ChrisHallquist comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 - Less Wrong

8 Post author: elharo 08 July 2013 12:04PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (343)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 08 July 2013 04:07:05PM 4 points [-]

High confidence prediction, based on the feminism rant. Rot13 because, while Eliezer has not retracted it, he recommended people not read it:

Va uvf enag ba UCZBE naq srzvavfz, Ryvrmre fnvq Urezvbar jbhyq pbzr onpx nf na nyvpbea cevaprff. Gurer jnf fbzr qvfphffvba bs jurgure ur jnf wbxvat va gur ynfg guernq. Gur snpg gung gur zbfg erprag nhgube'f abgr qvq abg rkcynva gung ur jnf wbxvat gb zr engure fgebatyl pbasvezf gung ur jnfa'g.

Comment author: EternalStargazer 14 July 2013 06:24:11AM 2 points [-]

Near certain prediction:

Va gur snasvpgvba "Sevraqfuvc vf Bcgvzny", juvpu unf orra erpbzzraqrq va Nhgube Abgrf vzcylvat RL unf va snpg ernq vg, nyvpbea cevaprffrf ner gur va-jbeyq ningnef bs genafuhzna fhcrevagryyyvtraprf juvpu nvq gur Negvyrpg NV jub pbagebyf gur havirefr. Xabjvat guvf, cynpvat Uneel va PryrfgNV'f cbfvgvba, Urezvbar jvyy or oebhtug onpx gb freir n fvzvyne ebyr, hfvat uvf gura genafuhzna novyvgl.

My mental model of EY would make exactly this kind of offhand reference. It is the answer to the riddle about the ring you saw once several years ago.

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 14 July 2013 10:44:10PM -1 points [-]

This is relevant information, but I don't think it seems to fit with the joke hypothesis quite well too.

Comment author: Benquo 08 July 2013 04:47:30PM *  4 points [-]

Makes sense. With slightly less confidence, I predict that:

"nyvpbea cevaprff" -> cevaprff sebz Yhzvabfvgl, Nyvpbea'f Gjvyvtug engvbanyvfg sna svpgvba -> n inzcver.

I think both your prediction and mine were made in the previous discussion thread as well. (Mine was made by someone else.)

Comment author: Velorien 08 July 2013 09:26:51PM 7 points [-]

I was actually joking about the Alicorn -> vampire thing, and will be somewhat distraught if I turn out to be right.

Comment author: Benquo 08 July 2013 09:30:05PM 2 points [-]

It seems like there's a good reason for that to happen, while there doesn't seem to be an obvious in-story reason for her to come back as a unicorn's horn. (Or as a winged unicorn.)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 09 July 2013 05:29:00AM -1 points [-]

Well, Harry might transfigure her body into a unicorn's horn at some point.

Comment author: bogdanb 11 July 2013 06:48:29PM 0 points [-]

He might also partially transfigure her body (say, the contents of her stomach) to unicorn blood. I don’t think that would work as well as one might think, since transfigured things are detected and treated differently by magic (e.g., goblins detecting transfigured gold), so I doubt the transfigured blood would work for raising the dead. (In magic logic, the ritual probably uses the blood as a symbol for a sacrificed unicorn or something.)

Interestingly, the fact that transfiguration is not permanent is not that bad. If transfigured unicorn blood worked for the duration of the transfiguration, it could still help. (For example, the temporarily revived person could create a horcrux, or get a precise and accurate brain scan for uploading, which might be the same thing in-story.)

Comment author: DanielLC 09 July 2013 12:07:09AM 0 points [-]

Perhaps she'll be the princess from Goldmage (also by Alicorn).

Comment author: Tenoke 09 July 2013 08:15:22AM *  2 points [-]

Thankfully, EY confirmed on facebook that this is a stupid theory, except that he used a nicer wording.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 July 2013 08:45:20AM 7 points [-]

Thankfully, EY confirmed on facebook that this is a stupid theory, except that he used a nicer wording.

If for a value of 'nicer' for which "very clever" means "stupid".

Comment author: Tenoke 09 July 2013 10:33:27PM 0 points [-]

You don't think that saying 'very clever' is nicer than saying 'stupid'?

Comment author: linkhyrule5 10 July 2013 02:01:48AM 3 points [-]

I think it has completely opposing informational content.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 July 2013 05:40:34AM *  1 point [-]

You don't think that saying 'very clever' is nicer than saying 'stupid'?

Yes. One could reach 'very clever' from 'stupid' either by adding a large amount of niceness or multiplying by a negative. Or, if 'very clever' is supposed to convey the meaning 'stupid' then one actually has to subtract niceness and add sarcasm or condescension.

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 09 July 2013 07:15:34PM -1 points [-]

Oh, seeing Eliezer's Facebook page, I see the entire thing was probably a joke. OK.

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 14 July 2013 11:07:55PM 1 point [-]

Oh wait, I just had a terrible thought: what if Eliezer was initially serious, but didn't expect anyone to take him seriously, but then n seeing people take him more seriously than expected decided to drop a hint that he was joking without saying so? AARRGGHH!

Comment author: Fermatastheorem 15 July 2013 03:21:51AM 2 points [-]

My model of Eliezer wouldn't troll us that blatantly.

Then again, this is the guy who wrote Quirinius One-Level-Higher-Than-You Quirrell.

Comment author: Jordan_Hoyt 08 July 2013 09:43:57PM 0 points [-]

Gur snpg gung gur zbfg erprag nhgube'f abgr qvq abg rkcynva gung ur jnf wbxvat gb zr engure fgebatyl pbasvezf gung ur jnfa'g.

Really? Gur ynfg pbhcyr pbzzragf sebz Ryvrmre er:UCZBE unir orra sehfgengvba ertneqvat gur jubyr srzvavfz guvat naq eryhpgnapr gb punatr fbzr jbeqvat va srne bs chggvat hc n "GUVF VF N WBXR fvta".

V'q chg zhpu zber cebonovyvgl vagb: 1) Ryvrmre vf gverq bs qrnyvat jvgu gur srzvavfg pevgvpvfz naq qvqa'g jnag gb pnyy zber nggragvba gb gur enag 2) Vg jnf n wbxr naq zbfg crbcyr tbg vg (frr gur fpberf va gung pbzzrag gerr), fb ur sryg ab arrq gb pynevsl zber wbxrf

Comment author: cody-bryce 08 July 2013 08:07:18PM *  0 points [-]

.