|
JosephWongKS posted:Chapter Six is really long (10,000+ words) and I only have that much free time each day. Fair enough. It's just kind of amusing given Seven's notoriety.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 03:25 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2024 07:09 |
|
No, that wouldn't be conjunction fallacy since he's not saying it's random chance AND destiny. However, he is basically saying that if there's a better explanation, then that explanation would be better, which is a meaningless tautology. Ok, when we get to the infamous part, could people please explain why specifically they have a problem? I have some guesses but I don't want to misrepresent people. And don't post now since we're supposed to be cutting down on spoilers. Added Space fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Mar 9, 2015 |
# ? Mar 9, 2015 03:39 |
|
Deptfordx posted:So i've been reading this, this weekend. Second to endorse this. If you have any knowledge of Dnd, especially 3rd editon this is a genuinally fun read. I genuinely enjoyed that. And it made me want to run a good old fashioned cliche-as-hell D&D game.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 05:24 |
|
Chapter 6: The Planning Fallacy Part Nine quote:
Much less catchy than “Yer a wizard Harry!”, I’m afraid. quote:
It seems rather out of character for strict “rationalist” Harry to read the Lord of the Rings. Why would he deign to read a novel, one that’s not even sci-fi? What could this brilliant scientific child prodigal possibly learn from it? quote:
“Sheesh, why did she always take everything so seriously” quote:
“Sinking sensations” do not “dawn”.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 06:48 |
|
Wasn't he told like, 10 pages back 'Hey, kid, lots of people lost friends and family in horrific ways to wizard nazis just recently so people aren't going to take this poo poo lightly'? And here he's surprised people are still worried about dark lords? Kid's kinda dumb.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 06:57 |
|
JosephWongKS posted:Chapter Six is really long (10,000+ words) and I only have that much free time each day. drat, that one chapter is passing by "short story" and moving into "novella" territory.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 07:24 |
|
fanfiction.net posted:Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality LotR: Words: 455,125 Atlas Shrugged: Words: 561,996 War and Peace: Words: 587,287 All seven Harry Potter books: 1,084,170 Words i81icu812 fucked around with this message at 09:42 on Mar 9, 2015 |
# ? Mar 9, 2015 09:37 |
|
Chapter 6: The Planning Fallacy Part Ten quote:
Holy over-use of italics Batman! quote:
Dumbledore did conceal a lot of vital information from Harry in the canon series. For someone who was ostensibly one of the “good” guys, he was really horrible to Harry. quote:
Notwithstanding my comments on Dumbledore above, and to be fair to this incarnation of McGonagall, at this stage she doesn’t know Harry well enough to entrust him with the various portentous secrets in her possession. It is therefore not rational of Harry to get angry with her for withholding information from him now – if he wants to get her trust, he should work to earn it. quote:
I’m not sure that it is “rational” to escalate directly to blackmail without attempting more congenial modes of diplomacy. A good long-term relationship is often worth much more than an immediate short-term advantage obtained through coercion.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 09:40 |
|
I read Harry's lapses of That or the author isn't very good at rationality
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 09:46 |
|
When i read this years ago (as far as it had come then) i had no idea who the author was, so i never got the "this is my manifesto of rationality" context. I just thought that harry was being portrayed as a 10 year old who read more books then was healthy and had no friends, and probably aspergers. He thinks he's being all über rational and whatever but really he's just a nerdy kid who read about bayers theory of probability instead of having meaningful human interaction. Honest question: If the author had been someone else without the baggage of Less Wrong, would you still think harry was being portrayed as always being right and an author insert, or just as a flawed character?petrol blue posted:That or the author isn't very good at rationality :v:
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 10:02 |
Killstick posted:Honest question: If the author had been someone else without the baggage of Less Wrong, would you still think harry was being portrayed as always being right and an author insert, or just as a flawed character? anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 12:30 |
|
anilEhilated posted:Yes. Because he's trying to pull off a ten year old kid that understands Bayes without being affected by it in other ways. The author isn't making any effort to portray him as flawed - or sufficiently advanced in his area. Child prodigies exist but this one just comes out as halfassed. Isn't he wrong about a bunch of things though, according to this thread? I don't actually know what Bayes theory is so it all goes over my head anyway, but i always figured that he had all this book-learned technical knowledge about a bunch of theories that he was more or less hopeless at applying to anything because he wasn't as smart as he thought. Hm, that does remind me of someone. I guess i can see the author insert point of view.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 13:27 |
|
Maybe I missed something: what are McGonagall's secrets that Harry is threatening not to keep? Is there something specific, or is just "If I find out your secrets, I won't be under any obligation to not blab them around"?
