of energy for it, too, so I'm going to quit trying.  This entire reddit discussion is a lost cause at this point.
17:49 It's going to take six months for these people to become receptive to TFS again.
17:49 (if "we" are lucky)
17:50 Even then, it will have to be approached in a very different way.
17:50 . . . and, honestly, the strongest argument you could make is to start working on a FUSE port.
17:50 libman Like I said, Phoronix is so dominant it squeezed all other benchmark results publications into obscurity.  And they rarely live up to the same standard of detail and openness.
17:51 s/squeezed/pushed/
17:51 apotheon That doesn't change the fact the benchmarks Phoronix provides often *suck*.
17:51 libman Compared to what?
17:51 apotheon compared to personal experience
17:52 libman My personal experience is different.  But I don't make generalization on it, I look for ways to measure objectively.
17:52 apotheon If my personal experience directly contradicts Phoronix benchmarks, and I can see methodological problems with Phoronix benchmarks, it makes sense to go with my personal experience instead.
17:52 Measuring objectively is great, as long as you're measuring the right thing.
17:53 If someone compares apples to ice cream for health benefits, and you use that to argue that we should all eat foxglove, you should expect to be told you're wrong.
17:53 libman Back in like 2011, when I tried accessing a UFS HD created by FreeBSD with OpenBSD - epic data loss.  But I don't bring up that anecdote as any conclusive argument.
17:54 apotheon That would be an argument for portable filesystems, not for using something other than UFS for a FreeBSD-only operation.
17:54 libman Phoronix tells you what hardware they used, what software they used, what changes they made to default settings, and they give you the source code.
17:55 apotheon Yes -- so you can often see exactly what methodological problems apply when you look closely enough.
17:55 libman So then this problem would be easy to solve: tweak their benchmarks and publish your own results.
17:55 apotheon . . . and from what I've seen, the information about changes from defaults is either often lacking or simply supportive of what I said (that the tests don't test what they should).
17:56 You'll just say those benchmarks don't count because they don't come from a "reputable" source, probably.
17:56 Plus . . . I have just enough time to dispute what you've said, and not enough to perform my own benchmarks.
17:56 libman But Phoronix has a long track record and a very positive reputation.  Ironically, someone in r/BSD didn't get the memo and posted a Phoronix link there just 6 hours ago!
17:57 apotheon The onus is on the guy trying to convince me to change my ways (speaking of "me" as a stand-in for anyone you're trying to convince).  As such, when someone points out a problem with the numbers, the proper response is for *you* to make the relevant changes to the test conditions and provide your own benchmarks.
17:57 . . . not to tell people they're wrong until they perform their own benchmarks and register a trademark under which to publish them, then spend a decade building popularity for that trademark.
17:58 Phoronix has a very negative reputation amongst people who actually know what they're doing, and very positive amongst those who just skim the surface.
17:58 People who just skim the surface are much more numerous.
17:58 libman I understand that Phoronix tests are not perfect, but they provide a substantial degree of support for my arguments.  Pointing out a few flaws is not a refutation.
17:58 apotheon Pointing out flaws that actually demolish the reason you brought the benchmarks up in the first place is a refutation.
17:58 libman Furthermore, the UFS performance problems are like 10% of the reason why we need a better copyfree FS.
17:59 apotheon If UFS is being presented in its least-performant configuration, the performance comparison with regard to UFS is invalidated.
18:00 libman The quality of the Phoronix benchmarks is demonstrated by their long-standing market share, and lack of other studies that contradict it, even though anyone can run a benchmark and publish the results.
18:01 apotheon You just absolutely refuse to even address methodological problems.
18:02 I don't give a shit how good Phoronix marketing has gotten.  I don't give a fuck.  I'll repeat: It does not matter to me.
18:02 I care about whether the benchmarks measure something I care about.
18:02 libman This reminds me of how I used to skeptically criticize the Global Warming data.  I had good points about the error margins for various models being overly optimistic, the difficulty of adjusting for the "urban warming" effect, etc.  But I never claimed that those flaws were a total refutation.
18:09 I've read the claims that all benchmarks are explained away by buffering settings, etc.  Not a refutation.  These results have been known for many years.  We need more experiments outside Phoronix, but BSD people seem to have a major aversion to this.  Boo hoo hoo, don't let facts get in the way of our kumbaya...
