All of LauralH's Comments + Replies

LauralH20

I thought it was that ALL of the horcruxes were updated to 2.0.

LauralH10

From the description of HPMOR's horcrux spell, it won't work unless a witch/wizard is killed.

Edit: didn't see Nornagest's post.

LauralH00

Yours isn't the first I've seen guessing that ; it makes more sense than it being any OTHER Death Eater's arm.

LauralH00

Of course women would be smarter about sexual "utopias" than men. I mean no offense, biologically women have to be less impulsive about that sort of thing.

LauralH00

Hell, it wasn't even considered committed in the 80s. Although I suppose different regions may have changed faster, in the South in the late 80s/early 90s, "going out" was what we said for "going steady", while "dating" implied a more casual relationship. (And the actual term 'dating' was rarely used - I remember being asked, "you guys messin'?" after a couple dates with a boy.)

So yes, true.

LauralH00

My head canon is that Riddle seduced his own DADA professor when he was a 6th year, so when he investigated Baba Yaga's death that narrative rang true to him.

LauralH00

Lucius said that his own Dark Mark didn't "truly bind [him]" since he was Imperiused. Voldy could prove that bit, but that might be revealing a bit much...

LauralH20

'it' in Quirrell's rant is the true name dealio, not the Maurauder's Map.

LauralH00

The story does feel like voldy saying 'when I was 16 I seduced a teacher, I bet that's how Baba Yaga died too.'

LauralH00

The Longbottoms were tortured into "insanity", but their canon appearance in St. Mungo's looks far more like brain damage from Cruciatus. And lots of Obliviates seem to cause brain damage as well. Breaking a FMC on Bertha Jorkins in book 4 ended up killing her.

LauralH30

I think that's more likely Quirrell actively casting that causes the anxiety.

LauralH70

Well some of it is faked, but he didn't intend to get caught drinking Unicorns.

LauralH00

But that's the first time Potter sees their magic interact, so what effect did Quirrell fake?

2BloodyShrimp
The sense of doom. I thought the magic-can't-interact was mostly just the strongest edge of that--e.g. (maybe "i.e." too) their magic could interact but it would hurt them enough that they don't try.
LauralH10

Perhaps this is how Potter will "be seen to once again defeat the Dark Lord"? (re: ch65-66)

LauralH00

I find it highly unlikely that he faked the Avada Kedavra/Patronus effect in Azkaban...

2BloodyShrimp
That could just be a feature of the True Patronus, which is pretty anti-death and especially anti-indifference-to-other-people's-lives.
LauralH50

All of them, as this is the first time Q hasn't turned into his Snake form first...

3jefftk
This makes me wonder whether we can trust anything Quirrell said as a snake. Let's say Parseltongue is "the ability to speak in snake language" and was created by Slytherin so that his heirs would have a way to talk to each other in a trusting way (plus so they could talk to snakes, because he liked snakes). Then Harry or Quirrell speaking as humans in Parseltongue are using Slytherin's creation, but Quirrell speaking as a snake animagus is just doing normal snake-talk and wouldn't have the restriction.
6UnclGhost
For that matter, why did he ever bother turning into his snake form? Just to make Harry think he had the limitation of not being able to speak Parseltongue while human, for some reason?
LauralH40

On the first point : he can only be defeated by the Power He Knows Not!

Phigment150

On the contrary.

Voldemort can only be defeated by The Power He Knows: Nott!

Notice that Theodore Nott is right outside. He was (oddly) traveling with the Meddling Kids Squad.

LauralH00

Old comments, but I used to know the author and I feel I should pimp for her - pardon the pun.

LauralH00

My personal case study ahem, went down immediately then went up after a month; and I've known lots of people who only dated after they got on SSRIs. So the answer is, IT DEPENDS.

Also, the paper seemed not to differentiate enough between libido and "love" drive.

LauralH40

Hm. I looked up the source and it looks like most of the "proof" is due to a few case studies. Not that anyone's still reading this but just in case.

0orthonormal
Thanks! (Ugh, papers that talk about fMRI results.) But for what it's worth, my own case study confirmed the claim as well.
LauralH00

In Canon, Dumbledore gives Tom Riddle a few galleons to pay for his books and school supplies first year, saying there's a fund for that sort of thing. Basically implying the fund is only for books and school supplies, so tuition+room/board is free.

LauralH20

Point one: Snape originally stayed in love with Lily because of the lost chance. He actually did think he had a shot with her till he called her a mudblood, but Harry pointed out that in fact he never did. I mean some people fall in love and if their loved one dies, never date again, so I was assuming Snape's feelings were of that variety. He knew they weren't actually "dating" but he thought he'd had a chance before That Day. Now, Harry tells him "Sounds like this Guy never had a chance with that Girl ever, because she's shallow." So, ... (read more)

LauralH10

My interpretation was that Snape told the truth, but there was something else that he knows about the Mark that he STILL can't divulge.

LauralH10

Putting Arthur Weasley in charge of Misuse of Muggle Artifacts, rather than an actual Muggleborn/halfblood, strikes me as incompetence of the highest order.

We even see that Minerva took top marks in her Muggle Studies class, but still thinks of herself as ignorant, and she happens to be fairly competent.

LauralH00

Right, Chapter 76 was mainly to verify that Harry was trustworthy.

