Posts

Comments

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapter 113 · 2015-03-03T03:06:59.807Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Something of the real voldemort was leaking through-and the part that was leaking through was, essentially, his gibbering fear of death.

Which really, really won't help in trying to cast a True Patronus.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapter 111 · 2015-02-25T23:57:32.000Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Agreed. While Voldemort has 'stated' the reason for not killing harry until now, it still feels...incomplete.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapter 110 · 2015-02-25T05:23:08.246Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Well.

That happened.

I'm rather hoping (too tired to put numbers on it, sorry) that Harry can summon a phoenix straight from the mirror-he never tested the claim that a phoenix only shows up once, after all...and now he's got the source of phoenixes right next to him. That's a gun that's just itching to fire.

"All your hallows combine" is fairly obvious, though the location of the stone is not entirely clear.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapters 105-107 · 2015-02-20T19:46:36.011Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

So. you know how Dumbledore thinks that Fred and George are kinda/sorta the heirs of Gryffindor?

I give them 90% odds of at least showing up.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:57:28.342Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

her flesh is what's important-for the revival ritual (IF that's why quirrelmort broke her out, which is quite likely.). she doesn't have a servant of her own to revive her with, so getting her a horcrux would be of no use.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:52:15.784Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

And then quirrel won a bet with dumbledore when it turned out that first-years could cast the patronus.
Fake-moody's statement that he'd get no more than a bloody nose...You woudln't want to try that in the MoR verse. one of the students might be tempted to test it. and if the've been in quirrel's wargames, well...

you get the idea.

cause in MoR, it IS largely practice-based. in cannon rowling left it vague.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:34:31.132Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

He thinks draco is much more suited to dealing with the politics, and that it's much less work to optimize draco's morals and hand power to him than to figure out how to navigate a political atmosphere for himself.

To put it crudely, harry plans to use draco as a puppet.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:21:16.057Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

what about from science fiction? star trek: TOS. kirk meets kahn. kahn has been on ice. many other star trek episodes. see also nancy's comment.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:15:04.253Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

...a last ditch effort to at least make their deaths quick, while opening up a window to hit the dementors with a point-blank patronus 2.0 without worrying about the guards? Not that I think it very likely, mind you. harry may be broadening his options somewhat, but he has a ways to go before he's quite THAT desperate.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 27, chapter 98 · 2013-09-02T00:10:48.515Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

It has occured to me that IF harry does obtain the sorcerer's stone...it's quite likely that quirrel will have been the one to get it out of the mirror, WITHOUT utilizing his leet magical skills.

  1. dumbledore thinks voldemort should find the trap surrounding the sorcerer's stone to be irresistable just for being such a puzzle.
  2. Quirrelmort declares he has never seen such an obvious trap...in a way that suggest that he is quite tempted to go after whatever is inside, whether or not he knows what's inside.
  3. The troll DID happen, even though whether it was quirrel's diversion or not remains to be seen.
  4. The stone is merely the most preferred way of obtaining an actual body as far as quirrelmort is concerned, while harry very much wants to make everyone immortal, and would very much want to use the stone.
Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-29T17:04:04.163Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Er, really? every thing i've read in the books indicates that quirrel was NOT a horcrux, but was posessed by the central voldemort who had previously been possessing snakes...or any other animal he could get ahold of.

So it was probably a blunder on her part when she said that quirrel was a horcrux, IF she said that.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-23T04:49:44.713Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

He gets it NOW. without having to run a risky feedback scheme between gringots and the muggle economy with only 100 galleons of seed money.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-23T04:22:58.166Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

It makes sense enough, if you already believed Harry Potter was voldemort and don't have harry's perspective.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-23T04:15:52.226Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

He DID want 7 total fragments. Then he accidentally turned harry into one and didn't realize he'd done so. I can't quit recall if he made nagini before or after the diary got zapped.

Quirrel is not a horcrux. he is possessed by voldemort himself.

Cannon Harry is an Accidental horcrux. Canon voldemort never realized harry was a horcrux BECAUSE he'd never used the incantation to seal the soul fragment within harry.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-23T03:47:28.841Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

that...said...it didn't do them much good whenver they caught a real witch/wizard, they'd just freeze the flames and scream to keep up with the act

One witch deliberately got herself caught repeatedly (14 times?) because she liked the tingling.

