I haven't seen STRANGE ÆONS' video about HPMOR here, so I'd strongly recommend checking that out
I enjoyed watching that, even as someone who really liked HPMoR.
I wasn't aware of a lot of the wider context around the author and the rationalist movement. For example, I read HPMoR with Harry calling all the wizards in the book NPCs as commentary about Rowling's writing (that her characters and magic system bend to suit the plot, as very few characters have any agency) so every other person at Hogwarts is an NPC, but if Yudkowsky actually believes that people who aren't rational are, effectively, subhuman, then that twists the interpretation of HPMoR rather dramatically. I'm still not convinced Yudkowsky thinks that, but it's disheartening to hear that some HPMoR readers basically founded a cult that does believe that.
Thanks for the link! I should check out his other videos. He seems like a really hoppy frood.
I’m still not convinced Yudkowsky thinks that
You should keep it that way; if you read more of his shit then his fascist proclivities will trip over themselves trying to convert you. But also it’ll cause psychic damage. So best to just avoid.
Back when I was a teenager and didn't know about LW or any of these turds, HPMoR came across my desk. I read less than five chapters before I realised I couldn't stand the smugness of MC Potter and dropped it. I took the most rational course of action after this and became a HPMoR hater. How could I prove, objectively, that this was a bad fic^[Note: This was just a framing device for this comment. I don't actually "hate" HPMoR. I mostly forgot about it until LW popped up in my life again like ten years later and I when into a K-hole and learned that the Bay Area, where I was soon to move for work, was filled with technofascists.]?
Initially, I was thinking about how it's kind of stupid to take a world with magic in it, then write a story about trying to impose "scientific" or "rational" concepts outside of that world onto it. It's kind of a non-starter in the sense that it feels like the point of a magical setting is to remove some of the annoyances of reality. I mean, that's the entire plot of HP to start with: Potter had a shit life, and now he gets to do dope wizard shit. Bringing in rationality to a magical world would seem to spoil the whole thing.
But then I realised that I don't read that much fiction and that there are probably enough counterexamples where I'm wrong, and that this idea is pulled off well. So I thought some more. How do you write a story that "rationally" talks about magic? I think it's an exercise in worldbuilding. Like, if you're going to write a story about a magical world and call out all the ways it doesn't fit with the economic and scientific models that apply to the mortal world, that kind of necessitates some reasoning about why.
For example, I remember that MC HP points out that you could perform arbitrage by exploiting the exchange rates between gold and silver in the mortal and magic worlds. OK, sure. The only thing that justified why the magical world hadn't closed this loophole was that the mortal and magic worlds were disconnected. My argument is: this is fine if the thing you're explaining is why mortals don't see fairies or dragons fly around every day. It's not fine if you're talking about arbitrage. You're saying that, in the magical world, nobody, at any point, has seen that you can buy something in one place for a lower price than you can sell elsewhere? Yud, of course, lampshades all this with Potter just saying "Boy, are these magical bumpkins stupid."
This is the only example I have to draw on from HPMoR because I ain't gonna read that shit to find more, but I guarantee that Yud never does the research about how all the models and laws and theories he likes to teach actually came about, and which ones would definitely be observable or applicable in the magic world and which wouldn't be.
I hadn't read HPRick and Morty, so thanks for that!
Lots of gems about wizard fascism. I liked this part:
"It means, oh golly oh gee, that uh, one day science will discover space travel and cryogenics and then we'll all be, uh, immortal space gods with our own private stars, Professor!"
Harry hated how inarticulate he sometimes sounded outside of his own internal monologues, which were much more elaborate. One of these days he would have to sit down and write down his internal monologues in a coherent sequence.
From the first and most popular comment
Your average narcissistic personality tests assume an average person as a test-taker, and so cannot tell whether one's overly inflated ego is justified or not.
yeehaw
Took me a second to realise this was LW.
Oof on the part of the author though:
Eliezer Yudkowsky: Nope.
Algernoq (the blogpost author): I assume this is a "Nope, because of secret author evidence that justifies a one-word rebuttal" or a "Nope, you're wrong in several ways but I have higher-value things to do than retype the sequences". (Also, it's an honor; I share your goal but take a different road.) [...]
Richard_Kennaway: What goal do you understand yourself to share with Eliezer, and what different road?
Algernoq: I don't deserve to be arrogant here, not having done anything yet. The goal: I had a sister once, and will do what I can to end death. The road: I'm working as an engineer (and, on reflection, failing to optimize) instead of working on existential risk-reduction. My vision is to build realistic (non-nanotech) self-replicating robots to brute-force the problem of inadequate science funding. I know enough mechanical engineering but am a few years away from knowing enough computer science to do this.
I should not be surprised that the author of HPRick and Morty also wrote SCP-8008.
This leads me to wonder: Has he said anything about Rowling, you know, turning out to be a garbage human?
I couldn't find anything, though I did find this thread where he ponders if the problem with police is that they just have too much gosh darn testosterone while awkwardly trying not to take a side:
People, I said "under 100 ng/dL of testosterone" with intent to thereby short-circuit trans issues because that is the part I care about. The conjecture (though I'd consider it halfway busted at this point) was meant to exclude, eg, a trans AFAB taking testosterone.
"A trans AFAB". Lovely.
Don't worry though, nothing quite says "transphobes not welcome" like this:
And to be explicit, we are happy to host economically literate people in favor of market solutions who politely accede to pronoun requests.
Well OK maybe they are welcome, but at least they'll begrudgingly use the right pronouns while they gleefully tear down all my human rights!
There was just recently a dust-up wherein authors quit a romance con because it was to feature someone who published a Harry Potter fic with the serial numbers filed off, and supporting anything that keeps the brand going is putting money in Rowling's pocket and thus actively making trans people's lives worse. People care about this kind of thing; at least, some of 'em do. There are reactions. Some of those are talk about "reclaiming the fandom", while others regard that as untenable self-justification... But any way you slice it, the subject is very clearly coming up.
In the year since the Neil Gaiman unpleasantness dropped, I've lost count of all the threads where people have said that they can't enjoy his work again, that they are painfully re-evaluating their relationship with Sandman or Coraline or American Gods. They can't help but engage with the subject. And, hey, I get it! I generally liked his stuff and saw him live at a few events over the years, where he was an enjoyable public speaker. I don't have a Death tattoo that now needs covering up, but I can still register a loss. Discovering Sandman while visiting a friend on vacation when they were checking it out of the public library... that was an uncomplicatedly happy memory!
This kind of thing grips a person and compels a response. Even if that's only a self-justifying rationalization of the status quo! But Yudkowsky (to my knowledge) has said nothing, none of the lesswrongs commenting on that interview said anything... I expected something, like a "Rational!Harry is the only canon now", or a "Methods of Rationality is the greatest fic to be based on the works of Hatsune Miku". Anything, you know? But I haven't even seen the step that elsewhere would be the bare minimum.
I don't think he ever cared that much about Harry Potter in the first place. Much of HPMOR has these odd little uncommented contradictions with the original books that seem to result from skimming or basing your info on fan wikis.
I think he pretty clearly wanted to preach rationalism and decided to weld it onto the most popular IP he could find.
I'm under the impression that he essentially stated as much, though i'm a bit too lazy to go quote mining.
"If you think you can point to an unnecessary sentence within [HPMoR], go ahead and try." --Eliezer Yudkowsky, August 2022
This is just a trap to trick people into reading the first sentence of HPMoR isn't it?
General HPMoR
🫡
Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.
AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)
This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.
[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]
See our twin at Reddit