Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, March 2015, chapter 118

Gondolinian

This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. This thread is intended for discussing chapter 118.

Plans for next chapter release:

Ch. 119 (9800 words) will post on March 10th, 2015 at 11AM Pacific (6PM UTC)
Note that the current chapter count goes to Ch. 122.

There is a site dedicated to the story at hpmor.com, which is now the place to go to find the authors notes and all sorts of other goodies. AdeleneDawner has kept an archive of Author’s Notes. (This goes up to the notes for chapter 76, and is now not updating. The authors notes from chapter 77 onwards are on hpmor.com.)

Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.

This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. This thread is intended for discussing chapter 118.

Plans for next chapter release:

Ch. 119 (9800 words) will post on March 10th, 2015 at 11AM Pacific (6PM UTC)
Note that the current chapter count goes to Ch. 122.

Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.

It's a question I've wondered about myself.

Obliviation makes a big difference in terms of the horcrux network, but I'm not sure what difference it makes in terms of Harry's reluctance to kill humans.

If we assume that our future selves want all of us around because we're cute-- that is, delightful and harmless, will they want both Voldemort and Quirrell? Is it clear that Quirrell was Voldemort all the time?

Would they want to give all our past selves (say, a sample of each of us from every major psychological change) to be given a chance to grow and develop?

Will they be willing to kill each other in extreme circumstances because they won't be harmless relative to each other?

Thank you. Yes, my question was about the moral difference, not the technical one, as other replies seem to interpret it. I understand that Harry had to have precautions in case his transfiguration fails at some point, but still, he destroyed the identity of his mentor without an immediate need to do so. He could have delayed irreversible actions until he has time to reflect. Rather un-Harry-like at this point in the story. Unless I'm missing something.