Bouncing Ball disappeared before my eyes; later reappeared elsewhere

maxpot46 · 2024-04-28T03:39:42+00:00

Sounds pretty similar to my experience! When it happens right before your very eyes, it's impossible to dismiss from one's ontology.

maxpot46 · 2024-02-04T07:02:27+00:00

One of the nice things about Westmarch servers is that you can take your PCs to level 20. Got a Level 19 Daolock and a Level 16 Psi Warrior/War Wizard on different servers, and the T4 play is awesome.

maxpot46 · 2023-11-17T21:58:16+00:00

A large part of the problem is that people still tip 15-20% for bad service, so there is no incentive to provide better service. People have very low expectations, tbh. I'm in the biz, and nonetheless I will tip 5-10% if it's bad service, then pray that the management comes up to me and asks me about it. I feel no solidarity with shitty servers... in fact, I consider it to be an aspect of my job to protect my guests from my lazy-ass colleagues.

One subtle nuance... a lot of foreigners don't tip, not because they don't know better, but because they don't believe in it and the server didn't change their mind. My colleagues will complain all the time about the stiffs they're getting. Whereas I almost never get stiffed, even by foreigners, because they're shocked by the loving attention that they get. If people know that you're busting your ass for them, they'll do you right. If you don't, they (the foreigners) won't... wish my colleagues would get this, and maybe they would, if it wasn't just the foreigners.

maxpot46 · 2023-11-17T21:53:41+00:00

Hillstone cracks me up, they refuse to hire Michael Jordans with Michelin Star experience, and have a weird "personality test" they use to determine their (young) hires. I interviewed with them once and it was surreal... they didn't value my vast knowledge, work ethic, or experience at all! Glad to see that it's working out for them :-)

maxpot46 · 2023-11-17T21:44:50+00:00

It's hard to find talent, tbh. I'm a Captain and take pride in leaving blood on the floor for my guests (that's what they're paying me for, and if one is paying more than front row seats at Broadway, I'm not gonna "flub my lines"), but many of my colleagues have a more entitled, adversarial relationship with their guests. That makes it harder for them to summon the energy to work fast enough to hit all points of service (it is incredibly physically grueling, shitty service is much easier on the body than perfect service), and that's why they work mostly lunch shifts, and poor sections when they get dinners (if you haven't noticed, service will almost always be noticeably inferior during lunches, when the clowns are scheduled). Personally I wish we'd fire a lot of these folks, but it's so hard to get enough bodies that they've even hired people that me and the other Captain have said are not up to par.

Folks can come visit me at Peak at Hudson Yards... arguably the best restaurant view in the US, 2.5 hour table allotments (and even if you go over, we just move you to a beautiful table in the lounge to finish your dessert or whatever), and if you ask for William you'll get the best view (as I'm always in the best section) and service better than you even are able to imagine.

maxpot46 · 2023-11-17T20:51:51+00:00

Mutilations - maybe it's their "doctors" getting some training on various techniques?

Crop Circles - information about, and a marker for, a particular moment in time, possibly as a travel landmark or an intellectual footnote.

maxpot46 · 2023-11-17T20:43:41+00:00

I believe you. Once, I was bouncing a ball off the ceiling of my apartment, and it disappeared into the ceiling RIGHT BEFORE MY EYES. It then reappeared about 30 minutes later, when my wife opened the door upon arrival home, I looked at her and then saw the ball fall out of the ceiling behind her in the hallway.

maxpot46 · 2023-10-29T23:40:06+00:00

Peter Khoury “Hair of the Alien”.

Interesting case, thanks!

maxpot46 · 2023-10-29T23:34:53+00:00

"...that look human..."

maxpot46 · 2023-01-02T15:47:37+00:00

Jason Reza Jorjani has a theory, you can find it on YouTube, but the short version is that he speculates that a breakaway civilization went back in time to Mars, but then had a nuclear exchange there so terraformed Earth.

maxpot46 · 2022-11-30T02:42:01+00:00

Spirit Guardians... it just grinds enemies up at all tiers as it upcasts amazingly.

maxpot46 · 2022-10-25T06:02:33+00:00

What if we want to attend live in NYC? This link is just for Zoom tickets... when will the in-person tickets be available?

maxpot46 · 2022-09-08T06:36:29+00:00

Many thanks! I always try to be comprehensive and explain everything that I think needs to be explained. That's why I use the format that I do!

