[01:01] <balloons> snizzo, which meeting?
[06:43] <Dragonkeeper> hi, im trying to deploy my app to the phone.   but, as the app trys to load on the phone it force quits and tells me module QtQuick.Controls isnt installed .
[06:44] <Dragonkeeper> this app loads on the desktop tho ..
[06:50] <Dragonkeeper> anyone ?
[07:34] <Dragonkeeper> nvm  fixed it
[10:38] <om26er> didrocks, Hi! Do you know how can I update to pycharm 5, is there a way to do that from umake ?
[10:41] <didrocks> om26er: use the built-in pycharm updater
[10:41] <didrocks> it should warn you about it and let you update
[10:41] <om26er> didrocks, it says already upto date, probably the built-in updater will working after a few days.
[10:42] <Dragonkeeper> anyone know the componant to create drop down selection menus >
[10:42] <didrocks> om26er: yeah, they are doing rollouts
[10:49] <om26er> didrocks, manually updated it for now, love the hidpi support.
[10:49] <om26er> didrocks, was instantly greeted with https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-141725 -- do you know when that will be fixed ?
[10:51] <didrocks> om26er: normally, jayatana is disabled for java app by default, did you export the env yourself?
[10:53] <om26er> didrocks, yes, I did. It warned me about jayatana when I started it, 5.0 disabled it by default, I re-enabled it. I am just curious if we will have a real fix sometime.
[10:53] <didrocks> om26er: I don't think if anyone is working on it that we would have a fix (or having a proper java integration support for appmenu)
[10:53] <didrocks> om26er: question for the fundation team I guess, we have a java maintainer
[10:54] <om26er> didrocks, oh, ok, will ask him. Do you know his name ?
[10:56] <didrocks> om26er: tdaitx
[10:56] <om26er> didrocks, thanks
[10:57] <didrocks> yw!
[12:31] <letatcest> Is there an option using a gesture or something to scroll through the terminal commands in the Ubuntu Touch Terminal?
[12:31] <letatcest> the formerly used ones i mean
[12:32] <ogra_> letatcest, use two fingers ;)
[12:32] <ogra_> oh, you want the command history, thats wipe left/right iirc
[12:33] <ogra_> (or was it up/down ? ... one of these)
[12:35] <letatcest> I sometimes am lucky boiko and ogra_ but mainly it doesnt work well... (trying to mirscreencast from a meizu, but it's pretty annoying to type in the commands...)
[16:44] <vitimiti> Is there a CMake variable to identify if the system is Ubuntu instead of just Linux? I would like to make a portable library that only uses QML for Ubuntu (it uses SDL2 as of now)
[16:57] <DanChapman> mardy: hey! could you point me to the bug for no edit ui in online accounts (if there is one) can't seem to find it
[18:50] <mzanetti> balloons, I'm afraid jenkins can do that dance longer than you can :DD
[18:50] <balloons> mzanetti, lol
[21:22] <dobey> aquarius: around?
