Posts
Comments
woops, yes that was rather stupid of me. Should be fixed now, my most preferred is me backstabbing Clippy, my least preferred is him backstabbing me. In the middle I prefer cooperation to defection. That doesn't change my point that since we both have that preference list (with the asymmetrical ones reversed) then it's impossible to get either asymmetrical option and hence (C,C) and (D,D) are the only options remaining. Hence you should co-operate if you are faced with a truly rational opponent.
I'm not sure whether this holds if your opponent is very rational, but not completely. Or if that notion actually makes sense.
Sorry for being a pain, but I didn't understand exactly what you said. If you're still an active user, could you clear up a few things for me? Firstly, could you elaborate on counterfactual definiteness? Another user said contrafactual, is this the same, and what do other interpretations say on this issue?
Secondly, I'm not sure what you meant by the whole universe being ruled by hidden variables, I'm currently interpreting that as the universe coming pre-loaded with random numbers to use and therefore being fully determined by that list along with the current probabilistic laws. Is that what you meant? If not, could you expand a little on that for me, it would help my understanding. Again, this is quite a long time post-event so if anyone reading this could respond that would be helpful.
In reality, not very surprised. I'd probably be annoyed/infuriated depending on whether the actual stakes are measured in billions of human lives.
Nevertheless, that merely represents the fact that I am not 100% certain about my reasoning. I do still maintain that rationality in this context definitely implies trying to maximise utility (even if you don't literally define rationality this way, any version of rationality that doesn't try to maximise when actually given a payoff matrix is not worthy of the term) and so we should expect that Clippy faces a similar decision to us, but simply favours the paperclips over human lives. If we translate from lives and clips to actual utility, we get the normal prisoner's dilemma matrix - we don't need to make any assumptions about Clippy.
In short, I feel that the requirement that both agents are rational is sufficient to rule out the asymmetrical options as possible, and clearly sufficient to show (C,C) > (D,D). I get the feeling this is where we're disagreeing and that you think we need to make additional assumptions about Clippy to assure the former.
I understood that Clippy is a rational agent, just one with a different utility function. The payoff matrix as described is the classic Prisoner's dilemma where one billion lives is one human utilon and one paperclip on Clippy utilon; since we're both trying to maximise utilons, and we're supposedly both good at this we should settle for (C,C) over (D,D).
Another way of viewing this would be that my preferences run thus: (D,C);(C,C);(D,D);(C,D) and Clippy run like this: (C,D);(C,C);(D,D);(D,C). This should make it clear that no matter what assumptions we make about Clippy, it is universally better to co-operate than defect. The two asymmetrical outputs can be eliminated on the grounds of being impossible if we're both rational, and then defecting no longer makes any sense.
7 years late, but you're missing the fact that (C,C) is universally better than (D,D). Thus whatever logic is being used must have a flaw somewhere because it works out worse for everyone - a reasoning process that successfully gets both parties to cooperate is a WIN. (However, in this setup it is the case that actually winning would be either (C,D) or (C,D), both of which are presumably impossible if we're equally rational).
Are you sure that's right chronologically? Just because in the UK we use dd/mm/yy and we say "Fourteenth of March, twenty-fifteen".
Japan apparently uses yy/mm/dd which makes even more sense, but I have no idea how they pronounce their dates. Point being, I'm not sure which order things actually evolved in.
This would to some extent letting Harry keep his wand- he wants to have some fun after all, and Harry should be given a very limited chance to win. Not much, maybe strip him naked, surround him by armed killers and point a gun at his head, whilst giving him only a minute to think. But leave him his wand, and do give him the full 60 seconds, don't just kill him if he looks like he's stalling.
Well, seeing as he was almost prophesied to fail, it was sensible to make sure Harry would have someone to stop him in the future. And as it turns out, this was a very good idea.
It's actually the same tactic as the Weasley twins used to cover the "engaged to Ginever Weasley" story- plant so many make newspaper reports that everyone gets confused. And it kinda happens again after the Hermione/Draco incident. Guess Eliezer like the theme of people not being able to discern the truth from wild rumours if the truth's weird enough.
So... what we should do now is to work out all the things Quirrell should have before this. He couldn't predict partial transfiguration, true. But he knew that Harry had a power he knew not, and had a long time to plan for contingencies.
Personally, I think he should have had the death eaters disillusioned, surround Harry but from a distance, cast holograms to confuse him and then use ventriliquo charms. At the very least disillusionment should be as much of a general tactic as a massed finite and the death eaters could have been hidden.
