= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
What does MLPTI stand for? It's hard to look up without knowing that much.
he has tried to kill Harry by feeding him to a dementor.
Almost certainly not. Remember, it was Quirrell who drew Flitwick's attention to the dropped wand. It is possible that Quirrell planned for precisely what occurred - Harry temporarily Demented and apparently evil.
it's a big leap to assume that he hasn't thought of taking Harry someplace isolated and setting a blowtorch on him.
Why do people keep assuming Quirrell thinks of Harry as an enemy?
He drew attention to the wand after Hermione committed herself to going to the cage. Maybe he didn't have to, but that's the sort of cleverness I expect from him. It tricked you, after all.
Why do people keep assuming Quirrell thinks of Harry as an enemy?
I can't speak for people, but Harry is Voldemort's enemy in canon. Until I see some extraordinary evidence to the contrary, I'm going to assume that hasn't changed.
In response to
HPMoR: What do you think you know?
Quirrellmort does not want to kill Harry. If he ever did, he changed his mind while offscreen.
He doesn't want to kill Harry right now. He may intend to kill Harry at some more convenient point in the future - everything we've seen of Quirrell indicates he plans for the long term.
If we take Hermione at face value on Ch43, he has tried to kill Harry by feeding him to a dementor. Although given the failures his more certain methods have had, it's a big leap to assume that he hasn't thought of taking Harry someplace isolated and setting a blowtorch on him. Extra points for a long torturous death.
Like a reference counter, it doesn't need to run collection cycles as it knows exactly when memory can be freed. Despite this, it handles circular structures just fine.
Apart from that, there's nothing special about it. The idea was absurdly low hanging fruit and that aspect might make it good LW post material. Assuming that it works as well as I think it does.
In response to
What are you working on?
A programming language that has the semantics necessary to elegantly express a new kind of garbage collector. A rudimentary prototype of the collector, written in C++ with a terrible interface, appeared to confirm the idea.
At least, that was the initial goal. The more I investigate the design choices involved in programming languages, the more room for improvement I see.
Suggestion: Make a new discussion thread giving other people the chance to agree or disagree with those bullet points and any other bullet points that represent questionable content of the current wiki page. You could also consider including suggested changes to wording that could make the page less bad in your eyes and see how people respond to those suggestions.
And in light of Eliezer's response, perhaps find someone he is willing to debate on the topic.
Can you elaborate on what kind of setup you're thinking of in terms of HN office hours?
Let people make appointments. Everyone involved would agree to meet somewhere online and depending on exactly what was needed: have a conversation or use a session sharing tool for some collaborative work.
This sounds like a good idea, thanks for committing the time for it! On reading I had two thoughts:
- While I'm assuming that you're willing to try helping with anything, people with more technical problems will appreciate a summary of what skills you can provide in particular.
- I'm also wondering if there is demand for this in a format more like HN office hours.
In response to
Attention Lurkers: Please say hi
Hi.
edit: I suspect LW has fewer lurkers than average. Speaking as a lurker, the conversations here are not easy to follow (this is more the structure rather than content, but sometimes the content gets pretty esoteric). I've limited my participation to reading top level posts of interest, and the comments if the article is sufficiently fresh.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
I thought that INTP was the type that inhabited Less Wrong. Where do they go in the new system?
INTPs seem to match "conscientious, introverted, self-conscious" and no other group of traits. This would file them under TS along with INTJs under the old system.
I still don't know what that means, though.