It wasn’t time-travel (which through Time-Turner can only go back an hour per turn, 6 times used in total), it was repeated Obliviations of Hermione.
It was Obvliations in this case but don’t be confused by the limitations in time travel. When it comes to this kind of task, one days worth of turner use done smart and with preparation would give more information than a month of constant obliviation use, without the pesky side effects of death by starvation, dehydration or sleep deprivation.
Similar strategies would give Harry a full index of the entire Hogwarts library ranked according to a reliable indication of potential usefulness, difficulty level, and possible risk. Even with the crippled turner as he currently has it, if Harry was out to win and not tell interesting stories, he probably would have won already.
He tried that, a while back. Ontological loops just give him “DO NOT MESS WITH TIME.”
Or, if kept at a reasonable scale, fun with pies and bullies?
I’m entirely familiar with the earlier experiments with time and maintain what I said in the grandparent. See the discussion from back then if necessary. The only reasons that Harry doesn’t use his time turner carefully, for practical benefit, are narrative convenience and an irrational protagonist. Much the same as in just about any fantasy fiction.
I am overwhelmingly unimpressed with Harry as a rationalist avatar most of the time. To the extent that I’d call “Methods of Rationality” something of a misnomer. He’s reasonably clever and flamboyant but his strategic thinking is abysmal.
So, we have a guy who preaches a lot about rationality, writing a fiction of rationality, and his main character isn’t acting rationally at times… Gee, I wonder how long it’ll take for you to notice your confusion. Oh, but there isn’t one, right? He is just a Bad Writer. Right? ;)
Please note that HP is beyond reason when his girlfriend being such is brought up. He also completely fails to realize his unreasonableness in those instaces. He is ubersmart, but not a perfect rational actor, and of course makes mistakes. That has been established.
What makes you think that others think you’re dissing Eliezer?
I didn’t downvote you for dissing Eliezer, I downvoted you for that rude and unproductive usage of sarcasm against fellow readers. I got your sarcasm, I just hated it.
Cloak & Hat kept saying “Hello, again”, when for all Hermione knew he’d not talked to her before. That’s indeed a somewhat bizarre slip for Quirrel to make. And regardless of whether he was going to tell “Time travel” or not, regardless of whether it was a lie or not, it seems a bit out-of-character for Quirrel to be catching himself mid-sentence.
Quirrell has slipped up before, when he tried to kill Bahry. Every rationalization Quirrell later gave for why it would have been stupid was absolutely correct, but I believe he did sincerely try to kill him. In the heat of the moment, in the depths of his hate, he decided to do what he felt like rather than what was smart.
Of course, this encounter with Hermione is not like his encounter with Bahry. But he is pretty agitated; he sounds agitated, anyway, and it fits, given that it took him a few hours to find the right lever to pull with Hermione. At any rate, he has no reason to be particularly careful with what he says to someone he’s planning to Obliviate anyway. And given all that, I think Eliezer was not acting out of character to pick that moment as a time to throw us some scraps.
Wait, but it seemed to be fairly clear that it’s time travel from the slip-ups H&C made. (Of course, you’d have to postulate a different form of time travel that allows for paradoxes, so I suppose Obliviation has a point up on that...)
The sentence “Time...” is in response to a question from Hermione about how H&C knows Harry will turn dark and destroy her, not in regards to anything having to do with the conversation itself.
Also if you reread the passage in question, you’ll see several hints that indicate a long time passed for Hermione also, even though she didn’t remember it, e.g. *”Her hand was almost slipping on her wand, there was a sense of fatigue in her fingers like she’d been holding the wand for hours instead of minutes”, and ofcourse the fact that the rush of adrenaline at the beginning of the conversations corresponds to the rush of fear at H&C decloaking at the end.
It wasn’t time-travel (which through Time-Turner can only go back an hour per turn, 6 times used in total), it was repeated Obliviations of Hermione.
Other than that, your point stands.
It was Obvliations in this case but don’t be confused by the limitations in time travel. When it comes to this kind of task, one days worth of turner use done smart and with preparation would give more information than a month of constant obliviation use, without the pesky side effects of death by starvation, dehydration or sleep deprivation.
Similar strategies would give Harry a full index of the entire Hogwarts library ranked according to a reliable indication of potential usefulness, difficulty level, and possible risk. Even with the crippled turner as he currently has it, if Harry was out to win and not tell interesting stories, he probably would have won already.