The massively more obvious solution is just to kill Harry quickly, and moreover to not EVER offer the protagonist 60 seconds to try to save himself, no matter how interesting that sounds.
Any other general/specific tactics that LV could and should have thought of in advance? He had an entire year to plan this, and has Harry level intelligence. He should have predicted and outplayed.
Other than modesty, letting Hermione take credit is a very elegant solution to a slew of problems: he can say that House Potter owes her no enmity after her defeating of their common foe, and this gets rid of any lingering doubts about her attacking Malfoy (probably...).
1 G is a high acceleration, but it's not that fast initially. That gives him about half a second before his head falls below ground level (0.64s to fall 2m).
I think Dumbledore's been suggested, but I have no idea and I'm pretty sure there isn't conclusive evidence anywhere.
At least one other person has suggested stating plainly, in Parseltongue, that the optimal way to kill Harry would be to send him to Azkaban and let him kill the dementors. If that doesn't kill him, then continue with the previous plan.
I doubt this is in fact the safest way to dispose of Harry, but it might be possible as an extra idea to gain time.
Yes, that particular plan is highly improbable, and LV can search the globe for Harry-builders in his own time.
The elements of this that are threatening are: if you kill me that might no avert the prophecy; and if you kill me I might come back to haunt you (means unspecified in both cases). The standard answer to the former is that if prophecies can't be averted then this is all a waste anyway, so LV might as well try to kill Harry. The second is harder, but I model Voldemort as rejecting this, although I don't quite know why.
tl;dr avadakedavra
Accusations in Parseltongue are not true, the speaker merely believes them. (Actually, this raises the possibility of lying using a confundus charm. I'll assume that's banned by some Rule). If you were trying to mitigate the chance of someone destroying the world, you place a very high probability on them trying to trick you. The response is to use Hermione's algorithm that defeated LV earlier and place an ethical injunction on not killing Harry.
Now, that's probably a little harsh for the exam question, and LV won't necessarily adopt his enemy's tactic (even though it defeated him once and that's one of his rules), but I should think he requires substantial evidence to not kill Harry. More than an accusation of not being ambitious, which is explained by Harry's naivety.
So what you're saying... is that Harry should sing?
You can't say 2+2=3, so no. You will input the word 'true' as the simplest fix.
My model of Voldemort is highly risk averse when it comes to existential risk. His response to this is to laugh at having been told he has no ambition, then to kill Harry.
Voldemort trusts himself not to destroy the world, just the same way as Harry trusts himself. Maybe we shouldn't be so trusting of either.
This is new as far as I can tell. Please write up a review based around this, and based on a cursory read through of Reddit, it might be best not to do this in prose, it takes even longer to evaluate apparently and Eliezer's plan has backfired
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoneHorriblyRight (look at last entry in "Fan Works" tab)
Variant of a suggestion from Reddit: the original is to transfigure the Earth into gold for a nanosecond, along with a trail that reaches out to the Pioneer probes. The goal being to hit all horcruxes at once, and at the same time transfigure the death eaters and LV to kill them horcrux-less. This is supposed to 'work' because it's for a short amount of time.
Bearing in mind that the magic cost is dependant upon target size, I'd like to suggest another option: transfigure the cubic kilometre below them into a small diamond, or better yet, transfigure it into a slew of tiny bullets travelling at 0.1c and aimed everywhere except a cylinder centred on Harry. The target size (the bullets) is small, so this is feasible in a short time frame whilst causing mass disorientation as everyone suddenly is hit by 1g downwards acceleration and 0.1c bullets.
If I've misinterpreted the phrase target size, be aware that the opposite plan is also OP: simply transfigure the layer of dirt you're standing on (if that's what target means) into a 2km tall tower, then apparate.
Existence of one stupidity does not allow for all stupidities. A perhaps unreasonably pessimistic assumption is that everything LV has done so far has been the correct choice, for reasons perhaps not well understood by Harry and thus the readers.
Regardless, the issue with the challenge is that if we can think of a solution, Voldemort is allowed t think of it unless it uses knowledge we know he doesn't have. The only other viable solutions are ones with no counter. This does have a counter (a very niche one, although I quite like the idea of an invisible death eater army and the visible one all being dummies; there are almost certainly other counters) and thus is not the optimal solution. I don't have a better one though as this is a horrendously high wall.
Ok, there is probably transfiguration material and I can't think of a source that states that transfiguration has wand movements. This therefore seems to meet the minimum criteria (I still think that this is perhaps an obvious solution, so Voldemort will have guarded against it, perhaps all the death eater's are disillusioned and are casting holograms and ventriliquo charms?)