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 14:12 |
|
Huh, another Let's Read by JWKS, I wonder what this one is abou... I don't think I'll be doing dramatic readings this time.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 14:21 |
|
Killstick posted:Isn't he wrong about a bunch of things though, according to this thread? I don't actually know what Bayes theory is so it all goes over my head anyway, but i always figured that he had all this book-learned technical knowledge about a bunch of theories that he was more or less hopeless at applying to anything because he wasn't as smart as he thought. Hm, that does remind me of someone. I guess i can see the author insert point of view. it is a statistical equation which is hella useful for statistical things and there's sort of a cultural trend in data management to start viewing things in a more bayesian manner (as opposed to the frequentist manner, which has certain philosophical and practical differences) - essentially, whether one should try to measure phenomena directly or via its context. this is, of course, grossly oversimplifying things, but that's the essence. it is, as one might imagine, less useful for developing a philosophy to live your life by, which is the whole dogmatic rationalism thing this guy seems to get off on
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 14:57 |
Mikl posted:Maybe I missed something: what are McGonagall's secrets that Harry is threatening not to keep? Is there something specific, or is just "If I find out your secrets, I won't be under any obligation to not blab them around"? Harry does not seem to be interested in a rational approach to things - a purely rational approach to things would be to say "I'm sorry, Professor, this is all really shocking," and then chat her up in privacy in some form.
|
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 14:58 |
|
my dad posted:Huh, another Let's Read by JWKS, I wonder what this one is abou... No need! There's a full cast podcast of every chapter! http://www.hpmorpodcast.com/?page_id=56 or all 154 episodes so far are on Itunes. You're welcome!
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 17:25 |
|
...really? It doesn't seem too bad, either. Well, given the source materiahahaha, nope, just got to the horribly editied in dialogue. This is awesomebad!
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 18:03 |
|
God, this Harry... He's just got absolutely no empathy or patience. It really is like watching a spoiled child who thinks he's entitled to everything throw a tantrum. "But I'm rational and special and goddamnit give me the things I want!"
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 18:09 |
|
I agree that if you don't know about the author, it seems like Harry is intentionally written to have flaws and biases to make him a somewhat more rounded character. Of course, that's actually just the author exporting his own flaws and biases that he doesn't think are flaws are biases, but that's part of why it managed to hook in people before it got REALLY weird, I think.JosephWongKS posted:It seems rather out of character for strict “rationalist” Harry to read the Lord of the Rings. Why would he deign to read a novel, one that’s not even sci-fi? What could this brilliant scientific child prodigal possibly learn from it? I think you really mischaracterize the author's ideology a lot, which is dumb because it's got plenty of stupid bullshit to criticize and make fun of it for even before that. I think only the craziest of lesswrongers (And as crazy as Yudkowsky is, he is by no means the craziest lesswronger) would ever claim that you shouldn't ever enjoy yourself, at the very least for the sake of your mental health.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 18:37 |
|
reignonyourparade posted:I agree that if you don't know about the author, it seems like Harry is intentionally written to have flaws and biases to make him a somewhat more rounded character. Of course, that's actually just the author exporting his own flaws and biases that he doesn't think are flaws are biases, but that's part of why it managed to hook in people before it got REALLY weird, I think. And then there's the Dark Enlightenment, the surprisingly well-tolerated 'neoreactionary' Less Wrong spin-off sect who believe LOTR to be the ideal social model and masturbate themselves to sleep over the idea of massacring swarthy, evil Southrons. These nerds just cannot have a normal response to anything.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 21:19 |
|
reignonyourparade posted:I think you really mischaracterize the author's ideology a lot, which is dumb because it's got plenty of stupid bullshit to criticize and make fun of it for even before that. I think only the craziest of lesswrongers (And as crazy as Yudkowsky is, he is by no means the craziest lesswronger) would ever claim that you shouldn't ever enjoy yourself, at the very least for the sake of your mental health. Fair enough. I'll keep that in mind for the remaining chapters.
