Wait? is ‘LessWrong’ not an admin account? I always assumed it was, but this thread implies otherwise.
I think it’s an extremely bad idea to allow an ordinary user to name themselves after the site. You’re basically inpersonating an admin!
Wait? is ‘LessWrong’ not an admin account? I always assumed it was, but this thread implies otherwise.
I think it’s an extremely bad idea to allow an ordinary user to name themselves after the site. You’re basically inpersonating an admin!
Honestly I think even the wand thing is way overblown.
In story, there was only a few minute or so between the making of the unbreakable vow (which did require Harry to have his wand) and Harry using it to kill the Death Eaters. Voldemort makes the “You have 1 minute to tell me your secrets or you die” offer immediately after the vow, after all.
Voldemort could have reasoned that he wanted to kill Harry as quickly as possible. Forcing him to drop his wand would have taken time. It also would have shown weakness in front of the Death Eaters. And Voldemort probably couldn’t imagine anything Harry could have done. He’s way too young for any really dangerous magic, despite his skill. Voldemort doesn’t know about nano-wires and all that stuff. It’s probably unimaginable for him that so little magic could have such a big effect.
Let’s not forget that forcing Harry to drop his wand first is not a proposition without any risk either. Voldemort wanted secrets Harry had. If he had demanded that Harry drop his wand, and Harry had refused, he would have been forced to kill him without learning any of his secrets. It’s very likely that Voldemort considered this a significant risk.
And let’s not forget that Voldemort is far from perfect. People keep saying “He always plays at one lever higher”. But the source of that statement was Voldemort himself! He’s obviously quite full of himself, but he’s definitely not without flaws. He makes quite a lot of mistakes throughout the story. He nearly died in Azkaban due to his own stupidity (casting a kill curse at an innocent in full view of a vital ally whom you know is absolutely against that in every way).
Excellent chapter! The last few were a bit short, but this one more than made up for it!
I really hadn’t seen the twist with Dumbledore coming. I am really, really, really glad that Dumbledore turns out to be sane after all. I really liked Eliezer’s take on Dumbledore. I was convinced he was much saner than most people believed, but I couldn’t figure out what game he was playing either.
The reference to Harry’s pet rock was brilliant. This story clearly has been planned out long in advance.
One bit of information that I haven’t seen anyone bring up before, is about the original prophecy (the Harry vs. Voldemort one).
Voldemort claims it is already fulfilled. But in an earlier chapter Snape claims that as the one for whom the original prophecy was meant, he will know when it is fulfilled, and it hasn’t yet. So assuming Snape isn’t either lying or mistaken (and Dumbledore is also present, bringing down the chance of Snape being mistaken), then that particular prophecy is still in effect.
Snape makes another very important claim in that passage. He claims that the ‘Power the dark lord knows not’ is not just a power that the Dark Lord doesn’t know, but one he can’t know. He explicitly rules out Harry’s knowledge of muggle science as this power.
As far as I can tell, this pretty much leaves 3 candidates for “Power the dark lord knows not”
Love, as per canon. Unlikely since it hasn’t been brought up, and unlike in canon probably doesn’t have any special powers.
Partial transfiguration. Not sure thought if this is a power that the dark lord can’t learn. Presumable if he studied muggle science enough, he’d be able to learn it
The patronus 2.0 & dementor scaring ability. This is absolutely a power Voldemort will never be able to learn, and thus in my book the best candidate. Assuming of course Snape isn’t full of shit.
I don’t see any immediate way to translate this bit of information into an action to escape Harry’s predicament. But hopefully others can do something with this. It’s probably relevant, and nobody seems to be talking about it. Especially since the prophecy implies that ‘the power the dark lord knows not’ is key to defeating him.
Looking back, I think I could have written that more clearly.
People were complaining about the mirror, and the Riddle-curse, being deus ex machina. I’m saying they weren’t, because they weren’t moving the plot forward. Take them out and the overall plot remains the same. That doesn’t mean those scenes served no purpose in the story.
The Riddle-curse scene in particular I thought was very good. When I was reading chapter 111, when Harry got his wand back, I got all excited. I kept thinking perhaps Harry had a chance after all. I did of course wonder why Voldemort let him keep his wand, and figured there might be a deeper reason, but seeing Harry with a wand still makes you hope. And then suddenly Harry is given an opening … and it turns out to have been all Voldemort’s plan all along, and Harry is even more thoroughly beaten then he already was before.
That serves an important function in the story. It drives home how bad Harry’s situation is. It drives home that there will be no easy outs, that Voldemort really is very, very smart, and isn’t going to make any easily exploitable errors. Basically, the scene is setting the background, and building up suspense, for the final confrontation.
It’s perfectly fine for a scene like that to have no foreshadowing. It doesn’t need foreshadowing. Nobody sane will think: “Harry totally would have won without that plot twist!”.
