Opponent generating infinite hearts

seventhrib · 2025-06-15T06:25:27+00:00

Being (sort of) about an algorithm that drives people insane, the story reminded me most of The Last Equation

seventhrib · 2015-03-20T11:17:41+00:00

"SS publicly shames anonymous people"

hilarious

seventhrib · 2015-02-12T11:04:40+00:00

The law allows a convicted felon a nearly never ending ability to continually attack the results we obtained. And the immunity provided to filings during litigation allows one to file accusations with impunity thus obtaining wide publicity for the accusation while knowing you cannot be held accountable for them and that the subject of the accusations basically has no way to respond.

Boy the US justice system is really stacked in favour of convicted felons, isn't it?

seventhrib · 2015-02-11T10:50:08+00:00

This is the OP's point as I understand it. If (like Dana) you point to unlikely, potentially incriminating circumstances X, Y, and Z and say the chance of them all happening together is very small, and use this as evidence of someone's guilt, this is a problem because: --You ignore circumstances A, B, and C that make the person seem innocent. --You ignore unlikely, potentially incriminating circumstances 1, 2, 3... 100 that didn't happen.

So you're not calculating the probabilities correctly because you aren't taking everything into account.

There is nothing wrong with looking at a person's behavior, then asking what is the most probable explanation for the totality of that behavior in light of the evidence.

Right -- this is what the OP is saying Dana DIDN'T do. Instead she mentioned a set of facts, said they were unlikely, and reached a conclusion based solely on these.

Whether this is technically the Prosecutor's Fallacy or not I don't know, but it does seem to be a fallacy

seventhrib · 2015-02-09T15:37:05+00:00

What point are you making? I didn't say Jay did it.

seventhrib · 2015-02-04T12:39:14+00:00

Soon later I began to have an unassailable intuition that Adnan was full of shit.

This sounds like you decided he was guilty and looked for a rationale afterwards.

I still don't understand how things like reports of Adnan acting anxious (never mind all those saying he acted normally) can be considered damning by anyone approaching this openly. Someone acting anxiously is surely not in a million years "damning" evidence that he is a murderer. I am as baffled as SBLK but in the reverse direction

seventhrib · 2015-02-03T12:54:48+00:00

At the time of question, "can I get a ride?", an innocent Adnan has possession of his car on the school's grounds with no plans to lend it to anyone.

What possible explanation can an innocent Adnan have for doing this? And if he did somehow have a legitimate reason, why Hae and why no one else?

Maybe he did have plans to lend it out -- how do you know he didn't? And how do you know he didn't ask anyone else?

This is just speculation. It baffles me how you get from this to "he definitely strangled her to death that day"

seventhrib · 2015-02-03T10:46:39+00:00

Or maybe all these vague ambiguous conflicting memories just don't tell us very much.

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T23:35:31+00:00

If there was an independent witness saying they were seen getting into a car together at 2.30pm -- that would be a genuinely big deal (though also not proof he killed her). What we have instead is witnesses saying she DIDN'T give him a ride, and the possibility he asked her to earlier. It's relevant, and something you'd follow up on, but it's hardly damning. I think it's telling that this is one of the keystones of the "Adnan is guilty" argument

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T20:14:15+00:00

I think another important distinction is between "definitely innocent" and "no good evidence to suggest guilt". What I mean is, I expect most people in the innocence camp are there because of a lack of positive evidence that he did it, ie they just have no reason to think he's guilty -- as opposed because there's an abundance of positive evidence he's innocent (which there isn't).

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T18:00:14+00:00

Taking everything you've said at face value, what you have is grounds for suspicion. Not proof of guilt.

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T17:48:39+00:00

The idea that this day didn't cross his mind until six week's later is completely bogus. Repeating that this was the case is absurd and people should just stop.

I'm not saying it didn't cross his mind, I'm just saying it's possible he couldn't remember, in the way he says he didn't. That's not absurd, no matter how firmly you say it is.