He tried that, a while back. Ontological loops just give him “DO NOT MESS WITH TIME.”
Or, if kept at a reasonable scale, fun with pies and bullies?
I’m entirely familiar with the earlier experiments with time and maintain what I said in the grandparent. See the discussion from back then if necessary. The only reasons that Harry doesn’t use his time turner carefully, for practical benefit, are narrative convenience and an irrational protagonist. Much the same as in just about any fantasy fiction.
I am overwhelmingly unimpressed with Harry as a rationalist avatar most of the time. To the extent that I’d call “Methods of Rationality” something of a misnomer. He’s reasonably clever and flamboyant but his strategic thinking is abysmal.
Wait, I can’t find this discussion and I am very interested, mind linking it?
It’s the Good Story Bias at work. Compare the very first Omake.
So, we have a guy who preaches a lot about rationality, writing a fiction of rationality, and his main character isn’t acting rationally at times… Gee, I wonder how long it’ll take for you to notice your confusion. Oh, but there isn’t one, right? He is just a Bad Writer. Right? ;)
Maybe he is a good writer and creating a story with a perfectly rational protagonist is neither optimal story-writing nor Eliezer’s expressed intent.
Please note that HP is beyond reason when his girlfriend being such is brought up. He also completely fails to realize his unreasonableness in those instaces. He is ubersmart, but not a perfect rational actor, and of course makes mistakes. That has been established.
Of course. Otherwise Eliezer would be a Bad Writer. There are circumstances where ‘heat conduction’ is the correct answer, you know.
Good/Bad writer is too crude a distinction.
At this point it’s almost funny how everyone seems to think I’m dissing Eliezer. Oh, well. Sarcasm clearly doesn’t work in writing.
:(:
What makes you think that others think you’re dissing Eliezer?
I didn’t downvote you for dissing Eliezer, I downvoted you for that rude and unproductive usage of sarcasm against fellow readers. I got your sarcasm, I just hated it.
I often don’t get it, and also hate it.
I think there is room for improvement in the writing of MoR, but it is very very very far away from bad.
Regarding the upper posting: pointing out one flaw does not make the writing bad. It would be just one flaw.
Forgive me if I’m being dense, but I don’t understand what remains of his point, given that he was wrong about how the Groundhog Day Attack worked.
Cloak & Hat kept saying “Hello, again”, when for all Hermione knew he’d not talked to her before. That’s indeed a somewhat bizarre slip for Quirrel to make. And regardless of whether he was going to tell “Time travel” or not, regardless of whether it was a lie or not, it seems a bit out-of-character for Quirrel to be catching himself mid-sentence.
Hmm, I just thought he was being, I guess, playful or something, rather than it being a slip.
Or he might just have been planning on Obliviating her again.
Doesn’t seem like Quirrel to slip even if he can’t see a way for it to hurt him. He’s too careful for that.
Quirrel wouldn’t have made any near slips. Apparently I don’t know what he was about to say, but Quirrel wouldn’t even have gotten that far.
Quirrell has slipped up before, when he tried to kill Bahry. Every rationalization Quirrell later gave for why it would have been stupid was absolutely correct, but I believe he did sincerely try to kill him. In the heat of the moment, in the depths of his hate, he decided to do what he felt like rather than what was smart.
Of course, this encounter with Hermione is not like his encounter with Bahry. But he is pretty agitated; he sounds agitated, anyway, and it fits, given that it took him a few hours to find the right lever to pull with Hermione. At any rate, he has no reason to be particularly careful with what he says to someone he’s planning to Obliviate anyway. And given all that, I think Eliezer was not acting out of character to pick that moment as a time to throw us some scraps.
Wait, but it seemed to be fairly clear that it’s time travel from the slip-ups H&C made. (Of course, you’d have to postulate a different form of time travel that allows for paradoxes, so I suppose Obliviation has a point up on that...)
The sentence “Time...” is in response to a question from Hermione about how H&C knows Harry will turn dark and destroy her, not in regards to anything having to do with the conversation itself.
Also if you reread the passage in question, you’ll see several hints that indicate a long time passed for Hermione also, even though she didn’t remember it, e.g. *”Her hand was almost slipping on her wand, there was a sense of fatigue in her fingers like she’d been holding the wand for hours instead of minutes”, and ofcourse the fact that the rush of adrenaline at the beginning of the conversations corresponds to the rush of fear at H&C decloaking at the end.