I’d also like to point out that unexpected things were kind of expected to happen. We already knew Voldemort was playing a vastly more complex game than just “I want to grab power” or “I want to kill Harry”. And we also already knew that there were unknown traps guardian the stone.
I think that’s somewhat missing the point of a lot of advice like that though. Often advice in the form of proverbs or popular quotes is not meant to be taken literally. It’s meant to offer you a new angle from which to look at the problem.
Just because two quotes contradict each other, doesn’t mean they can’t both be good advice. If you think someone is being too rash, quoting a proverb like “discretion is the better part of valour” can be good advice. But if you think they are being too cautious, the opposite (“nothing ventured, nothing gained”) can also be good advice.
Most advice is context dependent.
The article is unclear in its terms. At the top is says “92 percent of the Universe’s habitable planets have yet to be born” and at the bottom it says “Earth is in the first 8 percent”. Those two statements can only both be true if no habitable planets were formed between the formation of the earth and now (which is, of course, not the case). If the former is correct, earth might be significantly higher than top 8%.
I still don’t see how this escapees the Fermi paradox though. Even if we’re top 1%, that still means there must be great, great many potential alien civilizations out there. A factor 100 isn’t going to significantly affect that conclusion.
Straight out of the box, the new machine plays at the same level as the best conventional chess engines, many of which have been fine-tuned over many years. On a human level, it is equivalent to FIDE International Master status, placing it within the top 2.2 percent of tournament chess players. But even with this disadvantage, it is competitive. “Giraffe is able to play at the level of an FIDE International Master on a modern mainstream PC,” says Lai. By comparison, the top engines play at super-Grandmaster level.
That’s a pretty hard contradiction right there. The latter quote is probably the correct one. Modern chess engines beat any human player these days, even running on relatively modest hardware. That’s assuming full length games. At blitz games computers are much better still, compared to humans, because humans are much more error prone.
So if this neural net is playing at master level it’s still much, much weaker than the best computers. From master to grandmaster is a big leap, from grandmaster to world top is another big leap, and the best computers are above even that.
Still interesting of course.
O wow.
I’ve been following Lesswrong for months now, and only because of this post did I found out that there’s more posts hidden under ‘main’ than just the promoted ones. So Thanks Elo!
I now wonder if there are any other hidden site features I don’t know about.
I have to say this is not very good design. Why would you hide posts in such a non-obvious way. It’s also rather inconsistent. The discussion page opens an overview page of newest posts, while the main page shows only a subset of newest posts, and shows the full content instead of an overview. There is apparently a way to get both main and discussion on a single page (see the links Vaniver and ike posted), but then for some reason the overview page is formatted completely differently.
That was absolutely awesome. This story is really very well written. So much exposition, and it just all made perfect sense. And it was even somehow brought back far more in line with the original novel than I thought possible.
And I guess the ’”Power the dark lord knows not” really is love, which is kinda awesome.
It’s still kind of obvious how to defeat Voldemort though. Simply permanently disable him without killing him. Some magical prison, or a coma, or a permanent transfiguration into a stone. This is in fact so obvious that Voldemort himself should realize it as well. Maybe he just figures he is so far above Harry’s power level that he has nothing to fear. Or he has some defenses against even this.
Another way to get rid of him: Destroy all his horcruxes on earth, then kill him. He’ll live on on pioneer, but that’s fine. You can pick him up again in 10000 years when humanity has progressed far beyond him, and can probably even cure him. Heck that’d even be a nice ending. A epilogue set 10,000 years from now, with Harry recovering the Pioneer 11 and curing Voldemort.
The sequel could then be a Harry / Voldemort slashfic where Harry and a redeemed Voldemort rule the galaxy as father and son.
I’d say the most important objection to cryonics is the one you raise last, and only spend 1 line on. As a result your entire list seems rather weak. Because it’s not just that cryonics has a low chance of working. If cryonics was free I’d sign up tomorrow, low chance be damned. But it isn’t free, it is in fact very expensive.
So let’s rephrase your question 12: You have a rare fatal disease. There is a complicated medical procedure that can cure you. The good news is that it is painless and has no side effects. The bad news is that it costs $200,000 and has only a 5% chance of working.
I’d expect many people would still say yes, but also many people would say no.
And a 5% chance of cryonics working seems hopelessly optimistic to me. So let’s make that a 0.0000001% chance of working. Suddenly it seems like a pretty lousy deal. Do you think any rational person would still say yes?
For me, one of the strongest arguments against the simulation hypothesis is one I haven’t seen other make yet. I’m curious what people here think of it.