Yeah. it's cannon.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 26, chapter 97 · 2013-08-23T01:27:36.993Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

well... In cannon, the weaselys have a garden...and you can enlarge food with magic, though rowling never specifies what the multiplicative limit is. (it is STRONGLY implied there is one, though. seventh book.)

So a little bit of gardening by the women goes a long way, though it may only be poor families that actually resort to it.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 19, chapter 88-89 · 2013-08-01T04:13:41.844Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

on the planet earth, of course; abuse space-folding charms to make the rest of the universe fit into a cauldron of arbitrary size.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 · 2013-07-21T20:53:35.833Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

for those two different spell-elements cannot exist in the same voldemort...? O.o Those two different spell-elements cannot exist in the same fold?

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T19:44:24.740Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

oh. whoops.... so more like a way of poking holes in the strategy "i will do whatever I would have precommitted to do"?

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T05:38:54.240Z · score: -2 (4 votes) · LW · GW

How much do you know about many worlds, anyways? My alternate self very much does exist, the technical term is possibility-cloud which will eventually diverge noticeably but which for now is just barely distinguishable from me.

there you go.

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T05:10:54.357Z · score: -3 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Meh, the original is badly worded.

Take 2. Omega notices a neuro-quirk. Then, based on what he's noticed, he offers you a 50/50 bet of 100$ to 43.25 dollars at just the right time with just the right intonation...

NOW do you take that bet?

...Why yes, yes you do. Even you. And you know it. it's related to why you don't think boxing an AI is the answer. only, Omega's already out of the box, and so can adjust your visual and auditory input with a much higher degree of precision.

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:56:18.587Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

The trick with eeny-meeny-miney-moe is that it's long enough for us to not consciously and quickly identify whether the saying is odd or even, gives a 0, 1, or 2 on modulo 3, etc, unless we TRY to remember what it produces, or TRY to remember if it's odd or even before pointing it out. Knowing that doing so consciously ruins its capacity, we can turn to memory decay to restore some of the pseudo-random quality. basically, by sufficiently decoupling "point at A" from "choose A" to our internal cognitive algorithms...we change the way we route visual input and spit out a "point at X".

THAT"S where the randomness of eeny-meeny-miney-moe comes in...though I've probably got only one use left of it when it comes to situations with 2 items thanks to writing this up...

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:51:27.208Z · score: -4 (4 votes) · LW · GW

There exist QUANTUM coins, you know. when they see a fork in the road, they take it.

I'd be feeling a little queasy if omega came up to me and said that. maybe I'd say "erm, thanks for not taking advantage of me, then...I guess?"

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:51:16.235Z · score: -3 (3 votes) · LW · GW

um... lets see....

to REALLY evaluate that, we technically need to know how long omega runs the simulation for.

now, we have two options: one, assume omega keeps running the simulation indefinitely. two, assume that omega shuts the simulation down once he has the info he's looking for (and before he has to worry about debugging the simulation.)

in # 1, what we are left with is p(S)=1/3, p(H)=1/3, p(t)=1/3, which means we're moving 200$/3 from part of our possibility cloud to gain 10,000$/3 in another part.
In #2, we're moving a total of 100/2 $ to gain 10000/2. The 100$ in the simulation is quantum-virtual.

so, unless you have reason to suspect omega is running a LOT of simulations of you, AND not terminating them after a minute or so...(aka, is not inadvertently simulation-mugging you)...

You can generally treat Omega's simulation capacity as a dashed causality arrow from one universe to another-sortof like the shadow produced by the simulation...

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:48:15.651Z · score: 0 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Quantum Coins. seriously. they're easy enough to predict if you accept many worlds.
as for the rest... entertainment? Could be a case of "even though I can predict these humans so well, it's fascinating as to just how many of them two-box no matter how obvious i make it."
It's not impossible-we know that we exist, it is not impossible that some race resembling our own figured out a sufficient solution to the lob problem and became a race of omegas...

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:10:56.104Z · score: -5 (3 votes) · LW · GW

I'll give you the quick and dirty patch for dealing with omega: There is no way to know that, at that moment, you are not inside of his simulation. by giving him the 100$, there is a chance you are tranfering that money from within a simulation-which is about to be terminated-to outside of the simulation, with a nice big multiplier.

