= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
I believe I will be able to attend.
We might be well-served by finding a new place to meet with more space or seating for the next meeting. The Starbucks got to be rather crowded last time.
In response to
Berkeley LW Meet-up Saturday November 6
Okay, I give up. Unless you went all the way down to the peninsula, where'd you find a t-rex? (Also, I wouldn't have thought that Starbucks sat 20--live and learn. It's the one next to the theater, isn't it?)
Well, it didn't sit 20. We stood around and blocked traffic mostly.
I hope you come to some of the occasion Bay Area Less Wrong meet-ups. We'll be moving them from Santa Clara to Berkeley fairly soon. I'd also be happy to discuss discuss atheist organizations via Skype.
Believe me, you can't keep me away.
My username for everything is the same as my username here, possibly with @gmail.com appended if necessary.
precisely the reasons why we want better dark art skills just for the sake of countering them at least? I'm half tempted to start a thread on this, but I can't write as clearly as most here.
I too feel like I lack the wherewithal to write top-level LessWrong posts, but since this is a topic I too am interested in, perhaps we could collaborate and produce something worthy between us. If your issue is not being able to write clearly, I would gladly proofread and comment on drafts.
Hire PJEby to teach you guys emotional awareness/control. The Mankind Project uses some similar psychological techniques, which has helped me actually put what I read from PJ into practice, but is male-only and not rational in its approach.
Another kinesthetic practice to consider is Z-Health.
There are tons of PUA instructors, but that is an expensive route. Maybe some of the more successful in the community can volunteer some training. Is there an mPUA in the house?
Zvi thinks very highly of hypnosis as a psychological tool, I would consider that as well.
Wait. Isn't The Mankind Project the one that has been at the center of the... controversy surrounding the lawyer and the forced retreat? The articles I read on the issue made it sound like they used cult tactics and were variously disreputable. Would you care to share your experience?
Alternative idea: You only get one patronus. Harry's got hit by AK, so now he can't cast patronus anymore.
Shhh, if you're not careful, patronuses will be sentient next. Is it ethical to dismiss a sentient patronus?
I got the impression that Harry's patronus was special and strong for shielding against the Dementors, perhaps no others would have been strong enough to hide an escaped felon? Why hadn't more people been broken out?
Okay if saving Bellatrix is not about saving Bellatrix, could whatever it was about have been done in a more controlled environment? Could Quirrell have hired some goons to play a part in some formative point of Harry's education/ensnarement rather than taking a teen into a live fire situation.
What would have happened if Harry hadn't been able to cast Patronus? Could Quirrell have taught the lesson/ got a hold on Harry in a different way? If so why hadn't Quirrell got this hold as soon as he could have? It seemed that Harry's Patronus was the trigger for the Azkaban mission (Quirrell suggests it just after he finds out about it, why does Quirrell need to get the hold now).
The only explanation that makes sense in the "azkaban is not about bellatrix" scenario is that Quirrell wanted it to fail all along... I see insufficient incentive for Quirrell for the positive outcome to offset the severe risk of it going wrong.
I'm also confused. None of the explanations for what is going on make sense. Quirrell's motivation/identity seems the most under explained.
Interesting. I'm not sure whether or not it's better at shielding, because we're told that people break in to Azkaban to shield the inmates so that they might have regular non-nightmare dreams, or just a half-day of patronus time. So we know that just one typical patronus is strong enough to protect people from the worst effects of a Dementor for 12 hours.
I don't think we know enough about the defenses of Azkaban to say at what point the typical rescue operation would fail. But when we're witnessing the aurors in the command center, I find it interesting that only attempts to relieve the pain of being in Azkaban through patronus-presence are brought up (in the bit about bribes), not escape attempts. Perhaps it has to do with the "perfect crime" logic.
As to what the actual purpose was in this whole excursion, I have no idea.
I'm not sure intentional failure is the only explanation. It could be some weird bonding experience. Maybe Quirrel always dreamed of raiding wizarding prisons, pulling off bank heists, and taking over the world with his son. Chapter 55: "Adoption Papers"
I think from the duel that we can infer that Quirrel didn't expect to lose, even in a one-sided fight against a team of aurors. He was just playing games when it was one-on-one. Maybe he used the killing curse because he was (overly) confident that Harry was committed to trusting him completely with regards to this mission and didn't expect to be blocked.
Maybe chapter 55 will answer all of our questions. Ha. Haha.
If he had a patronus he could have saved Bellatrix a long time ago, by himself or using a more reliable ally than Harry. He seemed to have been waiting for Harry, thus either he doesn't have a patronus or he needed Harry to do this task for some other unknown reason.
I'm still confused. I think because I assume that saving Bellatrix was definitely not the point of the trip, and whatever the real point was, it specifically has to do with Harry so Quirrel's patronus status is irrelevant with respect to the Azkaban trip. Couldn't Quirrel always have used an ally in the plot? They wouldn't even necessarily have to be willing or reliable on their own, or can't you summon a patronus under the imperius curse?
Now I feel like I did when reading the chapter on the final army battle. I think I'm an n-1 player.
And failing to free her at all may cost him the opportunity to save the world. Harry should have had some doubts as to whether he was ready for the mission.
Failing that, the other thing that has been bothering me for a while is why did Quirrel take Harry to save Bellatrix now? If Quirrel was pure Voldy he wouldn't care about Bellatrix, he doesn't love her. Saving her now, by taking a young idealistic boy on an important high-stress mission, doesn't seem like a good plan. How much does an evil overlord value saving henchwomen, what risk is worth it?
I am not sure that Quirrel is pure Voldy. I'm half tempted to predict that Quirrel is Harry-grown-old-and-dark transported through time in some fashion. Hence the extreme inability to touch each other and the fact that Quirrel's priors are too good. There is a fair amount of evidence against that (lack of patronus, for one). But it is a fun idea.
Wait, can you explain why lacking a patronus is evidence against Quirrel being a time-traveling Harry? He would have the same super-bright human patronus that Harry does, which would be a bit of a tip that he was Harry-from-the-future. So obviously he would pretend to not have one.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Last time we met up at Starbucks, walked across the street where some people got food to go from Burgermeister, then found an open building at Cal with plenty of free space for us.
Then it was wide ranging group conversation in mingle mode about the wide array of topics sometimes covered on LW. Then everyone was invited to my house to continue conversations and/or drink beer.
It's very casual and very low pressure. No one will judge you for not having read enough of LW or anything.
On a related note, one topic that came up particularly frequently that some of us bonded over was rarely or never contributing. So to anyone out there lurking, don't be afraid to come just because you don't post. You won't be alone.