18:11 apotheon I'm not saying the Phoronix results are wrong.  I'm saying they're insufficient to be taken at face value.
18:11 Is that clear?
18:12 They *could be wrong*, and there is no clear preponderance of probability to back them up.
18:12 . . . so it's pointless to just take them at face value and consider the argument done.
18:12 "Boo hoo hoo, don't let facts get in the way of our kumbaya..."
18:13 Boo hoo hoo, don't let facts get in the way of the worship of numbers whose provenance is suspect.
18:14 Is it your intention to believe you're right, or is it to be sure *and* convince others?
18:14 If the former, I guess you're doing a great job.
18:26 libman I never claimed that Phoronix results are definitive, irrefutable, and final; only that they: *1* clearly show the present state of efforts at competitive performance measurements, *2* have not been refuted,
18:26 and *3* show what people from outside the BSD bubble think about BSDs (remember that BSD's market share is becoming an ever-smaller fraction of 1%).
18:27 And that fully supports my statement about UFS being a weak point of the present copyfree stack (unless it is married to Dragonfly, which has more GPL in base).
18:33 apotheon "*2* have not been refuted"
18:33 Shown to be unreliable is good enough, in this case.
18:35 libman Like I said on Reddit: saying "Newton was an idiot" doesn't make you Einstein.
18:35 apotheon I think I'm just going to give up on trying to reason with you about this.  If you create another flame war, I should just ignore it and focus my efforts on doing more productive things than run around with buckets trying to put out your fires.
18:36 18:35 < libman> Like I said on Reddit: saying "Newton was an idiot" doesn't make you Einstein.
18:36 That's a shitty, useless analogy that doesn't address what I said at all.
18:37 libman I am here because we can still work as a team.  You are a part of the BSD Reality Distortion Field.  You speak their language.
18:37 apotheon I'm not part of a reality distortion field.  I'm pointing out why your arguments are unconvincing.
18:37 libman And I'm pointing out why they are.
18:37 apotheon I'm not on a team with you -- I'm fighting the things you do that make everything worse.
18:38 If they were convincing, people would be convinced.  PAY ATTENTION TO THE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.
18:38 It's *TAUTOLOGICAL*.  Your arguments do not convince people of your point of view; they convince people of the opposite.
18:38 libman "Most people are religious, therefore God is real."
18:38 apotheon Therefore, they are unconvincing of your point of view.
18:38 If they were convincing, they would convince.
18:38 No, fucktard, IF THEY WERE CONVINCING, THEY WOULD CONVINCE.
18:39 That is *the* metric for how convincing an argument you present.
18:39 Everything else is just biased, blind self-justification.
18:40 libman BSD users are a consequence of evolutionary selection.  The number of people who've tried BSD is much higher than the number of people still running it.  Like with vegans and various religions, BSDs now attract a certain psychological type of person that fits the groupthink.
18:41 This is the reason why I've largely given up on BSD OSes and decided to focus on pondering up (and hopefully someday actually creating) a portable copyfree userland.
18:42 apotheon You really *should* give up, because if you do you won't actually *harm efforts to make things better*.
18:42 libman I enjoy being called FUCKTARD on Reddit more than on IRC.  Let's not have any more of this debate in here.
18:43 apotheon Yes, please stop filling this channel with pointless self-justifications.
18:44 libman I'd rather be filling it with constructive discussion, but my hopes of having ANY overlapping interests with you continue to diminish...
18:45 My efforts at popularizing your site are completely unappreciated.   Heck, even my pitches for the CI Works list went to /dev/null.
18:47 apotheon The fact I didn't quit my job to work full-time on rewriting everything to your exact specifications in the next two weeks does not mean I ignored and shitcanned every suggestion you made.
18:47 I have to go.  Real life is getting in the way of being a slave to your every desire again.  Later.
18:56 libman left #copyfree
21:33 zacts joined #copyfree
22:28 zacts joined #copyfree
23:07 unlmtd joined #copyfree

← Previous day | Index | Server Index | Channel Index | Today | Next day → | Atom Feed | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | plain, newest first