Stratagem (1) State something that is true, but that LV won't believe. Either LV thinks you've broken the Parseltongue curse, or you gain time in the confusion. Him thinking that you've broken the curse gives you a power he knows not that you can bargain/threaten with. Sub-suggestions: "Sometimes we make our own phoenix tears" (when asked why he told his friends to refrain back near the start) ; "The solar system will die in 10 billion years and you will be forever alone" ; "Hey, you know how you forged a time-turned letter? Well, it didn't actually include my code-word for time-turned messages... I wonder if the great Lord Voldemort can predict what will happen now?" (not a lie).
And someone else made the suggestion of making statements that have a true consequent so that you can make up the antecedent along the lines of "If you destroy me now, the sun will die, and the starts blink out one by one. I know not when, but it shall cause you great grief and misery teacher. If you allow me to live, shall keep them alive for as long as I can, remember my vow"
I might be wrong, but I interpreted that as Tom having made a previous commitment to not raise had nor wand against other versions of himself. That curse is gone, but the resonance is a distinct entity and is still there.
Pessimistic assumption LV knows that Harry can do partial transfiguration. LV has put up anti- apparition, anti- time turning and anti-transfiguration wards.
Less probable Pessimistic assumption these wards do not count as LV's magic once laid and will not resonate with Harry, meaning they will stay active. Alternatively, a death eater has laid them on previously understood instructions.
Pessimistic assumption LV has been planning exactly this conversation for months and has thought of every possible plan of action that he could do. He has Harry level intelligence. All viable solutions must therefore use information LV does not have access to, which does not include the fact that Harry is Tom Riddle. Asking for power he knows not is trying to patch this minor hole.
Meta reasons? If Harry didn't have a wand this would be even harder.
I agree this seems incompetent though, at least earlier he (may) have needed it for the Unbreakable Vow, which makes it less incompetent that him having had his wand unnecessarily for the last couple of chapters.
Okay, so far as I can see, this is a relatively new avenue of attack, but I haven't got a clear idea yet.
Firstly, assuming Harry can tell LV about some power he knows not (does simple knowledge count as a power? Harry could explain calculus or imaginary numbers real quick...), who do we save? One presumably banned option is to ask for Harry Potter (or Tom M. Riddle) to be saved. Who else is there? Obvious suggestions like Mad-Eye, McGonagall and others don't actually help Harry in his present situation as far as I can tell. Dumbledore?
Secondly, is there any traction in playing the fact that Harry Potter is... well, not the character we're calling Harry Potter? In Ch. 74 'Harry' actually summons Harry Potter (the fake ritual). I suppose the fact that Dr. Seuss wrote some of it means that it was indeed a fake ritual, so we'll call this this thread's crackpot theory. A similar theme is whether by being Tom Riddle, Harry can enter the horcrux system. I put very low odds on him being able to defeat LV from there, but he might be able to reincarnate in a more powerful wizard at least.
Thirdly, we have powers LV knows not. Partial transfiguration... well a number of suggestions have already been suggested involving this so I'll leave it. I will mention that the fact time-turners are safe seems to imply that anti-matter based ideas simply won't work for some unknown reason, but diamond bullets seem reasonable if you can find transfiguration material such as your own skin / Hufflepuff bones.
Any thoughts on this? How much of this (other than the horcrux thing) has already been mentioned?
So... what stops the dark Lord from seeing Harry's wand move, then immediately putting up shields? If Harry doesn't need to move his wand to perform transfiguration then fat enough bullets will work. I don't know what a reasonable wizard reaction time is, but it's safe to assume that 0.05c bullets will be too fast to notice. But if Harry has to move, LV can get up shields in time I think.
The next question is, what are you transfiguring? You don't appear to be able to transfigure the vacuum, and it's been established that air cannot be transfigured.
I don't see why she'd win. Unless alicorn princesses are innately more powerful in the spirit world...
WHY hasn't Voldemort ordered his followers to take Harry's wand? That is incompetence.
Fixed
Do we have a source for prophecies coming true reliably? Back in ch 108 Quirrell seemed to think it possible to avert a prophecy.
I still hold out hope that 'the power he knows not' is an actual power. Friendship, or Love is so clichéd as to be actively off-putting. But yay for Hermiocorn!
Damn. I missed that hypothesis. I had been assuming that Harry had somehow gotten a hold of Voldemort's gun (somewhat confused as to how it was in his pouch though). But yes, that clearly fits the data better and of course both Riddles would have thought of muggle weapons in advance, especially General Chaos.
Thanks for pointing out the false dilemma. I'm wondering whether he ever intended to kill Harry, specifically as to whether that gun is loaded.