LauralH00

I think EY's central point is something like: just because there's no built-in morality for the universe, doesn't mean there isn't built-in morality for humans. At the same time, that "moral sense" does need care and feeding, otherwise you get slavery - and thinking spanking your kids is right.

(But it's been a while since I've read the entire ME series, so I could have confused it with something else I've read.)

LauralH10

So the professor was playing Devil's Advocate, in other words? I'm not familiar with the "requirements" argument he's trying, but like a lot of people here, that's because I think philosophy classes tend to be a waste of time. For primarily the reasons you list in the first paragraph. I'm a consequentialist, myself.

Do you actually think you're having problems with understanding the Sequences, or just in comparing them with your Ethics classes?

2JMiller
It isn't that I don't understand the sequences on their own. It's more that I don't see a) how they relate to the "mainstream" (though I read Luke's post on the various connections, morality seems to be sparse on the list, or I missed it). And b) what Eliezer in particular is trying to get across. The topics in the sequence are very widespread and don't seem to be narrowing in on a particular idea. I found a humans guide to words many times more useful. Luke's sequence was easier, but then there is a lot less material. I think he was playing devil's advocate. Thanks for the comment.
LauralH00

This is pretty awesomely horrible, all right! ::applause::

LauralH00

I also think this is a good idea, and hereby vow to buy a membership when HPMoR is finished for this purpose of voting it for Best Novel. As pointed out, even being nominated would get it a lot more attention.

I'm hoping for something like Neil Gaiman had when he won and then they banned comics/graphic novels afterwards.

LauralH20

I used to read overcomingbias.com, a friend of mine often linked to it on Delicious, and I noticed I preferred EY's posts in general.

I got out of the habit after I caught up with all his posts in 2009 or so (before this site came to be), but someone linked to chapter 5 of HPMoR and I was all WAIT A MINUTE THIS SOUNDS BLOODY FAMILIAR.

LauralH10

You mean most people don't read the Sequences and go "Yeah, that's exactly right!"

Hmm.

LauralH00

So wizards are Zombies...

[This comment is no longer endorsed by its author]Reply
LauralH20

I was a little creeped, but more because she would be forgetting it rather than because of consent issues. She was the one asking him, after all. And as a character moment, it was huge - his first kiss! The rope of his love for Lily is shredding all the more! Will anything keep him as an agent of the Light?

LauralH-20

I was under the impression that the HPMoR story was to entice people to become "more rational", that is, get them to read more of the "day-job" stuff. There was also supposed to be an actual book on rationality, but it looks like that's been put on hold as well. Which to me seemed like a wise decision, since more people were being led to simply read the sequences via HPMoR already, so why bother with a book?

1BerryPick6
What evidence do you have for this? I recall some stats from the last census which indicated that LWers referred here by HPMoR were less likely to have read the sequences and be active participants than the general population.
LauralH80

It's just fanfic terms: "shipping wars" are people who argued over, say, Harry/Hermione vs. Ron/Hermione, and "OT3" in that case would have been Harry/Hermione/Ron. (The original acronym was OTP=One True Pairing.)

1MartinB
Ok thats rofl worthy. I got the OTP with google, but didnt make the connection to the fanfiction usage of shipping. My guess was a reference to Vanderbuilt and similar guys at see.
6David_Gerard
This is actual day-job stuff.
1[anonymous]
Try reading through Mysterious Answers to Mysterious Questions. You might actually find yourself enjoying it!
LauralH20

Also, Harry really really doesn't want to kill ANYONE. He didn't even want to kill the nasty canon-style description of sadistic!Voldemort, for pete's sake.

LauralH20

Another way to look at this (link me if someone's said this already) is as repeated matches of the Prisoner's Dilemma. The winning strategy tends to be "Start nice then match what the other guy does." So if Harry's considering this Hermione/Draco thing as the beginning of Harry vs. Voldemort (prophecy baby wouldn't count to him), no one died, it's fairly obvious that no one was meant to die (well, after ten years Hermione might have been dead, but that wasn't a given, Bellatrix and others from the last war have survived a decade), so Harry can hang on to his "no killing yet" stance for now.

2Brickman
Whatever theories we may have, most of them contingent on the defense professor being Voldemort and the one behind this plot (a conclusion Harry hasn't yet reached and which, frankly, there isn't enough in-universe or possibly even total evidence to make conclusive), it is NOT "obvious" that noone was meant to die. Draco almost died and if it was anyone except the defense professor behind this he was almost certainly supposed to die. Hermione was, as far as I can tell, being sentenced to life in Azkaban, which I'd rank about the same as killing her. If anything, it's obvious that this was meant to be a lethal plot and sets him pretty firmly on the "defect" side.
3chaosmosis
Azkaban is pretty serious, you too easily dismiss it. Trying to send an innocent friend to prison is not the act of someone who you necessarily want to cooperate with. The superhero thing doesn't really have very much to do with the PD.
LauralH-40

I thought it was funny. Because I'm not a Libertarian!

disclaimer: I am a libertarian.

3Bugmaster
Well yes, that's what I'd like to believe too, but 4 isn't exactly "many" (it's less than 7, for instance). Hmm.
LauralH20

Speaking as the middle of 5 kids - having a bunch of kids close to the same age like that can get expensive, and Molly didn't work.

Load More