|
# ? Mar 9, 2015 23:48 |
|
Chapter 6: The Planning Fallacy Part Eleven quote:
ARGH, stop it! Just stop it, you rotten spoiled brat! quote:
But even if Harry has set up this signal to alert future him that his memories have been tampered with, how would he be able to know the identity of the tamperer in advance? quote:
Unfortunately he seems to be unaware that “has read lots of books” was not necessarily the same thing as “intelligent” or “wise”.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 02:33 |
|
i81icu812 posted:LotR: Words: 455,125 This is why I told JWKS that this was a bad idea. Even if this poo poo was good, it's long as gently caress. quote:Adults don't respect me enough to really talk to me. And frankly, even if they did, they wouldn't sound as smart as Richard Feynman, so I might as well read something Richard Feynman wrote instead. I'm isolated, Professor McGonagall. I've been isolated my whole life. Maybe that has some of the same effects as being locked in a cellar. And I'm too intelligent to look up to my parents the way that children are designed to do. gently caress you, Yudkowsky. If I ever needed proof that you are a pseudo-intellectual shitlord, this would be one of my exhibits. Richard Feynman was famous for being extremely inquisitive and conversational. He was interested in physics since childhood, be it water waves, radio signals or light switches. But he had interests everywhere else, bongo drums, the Japanese language, travel, safe-cracking. The man had an extremely inquisitive mind and loved learning about everything ever. Yeah okay he was somewhat of an rear end in a top hat, but he never considered others to be beneath him. The man was an -excellent- teacher, people had to get tickets to his lectures and that poo poo got sold out fast. He was REALLY GOOD at explaining things, and one of his greater disappointments was his inability to explain the physics of fire to his dad. Hell, one of the reasons he is famous is because of his Feynman Diagrams, which were used to explain the movement of sub-atomic particles iirc. He made quantum mechanics a lot easier to understand and much more approachable for everyone. Richard Feynman doesn't try to "sound smart". Whenever he presented knowledge, he would use conversational speech, only dipping into scientific jargon when necessary. You don't know what the gently caress you're talking about. And then, in the same loving breath, you say that "I'm isolated...locked in a cellar...too intelligent". I don't have an big enough. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Mar 10, 2015 |
# ? Mar 10, 2015 04:16 |
|
I'm really not getting how "this is a tract on the author's philosophy" and "Harry is a flawed and occasionally very dumb kid (with Mysterious Things that make him sometimes not act eleven)" are incompatible, which seems to be the working assumption here. He can talk the talk and still be poo poo at walking the walk--it's easy to know about blindspots, but that doesn't mean yours go away. This is a crazy common weakness among smart kids! Harry strikes me as kind of deliberately insufferable, and from reading later on, yeah, there's character development, so it's intentional. Right now a lot of this is just "Man, that Yud, so crazy" and "Wow, this is supposed to be a role model?" which is getting kind of repetitive. We know, man. We know. Maybe just mostly stick to what's on the page and ignore the rest of it? It's actually fairly enjoyable if you do that. The author is pretty good at absurdist humor. And I'm gonna defend that one particular freakout about her thinking Harry's parents might be abusive. I mean, it simultaneously a) establishes that Harry's occasional not-eleven moments are totally intentional, b) while also serving as a good example of him still being a stupid kid (that is one hell of a freakout), c) establishes that Harry really does love his parents (important, considering his continual irritation at how adults never take him seriously), and d) illustrates that McGonagall takes the welfare of her students very seriously. That's not bad writercraft. It'd all be better without the Teaching Moments grafted onto it, but this story is okay.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 07:50 |
|
Einander posted:I'm really not getting how "this is a tract on the author's philosophy" and "Harry is a flawed and occasionally very dumb kid (with Mysterious Things that make him sometimes not act eleven)" are incompatible, which seems to be the working assumption here. He can talk the talk and still be poo poo at walking the walk--it's easy to know about blindspots, but that doesn't mean yours go away. This is a crazy common weakness among smart kids! Harry strikes me as kind of deliberately insufferable, and from reading later on, yeah, there's character development, so it's intentional. Right now a lot of this is just "Man, that Yud, so crazy" and "Wow, this is supposed to be a role model?" which is getting kind of repetitive. We know, man. We know. Except this whole chapter just makes me loath this stupid "kid." The problem is that Harry hasn't demonstrated at this point that he is actually a person to be respected, and every time he demands that everyone recognize his genius or whatever it just drives in how little I like or respect this character. Going and threatening an adult who has been nothing but kind to him and has demonstrated that she cares about his wellbeing is the action of a sociopath; this character doesn't have a bit of charisma, or an ounce of wonder or fun that would make me tolerate what a slimy pile of poo poo he is. Also, I think you're wrong. Harry's not-eleven moments are widely divided into two types, his "cold rage" or whatever and the times where he simply fails to act like a kid or even a scientist. There is no wonder or discovery in this child getting a vista into a world that fundamentally alters what he knows about reality. A child would be amazed, and a scientist would probably be trying to get help figuring out a way to unify the two perspectives. The thing about Harry is that he is an arrogant, asocial, joyless, petty, lying, manipulative, self absorbed prick to the point I think he needs to be locked away; not all of that can be laid at the feet of a plot twist. In fact I bet that the author doesn't see most of those qualities, Harry in this scene is supposed to come across as righteous, if overzealous, and also competent. I don't see him that way, it feels like he pulled something about memory tampering that he should have had no knowledge of before today out of his rear end, and I hate how he's trying to bully someone because they don't instantly recognize he's the bestest, smartest eleven year old in history.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 10:02 |