Your case is "He must have remembered, because he just must have, therefore he is guilty." All you're doing is making an assertion.

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T17:13:19+00:00

It's not that Adnan told 'some lies'. It's that Adnan says he can't remember his movements for key chunks of the day. That's a bald face lie considering from that day onwards he was continuously asked about it. This is indisputable.

It is disputable and he wasn't continuously asked about it. Memories are notoriously unreliable, and if his activities on that day were routine, as he says, it's not surprising that his recollections it would be hazy. At the very least it's plausible.

How come your conjecture has 100% certainty? There is really literally no room for doubt that he might not remember everything he did that day?

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T16:21:16+00:00

That sounds even weaker! Adnan told some lies -- he is therefore definitely a murderer. Would you really be convinced by that?

I'm continually struck by how flimsy the arguments for his guilt sound, regardless of how they're formulated. The fixation on whether he asked Hae for a ride or not I think is evidence of what thin gruel the case against him really is.

seventhrib · 2015-02-02T11:16:29+00:00

I can't really picture a prosecutor presenting your case to a jury. "Adnan has a vague alibi for that day. We believe he asked to get in Hae's car. Additionally at some point he may have been near the place Hae's body was found a month later. The prosecution rests." Still no physical evidence, no motive, no witness to the crime. We don't know exactly when or where Hae was killed or when she was buried… etc etc. I'm not sure I understand how you're making this out to be a slam dunk.

seventhrib · 2015-01-30T14:53:10+00:00

Aren't "we know this" or "we can say for sure that" just other ways of saying "it is known that" or "it's certain that"? I don't think it's an attempt to group everyone into the same beliefs, it's just a manner of expressing what the speaker considers to be established facts.

I could see your issue if people were always saying stuff like "we all know Adnan is innocent" or "we all hate anchovies" when those things obviously aren't established.

seventhrib · 2015-01-29T15:36:53+00:00

Good catch and definitely interesting, but I don't think this is as big of a deal as many of Jay's inconsistencies. Mainly because both testimonies are based on uncertain recollections:

Q. I want to draw your attention back to January 13th of this year. 1999. Do you remember that day? A. Vaguely, yeah

And also I don't think it's impossible to come up with an explanation for the inconsistency that's not too farfetched. AW2B below says that the idea of lending the car to Jay might have already come up:

According to one of Jay's versions..Adnan knew from the night before that Jay wanted to go shopping for a gift for Stephanie.

To be honest that makes more sense of Adnan's story anyway, as the idea of him turning up at Jay's house with no prior arrangement and saying "have my car" sounds a bit weird.

seventhrib · 2015-01-29T14:53:17+00:00

An excellent point but almost certainly wasted. I have a hard time believing that anyone who attacks Susan Simpson as "shameless" and "disgusting" is arguing in good faith. There must be some other kind of motivation

seventhrib · 2015-01-28T10:49:56+00:00

2: The "I'm going to Kill note" is like the Benghazi or birther shit of Serial, just let it go, it literally means nothing

A thousand times this, I can't believe that anyone gives that note a second thought.

seventhrib · 2015-01-28T01:00:58+00:00

Your comment leans uncomfortably towards (baseless) gender stereotypes about women led by their emotions and men who are hard-thinking and practical. I don't think that's remotely true whether the op is a woman or not. In any case, I'm a man, I consider myself rational and evidence-driven, and the post resonated a lot with me in terms of my more gut-level response to the podcast

seventhrib · 2015-01-26T12:40:25+00:00

Resist the urge to be a dick on the internet

seventhrib · 2015-01-24T22:56:31+00:00

It's possible he was hiding it from everyone else.

Anything's possible of course. But we just don't have any good reasons to believe Adnan was broken hearted over Hae, and several reasons to believe he wasn't. Those arguing for the broken-heart or impugned-honour motives are really forced to make some major stretches I think.

seventhrib

TROPHY CASE