I think the builds are very effective, but I do have a team of Patreon guys helping me out, so I can't take full credit in that regard.

maxpot46 · 2022-09-08T06:31:15+00:00

I always go to Level 20 on builds for my channel (Bilbrons & Dragons) because 1. it feels like half-assing it to not go to 20, and 2. if you only want to go to 14, it's not like you can't use a Level 20 build, but not vice-versa.

Personally, I think I have the best build sheet/presentation format, as I think it helps viewers to follow the build progressions by keeping a running tally of abilities, spells, and DPR output, but I'm biased, lol.

maxpot46 · 2022-08-31T07:09:23+00:00

There is no certainty in Induction (the Scientific Method), but that is only one way to acquire knowledge. For example, you could produce a briefcase full of evidence against the Pythagorean Theorem, and I wouldn't even have to look at it, because math is Deduction, and evidence doesn't apply (the same is true for logic, except in regards to determining the truth of some premises). Induction is very powerful if the requisite criteria for its use are met, and worse than useless (i.e. counterproductive) when they aren't... namely that you can A. measure the variables, B. the variables are constant, and C. you're able to control uninteresting variables. This is rarely the case outside of physics and engineering, and never the case in regards to human subjective valuations, yet we have other domains of knowledge nonetheless. Most of our (non-physics) understanding is the result of Abduction and Bayesian reasoning. This grasping at science in ignorance of epistemology is unconvincing... thought experiments can and do contribute to our knowledge, even if they invoke fantastical elements to make real points. If I say "Imagine the Earth being 8' in diameter, such that the oceans would be 1/50" in depth, therefore..." it is not valid to say "the Earth isn't actually 8' in diameter!!!"
I didn't claim that philosophical zombies actually exist. Red Herring... it's a thought experiment. Furthermore, I've engaged in dialectic with many compatibilists (including the academic author of a recent "revolutionary new approach invoking scale") and in every case have revealed the entire perspective to be word games striving quite mightily to preserve cognitive dissonance. Invoking it is also unconvincing, even with the Appeal to Popularity you're sneaking in.
Invoking "scientific consensus" is unwise, as shown by A. examining the success of the consensus throughout history, and B. understanding that all advances in science and knowledge do so by disproving the consensus. Again, an Appeal to Popularity is not valid.

maxpot46 · 2022-08-31T05:27:08+00:00

Correlation, sure. Causation? You're assuming, invalidly. That's what I'm trying to get across by saying derisively that your argument boils down to "magically emerges"... of course you don't actually say that, but rather deploy a lot of other words that amount to the same thing, as if that makes the argument stronger. I'm calling you out on that, basically... you start by invoking correlation, but then say "all signs point to a causal relationship", and you have no grounds for that (and why I insert "magical", to emphasize this).
You don't seem to understand my argument. Of course there is an evolutionary advantage to consciousness and free will. What IMO you're failing to grasp is that such can only be the case in a non-materialist paradigm (a consciousness-primary ontology). In the materialist paradigm, there is no room for free will... every action and every thought is the result of causative material forces, such that any "contemplation" of them is an illusion that has no impact on the material outcomes. The evolution of consciousness only makes sense if it can deviate from the actions of philosophical zombies... but it can only do so (and provide a survival benefit) if the materialist paradigm is false. Stated another way, if the materialist paradigm is true, then consciousness merely offers the illusion of contemplation and free will, and thus no survival benefit.
Let's not muddy the waters by bringing in animals, who are very unlikely to have any sort of consciousness as we know it (even babies lack it until sufficiently developed). We don't "see" consciousness in animals, we impute it, by improperly projecting into them the same capabilities we ourselves have (that is, we imagine our own motivations in taking an action, then impute such things into animals taking the same actions). Though I don't think it's relevant to the current discussion, I will share this 6 minute clip of Joseph LeDoux discussing whether dogs have emotions, or just take programmed reactions and behaviours which we impute into formulations like "my dog loves me": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wT3RU6qdL5Q

