I do not recall Harry or Hermione requiring adult input to enter their contract except for McGonagall advising them on the form and possibility of such contract. Granted, it was overseen by the Wizengamot and their legal guardian, but if they could not have done it legally by themselves, we should have seen Dumbledore’s explicit approval instead of just lack of overruling it.
hirvinen
Karma: 166
[Question] How to reset my password?
A: ”. [] Do you understand?” B: “I understand.”
I claim that in normal human communication that type of exchange is viewed as B accepting what A says, unless B somehow signals explicit disagreement. Then, if B knows this, and assumes that A thinks likes this, and only explicitly affirms understanding while withholding knowledge of their disagreement, B is at the very least deceiving A.
Of course Moody should know to be more paranoid in what he forbids Harry from doing. Especially with him having witnessed Harry showing cunning and paranoia on a level he finds promising.
Do we have evidence that his Eye sees through things like that? It sees in all directions and through hiding-magic but does it see e.g. through walls?
From what we have seen so far, it would rather appear that Harry’s signature is just as valid as if he had been an adult. He can be overruled by Dumbledore but it is not required that Dumbledore signs the papers for him.
“Do not sign anything that Lucius Malfoy gives you,” Mad-Eye Moody said. “Nothing, do you understand me, lad? If Malfoy hands you a copy of The Wonderful Adventures of the Boy-Who-Lived and asks you for an autograph, tell him that you’ve sprained a finger. Don’t pick up a quill for a single second while you’re in Gringotts. If someone hands you a quill, break the quill and then break your own fingers. Do I need to explain further, son?”
“Not particularly,” Harry said. “We also have lawyers in Muggle Britain, and they’d think your lawyers are cute.”
That’s close enough to a promise. Besides, Dumbledore could have made him promise more explicitly off-screen and this is just Moody doing the same independently or reiterating it.
We do have RSS.
I think a language/country subreddit or language-tagged threads might better solve the objective of a country/language specific mailing list.
Blaming the Pioneer Plaque for the progressive degredation sounds like it makes sense at first, but the point of the Pioneer Plaque thing is that this Voldemort is supposed to be smarter than canon Voldemort, and a Pioneer Plaque horcrux superior. That theory makes the Pioneer Plaque horcrux inferior.
Smart people still overlook things. A lightspeed delay problem in horcrux syncing would not have come up ever before, so it could have been easily overlooked even by a very smart person, especially one that is not scientifically oriented. If he had been more scientifically oriented and been otherwise interested in Muggle space programs, this possibility might have occured to him and he could have tested it with the moon missions, if he had come up with a way to detect anticipated problems.
The spell hides current environment, except for a floor/ground “disk.” It could be oriented so that the sun is down and thus out of sight.
Isn’t AK supposed to destroy the soul?
I hate mailing lists. Are there many people on it that are not on e.g. fb? Language subreddits or [lang] tagged threads here if wanted?
From “So you do really care” and his well-established view that most people are painfully stupid, he should deduce also the latter, as it is more unlikely that Harry is both exceptionally rational and exceptionally caring unless he has a reason to believe that the former causes or at least strongly correlates with the latter.
Then again, someone who has a low opinion of others’ intelligence should already believe that others are not rational enough to seek resurrection, even if they cared to want it.
I think a simulation (Y) is a process of mimicking something else (X). In which case we should not observe in Y something (Z) that couldn’t happen in X.
So maybe we should rather say that Y is a game with otherwise X-like rules, but additional rules that allow Z, rather than calling it simulation. Or at least I think if “simulation” Y is not an accurate simulation of X, we should use some explicit qualifier to indicate its non-accuracy.
1,920 hours of SI staff time (80 hrs/week for 24 months). This comes out to about $48,000, depending on who is putting in these hours.
$384,000 paid to remote researchers and writers ($16,000/mo for 24 months; our remote researchers generally work part-time, and are relatively inexpensive).
$30,000 for wiki design, development, hosting costs
Dealing with spam shouldn’t be counted under “design, development and hosting”.
The first item establishes SIAI staff time cost at 25 $ / h. If the (virtual) server itself, bandwidth and technical expert maintenance is 500 $ / month, that still leaves 720 hours of SIAI staff-priced work in the “design, development and hosting” budget.
If we roughly quadruple your time estimate to 3 hours per week to combat spam, then that still leaves 720 hours − 2 years 52 weeks 3 hours/week = 408 hours, which still seems excessive for “design, development and hosting” considering that we have a lot of nice relatively easily customisable wiki software available for free.
The random is not in the dice, it is in the throw, and that procedure is never identical. Also, XdY is a distribution, always the same, and the dice are just a relatively fair way of picking a sample.
The price tag of the wiki itself sounds too high: If 1920 hours of SI staff costs USD 48000, that’s USD 25/h. If hosting and maintenance is 500 / month(should be much less), over 24 months that would leave USD 18k to design and development, and at SI staff rates that would be 720 hours of work, which sounds waaay too much for setting up a relatively simple(?) wiki site
There are several relatively mature wiki engines beside mediawiki, with different markup languages etc. The low barrier of entry for wikis, even with less familiar markup languages is a very important consideration.
With good collaboration tools, for many kinds of tasks testing the commitment of volunteers by putting them to work should be rather cheap to test, especially if they can be given less time-critical tasks, or tasks where they help speed up someone else’s work.
Serious thought should go into looking for ways unpaid volunteers could help, since there’s loads of bright people with more time and enthusiasm than money, and for whom it is much easier to put in a few hours a week than to donate equivalent money towards paid contributors’ work
They wanted to be able to testify under veritaserum that they had not been profiting.