divabot posted:The Beisutsukai, you insufficiently rational person who is probably from a low-IQ country. (Ordinary humans were not so impressed.)
|
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 09:22 |
|
|
# ? May 30, 2024 12:20 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:At least here you can see bits where he's poking fun at the original books. Harry and co do win a lot of points for the House Cup because of their Voldemort-related activities, and Hogwarts does give out a time travel device to kids on a very flimsy justification. I'm not sure though that they get points because they're helping defeat Voldemort, or if it's just because Dumbledore was in Gryffindor and wants them to win, just like how Snape blatantly favours Slytherin (and penalises Harry and his friends because he hated Harry's dad). Dumbledore might use the Voldemort-related stuff as justification, but he'd probably find some other excuse to give Gryffindor those points otherwise.
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 12:11 |
|
He hadn't for the past... how many years?
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 12:27 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:At least here you can see bits where he's poking fun at the original books. Harry and co do win a lot of points for the House Cup because of their Voldemort-related activities, and Hogwarts does give out a time travel device to kids on a very flimsy justification. Are you insinuating HPMOR is part of sneer culture?? anilEhilated posted:...It's turtles all the way down, isn't it. It took me way too long to realise that all the references to references to references don't actually resolve to any sort of solid facts or achievements. (I look at my early LW comments and marvel at how hopeful I was that the stupid bits would turn out not to be stupid.)
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 12:36 |
|
divabot posted:Are you insinuating HPMOR is part of sneer culture?? When I've heard people talk (in real life) about HPMoR it's usually been something about liking the bits that poke fun at the silly bits in the original series. And if it stuck to that it'd be pretty unremarkable, it's just that it doesn't.
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 12:52 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Hahaha, that's in response to a response to su3su2u1's readthrough I think? "Sneer culture" is one of those phrases (c.f. "pseudoskeptic") which only ever means "you stepped on my personal toe!" These are the same people (literally) who advocate unvarnished communication. What they mean is they want to send unvarnished communication; they reliably hit the roof when they receive it.
|
# ? Jul 28, 2015 13:04 |
|
Chapter 14: The Unknown and the Unknowable Part Four quote:
Seems like Eliezarry is a believer in the “Great Person” theory of history. Has Eliezer expressed his belief in this theory in his other writings? Has he addressed Spencer’s or Tolstoy’s criticisms that “Great People” are merely products of their social environment? quote:
Oh for Pete’s sake. Making the supporting characters or antagonists artificially stupid doesn’t make the protagonist / author avatar look smart, it just makes the author look lazy.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 07:17 |
|
JosephWongKS posted:Seems like Eliezarry is a believer in the “Great Person” theory of history. Has Eliezer expressed his belief in this theory in his other writings? Doctor Spaceman fucked around with this message at 08:08 on Jul 29, 2015 |
# ? Jul 29, 2015 07:39 |
|
Yeah, basically everything Eliezer writes is based on the idea that not only do Great People exist, he (and other rationalists) are those Great People.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 07:47 |
|
I shall choose to believe McGonagall is being really sarcastic, there's a drat good reason why Time Turners are so fragile and she doesn't feel like explaining it to the most annoying 11 year old in history.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 08:51 |
Dabir posted:I shall choose to believe McGonagall is being really sarcastic, there's a drat good reason why Time Turners are so fragile and she doesn't feel like explaining it to the most annoying 11 year old in history.
|
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 08:54 |
|
Just cause that's what he was going.for, doesn't mean that's what he wrote
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 08:58 |
|
Night10194 posted:Yeah, basically everything Eliezer writes is based on the idea that not only do Great People exist, he (and other rationalists) are those Great People. Everyone should read this, it's a sheer delight. quote:It was getting late. I asked him about the rationalist community. Were they really going to save the world? From what? (This is the guy who founded MetaMed, whose entire schtick was literally: you pay us lots of money, we get medically-untrained LessWrong alumni to research your problems using their trained rationality. You'll be amazed to hear it went bust, and stiffed a lot of people in the process.) The purpose of HPMOR is literally to propagandise for the rationality skills described in this quote.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 12:59 |
And this is what happens when critical thinking takes a nice, long vacation.
|
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 15:12 |
|
divabot posted:Everyone should read this, it's a sheer delight. On that wiki article there isn't a single link to medical blog or any reputable medical journal. That should be a good indication of it as a sham.
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 22:19 |
pentyne posted:On that wiki article there isn't a single link to medical blog or any reputable medical journal. That should be a good indication of it as a sham.
|
|
# ? Jul 29, 2015 22:45 |
|
Chapter 14: The Unknown and the Unknowable Part Four quote:
Confirmation that Eliezarry’s world operates on the Doraemon model of time travel. Which opens up / confirms the possibility that the person who left the “clues” for Eliezarry was a Eliezarry from the future who had time-travelled into the past. quote:
Doesn’t the anthropic principle merely state that a universe which has sapient lifeform must be such as to permit the creation of such lifeform (weak anthropic principle) or that a universe is compelled to eventually have sapient lifeform within it (strong anthropic principle)? Time travel (at least the variety of time travel applicable to this world as confirmed by McGonagall) would not be incompatible with the anthropic principle.
