Comment author: OnTheOtherHandle 20 July 2013 03:39:11AM *  15 points [-]

I didn't cry in "Humanism." I didn't cry in "Stanford Prison Experiment." I didn't even cry when Hermione died. But this chapter finally did it for me. "If I were the first person in the universe who ever really cared about someone, then I'd be honored to be that person." That's the kind of moral stand missing in any number of lectures and parables by supposed moral absolutists. It takes quite a bit of deviation from normal thinking to even really comprehend that emotion, let alone spontaneously describe it.

What I love best about HPMOR is that it could so easily have been a Kid Hero parody fic, and even though it skirts pretty close, especially in the earlier chapters, it is never quite a straight up parody. In fact, for all that Harry snarks about his life being one big fantasy cliche, HPMOR takes the Kid Hero genre deadly seriously and plays almost every trope completely straight. Sure, Harry doesn't rush headlong into every danger like most kid heroes, but that's a difference in method, not in spirit. He feels the weight of responsibility just like anyone else who was ever chosen, or chose themselves.

Far more than the science and even the rationality, I love HPMOR because it believes in heroes. Conversations like this one are why I'm not reading a textbook. One day, I'm going to catalog every single discussion about morality, duty, heroism, or wisdom. I genuinely think reading them often will make me a better person, or at least better at being good. So thank you, Eliezer. You really make fiction shine as a teaching medium

Comment author: sboo 19 April 2014 05:55:52AM 0 points [-]

I didn't cry in "Humanism." I didn't cry in "Stanford Prison Experiment." I didn't even cry when Hermione died. But this chapter finally did it for me.

me too :)

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 24 July 2013 07:46:07AM 7 points [-]

After sitting down and going over everything I know about this fic, I believe I've gotten a substantial way towards solving its puzzles. The long version is at my blog here, but here I'll just state without justification the prediction I've come up with:

Voldemort believes fate won't let him defeat Harry until Harry attains the power to vanquish him, which in this case means becoming powerful enough to destroy all of Voldemort's well-hidden horcruxes. And in fact, Harry will become that powerful, by using the differing conservation laws for magic and science to conduct conservation-law arbitrage. Voldemort's plan is to possess Harry once Harry has attained ultimate power, but Harry will prevent Voldemort from winning through complicated means involving multiple currently yet-to-be-fired Checkov's guns.

Comment author: sboo 19 April 2014 04:24:11AM *  0 points [-]

why would voldemort need to possess harry? he's already stronger and smarter. and immortal.

Comment author: Caledonian2 08 December 2007 04:31:26AM 8 points [-]

I would make a rule: any discipline against a troll will be matched by identical discipline against anyone who engages that troll, even in attack.

In practice, such rules create echo chambers where any discussion that the moderators don't agree with is silenced. It's theoretically possible for a human being to be utterly impartial when deciding whether conversations are useful, but it requires near-superhuman patience and tolerance.

Quite a lot of the problem is that the category of 'troll' quickly expanded beyond its original meaning; in everyday Netspeak, it generally refers to "a person who persists in saying things I don't wish to tolerate".

Comment author: sboo 14 April 2014 06:58:23PM *  1 point [-]

well, it's tone too.

e.g. say sauvine.com had said: "this is why i think the scientists who believe in global warming have formed a BEC..."

i bet people would downvote, but i doubt they would label them as a troll.

Comment author: eirenicon 08 January 2010 09:42:49PM 1 point [-]

I have delayed-phase sleep disorder - I would say I "suffer" from it but it's really only a problem when a 3-10 sleep schedule is out of the question (as it is now, since I currently work 9-5). It's simply impossible for me to fall asleep before 2 or 3 am unless I am extremely tired. In addition, I'm a light sleeper, and have never been able to sleep while traveling or, in fact, whenever I'm not truly horizontal. I took melatonin to help with this for a couple years (at a recommended 0.3 mg dose), and it worked extremely well. However, I experienced unusually vivid dreams, and would often wake up feeling groggy. Ultimately, I switched to taking 50 mg 5-HTP an hour or two before bed. The result is that I fall sleep as easily as with melatonin, but wake up feeling far more refreshed. I usually clock 7 hours of sleep a night now, and have brighter and more productive days.

The best sleep aid I've ever used isn't a legal one, though. Luckily, it's widely available here in Canada...

