Stack Exchange
log in

Bridgeburners

 Discussion on question by Miles Means…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Bridgeburners
Mar 7, 2020 17:09
A good realistic sci-fi example of this is Greg Egan's "Amalgam" civilization, which appears in his novel Incandescence, and his short stories: Riding the Crocodile, Glory, and Hot Rock.
 

 Discussion on answer by Wesley Long: …

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Bridgeburners
Aug 30, 2019 13:05
@WesleyLong All human tasks can be reducible to if-then style task lists. We just don't see it that way because, when we come across a problem of exponential complexity, we approximately reduce it to polynomial complexity via heuristics. This gives us the illusion that we're doing something deeper than a task-list. But AI already beats us in many problems of that nature (e.g. playing chess, diagnosing skin cancer), and it's already getting better. So your statement "no real skills... doing things that can be automated" can, in principle, apply to all humans.
 

 Discussion on question by Conny: Disc…

Imported from a comment discussion on workplace.stackexchange....
Bridgeburners
Aug 8, 2019 12:54
TBH to the OP, real life disputes are almost never as one-sided as you made this one sound. You clearly favor John's position over Chan's. Are you sure there aren't other stated reasons that Chan wouldn't want to abandon the legacy Windows product besides protecting employees?
 

 Discussion on answer by Amadeus: Can …

Imported from a comment discussion on writing.stackexchange.co...
Bridgeburners
Jun 28, 2019 19:16
O'Brien "wins" 1984. He's as tangible a "bad guy" figure as you can get in a book. Also, why was a Song of Ice and Fire so highly regarded? Even before the show was announced, it was one of the most successful series in the high fantasy genre. And its third book Storm of Swords (the most widely considered "best" of the series) could have "bad guys win" as its synopsis. And it's certainly not like it grabbed people's attention with good guys prevailing in the first book. (In fact, it's the very opposite that gave it its notoriety in the first place.)
 

 Discussion on answer by jo1storm: Is …

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...
Bridgeburners
Jun 19, 2019 13:08
I think it's only a logical fallacy if you're inconsistent about it. There's nothing invalid about my adoption of the axiom "the only moral acts are those that are legal in the state in which they're committed". Then any time I refer to the law to determine if something is moral, my logic is sound. I'm just then bound to acknowledging that the Nazis' concentration camps and Rome's gladiator matches were morally permissible, according to my definition. (Usually people who invoke the law for morality wouldn't make those concessions, hence the contradiction. But in principle, they could.)
 

 Discussion on answer by Cyn: How to c…

Imported from a comment discussion on writing.stackexchange.co...
Bridgeburners
May 3, 2019 16:36
It is interesting that a lot of these characteristics overlap with autistic behavior, because (according to the DSM, iirc) we do attempt to emulate normal human behavior on a regular basis ("social camouflaging"). I imagine that's exactly what you're postulating that the eldritch is doing. I could certainly relate to several of these bullet points. And, growing up, my siblings have often joked that they think I'm an alien. I think it would be quite instructive for the OP to use some known symptoms of autism as an inspiration for the character.
 

 Discussion on question by Type Theori…

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...
Bridgeburners
Mar 1, 2019 13:01
@TypeTheorist Your program that proves a contradiction can only be said to be a "computer program" in the sense meant by the Curry-Howard correspondence if you can actually use the isomorphism to translate your program into a mathematical proof. Thus if you have a true "computer program" that evaluates (A = A & A != A) to True, you should be able to use C-H and translate that into an actual logical proof. Please do so.
 

 Discussion on answer by Amadeus: Is t…

Imported from a comment discussion on writing.stackexchange.co...
Bridgeburners
Jan 20, 2019 02:47
I probably wouldn't try to "fight back" or "escape" if I was being held captive by a dangerous organization with guns. I don't think it's a sexist trope if the female captive also doesn't do that.
 

 Discussion on answer by Sklivvz: Did …

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
Bridgeburners
Jan 8, 2019 20:28
The quote "Non-avian dinosaurs were extinct about 65 million years ago, as the most recent dinosaur bone was directly dated as being 64.8 ± 0.9 Ma old." is a pretty weak inference. Actually, it's just a logically incorrect statement. That bothered me. Now, I already believe that we have enough evidence to reasonably claim that they went extinct 65MY ago and we can treat it as a fact. But the reasoning of the above quote is still wrong.
 

 Discussion on question by Ian Ng: Tel…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Bridgeburners
Jul 20, 2018 13:42
I have news for you. When you walk one foot in any direction, that's also the same as killing yourself and making a clone somewhere else. The entire notion of some object having identity, and maintaining that identity when we move it some distance, completely evaporates when you look at fundamental particles like electrons. They are called "identical particles" in quantum mechanics for a reason. Switching the position of two electrons is literally identical to doing nothing at all.
 

 Discussion on question by Carlos Cine…

Imported from a comment discussion on stats.stackexchange.com/...
Bridgeburners
Apr 29, 2018 21:41
I think the best way to go about it is to start with the question, "what is the probability that ball $k$ will remain in the vase at 12PM?" Then do the math and show that the answer is zero. After everyone is satisfied with that, then you can ask "how many balls will remain in the vase at 12PM?" It should dawn on everyone that what you showed is true for all $k.$ Afterwards, much highjinks will ensue. But at least any confusion on the question (of which I admit I have much) would not be due to a lack of understanding of the relevant probability theory.
 

 Discussion on question by Bridgeburne…

Imported from a comment discussion on interpersonal.stackexcha...
Bridgeburners
Mar 16, 2018 22:46
I really appreciate all the answers and comments! Honestly, the volume of responses is substantially higher than I expected. Turns out IPS is far busier than the SE sites I normally frequent, which has thrown me for a loop. I'm not ignoring all of you, I have just been really busy, and cannot possibly tackle all of this now. There are a lot of common themes in responses, so I might address them in an edit in my question. But I'll have to find a few hours on the weekend to do so, as well as decide which answer I want to accept. I'm not ignoring all of you!
 

 Discussion on question by ArcWraith: …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Bridgeburners
Feb 22, 2018 17:06
What you're describing sounds a lot like dinosaurs. Keep in mind, in the real world, our mammalian ancestors were never able to evolve more dynamically beyond the kind that were small, and skittered around and hid really well, until after the dinosaurs' extinction. That doesn't mean it's impossible to have something like humans and dinosaurs; only that the evolutionary path that led to humans must have occurred in isolation from, or well before dinosaurs became the force that they were. Otherwise dinosaurs would render our evolutionary path virtually impossible.