A Terrifying Halloween Costume

post by Eliezer Yudkowsky (Eliezer_Yudkowsky) · 2007-11-01T02:54:40.000Z · score: 9 (14 votes) · LW · GW · Legacy · 10 comments

After the jump, you can see me dressed up as something so horrifyingly dreadful that it surpasses the comprehension of a mortal human mind.

Dust specks

10 comments

Comments sorted by oldest first, as this post is from before comment nesting was available (around 2009-02-27).

comment by Eliezer Yudkowsky (Eliezer_Yudkowsky) · 2007-11-01T04:17:29.000Z · score: 9 (11 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

In response to email from at least one person who didn't get it:

No, that is not a real Halloween costume. It is a joke. It is supposed to suck. Thank you.

comment by Ryan_McCall · 2007-11-01T04:20:57.000Z · score: 13 (14 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

aaaH! so scary it hurts my eyes!

comment by Tiiba2 · 2007-11-01T05:20:37.000Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

I can see one speck, but it looks like it really hurts.

comment by anon7 · 2007-11-01T05:34:15.000Z · score: 6 (6 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

Assuming that in addition to the existence of a Yudkowsky Demon able to direct one speck of dust into a Yudkowsky number (3^^^3) of future eyeballs, there is also a Yudkowsky Angel, able to deflect one speck of dust from each of a Yudkowsky number of future eyeballs.

If we find the prospect of a Yudkowsky Demon so intimidating that we are willing to pay the price of torturing a man for 50 years, or even 50^50 men for 50 years each, to avoid the dust, shouldn't we by the same token choose the deflections of the Angel in lieu of the curing of cancer on this planet tomorrow?

comment by Richard_Pointer · 2007-11-01T06:38:45.000Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

I love this blog.

comment by Dave2 · 2007-11-01T10:41:07.000Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

hahahaha, rofl, that one's going to come back to haunt you!

comment by Koen · 2007-11-01T15:01:30.000Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

I think Dave is right, a sign like this is just to easy to photoshop...

comment by Mark3 · 2007-11-01T18:02:43.000Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

Graham's Number, please, not Yudkowsky's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham%27s_number

comment by Kaj_Sotala · 2007-11-01T19:02:24.000Z · score: 3 (3 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

Stigler's Law is in effect, I see.

comment by Nick_Tarleton · 2007-11-01T19:17:18.000Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW(p) · GW(p)

Not really. Graham's Number is unimaginably greater than Yudkowsky's.