Profile for Thuryl


Recent posts

Pages

AuthorRecent posts
Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #15
quote:
Originally written by Iffy:

If you gotta do it, DO IT IN YOUR HOME/HOME BATHROOM! I don't get why people would do it in a public place.
Well, it's kind of hard to explain to your wife if she walks in on you at home.

quote:
Originally written by Excalibur:

The ACLU cracks me up. Civil rights groups almost seem silly these days.
If you want to talk about things that are silly, how about sending police officers to camp out for hours in public toilets waiting for someone to make sexual advances toward them? Surely they have better things to do.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #5
quote:
Originally written by Arancaytar:

I still think that the most bewildering part of this was how the policeman "recognized" the "signals".
It was a sting operation. That particular public restroom was known by police to be a hangout for men seeking gay sex. An undercover officer was sent in there to wait around for people to solicit him for sex so he could arrest them.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
in Blades of Exile
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #38
quote:
Originally written by Celtic Minstrel:

Can you be more specific? It sounds like you're advocating an increase in the maximum possible value allowed in the various fields for Items and Monsters.
That's correct. 2500 HP is usually enough for anybody, but a maximum of 40 Skill isn't nearly enough: by blessing enough, it's possible to make sure that even monsters with 40 Skill will almost always miss the PCs.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
I, II, or III in The Exile Trilogy
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #14
quote:
Originally written by Unhasty:

Apparently it also prevents the character from indirectly damaging the opponent in any way, including by summons, field spells, buffs and debuffs...
I briefly tried using a pacifist character once a few years ago and I'm pretty sure that damaging field spells don't work but all the others, including summons, do. It still means you have a character who's useless half the time, and the experience bonus won't come anywhere near making up for not getting any kills at all.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
You saw this thread coming!!! in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #32
quote:
Originally written by Arancaytar:

I really liked that E1 "Monster saw you" sound, which literally went ".rar".
If that wasn't an intentional joke, you've been spending way too much time around computers.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
I, II, or III in The Exile Trilogy
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #12
quote:
Originally written by bagelfairy:

And what pacifism are you referring to?
It's a trait in Exile II that gives a 40% experience bonus but prevents the character from directly damaging an opponent in any way. It's even less useful than it sounds.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Canister Limit in Geneforge 4: Rebellion
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #7
quote:
Originally written by Micro Phage:

Do you, or anyone who sees this, know a similar "cheat" that can be typed in this way that will allow you to change to the lower or upper world maps? I've searched the forum and read the scripts for the eastern and western rises and had no luck finding the right sdf xxx x x or whatever. I've found change_world_map(0) and (1) but no joy. :(
I don't think that's stored in an SDF. You'd have to edit the zone script for every zone in which you wanted changing maps to be possible, which seems like more effort than just walking across the Eastern or Western Rise every time.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
[censored]! in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #11
quote:
Originally written by Ephesos:

No, I'd say that there's a very good chance that this law will be passed, for reasons outlined above. It won't be enforced that heavily, is my guess.
In fact, the article seems to indicate that the law is intended to be selectively enforced. That's usually a pretty terrible basis on which to make a law, since it almost always turns into an excuse to discriminate against some group.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #189
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Thuryl, it’s not about me “doing my homework.” I was asking for your professional insight. Now I’m very curious as to what you do so that you’ve never considered relative complexity of various organisms.
Now I'm rather curious as to what you imagine that biologists actually do. Under what circumstances do you think a biologist would need to compare the relative complexity of various organisms?

quote:
Complexity – the degree to which a system is characterized by an intricate arrangement of parts, units, etc.
"Intricate"? You've gone and defined a word in terms of one of its synonyms. That's not helpful at all!

Which is more complex: a machine with 100 parts that all need to be in exactly the right position in order for it to work, or a machine with 1000 parts that can all be arranged in a large number of different ways and still work?