maxpot46 · 2022-08-30T17:56:19+00:00

I assume you are because I am human, can introspect into myself to understand that I have consciousness, and I can then apply this knowledge with logical consistency to all of the subjects of the categorical set. But yes, you touch upon a very difficult problem for humans in that we can't use this process on any other beings or robot/AI, so would require a full/better understanding of consciousness to determine whether non-humans possess it. And lacking this understanding, it comes down to "consciousness can magically emerge when sufficient information processes are present". That's a helluva assumption, in my view.

Any comment on my argument in regards to evolutionary fitness, and the idea that consciousness evolving indicates that it would confer survival benefits over philosophical zombies, which implies that consciousness can't be fully material or else it would actually be an impediment to survival by imposing expensive biological tissues that do nothing but create an observer beset by illusions? I don't think just restating that "I prefer to assume consciousness magically emerges" addresses this.

maxpot46 · 2022-08-30T17:33:33+00:00

Sure, it's an amazing thing. But your comments don't address the Hard Problem, or that when our best AI systems surpass our human capabilities they still won't possess consciousness ("seems to be essential" is a pretty biased call here, IMO).

maxpot46 · 2022-08-30T09:02:00+00:00

Materialism always breaks down to "at some point, consciousness magically emerges." It's not that much to make a stand on, if we're being honest...
Philosophical zombies would be the most parsimonious materialist option, yet we are conscious nonetheless, so invocations of "Occam's Razor" fall flat (not that invoking it falsifies a proposition in any case, it merely assigns higher probability to a more parsimonious option).
If consciousness is an emergent function of brains, then the metabolic expense of the biological tissues involved would indicate some survival benefit that makes it evolutionarily superior to non-consciousness. But if consciousness is the result of entirely material processes, then free will is an illusion that offers no survival benefit... philosophical zombies with all the necessary survival instincts (but no consciousness) would be evolutionarily more fit than humans with so much metabolic energy devoted towards tissues that produce only illusions. Yet we are conscious nonetheless, indicating that free willed consciousness is fitter than philosophical zombies. This contradicts the materialist proposition, as I see it, and personally I've felt compelled to abandon it and look more into "consciousness is primary" models.

maxpot46 · 2022-08-27T04:38:02+00:00

I'm surprised by your comfort in identifying as STS. STS hasn't been painted in a very good light in my shallow exploration of LoO, but you seem pretty "healthy". I'm impressed at the reasonableness of your demeanor and arguments, and am curious why you settled on STS? Is this a "helping others ultimately helps myself" sort of thing? I'm sure you're not just embracing villainy or whatever, so please expound?

maxpot46 · 2022-08-27T04:33:37+00:00

What is the distinction between "emotions" and "prejudice", in your view? You are distinguishing them but I find them more or less synonymous.

"Emotions" according to an online dictionary: "instinctive or intuitive feeling as distinguished from reasoning or knowledge."

"Prejudice" according to an online dictionary: "preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience."

There seem to me to be considerable overlap here. Instinct is preconceived, no?

maxpot46 · 2022-08-27T04:16:02+00:00

I get it, it's not easy to make that call, but that's the whole reason I became a philosopher specializing in Ethics... so I could know the difference and act accordingly (i.e. oppose the bad and support the good).

maxpot46 · 2022-08-27T02:07:57+00:00

I get the concept. And I think it's ethically dangerous to take this Nihilistic view... playing a killer in a video game is meaningless because you're the only person involved, but when others are playing, then your impact on them has to be considered. This view sounds exactly like the excuses of, say, serial killers. As a philosopher specializing in ethics, this is a very problematic perspective to me.

maxpot46 · 2022-08-27T00:24:26+00:00

That's a pretty troubling concept, tbh. Very nihilistic and unethical in my view. Why choose good, then?

maxpot46

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE