If the universe was non differentiable and non continuous I would consider that to be evidence for simulation. And in fact I’ve heard that argument. Everything is discreet like it’s all bits at the bottom is evedence its run on bits and so a simulation. But continuity and discreetness can’t both be evedence for the same thing.
William_Quixote
Karma: 1,867
I will note that you can’t improve the past and have limited ability to improve other countries. So criticism of those won’t lead to anything useful. Critical views of where you are right now can lead to effective action. So I don’t know if the pattern being criticized is a bad pattern
I down vote posts I think are bad for the sites reputation / public image. I think people who like controversy or trolling privately benefit from such posts and externalize reputation all harms onto the site overall. I also think people in general benefit from a forum with good members and don’t factor in long term reputational effects. I use karma to help people internalize these better.
I like this post a lot. It’s very clear and seems to be pointing to something. So did the first post. By contrast the second post felt more handwavey to me. That’s some indication that you may be missing a step in your chain of reasoning. You may want to mentally walk through the second post “showing your work” in more detail as a double check in case you missed something.
These sound like great tools. Thanks for making them available.
On a meta level I don’t mind if members of the community promote their own work here if it’s something that other community members will find useful. I’ll also note that these seem lik tricky enouph things that they could also have been mentioned in the bragging thread when you finished them.
I think this post jumps the gun. We don’t have a really meaningful concept of happened outside of experience or consciousness. At present I think we have very little clue about how those work, how they arise, and what they even precisely are. The later question of happiness doesn’t really make sense until we have the first one.
It may just be a coincidence, but I notice this was published at the end of March. Historically there have been a lot of spurious results published on or immediately before April first.
Some paleo diets and blogs claim that people should avoid plants from the nightshade family (tomatoes, eggplants etc). Some inflammation and auto immune blogs claim the same thing. Does anyone know if these claims have a scientific basis and, if so, what mechanism is purportedly driving the effect?
I figure there has been enough interest on paleo here, that before I invest hours into digging through Google scholar it makes more sense to ask if anyone already knows the answer. Thanks in advance
I think this is a good post and I upvoted it. That said, I do want to present an alternative view. Rather than aiming to boost life expectancy by increasing your odds of survival given a life threatening situation, aim to reduce your odds of being in a dangerous situation in the first place. In the amount of time it would take you to arrange one round of paintball you could probably check detailed crimes stats for several neighborhoods including things like time of day.
I think Snape has a big part in HPMOR. At least he consumes a lot of narrative space. He essentially drives the whole hermione and the hero club arc, since if he didn’t help them it would have been over fast. He does a lot to help Harry mature.
Yeah, that’s Harrys MO. By this point it’s almost a running gag (or it would be if it were less sad). In the first bunch of chapters Harrys lectures are really funny for just how out of place they are if you actualy imagine them coming from an 11 year old. In fact they are out of place if you imagine them coming from any real person at all, rather than from a character in a book. In the early chapters this is played for laughs and then even called out when Hermione notices that people in books speak like books.
Here though the exact same behavior goes from funny to sad. Stakes are too high.
This is a different, McG mentions the existince of a reversible memory charm to seal away but not lose memories to Hermione after she gets back from her trial. Which I now realize was foreshadowing this.
The question Harry asks Draco and Draco’s final non answer seem like a reference to the book The Sunflower by Simon Weisenthal.
Simon was in a concentration camp and called to the bed of a dying SS officer who asked for forgiveness. He felt pulled to both forgiveness and to the justness of telling the nazi that what he had done was unforgivable. In the end he said nothing.
The book has Weisenthal discussing the dilemma and then 53 other people of note commenting on what they would have done ranging from the Dali Lama to Desmond Tutu.
As further evidence that the vow blocks killing all the people consider this.
The vow blocks Harry from telling muggels about magic and starting mass healing. At the time it blocks him the ideas he thought of were transfiguring nuclear weapons and plagues that could replicate before the transfiguration wore off. Neither of those poses any danger to “the world” but they pose great danger to the worlds people. Harry doesn’t think of up quarks until after he has already been blocked. So the vow seems to be interpreted as killing everyone being the end of the world. Which is quite possibly how Harry understood it.
She knows it killed all the death eaters and that it doesn’t even register as magic on their wards. That’s somethjng she couldn’t do. And it’s thh kind of dangerous weapon she might think should be a secret to everyone.
Based on that timing the stone was Gilgamesh’s pearl
I think there is evidence that “magic” has natural language processing and is capable of taking context and intent into account. I don’t know that Harry wouldn’t be unable to interpret distorting the world as killing everyone. Particularly dice the person he gave the vow to was particularly concerned about and motivated by the death of people (or at least of one specific person).
Unlike Harry, the death eaters have lots of wandless options. Not just one.
I begin to wonder if we (the community) really found the best plan or if we are reading a sadder ending. Maybe there was a plan that saved everyone.
People should base self eating on accomplishment not rationality. It is very easy to be wrong about internal mental states, it’s much harder to be wrong about real world observables.