[ Saturday, January 12, 2008 12:23: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #183
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Really!? How do you define complexity in such a way that a dolphin is not more complex than a single-celled organism? I’m really puzzled. All of the Darwinistic literature I’ve seen acknowledges that there’s increase. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard that the human brain is the most complex thing we know of.
Maybe that's true and maybe it isn't, but you're the one talking about complexity here and now, so it's up to you to propose a definition of complexity and explain why it's coherent. I hold no particular position on the topic of whether or not a dolphin is more complex than a single-celled organism, because I'm not as yet committed to holding any particular definition of "complexity"; it's up to you to, as you love to say, show the logical premises that support your conclusions. I don't feel like doing your homework for you today.

quote:
Here’s what I’d like first, if you don't mind: At the top of page 7 in this thread is an inductive argument for why I believe that life was created by a willful agent and did not descend from one common ancestor through naturalistic means. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but it makes sense to me. What I’m asking is for you all to do the same and show your premises to support your belief that natural processes are responsible for all of the increase in complexity in organisms since the first life hit this planet.
First, could you please tell me what you mean by "natural processes", and what would constitute a non-natural process? It's clear by this point that you speak a language that closely resembles but isn't actually English, so using common-sense definitions only leads to you twisting our words.

[ Saturday, January 12, 2008 00:19: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #177
quote:
Originally written by Jumpin' Salmon:

Is there some correlation between complexity and cellular combinations? If so, it would hardly be surprising that over time you would find that multicellular things developed where before they were just spatially juxtaposed.
You'll no doubt be pleased and interested to know that we have plenty of good examples of just about every imaginable step on the continuum between unicellular and multicellular life. Bacteria in colonies can behave in radically different ways from isolated bacteria, many fungi have both unicellular and multicellular stages in their life cycle, and marine biologists still argue over whether some kinds of algae are fundamentally multicellular organisms or colonies of single-celled organisms.

quote:
Originally written by Nioca:

And Salmon, how do you know that other people don't speak in similar patterns? Have you spoken with every English-speaking person on this planet and determined that Excalibur is a singular anomaly? Or are you just guessing?
He actually sounds pretty much exactly like my dad does when he tries to sound smart. That's not a good thing, unless one's goal is to come across as a pretentious git.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #167
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

I’m sure that you think dolphins are more complex than blue-green algae
Then you're surer of that than I am.

[ Friday, January 11, 2008 16:23: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #165
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Non-random means that a pattern is formed or proceeds with a specific guide or objective. If an asteroid strikes a mountain, causes a rockslide, one of the rocks rolls into a cave, and water drips from the cave ceiling and erodes it, then it is random – even if it looks like a heart. There is no objective on the part of the cave, the water, or the rock. Contrast that with an automated assembly line that produces heart-shaped chocolates. The machinery and programming have the specific purpose of shaping the chocolate into hearts every time.
Your argument is circular, because the concept of an "objective" implies an intelligent agent to form that objective. Life performs certain functions, but so do rocks. That doesn't mean that either has an "objective". Whatever goals we see in it are of our own creation.

quote:
My argument deals with things for which we know the origins. The earth is prehistoric. Besides, there is no specific guide or objective that we can see for the structure of the earth like with life.
Shifting ground again, I see. We don't know the origin of life either (in fact, we know less about it than we know about the origin of Earth), so by your own admission, your argument doesn't apply to it!

quote:
Thuryl, it seems you’d be qualified to answer my question to Kel, SoT, and now Salmon. Please show the logical premises that support the conclusion that natural selection is responsible for all increase in complexity in biological systems.
I can't do that until you've decided what you mean when you say "complexity", so that I can determine whether, by the definition you end up using, any increase in complexity in biological systems has ever actually occurred.

Putting that aside, natural selection doesn't cause changes in individual organisms; it's just what allows individuals with beneficial mutations to survive and reproduce once they occur. (More precisely, natural selection simply is the survival and reproduction of individuals with beneficial mutations.)