My problem with the idea of us living in a simulation is that it would be breathtakingly cruel. If we live in a simulation, that means that all the suffering in the world is there on purpose. Our descendants in the far future are purposefully subjecting conscious entities to the worst forms of torture, for their own entertainment. I can’t imagine an advanced humanity that would allow something so blatantly immoral.
Of course, this problem largely goes away if you posit that the simulation contains only a small number of conscious entities (possibly 1), and that all other humans just exist as background NPCs, whose conciousness is faked. Presumably all the really bad stuff would only happen to NPCs. That would also significantly reduce the computational power required for a simulation. If I’m the only real person in the world, only things I’m looking at directly would have to be simulated in any sort of detail. Entire continents could be largely fictional.
That explanation is a bit too solipsistic for my taste though. It also raises the question of why I’m not a billionaire playboy. If the entire world is just an advanced computer game in which I’m the player, why is my life so ordinary?
When I was a little kid we used to make blackberry jam. You can just pick wild blackberries in some places, which is quite a lot of work, but hey, you’re out in nature, it’s fun, and it’s free. Looking back I think it was mostly my parents picking berries while my sisters and I were running around and playing in the forest and eating half the berries our parents picked.
The recipe for making jam is indeed just berries, water and sugar. We used a large pot though, not a frying pan. Just cook and steer until it’s done. Pour the jam into a jar while it’s still hot, and screw the lit on. As the jam cools it’ll create a slight underpressure in the jar, helping preserve the jam and tightening the lit even further.
Sealed properly it can stay good for a long time. One year we kind of overdid things (my sisters and I were a bit older, and actually starting helping instead of ‘helping’) and ended up with over 300 jars of blackberry jam. They were still good 10 years later.
Self-made jam tastes much better than store-bought jam. Whether that is because it actually tastes better, or because your brain just thinks it tastes better because you made it yourself, I don’t know. But it doesn’t matter, the end result is the same.
Well done Eliezer!
I have read lots and lots of ‘partial transfiguration’ solutions over the past few days. I didn’t really like them, they seemed artificial, unrealistic.
But somehow when you told the solution, it didn’t feel artificial at all. It felt like it made sense. And I really liked the way Harry stalled for time as well. A few very nice tricks there.
I’m not sure why Harry went through all the trouble of covering up his involvement though. Is there a reason he doesn’t want to to take the credit? Is he afraid it will give away the secret of partial transfiguration? Or perhaps he doesn’t want Draco to know he, presumably, killed Lucius? I guess we’ll find out tomorrow ;)
I know this is a very old story, but I have some thoughts on it I wanted to share.
Let me first share an experience that I think everybody who has ever seriously studied math (or any complicated subject) has had. You’re working on a difficult math problem, say a complicated differential equation. You are certain your method is correct, but still your answer is wrong. You’ve checked your work, you’ve double checked it, you’ve checked it again. Your calculation seems flawless.. Finally, in desperation, you ask a friend for help. Your friend takes one glance at your work, smiles, and says: “Four times five does not equal twelve”… Oh. Yeah. Right. Good point.
We all make mistakes. Even very skilled people sometimes make elementary mistakes. Brennan in the story is doing a calculation that is very trivial for him, but it is still possible. Even if he can’t see a flaw, can’t even imagine a flaw, that doesn’t mean the odds are zero.
Yes, they are certainly very small. Brennan is saying “The odds of me making a mistake are very small, so I am confident I am correct”. But this is the Bayesian Conspiracy, not the Frequentist Conspiracy. Brennan should be asking: “Given that someone has clearly made a mistake, what are the odds of me having made it, instead of every other person in the Conspiracy. The answer is obvious.
Thus, Brennan fails as a Bayesian, and should not be accepted into the Conspiracy.
And I am not merely making a pedantic point here. This is a very important point for the real world as well. Yes, standing up to peer pressure is important, but only when it is rational. Global warning deniers also think they are standing up to peer pressure. Creationists also think they are standing up to peer pressure. And often for the exact same reason that Brennan is doing so, in this story. They thought about the issue themselves, they may even know a thing or two about it, and they really can not see any flaw in their logic, so they stick with it, convinced the odds of them having made a mistake are very small, forgetting about the huge prior.
This is actually my first post on this site. I have read quite a bit, but not everything, so I hope I am not inadvertently saying something that has been discussed before. I couldn’t find anything, and I think it’s an important point.
The problem with Quantum Immortality is that it is a pretty horrible scenario. That’s not an argument against it being true of course, but it’s an argument for hoping it’s not true.
Let’s assume QI is true. If I walk under a bus tomorrow, I won’t experience universes where I die, so I’ll only experience miraculously surviving the accident. That sounds good.