Does anyone remember anything in Parseltongue which stated explicit intent to kill? I note that this line is not in Parseltonge:
I suppose you have doubts? Mark well, I could kill you this instant, for there is no longer a Headmaster of Hogwarts to be informed of it. Doubt me all you wish, but remember that.
The previous dialogue is in Parseltongue, and the dialogue ends after this. I'll go have a more critical look at earlier chapters but I'm predicting the gun in Harry's hand will go 'click'.
EDIT: my mistake, Harry brought his own gun. I have a strong sense of literary disbelief that Harry managed to shoot Voldemort while his horcruxes were so conveniently down. If the gun is not suspect, then back up hypotheses are: Voldemort can deflect bullets OR Voldemort's horcruxes were in fact still working.
Is there any legitimate reason why a gun wouldn't work? I mean, I now strongly suspect it wasn't loaded, but in theory it should do.
I admit the uncertainty as to how the horcrux system works could mean that killing Tom R. Jr is a bad idea.
Maybe the final spell is the alicorn Princess spell, and the resonance was caused on a meta-level by the literary gods.
I suspect that Hermione goes first, because that's how you test that this is a safe idea: you do something 'nice'. I dispute the use of others as guinea pigs as actually being nice, though. Even when there are positives to them.
He says in Parseltongue that his reason is to for her to help Harry. I don't believe Harry's fears about perfect Occlumens, because Slytherin would have known about their existence and not made such a mistake (I'm putting 90% on Parseltongue being a secure communications method between Voldie and Harry).
Suggestion: the entire plot with super-Hermione is Voldemort's practise at being nice. But he's not being nice to Hermione, he's being nice to Harry. He reasoned that this is a better way of stopping Harry destroying the stars than simply killing him (this way carries a slight risk but stops him having to kill his friend). He simply didn't see it because is was a 'nice' method.
This would explain the extravagance of the immortality mechanisms he's giving Hermione.
What's interesting is the irony- he seems to think that Hermione can stop Harry making world domination choices. Harry. This is Voldemort here, and he genuinely believes that his nemesis, who is very much against death (even more so than him) is a greater threat to the world.
And his solution: make sure he has friends. I neither see how Voldermort sees Harry as a more credible threat than himself, nor why he thinks Hermione is a better option than simply killing Harry.
This seems viable. The line immediately preceding:
For I would never want you to be deprived of Hermione Granger's counsel and restraint, not ever while the stars yet live.
This strongly suggests to me that he wanted to make Granger a horcrux (as in, a horcrux for Granger). This helps to pattern match with 'practising being nice' but as before, we meet the same confusion: If Voldemort is going to kill HP, why is he trying to make Hermione invincible?
At least if this all ends well, Hermione really will be the stand-out witch of her generation. And the next.
I find the assumption that Dumbledore is in the mirror and can use it suspect. I fully expect him to either (a) not be in the mirror, but actually behind it/other side of room. or (b) to simply walk out at the start of the next chapter.
So no, I don't expect an epic battle next chapter. However, I don't see a way out of one... I notice that I am confused.
(Prediction: Dumbledore comes out of the mirror, followed by several more Dumbledore's. Or maybe multiple ancient Dark Wizards and Light Lords... would explain the Map's confusion. This actually could lead to an epic battle.)
But Dumbledore doesn't necessarily expect to live out any encounter with Voldemort, does he? And Harry's lost his chance of a phoenix
This was what I thought as well. I doubt we'll get confirmation of that prediction though, unless Quirrell/Harry actually DOES try to destroy the world. In which case presumably the Atlanteans have to save the day (unsatisfying from a literary point of view, hence unlikely).
Fair point. I suppose it was that if everyone posted subtle variations on a theme it's a way to vote mine. Or simply copy someone else's answer, write in an "Edit: ninja'd" and hope for accidental votes.
Having said that, looking at the HTML is a much more general solution and probably does deserve an up-vote. But the principle was to only give a vote to the first person to answer, because after that help is technically unsolicited (since they can see it's already been given).
It's not further evidence, but it's a good suggestion for a possible place for Hermione to be. It's safe from Quirrell and unexpected. It's also partially hidden by a different charm (assuming QQ can sense Harry's magic)
now I feel stupid for not doing a google search to see if parts of that sentence were recognised phrases. Of course that's what it means. In fairness though, this is simply a FAI refinement of my first reading- it doesn't show what it thinks you want, but somehow scans your utility function and calculates what to show you.
Either way, the Mirror of Erised still seems to be pretty much standard.