If you're interested in the actual mechanisms by which mutations can occur, I'd suggest taking a course in genetics -- there are a lot of them and some are quite elaborate. Gene duplication is one of the most important, because it creates a new, redundant copy of a gene in the genome, which can mutate without harm to the organism carrying it. Nearly all known genes have descended from other genes in this way, and they often end up carrying out quite different functions from their "ancestors".

quote:
Originally written by Stareye:

So again, I ask you the original question you continue to dodge: Does quantum mechanics makes sense to you? Yes or no. Does it make sense to you? Yes or no.
Given that he's previously expressed support for wacky fringe theories of cosmology, I don't think forcing him to admit that he doesn't believe in quantum mechanics will gain us much.

[ Friday, January 11, 2008 15:23: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Firewalk spell? in The Exile Trilogy
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #1
I hope you haven't angered the Anama, because Ahonar sells it.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
G1 canisters in Geneforge Series
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #10
quote:
Originally written by V12:

quote:
the game doesn't check to see whether you've been using them or not; it assumes that you have been.
Is that for sure? I've seen in the walkthrough that
"...There's no penalty for doing so (at least, not intrinsically. There are a few encounters which are different if you haven't used many)."

Learned Darian notices something different about you if you've used a lot of canisters, and the Quiet Marshes has somewhat different text if you've used a lot of canisters compared to if you've only used a few. That's about it. It doesn't have any real gameplay effects.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #144
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Again, your mutation argument is not an issue with me. As far as it being deleterious, well that depends on the specific case you’re talking about. If there is a loss of function it is by definition deleterious, even if the organism becomes more fit for its environment. That is not the kind of change you need to get from bacteria to biologists. A series of deletions does not yield an increase.
Please, by all means, keep trying to teach us biology. :rolleyes:

When you use phrases like "by definition", it helps to know what the definitions mean. You don't.

quote:
1. All objects for which we know the origin that have the qualities of being both aperiodic and non-random are made by willful agency.
2. Life is both aperiodic and non-random.
3. Life is made by willful agency.
You still haven't given an adequate definition of either "aperiodic" or "non-random", and it's rather difficult to evaluate your first premise until you do. If by "non-random" you mean "not produced by any means involving random processes", then your argument is circular. If by "non-random" you mean "not produced solely by random processes", then your argument is vacuous. (Given that there's an ongoing debate among theoretical physicists about whether there's any true randomness in the universe at all, your arguments probably shouldn't rely so heavily on randomness in the first place.)

[ Friday, January 11, 2008 00:53: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #130
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Common descent doesn’t predict anything beneficial that knowing that all living things are similar doesn’t.
Except how do you know that all living things are similar, when we haven't examined every single living thing? If you just assume that all living things are similar because all the ones you've seen so far are similar, you run smack bang into the problem of induction. It's absolutely necessary to have a theoretical framework which justifies why we can expect all living things to be similar.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #118
quote:
Originally written by Thralni:

Kel and Thuryl: Every time I see you talking to Synergy, I ask myself "why". You guys are clearly irritated by Synergy and his "arguments based on experience instead of facts". Why do you keep posting then? For god's sake, go home, all of you, take a nap, a crate of beer, whatever, and then come back. The only thing that happens now, is that you're all getting worked because of each other, and the rest of the community hangs around it and sighs, going like "oh no not again".
Irritated? I don't know about anyone else, but I'm still having fun. It's not like this topic didn't suck before we got to it anyway.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #116
Goodbye forever, Synergy. See you next week.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #114
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

EDIT: And jeez, people, can we tone down the personal attacks?
I'm just giving him what he's clearly demonstrated that he wants. Why else would he keep coming back here?

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #112
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

Why would someone like you even need to bother to respond to such a person? Do tell.
Because you keep promising to shut up and go away, and I'm curious about what it would take for you to make good on your promise.

(And then you expect us to trust your word when you testify to miracles, when we can't even trust you when you say you're leaving. Ha.)