[21:23] <aquarius> I am
[21:23] <dobey> aquarius: surely at the pub as well? :)
[21:24] <aquarius> debating heading out, but not yet :)
[21:24] <dobey> aquarius: anyway, alecu sent round the irc log of your questions about IAP and i wanted to clarify some things for you
[21:25] <aquarius> coolio
[21:25] <dobey> aquarius: 1) the API calls in QtPurchasing are perhaps not quite aptly named for how IAP works
[21:25] <aquarius> clarify away :)
[21:26] <dobey> the API was also heavily designed around how iOS/Android work, since it was originally designed for those platforms
[21:26] <aquarius> k
[21:27] <dobey> restorePurchases() makes it sound a lot more complex than it is, for one. it doesn't currently work while offline, but it's not something you should avoid calling
[21:28] <dobey> and while iOS/Android don't give you root on the phone, there are certainly plenty of sites/videos showing how to get free IAP items on those platforms :)
[21:28] <aquarius> ah, OK. It explicitly warns that it might ask for passwords
[21:28] <dobey> on ubuntu it will not do that
[21:28] <aquarius> if that's the case, I obviously don't want to call it on app startup
[21:28] <dobey> ever
[21:29] <aquarius> ah. Good. :)
[21:29] <dobey> on ubuntu we only ask for the password if it's been more than 15 minutes since you last actually logged in by typing the password, and you're actually trying to spend money
[21:29] <aquarius> certainly there are limits to how far one can go to protect an app from someone hacking its data files or source to get free stuff; the only way to actually avoid that is to not trust the app and do it on the server :)
[21:31] <dobey> right, the only way to do it "securely" is to have some sexternal service where you verify things
[21:31] <dobey> with some sort of encryption and API that can't be broken
[21:32] <aquarius> ya
[21:33] <aquarius> I'd just like to not make it necessarily *easy*, and "echo 'update purchases set coins=1000' | sqlite3 ~/.local/share/app.sil/db" is a bit too close to being easy :)
[21:33] <dobey> yeah
[21:34] <aquarius> hence the question about maybe you give me back a little signed token file I save somewhere which I can pass to IAP.decodeThisToken and get back {"coins":1000} -- IAP.decodeThisToken would be a local call, and just do public key verification on the token
[21:34] <dobey> well, you could make proprietary apps and do everything in c++ (or at least in qml that is embedded as resources in a c++ qt binary), and encrypt the db
[21:34] <aquarius> but I'm just making up API here; there are likely better ways
[21:34] <dobey> yeah, i'm not sure what the best way to do that is
[21:35] <aquarius> I was just hoping to avoid having to hit the internet for it, because then if I call restorePurchases() on app startup and you're currently in a phone dead zone then the app switches back into you-haven't-paid-for-it mode, which will annoy people
[21:35] <dobey> we could maybe do it on the client side, but as part of the service, rather than something each app deals with
[21:37] <dobey> aquarius: re: customization, the UI is exactly the same as when purchasing an app. you can set the name of the item, and an icon, in the store side, and that's what is displayed in pay-ui
[21:37] <aquarius> ah, OK; fair enough, then
[21:39] <dobey> the situation where verification of things is required, is indeed a bit difficult to deal with. one of the reasons why we are suggesting to just add "Donate $5" sort of items to start with, where they are immediately consumable, and you don't need to verify for using the app. and it fits well with the current case where people have one version of an app in the store that's for purchase to support development of it, and anoth
[21:40] <dobey> so with this, instead of two apps, you'd just have the one, and a page with the list of donate buttons for different amounts
[21:40] <dobey> the current minimum price requirements also make it more difficult to have some sorts of IAP items that are common in games with micropurchases
[21:41] <mhall119> alecu: I want in on the in-app-payments testing please
[21:41] <aquarius> that's a fair comment, indeed
[21:41] <aquarius> and I can save that the person has donated in my database
[21:42] <aquarius> and yes, someone could then flip that switch so it looks like they've donated when they haven't
[21:42] <dobey> well you don't even need to care if they've donated or not
[21:42] <aquarius> but that person is just a heel if they do that, and get no benefit, and go to hell for guilt later.
[21:42] <dobey> in the app anyway
[21:42] <aquarius> it'd be nice to not show them the button ;-)
[21:42] <dobey> well what if you added a new feature, and i want to buy you another beer?
[21:43] <alecu> mhall119: sure thing!
[21:44] <dobey> aquarius: make it a "Support" button on the main page, but it opens the page with the store so they can support you with beers, instead of you giving them support ;)
[21:51] <aquarius> ha! sneaky. :)
[21:51] <dobey> aquarius: and the problem with having something like ubuntu coins, is that then we have to track how many coins people have, how many they give to other people, and we lose money when the value of the dollar/pound/euro changes
[21:52] <aquarius> yup
[21:52] <aquarius> on the other hand, you don't have to have a minimum price of three dollars.