But here’s where the nightmare starts. Dying is not a binary process. There’ll be many more universes where I survive with serious injuries then universes where I survive without injury. Eventually I’ll grow old. There’ll be some universes where by random quantum fluctuations that miraculously never happens, but in the overwhelming majority of them I’ll grow old and weak. And then I won’t die. In fact I wouldn’t even be able to die if I wanted to. I could decide to commit suicide, but I’ll only ever experience those universes where for some reason I chose not to go through with it (or something prevented me from going through with it).
It’s the ultimate horror scenario. Forced immortality, but without youth or health.
If QI is true having kids would be the ultimate crime. If QI is true the only ethical course of action would be to pour all humanity’s resources into developing an ASI and program it to sterilize the universe. That won’t end the nightmare, there’ll always be universes where we fail to build such an ASI, but at least it will reduce the measure of suffering.
Downvoted. I personally agree that username2′s idea is naive, but it seems sincerely held, and making fun of it instead of explaining its problems is dickish.
Slightly unrelated to the point made above, but there is one particular weird argument that always seems to come up (at least in my circle of friends and acquaintances) when talking about immortality.
I tell someone plan to live forever, and the response is “Not me! That must be terrible! Imagine being forced to watch as everybody you know dies. And what if humanity dies out? You’ll be sitting on a barren world for all eternity. Imagine how bored you will get.”
I call this the ‘cursed with immortality’ argument. It is of course utterly ridiculous, but it’s surprisingly common. My guess is that people place the idea of ‘immortality’ firmly in the realm of fairy tales, and in fairy tales the immortal being desperately trying to die is of course a common theme.
People who use this argument aren’t stupid. They of course realize that an immortality curse is the stuff of fairy tales, and has nothing to do with science. But that’s the point, they don’t consider the question to be part of the realm of science.
And so if you ask people about immortality, make sure they take the question seriously first, and consider it in the right context, before assigning any value to their answer.
Honestly the easiest explanation is just that Aumann is a very muddled thinker when it comes to religion. That’s hardly a surprising explanation—muddled thinking is extremely common when it comes to religion. And it doesn’t mean that such a person can’t otherwise be very rational. I know I’m being blunt here, but I see no reason to look beyond superficial appearances here. Just because a statement is religious doesn’t mean it’s deep.
All this stuff about non overlapping magisteria is honestly just confused nonsense. There’s only one truth. Sure you can approach that truth from different directions, but not if those directions directly contradict each other. Spending a great many pages talking about this just obscures that obvious fact.
And it’s all good and beautiful to say that “Religion is very different from science. The main part of religion is not about the way that we model the real world”. But I’ve never met a religious person who said that and then didn’t immediately turn around and started applying their religion to the real world. Aumann also does that. In fact in this very interview he literally says that copying software is wrong because his religion says so. So he clearly is modelling the real world based on his religion.
I disagree that the writing has deteriorated.
People complain a lot about the lack of foreshadowing of the mirror and the “Riddle can’t kill Riddle” curse. But I don’t think the lack of foreshadowing matters, because both of these things are minor details in the overall story line. Let’s start with the “Riddle can’t kill Riddle” curse. Voldemort wasn’t just not killing Harry because of this curse. After all now that the curse is lifted he still isn’t killing Harry. The curse is entirely unneeded to explain his earlier before, or his current behavior. Nor was the curse needed to resolve the current plot. Voldemort was in complete control of the situation all along.
So there’s no deus ex machina. It’s a sudden unexpected development, yes, but one that doesn’t really affect the story. It’s purpose was to drive home how utterly defeated Harry is. How he is now completely at the mercy of Voldemort, having no clever tricks or last minute saves. Also it gave us a nice cliffhanger. But you can take out the final lines from 111 and the first few lines from 112 and the story continues exactly as it does now.
The same with the mirror scene were Dumbledore gets defeated. Take it out, have Dumbledore never show up,and the story still continues exactly the same as it does now. Dumbledore is a side character. He needed to be got rid of, so neither Harry nor the reader would expect or hope for Dumbledore to show up at the last minute and save the day, but ultimate he’s not important to the story. And Voldie getting rid of Dumbledore with relativele ease is entirely expected anyway. He is established as being much stronger.
Anyway, bottomline: I really like the story so far. Elizier is doing a terrific job of driving home just how utterly screwed Harry is. How completely outplayed and outgunned he is.
I’m really looking forward to the resolution. I have no idea what it is going to be, but I fully expect it to be glorious. I do know it won’t be Harry casting “Problemsolvius” or someone showing up casting “Savethedayius”. I know this because Elizier went to great length to crush that expectation at every possible avenue.
Of course, my disappointment if I am mistaken and the final solution does some completely unexpected deus ex machina, shall be big indeed.
And for the record: My prediction is still that Voldemort shall not be dead by the end of the story. I give that 80%. Up to a few chapters ago my theory was that Voldemort wanted to team up with Harry to permanently get rid of death, but that seems increasingly less likely.