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Why did Starman Get Banned? in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #5
quote:
Originally written by Nioca:

In before one of these: IMAGE(http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ubb/lock.gif)
quote:
Originally written by Toenail Returns:

-waits for lock-
Predicting that a thread will be locked should be a bannable offence.

Also, X-dawg, do you really see no problem with the fact that your sig is 13 times the length of your average post?

[ Wednesday, January 09, 2008 12:42: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #87
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Yeah, I wouldn’t say synonyms, but things with specified complexity have information content. I would definitely say “strongly related terms.”
Again, the kind of data with the most information content per bit is random data. When I asked you whether you knew this, you spouted off some stuff about specified complexity being non-random. Considering that mathematicians don't actually have any reliable algorithm for determining whether a given sequence is truly random, identifying specified complexity would be quite a feat if it existed.

quote:
Think about the shortest algorithm you’d need to write to generate a random arrangement.

1. Print any letter.
2. Return to step 1.

You could generate volumes full of random letters.
That's not the same as the shortest algorithm you'd need to recreate a specific random arrangement which had been generated in the past. You seem to be implicitly assuming some vague idea that all randomly-generated sequences are somehow equivalent, which is an idea that has no place in mainstream information theory.

quote:
“[T]here is enough information capacity in a single human cell to store the Encyclopaedia Britannica, all 30 volumes of it, three or four times over.”
R. Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: W.W. Norton, 1986), p. 115
Note that that says "information capacity", not "information". The actual amount of information will be less, because the data encoded in DNA is somewhat compressible.

quote:
And how would you predict pi? In what way are my triangles random that a circle is not?
A truly random infinite sequence of digits, by definition, would require an infinitely large amount of data to store its exact value. The randomness of a sequence is path-dependent: if a sequence has been generated by a deterministic algorithm, IT'S NOT RANDOM. The exact value of pi can be encoded by a simple definition: the ratio of any given circle's circumference to its diameter. A relatively simple algorithm can calculate the digits of pi to arbitrary precision. Pi is in fact about the least random number we know of, even though its digits behave like random digits in subtle and intriguing ways.

Incidentally, when you claim that specified complexity is "not random", are you claiming that specified complexity is also path-dependent: that is, that anything generated by a wholly or partially random process is by definition incapable of containing specified complexity? Because if so, your argument comes perilously close to question-begging.

[ Wednesday, January 09, 2008 12:34: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #76
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

If a pattern is aperiodic and non-random it has specified complexity. The shape of “i” would qualify. Yes there is a continuum with the shape of “i” being at one extreme and you at the other. The extremes don’t have anything to do with it though, because all other objects with specified complexity arise from a mind.
So you're saying that if I find a rock shaped like the letter I, it must have been produced by a mind? Honestly, I knew you were going to make yourself look ridiculous sooner or later, but I didn't know you'd do it so quickly.

By the way, you might be interested to know that by your definition, the digits of pi have specified complexity: they're not periodic (any schoolchild knows that they never repeat), but they're also obviously not random. Pi isn't the product of any mind, though -- it's just a natural consequence of what a circle is.

Honestly, Stillness, I've met poached eggs with better debating skills. Check that your own arguments hold water before you put them out there for us to tear apart.

[ Wednesday, January 09, 2008 07:00: Message edited by: Thuryl ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Locking in General
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #73
quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Thuryl, your question completely misses the point. The discussions of complexity were regarding specified complexity (a term coined by an evolutionist) and irreducible complexity. When I introduced these I meant neither to be considered quantitatively. A qualitative understanding serves the purpose for both.
Except that it doesn't. Does the shape of the letter I exhibit specified complexity? How about the word "it"? The sentence "methinks it is like a weasel"? At what exact point does specified complexity enter the picture? Or is it the case that all instances of "specified complexity" lie on a continuum, in which case its position on that continuum would have to be (ta-dah!) quantified?

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00

Pages