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:08:20.577Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Fine, then interchange "assume omega is honest" with, say, "i've played a billiion rounds of one-box two-box with him" ...It should be close enough.

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:07:39.618Z · score: -4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

|Perfect knowledge

use a Quantum coin-it conveniently comes up both.

Comment by fractalman on Counterfactual Mugging · 2013-07-21T04:06:13.750Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Omega is assumed to be mildly bored and mildly anthropic. And his asking you for 100$ could always be PART of the simulation.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 · 2013-07-20T22:38:35.545Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

"become animagus" is a bit more general than "turn into a giant snake". The original evil-overloard rule is about how turning into a snake lets the hero kill you without losing alignment points, which is why it's such a bad idea.

that ISN'T what quirrel does. He uses it to slip into harry's pouch instead and reduce the sense of doom. much smarter than Jafar.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 · 2013-07-20T21:48:13.232Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

it MIGHT be the glint of silver in chapter 1. maybe. :shrugs:

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 · 2013-07-19T14:36:06.573Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

The other thing is, quirrel...is passed out. remember the azkaban fight? it decreased a bit when quirrel passed out.

it is, at best, rather weak evidence for a truly fundamental change in Quirrelmort's view. enough to tip the scale over the 50% mark? maybe.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-18T00:48:51.646Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

His occlumency is not the issue. In MoR, as best as we can tell, there are perfect Occlumens, but not perfect legillimens.

it's the other little clues that get left around that may or may not give him away.

Comment by fractalman on Model Combination and Adjustment · 2013-07-14T20:45:19.081Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

"What does more than one model being correct mean?"

maybe something like string theory? The 5 lesser theories look totally different...and then turn out to tranform into one another when you fiddle with the coupling constant.

Comment by fractalman on Robust Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma · 2013-07-14T20:19:37.398Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

hm. I'm still a bit shaky on the definition of modal agent...does the following qualify?

IF(opponentcooperates with me AND I defect is a possible outcome){defect} else{ if (opponent cooperates IFF i cooperate) (cooperate){else defect}

(edit: my comment about perfect unfair bots may have been based on the wrong generalizations from an infinite-case). addendum: if what I've got doesn't qualify as a model agent I'll shut up until I understand enough to inspect the proof directly.

addendum 2: well. alright then I'll shut up.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-14T19:08:58.967Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

on the first one, according to http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Dementor

After Apparating to Hogsmeade, Harry, Ron, and Hermione set off a Caterwauling Charm and hid under Harry's Invisibility Cloak. Unable to find them, the Death Eaters dispatched Dementors to attack the trio, and Harry was forced to cast his Patronus to protect them from being Kissed.

My original point about patronuses turned out to be more hair-splitting than anything else...but it also turns out that Rowling's take on the partronus totally diverges in lesser-cannon.

"Wonderbook: Book of Spells is the closest a Muggle can come to a real spellbook. I've loved working with Sony's creative team to bring my spells, and some of the history behind them, to life. This is an extrodinary device that offers a reading experience like no other." —J.K. Rowling on Wonderbook: Book of Spells -giving us a source of Rowling-approved info...

In that book, a guy called Raczidian tries to cast a Patronus. He produces, instead, a swarm of maggots....Which turn and eat him up.

MoR "dark-wizards" simply find that the spell fizzles.

Comment by fractalman on Prisoner's Dilemma (with visible source code) Tournament · 2013-07-14T06:21:48.920Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

There's two types of mimicbots running around: fixed-rank, and random-reliant.
Which mimicbot are you analyzing?

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-14T03:11:40.716Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

He has.

Eleizer has: changed the fundamental mechanism for the patronus, made dementors killable with patronus 2.0, edited the magic interactions between Harry and Voldemort to be dangerous to Harry as well as Voldemort, changed how the elder wand works (It's...maybe a +5 wand under normal use, and is only an "infinity+/-1" wand when fed blood sacrifices), and made Harry's invisibility cloak work against dementors-Cannon!Dumbledore (or...someone) warns Harry explicitly that invisibility cloaks do not work against dementors.

Comment by fractalman on Robust Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma · 2013-07-14T02:38:42.812Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

trollDetector-a fundamental part of psychbot-gets both of these to cooperate.