|
See, this is why the author needs to die (speaking figuratively, I mean). There's really no point in arguing about authorial intent when the "intentionally bad" and "unintentionally bad" interpretations are perfectly valid within their own contexts.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 12:11 |
|
akulanization posted:Except this whole chapter just makes me loath this stupid "kid." The problem is that Harry hasn't demonstrated at this point that he is actually a person to be respected, and every time he demands that everyone recognize his genius or whatever it just drives in how little I like or respect this character. Going and threatening an adult who has been nothing but kind to him and has demonstrated that she cares about his wellbeing is the action of a sociopath; this character doesn't have a bit of charisma, or an ounce of wonder or fun that would make me tolerate what a slimy pile of poo poo he is. If this is you first exposure to less wrong, the story could just as well be interpreted as a dead-pan parody. At least at the current progress of this reading.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 13:29 |
|
To be exactingly fair: this Harry is closer to a real Rationalist than Rowling's Harry is to someone kept in a cupboard under the stairs:Me? No, I love monkeys, why do you ask? posted:Harlow et al. reported that partial isolation resulted in various abnormalities such as blank staring, stereotyped repetitive circling in their cages, and self-mutilation. These monkeys were then observed in various settings. Yud doesn't accept your argument that Rowling was writing a kids' adventure story and not a torture/horror story.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 13:57 |
|
I found a tumblr that did a chapter-by-chapter review. Looking over the whole story with a broader lens I had to admit I was repressing certain factors in thinking this was a good story. The story has some good pieces to it, but I'm back on the hate train. This story is crap and and our hero is an insufferable douchebag.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 15:12 |
|
Added Space posted:This story is crap and and our hero is an insufferable douchebag.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 20:41 |
petrol blue posted:To be exactingly fair: this Harry is closer to a real Rationalist than Rowling's Harry is to someone kept in a cupboard under the stairs: The negativity of his home environment came from his foster family being boorish and overbearing, not literally starving him or confining him in a cage like a lab monkey.
|
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 20:49 |
|
Eliezer Yudkowsky posted:I would like any readers who think that HPMOR deserves it sufficiently, and who are attending or supporting the 2015, 2016, or 2017 Worldcon, to next year, nominate Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality for Best Novel in the 2016 Hugos. Whether you then actually vote for HPMOR as Best Novel is something I won’t request outright, since I don’t know what other novels will be competing in 2016. After all the nominees are announced, look over what’s there and vote for what you think is best.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 21:26 |
|
Ahahahahahahaha! I'd love to see what a normal editor would do to his insane shitpile, let alone the copyright clusterfuck.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 21:34 |
|
Night10194 posted:Ahahahahahahaha! I'd love to see what a normal editor would do to his insane shitpile, let alone the copyright clusterfuck. The more entertaining thing is that the epilogue so far is super unsatisfying and Yud is getting defensive. "If you can't handle short chapters wait until Sunday" because of a bunch of oddly irate reviews.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 21:54 |
|
Nessus posted:To be fair I don't believe Harry was literally being confined in that space full time, but rather it was his room, and inadequate as such. "Not having your own bedroom," which probably not good for a small child, is hardly necessarily going to produce psycho monkey syndrome. They did actually starve him, though. There's a reason he's described as looking thin and malnourished while Dudley is a big fat tub of lard.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 22:01 |
|
. . . there are no words for this. None really.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 22:03 |
|
Again, having not been exposed to LW, the second paragraph seems pretty decent to me: "I did a big thing that a ton of nerds love, lets see if we can raise some charity cash with it" is a statement I find hard to mock. It's like Yud has the same sudden shifts Harry does, lurching from 'rationalist' joyless ubermensch to kinda-decent-dork. Funny that.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 22:25 |
|
I wouldn't be surprised if "charity" meant "my Singularity Institute".
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 22:32 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2024 07:09 |
|
petrol blue posted:Again, having not been exposed to LW, the second paragraph seems pretty decent to me: "I did a big thing that a ton of nerds love, lets see if we can raise some charity cash with it" is a statement I find hard to mock. I think it's more of a case of him trying to have a comeback once the idea is dismissed. "JK hates charities, and is a horrible person, because she wouldn't agree to let me publish my rip-off of her work." If he's serious, just do the loving 50 Shades thing, and change the names and publish it that way.
|
# ? Mar 10, 2015 22:38 |