[21:52] <dobey> which is why MS don't do it any more on xbox either :)
[21:52] <dobey> well we do
[21:52] <dobey> it's just not a minimum price we have to make app developers deal with
[21:54] <dobey> and we don't want to deal with currency conversion, which having a fake currency would make us do
[21:56] <aquarius> s'pose, yeah
[21:56] <aquarius> make it an altcoin ;)
[21:57] <dobey> the minimum price thing isn't new either. we've had it for years (since we had apps for sale in the software-center)
[21:57] <mhall119> dogecoin or nothin
[21:57] <dobey> but we are actively working to reduce it
[21:58] <mhall119> dobey: instead of "ubuntu coin" we could always just track a "balance" in someone's Ubuntu One account and debit from small payments from that
[21:58] <aquarius> ya, I know it's not new, but opening up more ways to pay makes it more annoying ;)
[21:58] <aquarius> mnah, handwave, that means you're a bank
[21:59] <aquarius> money laundering regs go through the roof if you hold balance for people.
[21:59] <dobey> mhall119: but then we are google wallet or paypal
[21:59] <mhall119> only in the way my AT&T pre-paid service is a bank
[21:59] <mhall119> it works the same way
[21:59] <dobey> no, at&t pre-paid service is you buy X minutes per month
[22:00] <mhall119> dobey: yes, but I don't pay for those minutes with my credit card, I pay for those minutes out of my AT&T account balan ce
[22:00] <aquarius> can you get the balance back?
[22:00] <mhall119> I have to top-up my account when it runs out, then I can renew my monthly service
[22:00] <mhall119> aquarius: never tried, maybe? I'm sure it wouldn't be easy
[22:00] <aquarius> sounds like they're a bank. But AT&T have more lawyers than you've got lines of source, so it's easier for them :P
[22:01] <mhall119> I dunno, I used to write Java code
[22:01] <dobey> at&t have their own credit clearing i think
[22:02] <dobey> but that is the same problem, whether it's actual money we hold as a balance, or ubucoins
[22:02] <alecu> I think the key is what aquarius suggested earlier: we sell Ubucoins, and the prices of IAPs are in that virtual currency.
[22:03] <aquarius> that is precisely what I was suggesting, yeah
[22:03] <dobey> what key is in there?
[22:03] <alecu> then we don't have to do conversions, and we are not a bank
[22:03] <aquarius> but I see dobey's arguments against it, around the changing price of money
[22:03] <aquarius> I hadn't thought of that.
[22:03] <dobey> alecu: yes we do have to do conversions
[22:03] <dobey> alecu: otherwise we can't pay developers :)
[22:04] <alecu> we pay a rate out of those coins
[22:04] <dobey> and we would be a bank
[22:04] <alecu> and that rate can vary with time
[22:04] <dobey> you're describing a bank :)
[22:04] <alecu> bah
[22:05] <alecu> anyway, I'll let legal figure it out :-)
[22:05] <dobey> instead of a vault full of cash, it would be a hard drive full of bits
[22:05] <aquarius> alecu, the risk is this: I pay £2 (equivalent to $3) and get 200 Ubuntu Fun Bucks. A month goes past, during which the exchange rate for the pound goes in the toilet, meaning that Canonical's bank account with £2 in it is now worth $3.50. Then we have to pay the developer the equivalent of 200 Fun Bucks because of their purchases, which means paying them $3.50 when we've only got $3.00. So Canonical loses 5
[22:05] <aquarius> 0c.
[22:05] <dobey> but those bits are valued against the currency rate
[22:06] <aquarius> essentially, you avoid holding balances for people, *and* you avoid the minimum charge for most purchasers, *but* you have to become a money speculator. :)
[22:06] <dobey> exactly
[22:07] <aquarius> all of these are unenviable choices.
[22:07] <dobey> it also means we have to follow a whole different set of legal guidelines, becuase we are holding balances, rather than just asking some other credit clearing house to process some transactions for us
[22:08] <mhall119> the proper solution of course is just to get a massive volume of sales so that we can negotiate a lower per-transaction cost
[22:08] <aquarius> well, you aren't really holding balances; you've just got a DB table somewhere with (userid, funbucks) in it. But I appreciate that the money laundering people will not see it that way ;)
[22:08] <aquarius> the proper choice, of course, is "be a big enough deal that banks will drop their minimum charge" and then it's all good
[22:08] <aquarius> ha! jinx, mhall119
[22:08] <mhall119> lol
[22:09] <aquarius> but: egg, bag, bag, egg.
[22:09] <aquarius> maybe that'll happen.