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 08:03 |
|
It's not that time travel would be incompatible with the anthropic principle, it's that if time travel had caused a paradox that destroyed the universe no one would be around to observe, so the fact that it hasn't happened yet is not necessarily proof that time travel can never destroy the universe. We have a deflated sense of the odds of our own self destruction in the same way that we have an inflated sense of the odds of our own existence.
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 08:18 |
Still makes no sense, though. You can't have things happening in a destroyed universe. I don't see how the last sentence is relevant in any way, either.
anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 09:25 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:At least here you can see bits where he's poking fun at the original books. Harry and co do win a lot of points for the House Cup because of their Voldemort-related activities, and Hogwarts does give out a time travel device to kids on a very flimsy justification. Actually, having just listened to the PoA audiobook (Stephen Fry, baby!) Hermione reveals that Prof McGonagall had to write all sorts of letters to the ministry to convince them to allow Hermione to have one for her school work. She wasn't just given one. Sperg over
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 09:54 |
|
The anthropic thing is basically just a refutation of the admittedly inane answer that "I would have remembered hearing about that." The chance of time turners destroying the world could be enormous - it might be that there are a million universes lying in ruin because of irresponsible time turner usage for every universe that is still in one piece - and you still wouldn't know for sure because according to the anthropic principle, your universe has to be one of the ones that haven't been destroyed no matter how likely or unlikely the event is, because you're here having this conversation about it. Not having heard about the universe blowing up is not, on its own, not reassuring. But it's still pretty dumb, because you have to assume people have been using time-turners before in this universe more than a few times. In fact, if you're giving them out to children, it's reasonable to assume they've been in active use by non-children for much longer, so there is (presumably) a pile of supporting evidence that time-turnerss don't, in fact, destroy the world, and Harry just doesn't possess the evidence required to reject McGonagall's assertions about them. Besides which, why are we jumping straight to universe-destroying cataclysms anyway? Surely there's a spectrum of potential ill effects. We don't have to assume the worst straight away. I would call Harry's tendency to freak out over poorly-understood magical phenomena a deliberate character flaw, except I don't think it ever gets addressed in any way.
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 13:29 |
|
It's like transporters in Star Trek. They're plausibly murder machines, but everybody's used to them.
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 13:53 |
|
pentyne posted:On that wiki article there isn't a single link to medical blog or any reputable medical journal. That should be a good indication of it as a sham. They hired a doctor who lost his license in NY. Evidently this was the rational choice.
|
# ? Jul 30, 2015 17:06 |
Hyper Crab Tank posted:The anthropic thing is basically just a refutation of the admittedly inane answer that "I would have remembered hearing about that." The chance of time turners destroying the world could be enormous - it might be that there are a million universes lying in ruin because of irresponsible time turner usage for every universe that is still in one piece - and you still wouldn't know for sure because according to the anthropic principle, your universe has to be one of the ones that haven't been destroyed no matter how likely or unlikely the event is, because you're here having this conversation about it. Not having heard about the universe blowing up is not, on its own, not reassuring. No, he acts like he's just found out Jesus didn't die on the cross, and instead went to France and knocked up Mary Magdalene, because to him it is a similar faith-shattering revelation.
|
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 02:31 |
|
I think the only problem with that is, as you say, that it clearly isn't what Yudkowsky had in mind. In the hands of a more competent writer with the explicit goal of portraying a young boy enamored with the idea of science, but not really understanding it other than as received wisdom, and who gradually goes from freaking out to actually approaching things with more healthy skepticism and curiosity, that could actually be a good story. But this isn't that story. Or if it is, it doesn't feel like it, and the other three or so simultaneous plots elbow it out of the way. Like I said, if Harry's tendency to freak out was actually addressed at any point, that would be better - not great, because parts like this still come off as obnoxious and cringeworthy even though they don't have to be - but better. But I think what Yudkowsky thinks he is doing here is rightly and smartly pointing out some inherent absurdity in an element of the Potterverse. The way HPMOR constantly tilts between author tract and characters just being themselves makes it hard to know for sure sometimes, though...
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 10:33 |
|
Hacker News on the wisdom of Rational Fiction. Seek out the comment from angersock, which is greyed-out because it's not drooling fanboyish.
|
# ? Jul 31, 2015 11:01 |
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:I think the only problem with that is, as you say, that it clearly isn't what Yudkowsky had in mind. In the hands of a more competent writer with the explicit goal of portraying a young boy enamored with the idea of science, but not really understanding it other than as received wisdom, and who gradually goes from freaking out to actually approaching things with more healthy skepticism and curiosity, that could actually be a good story. But this isn't that story. Or if it is, it doesn't feel like it, and the other three or so simultaneous plots elbow it out of the way. for what it's worth, yudkowsky claims that this is exactly what he had in mind (this is worth nothing, because he is incompetent and also a liar)
|
# ? Aug 1, 2015 17:44 |
|
Um, Harry is very obviously a super-flawed rationalist, somebody who merely read a bunch about science, and the author intends it that way, and to the point of parodying his past self in many places.
