Delicious LiveJournal Links for 6-7-2010

[andrewducker]

• What if political scientists covered the news?
  (tags: politics journalism media news funny usa)
• I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility (a fiction of infinite regression)
  (tags: scifi story fiction quantum computing philosophy)
• How to Make Perfect Thin and Crisp French Fries
  (tags: food cooking science potato frenchfries)
• On Wiscon, race, fandom, and safe spaces
  (tags: race fandom)
• Arizona School Demands Black & Latino Students’ Faces On Mural Be Changed To White
  (tags: racism politics immigration race usa arizona)
• The Shortest Possible Game of Monopoly: 21 Seconds
  (tags: monopoly gaming)
• How Much Do Music Artists Earn Online? A gorgeous infographic
  (tags: music visualization economics)
• Experience: I run a brothel in a country village
  (tags: story life sex prostitution uk brothel)
• The demise of real sharing - how Facebook is limiting our communication
  (tags: facebook livejournal socialnetworking)

Comments

What if political scientists covered the news?

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Ooh, Can I have all my news like that, please?

I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

[neuralbuddha.livejournal.com]

People need to go away and read Permutation City by Greg Egan. This concept is just a subset of the shit going on in that book.

Basically there is no problem. Whatever the setup, the conclusion is, whatever they do to the simulation of the universe directly affects their own universe. However, the terms of the creation of their universe mean that it is capable of supporting infinite computation. Therefore it is capable of supporting itself without an external source of computation. There is no reason for it to switch off just because an infinite computer contained within it is switched off. Thought experiment: Say they built two computers, ran the exact same program on each and switched one of them off but not the other. Paradox, neh? This also means that affecting the program would not affect the "real" world as that also leads to the previous contradiction. Those circumstances fall outside events of the story but that just shows that the story is built on a logical flaw. Sorry.

Also someone linked to this paper which is logically valid but has dodgy assumptions and draws the wrong conclusions. The quick upshot is I'm perfectly entitled to believe I'm living in the real world as if I were living in a simulation such as is described that paper would be impossible to write never mind for me to read it.

Re: I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

[andrewducker]

It's built on a massive logical impossibility - an infinite computing device. Once you deal with infinities logical contradictions pop out all around you.

And yes, it's very Egan-like, although Egan is a better writer, and smarter.

Re: I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

[neuralbuddha.livejournal.com]

I'm accepting the concept of infinite computation as a plot device, as Egan himself does in 'The Planck Dive'. And, no, they don't, not really. I'm not an expert on trans-finite mathematics but it's fairly solid, as far as I'm aware. I definitely agree with your last two phrases, though.

[momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com]

I don't know the US names, but that Monopoly looks like crack.

- Purchase 3 houses for Boardwalk, 2 for Park Place ($1000, now has $150)

You can't buy 3 houses until you have a set, and you can't get a set on your first round of the board because you can't get a 1 roll of the dice.

- Roll: 6-6, Lands on: Illinois Avenue
Action: None, Doubles therefore roll again

No auction?

[draconid.livejournal.com]

I never even picked up on getting a set... good point!

[anton-p-nym.livejournal.com]

The "no auction" point is valid, but I know a lot of players who play without auctions. It's a very common variant, akin to the "money on Free Parking" variant.

The "set" point is not; on the US board, Boardwalk and Park Place are a two-property set with a "Luxury Tax" space between the two. Immediately after B is the "Go" corner. It is possible to buy the two in one go 'round the board, albeit extremely unlikely. (Land on PP, then 1/36 chance of getting a "2" to land on B.)

-- Steve never did that once despite a childhood of play and a lot of time on the computer version... and can't remember anyone doing it to him either.

[matgb]

Yeah, they've had the auction thing pointed out.

But they're right if you ignore auctions. PArk Lane and Mayfair, the expensive properties right at the end of the board, are separated, hence double 1 gets you from one to other. And There's an "advance to Mayfair" card.

Regardless, as the comments make clear, much quicker to just have an auction on the first property then have a problem, but even that doesn't quite work.

[momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com]

Ah right you are. I wasn't keeping count of just how far the doubles were getting them round the board!

[holyoutlaw.livejournal.com]

Thanks for linking to me!

[andrewducker]

Thanks for writing a great post!

I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

That's really interesting. However, the thing that bugged me, is that Simon and I once discussed the idea of an infinite computer simulating the universe, and we couldn't see a way of ensuring that it simulated this exact universe: you can compare things in the universe to known data as accurately as you can measure it, but that doesn't especially stop it from diverging in the future.

Re: I don't know, Timmy, being God is a big responsibility

[andrewducker]

This is, I believe, the problem with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, amongst other things. You cannot have perfect knowledge of the universe, only imperfect knowledge, which means that your simulations will diverge very quickly from the real thing.

[matgb]

I plan to test the chips process soon, but part of me is reticent because boiling them makes them taste nicer, but removes the nutrients, straight frying after chopping is the most effective way of getting all the good stuff from a spud.

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of french fries (which I understand you non-American speakers erroneously refer to as "chips") that are supposed to be nutritious.

[matgb]

That's because the way you guys make them, you take everything that could possibly be good out of them, and replace it with pure fat.

Take a raw potato. Do NOT peel it, instead scrub it under the tap to get the dirt off.

Chop it up into chips. Place in a deep fat fryer that's got very hot oil in it. If you need to test the temperature, put in a small drop of water first, when the popping has finished, it's boiled all the water out and is hot enough.

The oil, being incredibly hot, seals the nutrients from the potatoes (Remember it's possible to survive for some time on a diet existing solely of potatoes, not recommended, but possible). Keep them in the fryer until they're lightly golden, then remove, allow to cool. Turn down the heat in the fryer.

After about ten minutes, stick them back in.

As long as the spuds were good quality, after a minute or so they'll be lovely and crisp and you have good, nutritious chips.

Keeping the skins is important, ensuring the oil is hot is important, making sure you don't boil them or do anything else first is important.

Sure, they're also full of fat, but the nutrition remains. As long as you eat a balanced diet, you'll be good.

We eat loads fo chips, per capita, in the UK. We also have a much much smaller obesity problem, in fact, there appears to be a reverse correlation. People are switching more'n more to US style 'fries', thus not getting any goodness.

/food snob geekery ;-)

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

Well the way I make them specifically is to chop them into strips, marinate them in oil/cumin/paprika/ground peppers (red and black) and then bake 'em at 350 for an hour fifteen.

I *have* peeled potatoes in my day, but only under duress. :)

I'm one of those fat people who doesn't make into the statistics, because my diet is awesome--I just eat too much of it.