[22:10] <aquarius> I *personally* think that the real solution here is to stop people whining about three lousy dollars when a latte costs more than that, and actually value the software they purchase. But I've not had a lot of luck with that philosophy.
[22:10] <dobey> aquarius: well, that's all a fiat currency is. bank computer just says you have a running balance of $XXXX, but they spread your balance around in loans to other people
[22:10] <aquarius> you're not allowed to say "fiat currency"; it makes you sound like an r/bitcoin nutter. I mean, I'm not disagreeing with you :)
[22:11] <mhall119> of course, the other option is lower the minimum below what it actually is, and take the hit on every transaction in the hope that the increased transactions eventually get us below that new minimum
[22:11] <aquarius> won't happen fast enough
[22:11] <mhall119> also, that's not what a fiat currency is
[22:11] <dobey> well the US$ is a fiat currency :)
[22:11] <mhall119> even on the gold standard it's pretty much all just numbers in a computer
[22:11] <aquarius> Ubuntu phones are not currently in the position where there are a zillion customers but they all refuse to pay because the prices are too high. If everyone with a phone paid for every app they use you still wouldn't make serious money, not yet.
[22:12] <mhall119> fiat just means the sum of all those numbers is chosen by a person or persons, rather than some natural limitation
[22:12] <dobey> fiat means you can't take those numbers and exchange them for some physical item
[22:13] <mhall119> I can exchange USD for physical items
[22:14] <dobey> you can make a transaction and give them to someone else to obtain an item they own possession of
[22:15] <mhall119> and that's different from a silver note or gold-backed paper currency how?
[22:15] <mhall119> heck, I can trade you Microsoft stock certificates for beer
[22:15] <dobey> the government owns the silver or gold and you can take your note to the government and they will give you silver or gold
[22:16] <mhall119> true, but I can take my USD into a pawn show and they will give me silver or gold for it too
[22:16] <dobey> yes, but you can also get an ipod or a gun in that pawn shop
[22:16] <mhall119> I can probably get them from the government too, somehow
[22:17] <dobey> the value of the dollar isn't tied to the value of that gold, ipod, or gun
[22:17] <dobey> anyway, speaking of beer
[22:17] <dobey> it is that time approximate
[22:18] <mhall119> which brings us back to my original assertion, currency is a fraction of some whole value. Fiat currency is when that whole value is simply declared by some authority, rather than being based on some measurable substance like gold
[22:19] <mhall119> bitcoin isn't backed by any physical substance, but it's not fiat because the total number of bitcoins in existance isn't determined arbitrarily
[22:19] <mhall119> it's a function of some funky hard math
[22:20] <dobey> but it's not an unlimited amount either
[22:20] <mhall119> it's also not a static currency, the total number of bitcoins that exists is *increasing*
[22:21] <dobey> it is finite. once all the bitcoins have been calculated, there will be no more
[22:21] <aquarius> anyway, I shall leave you to the discussion -- thank you for the detail, dobey! I shall try to find time to be part of the pilot ;)
[22:21] <mhall119> dobey: I don't believe it is finite in theory
[22:21] <mhall119> but I could be wrong
[22:22] <mhall119> I thought it just kept getting exponentially harder to create new ones
[22:22] <aquarius> (on my way out: mhall119, it is finite. There can never be more than 21 million bitcoins. As the total number approaches that, mining gets harder, until when it hits that, mining is impossible. It asymptotically approaches 21m.)
[22:22] <dobey> gold was a finite resource too
[22:22] <mhall119> aquarius: thanks
[22:22] <dobey> mhall119: https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#wont-the-finite-amount-of-bitcoins-be-a-limitation
[22:23] <mhall119> in that case, at some point in time bitcoin will become irreversibly deflationary
[22:23] <mhall119> assuming it ever catches on widely
[22:24] <dobey> right
[22:24] <mhall119> which would pretty much spell the end of a bitcoin economy
[22:25] <mhall119> then everybody will move to dogecoin
[22:25] <dobey> it's probably wiser to invest in ammunition, realistically :)
[22:26] <mhall119> or, currencies backed by a reliable economy
[22:26] <dobey> so one where humans are not involved at all then
[22:28] <dobey> anyway
[22:28] <dobey> time to go :)