Comment author: sboo 25 February 2014 10:12:45PM 0 points [-]

as 5-HTP is metabolized to melatonin, i wonder how much of the effect comes from melatonin itself.

Comment author: wedrifid 16 March 2013 08:20:32PM 1 point [-]

Bentley said. "It is a powerful hormone, and yet people don't realize that it's as 'powerful' as any steroid. I'm sure that many people who take it wouldn't take steroids so glibly.

Unless the quality of the remainder of the article uses an entirely different caliber of reasoning than what you have chosen to excerpt here it should be dismissed as drivel. The (by clear implication, anabolic) steroids that Bentley attempts to equate to melatonin have clear effects that need to be managed or accepted. There has been enough research and practical use of melatonin to reliably establish that whatever the effects of melatonin are they less significant than the effects of anabolic steroids.

Comment author: sboo 25 February 2014 10:09:21PM *  1 point [-]
In response to comment by lukeprog on How to Be Happy
Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 18 March 2011 04:07:46PM *  3 points [-]

Roots of Empathy seems promising, but I don't know whether it's been tested in adults.

EDIT: Fixed link.

In response to comment by Kaj_Sotala on How to Be Happy
Comment author: sboo 09 February 2014 11:55:33PM 0 points [-]

tl;dr

Roots of Empathy says caring for babies nurtures empathy.

In response to comment by aretae on How to Be Happy
Comment author: dki 24 September 2012 02:44:31PM 1 point [-]

Ditto the Kahneman TED talk. Very insightful.

Like Luke, I was UNhappy for a long, long time. Then it hit me one day and I've never been unhappy for very long since. Here's my thoughts on happiness: http://j.mp/RQrYNa

In response to comment by dki on How to Be Happy
Comment author: sboo 09 February 2014 11:43:29PM 0 points [-]
Comment author: chaosmosis 05 August 2012 07:18:36PM *  2 points [-]

I figured out an exploit to make Horcrux users even more invincible.

A. If you make a Horcrux, you cannot be destroyed unless your Horcrux is destroyed.

B. People can be Horcruxes.

QED if one person turns another into a Horcrux and the other reciprocates then they have foolproof immortality.

This method also has three other benefits over the Dark Lord's attempt, that I can think of. First, it requires only two murders, not seven. Second, it causes twice as many people to become immortal. Third, you'll retain a much larger portion of your soul than you would otherwise, and avoid much of the consequent degeneration.

Quirrelmort is playing on the level below mine, clearly.

Comment author: sboo 03 February 2014 01:58:35PM 0 points [-]

you can only horcrux matter, not "minds".

Comment author: advancedatheist 17 November 2012 06:04:57PM *  5 points [-]

Many science fiction writers have postulated the return of feudal social structures, noble houses, monarchies and such in "the future." The democratic era we live in and take for granted could very well have resulted from a drunkard's walk away from long-term social norms., and if we could survive cryotransport, we might find ourselves in nondemocratic, hierarchical societies in Future World.

BTW, I've noticed from watching The Walking Dead series that feminism, progressivism and democracy have to fall by the wayside when our kind of civilization collapses and the strong males have to take charge to keep the surviving hunter-gatherer bands in business. Why couldn't this also happen in a society which manages to maintain high living standards and technological progress?

Comment author: sboo 29 January 2014 10:28:42PM 0 points [-]

what? no. maybe only strong "compassionate"/"nurturing" females can keep groups of hundreds together without fragmentation.

In response to An Alien God
Comment author: Jannia 02 November 2007 08:07:29AM 7 points [-]

Maybe predators are wary of rattles and don't step on the snake. Or maybe the rattle diverts attention from the snake's head.

The point of a rattle, as I understand it, is that it's metabolically expensive, and time consuming, to produce poison. A snake that can chase off a dozen threats a day by wagging its tail is much better off probability-of-producing-offspring-wise than one that can only bite and poison three threats before being left defenseless for a few days.

It does leave me wondering what benefits the intermediate mutations provide though, since going from a normal snake tail to a rattle seems like it would take more than one step.

In response to comment by Jannia on An Alien God
Comment author: sboo 30 December 2013 10:25:22PM 4 points [-]

even if poison were cheap, every fight has a risk. better to neither fight nor flee.

View more: Prev | Next