TrollDetector tests opponents against DefectBot. If opponent defects, it cooperates. if opponent cooperates, TrollDetector defects.

So both UnfairBot and Fairbot cooperate with it, though it doesn't do so well against itself or DefectBot.

Comment by fractalman on Effective Altruism Through Advertising Vegetarianism? · 2013-07-13T00:59:26.991Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

That doesn't even pass a quick inspection test for"can do something different when handed different parameters" .

The original post looks at least as good as: int calculate_the_conclusion(string premises_acceptedbyreader[]) { int result=0; foreach(mypremise in reader's premise){result++;} return result. }

-note the "at least".

Comment by fractalman on Svante Arrhenius's Prediction of Climate Change · 2013-07-12T22:31:19.923Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Oh, I’msure he gave different weights to different things in his utility function than say…well pretty much anyone other human…but there are plenty of models that show a disaster for any “typical” human utility function. The ones showing disaster: venus and disaster: new ice age…are not exactly rare, though I’m not exactly sure how seriously to take them myself.
"Positive and negative in this day and age is dominated by public opinion"

Relying on Public Opinion is a cheap and dirty variant of Auffman's agreement theorem; it gives plenty of bad results, but it's a million times easier to use, and is still slightly better-maybe-than pure random-decisions....er, maybe.

Either that or we just differ in terms of what we're labeling utility function versus part of the model?

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-12T22:05:24.212Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

They aren't. but someone else once showed that all the elements were present, except for the usual incantations to set it up. In this view, it's more like an accidentally created ritual.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-12T21:58:06.227Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

|Aren't horcruxs supposed to be incredibly costly to create?

I'm afraid you'll need to find MoR evidence for that, not Cannon evidence. Eliezer rearranged a lot of the details on how Dark Magic works-basically, some rituals, but not all, twist your mind as an explicity price, and it's often dangerous, but rarely is it truly Evil in and of itself.) He has been very carefull not to make it obvious what the new price or prices for horcrux creation are-except that it still requires a murder. If he's dropped hints that give more than a +/-5% boost to any particular hypothesis, I haven't noticed them as such.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-12T14:42:34.837Z · score: 3 (3 votes) · LW · GW

ok. so: assuming Harry's memory of the night his parents died is correct, what if the crucial difference is that, instead of shrugging Lilly off, Voldemort accepted her bargain...making it a two-person ritual rather than just a one-person ritual...which meant that not only was Harry protected against Voldemort, now the latter had to actively guard Harry's life.

Second part: And as he looked into harry's eyes...he had his equivalent of an "oh crap", and then made harry a horcrux because he figured he may as well. Which THEN sparked a nasty resonance that blasted his body to bits and didn't take like a normal horcrux (is anyone other than Eliezer ~90% sure how they're supposed to work in MoR?) because he'd already used lilly's life in a ritual.

Comment by fractalman on Evidential Decision Theory, Selection Bias, and Reference Classes · 2013-07-12T04:28:36.309Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

um...that wasn't sarcastic, was it? I just ran low on mental energy so...

anyways, the downside is you have to figure out how to dissolve all or most of the anthropic paradoxes when evaluating simulation chance.

Comment by fractalman on Evidential Decision Theory, Selection Bias, and Reference Classes · 2013-07-12T04:06:45.203Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

there's another CRUCIAL difference regarding the Newcombs problem: there's always a chance you're in a simulation being run by Omega. I think if you can account for that, it SHOULD patch most decent decision-theories up. I'm willing to be quite flexible in my understanding of which theories get patched up or not.

this has the BIG advantage of NOT requiring non-linear causality in the model-it just gives a flow from simulation->"real"world.

Comment by fractalman on Prisoner's dilemma tournament results · 2013-07-12T02:43:41.255Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

yeah...but I was more concerned about various TrollBots-including but not limited to HashBot, Randombot, DitherBot, cooperate-IFF you are a defect bot or cooperate bot, antimimicbot...and I considered "cooperates with C-Bot" to be extremely useless as a source of information given the unusual demographics of LessWrong while drawing up my plans.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-11T22:57:49.292Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

hm. I've increased my estimate that Harry could further hack into transfiguration, but I still find it very unlikely that he's managed to do so for RingMione. (simply not enough time).
"Even accidents are somewhat intuitive: an extra cat hair in Polyjuice can give you cat attributes instead of blowing up or not working at all."

