Any program that reads this post and these articles wasn't stuck in a sandbox anyway.

Sometimes a user puts something in a "name" field that they do not actually intend to be used to identify themselves.

They may be trying to get that string displayed to other users in a highlighted fashion. If someone puts "Wal-Mart Sucks" in the name field on a blog comment, it isn't because they seriously want to be identified by the surname of Sucks. They're just saying that Wal-Mart sucks, in a dramatic way.

They may be trying to break the system in one way or another. If someone puts their name as "Robert'; drop table students; --" then depending on the social and technical context they might be giving themselves a clever alias; or they might be trying to attack the database.

The word get's used by different people for different purposes. One person might say "loser" to mean nerdy people with low social skills. Another might say "loser" to mean people who don't have well paying jobs or the prospect of getting them after finishing university.

It's hard to know what someone else means with the term.

this was an unhelpful comment, removed and replaced by this comment

I hope I'm posting this correctly. I swear that I did my best to research how to use open threads here but to no avail. This is a poem I posted a few days ago in discussion, and I am attempting to have it talked about in open thread where it "belongs."

I've been considering poetry that I write of this nature to be of a Reason/Cyberpunk/Transhuman sort of genre. Feedback would be appreciated.

I forever wish to change from who I am today,
Yet as I am today, I do not wish to cease.
Who am I in this moment?
I am nothing to myself without the passage of time

If I had no fear of death,
Would I have a wish to live?
I can deny cynicism.
Can I verify optimism?

Must euphoria define my goals?
Every euphoric drive has served to continue my existence.
From the beginning mechanisms of life, I have emerged
Passed through millions/billions of small keyholes of existence

A package of information, which served to create me
Developed me to fit my environment.
Existing just to continue to exist.
An axiom of my function

Euphoria drives me
Skepticism contradicts me
I cannot withhold judgement on the purpose of existing.
To enjoy the show is to accept this euphoria as my chosen purpose in the end.

Can I want without pleasure?
Can my wants be reasoned?
Why do I want to enjoy the show,
Yet not to be consumed or confined to an eternity of bliss?

Is dignity and pride different from euphoric drives?
Are they the strategies and philosophies of my existence?
Can I be more obsessed with finding the perfect design for myself,
Than with finding bliss? Are they functionally different?

Thank you for this post. I have made similar experiences, and feel much more dim-witted when speaking in person (especially compared to others).

Upvoted for changing your mind.

Aha - at http://www.pnas.org/content/109/26/10409.full.pdf , zero-determinant strategies are defined by two factors, chi and phi, and at least when chi is 1, maximum phi results in the strategy of Tit-for-Tat, which is exactly what I was looking for.

Hm... is there a mathematical notation for the maximum of a variable, like |x| indicates the absolute value of x?

I think there's been a shift, with tall women being much more valued than they used to be some decades ago, but I've heard that tall teen-aged girls still get harassed for their height.

Anyone have more solid information?

You might want to post this on the hpmor subredit page instead - or in the latest open thread. I don't, however, think that a top-level discussion post is necessary for this.

In any case, Snape saying that the number of valence electrons of carbon is a meaningless fact is weak evidence that he didn't read it in Harry's mind.