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 08:45 |
|
sarehu posted:Um, Harry is very obviously a super-flawed rationalist, somebody who merely read a bunch about science, and the author intends it that way, and to the point of parodying his past self in many places. That would be really interesting, especially if it was parody of anything after the age of, like, twelve. Yudkowsky tends to send information about his past self (past a certain point) down the memory hole, presumably since it's hard to get people to take you seriously if they can find out you once predicted that writing a new programming language would unlock the Golden Age of AI and will be done any time now (then failed to write so much as a language spec), or that you once invented a psychological theory from whole cloth to explain why your utter lack of follow-through is actually an evolutionary breakthrough and you are the harbinger of the new age of (really unbelievably lazy) humanity. So it'd actually be kind of cool if there was self-parody. I could respect Yud a little bit more if I knew he didn't take himself so seriously. Which parts do you mean?
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 14:12 |
I'm assuming that if it was a parody, the other characters wouldn't put with Harry's bullshit as opposed to being as awed as they are. Not to mention it's, y'know, not funny or indicative of criticism of the attitude it's supposed to be parodying in any way.
|
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 14:37 |
|
SolTerrasa posted:or that you once invented a psychological theory from whole cloth to explain why your utter lack of follow-through is actually an evolutionary breakthrough and you are the harbinger of the new age of (really unbelievably lazy) humanity. What? This sounds utterly amazing. Could you give me a link to this?
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 15:17 |
|
sarehu posted:Um, Harry is very obviously a super-flawed rationalist, somebody who merely read a bunch about science, Indeed. sarehu posted:and the author intends it that way, and to the point of parodying his past self in many places. You keep telling yourself that, while you're rocking in the corner sobbing.
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 15:38 |
|
JosephWongKS posted:What? This sounds utterly amazing. Could you give me a link to this?
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 16:09 |
|
JosephWongKS posted:What? This sounds utterly amazing. Could you give me a link to this? Like I said, memory hole. The oldest version of it that archive.org has now just says "I no longer believe neurohacking will be required to reach the singularity. Artificial intelligence will be quite enough. Therefore this page has been removed". Here's something which makes references to his goofy Algernon theory: https://web.archive.org/web/20010409002122/http://www.sysopmind.com/algernon_ethics.html E: ha! Found it. His site had backups that archive.org crawled and if you follow those it has older versions. Yeah, read this if you want to hear about the whole Algernon thing. https://web.archive.org/web/20001204212900/http://sysopmind.com/algernon.html E2: that's more insufferable than I remember. Just this, then: quote:According to my parents, I was an unusually irritable baby; as a child I wouldn't play with the other children or strangers; I didn't start speaking until the age of three (*); and so on - it's a good bet that the Algernic perturbation was present at birth. I was also an unusually bright child; at the age of five I was devouring Childcraft books, especially the ones on math, science, how things work. In second grade, at the age of seven, I discovered that my math teacher didn't know what a logarithm was, and permanently lost all respect for school. Eventually, I convinced my parents to let me skip from fifth grade directly to seventh grade. My birthday being September 11th, I turned eleven shortly after entering seventh grade. Ugh, that's completely unreadable. Summary: he totally is brilliant but tragically due to the mechanics of optimization processes it's impossible to be as brilliant as he is without paying a Terrible Cost (yes, he does love animes, why do you ask?), which manifests as a complete lack of ability to accomplish anything. VvvvV anilEhilated posted:what the gently caress is a keer You can read the whole pile of loving nonsense bullshit if you want, it is not worth it, there is no pay-off. A keer is an emotion. Yudkowsky likes to make up words for things we already have words for. Specifically it's the emotion of being frustrated. Yudkowsky has a superbrain which gets super feels, so he gets mega frustrated instead of regular frustrated, and you guys just don't know what it's like to be him. This is more plausible than the theory that he is a spoiled baby because his SAT scores were higher than average in middle school. He got the second highest SAT score in Indiana among sixth graders, see. SolTerrasa fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Aug 3, 2015 |
# ? Aug 3, 2015 17:07 |
what the gently caress is a keer edit: Someone should really get this clown to a psychology 101 course. Somehow the whole thing gets stupider as it goes on. anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Aug 3, 2015 |
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 17:18 |
|
anilEhilated posted:Somehow the whole thing gets stupider as it goes on. A succinct summary of Yudkowsky and every contribution he ever made.
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 18:27 |
|
anilEhilated posted:what the gently caress is a keer That would require getting near a college, which might show him he's not a hyper genius.
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 18:49 |
So what happened to the kid who got the top sixth-grader SAT score?
|
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 19:55 |
|
Nessus posted:So what happened to the kid who got the top sixth-grader SAT score? Full-ride to Northwestern, which they usually decline in favor of an Ivy. Usually a nice one-column article in a local paper. Very little fanfic published, overall.
|
# ? Aug 3, 2015 20:30 |
|
|
# ? May 30, 2024 12:20 |