Even THAT"S rather dangerous in the MoR universe, while in cannon it was mostly funny. And...I think MoR potions don't blow up anywhere near as often as Cannon potions...though maybe that's just because Slytherins and Gryfinndors aren't throwing things into each others cauldron while Snape turns a blind eye. maybe.

edit: hm.

Comment by fractalman on Prisoner's dilemma tournament results · 2013-07-11T22:42:02.995Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

for reference, here's what I was "planning"-I was all too aware i didn't have time to learn a new language to actually implement it in. a pity i didn't think to post this before the tournament results, even if it's just pseudocode...

run(me,opponent){ //start point notethetime() if(me=opponent){return C} defectbot[]=a list of primitive defectbots with a junk string value added run5times and record results:(run(opponnent, (opponent, defectbot[i]) { if (opponent cooperated sometimes){ if(isooponentclearlymimicbot(ooponent)){cooperate()}else{defect()}}//mimic bot is assumed to be simple and easy to identify as such, but I'm not exactly sure how i'd test this. checktime()//if the opponent takes way too long to run against a short defect bot with barely any baggage, it's going to have trouble with you. Defect for both your sakes.

if(opponent cooperates allways){if(opponentisclearly cooperate-bot){do I cooperate with C-bots in the hopes of cooperating with those who cooperate with C-bots or do I take advantage of the schmuck?}//a decision i really never made...

mimicbot="...." result=(opponent,mimicbot) if(opponent defected{defect()} checktime(){}//but this time, cooperate if things are taking dangerously long-MAYBE. it's somewhat reasonable for an opponent to take a while against a mimicbot, especially if opponent is mimicbot with small epsilon. .

psychbot1.0=("...."+mimicbot+"..."); /psychbot 1.0 sends you against mimic bot, and then does what you do. only, I get to see the final result.
record(run( opponent,psychbot1.0))

checktime();-possibly in a seperate thread. depends on how quickly this whole thing goes.
psychbot 1.1="...+defectbot".
result=run(opponent, psychbot1.1); psychbot 1.1 also checks you against defect bot, like the main program. the purpose, if used, is to avoid cooperating with programs that defect on finding a "D" if(result=C){return C;} else{return D}. }

}

Yeah. pseudocode. for java, not lisp.

edit: clarified a few things in the intro.

Comment by fractalman on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94 · 2013-07-11T22:10:07.291Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

"Basically we have a very surprising and useful result for a self-reported self-experiment with a sample size of one, that has not been replicated in hundreds of years despite known attempts by known competent, motivated, and resourceful people provided with (allegedly) clear and complete documentation. Nobody even managed to steal either the stone or the elixir it’s supposed to make. (And IIRC, it’s claimed that Flamel needs to use the elixir repeatedly.)"

-well... If it were purely a real-life situation I would agree. but we have priors from...cannon... Oh. Right. it never actually DOES anything onscreen that couldn't be done by a pretty red(?) rock. There's still a high chance that Cannon!Stone works as advertised, though...

I shall refer to "the McGuffin". the McGuffin may or may not be a working philosopher's stone. lets see.

  1. Quirrelmort has some way of detecting the McGuffin.
  2. Quirrelmort thinks it's valuable.
  3. Dumbledore REFUSES to hide it outside of hogwarts.
  4. Harry notes that Wizards have obunoculars. I note that wizards think they're great devices to watch Quidditch from a distance, and might not have thought to look at something CLOSE with them. -conclusion: hm....quite the mixed bag. Quite the mixed bag indeed...

p.s. Do you REALLY think there's any significant chance that MoR unicorn blood works as advertised in Cannon? I once fantasized about asking a unicorn for a sample of blood in order to totally bypass the downside.

...now that i'm thinking about unicorns, who's blood Cannon Quirrel drank, I find it rather likely that Quirrelmort's zombie-mode is the side-effect of drinking unicorn blood, and that it would be worse if he were killing unicorns. Or maybe not as bad; he could also be letting them live to avoid attracting centaur attention.