= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 16, chapter 85 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1106)
That's weird. So is the first instance supposed to be a massive flashforward (despite no one ever noticing this before because it was written as present tense), or is this second instance supposed to be a big flashback (despite being written as though it happens after Harry finishes his soliloquy)? Maybe Eliezer deliberately or accidentally just made it very similar.
No, this one is 11pm, the previous one was 2am.
Um, the accepted Outcome Pump explanation of prophecies says that only the right listener will discharge the time "pressure". (Possibly relevant.) The same prophecy could fail to erupt many times.
OT: In Ch. 25, Hold Off On Proposing Solutions, Harry considers only intelligent and evolutionary causes of optimization. I have no clue if an Outcome Pump could coherently explain all magic.
As the CS saying goes, things happen 0, 1, or indefinitely many times. Why does this Sybil failure happen only twice (as opposed to every night, the prophecy not having gone off on a vacation or anything), and why is it linked with additional characters who were not also linked to the previous incident?
I don't think we should assume that. The end of 85 reads to me like a flailing optimization process that can't 'find' a natural route to changing Harry's future and is pushing absurdly improbable routes.
I think it's safe to assume it's deliberate, although I do not think it is the same instance.