0391: "Anti-Mindvirus"

[netsplit]

Though some people here perhaps are as batty as the followers in Brian's tale...

I like to consider myself in that camp, at times. Count me into the "First Coming of Randall" side of the schism. Also,

You win by reaching level 256. It just has a fucking weird ending.

wtf?? There's actually an ending to PacMan and someone has achieved it? Dear god - I am crazily impressed. What version?

Just a guess, but level 256 is where the memory variable for level number ran out of values.

[pinkgothic]

You win by reaching level 256. It just has a fucking weird ending.

I wouldn't really call that an ending, mind.

...

...ack! Curses, another thing to define.

*throws hands into the air*

Gah! I'm sorry!

[StClair]

First, I agree with Thermal.

Second,

wtf?? There's actually an ending to PacMan and someone has achieved it? Dear god - I am crazily impressed. What version?

Just a guess, but level 256 is where the memory variable for level number ran out of values.

Correct. When that happens, the game freezes: half the screen displays the maze, the other half garbage/random characters (are they random, or the same every time?), split vertically.

[Starsky]

...because the person I quoted was saying that you can't deny that you are playing the game or it just means you are even more and more.

Ok, I admit it. I was troll baiting when I said that.

However, I believe (and I'm sure others will disagree, which is great) the "real goal" of the game is the survival and spread of the game. Hence, rules like having to tell a bunch of strangers who have no clue "I just lost twenty dollars and my self respect" and having to explain and getting them to think about it.

If you accept that, then passionate arugment about whether or not someone is playing just feed the "real goal" by lodging the game deeper into peoples minds, whether you actually are or aren't "playing".

Though some people here perhaps are as batty as the followers in Brian's tale...

Guilty as charged.

[Yuri2356]

wtf?? There's actually an ending to Pacman and someone has achieved it? Dear god - I am crazily impressed. What version? (Lately, I've been most familiarized with, but do rather suck at, the xbox 360 arcade version.)

(And furthermore, I still maintain we need sarcasm html tags, eg, <sarc> </sarc>. Any proposals as to what it should look like? Purple italics has always been my vote.)

If you play for long enough the level counter will overflow, which can have... interesting consequences. Happens with a lot of old arcade games.

I'd maintain that playing until the machine crashes is not a win, as it is a result of the limits of the implimentation of the game, rather than its rules. That would be like saying you finished singing the song that never ends because you got hit by a bus in mid-verse.

[bumpgrrl]

However, I believe (and I'm sure others will disagree, which is great) the "real goal" of the game is the survival and spread of the game. Hence, rules like having to tell a bunch of strangers who have no clue "I just lost twenty dollars and my self respect" and having to explain and getting them to think about it.

If you accept that, then passionate arugment about whether or not someone is playing just feed the "real goal" by lodging the game deeper into peoples minds, whether you actually are or aren't "playing".

The game (and/or its follwers) has ulterior motives and a hidden agenda (ie, not overtly stated in the rules)? A-ha! - so it *is* like a religion. Does it accept or deny Randall as its messiah? Can I be on the side of schism of "the Coming of Randall" if I am not, in fact, a follower of the game? Can it be that this forum has finally devolved into ridiculosity?

[The Finn]

Okay. First forum post for XKCD ever. Long time fan.

There seem to be some misconceptions running rampant in the forum thread; Three that I see right off the bat.

One: Many people are accepting The Game as reality without testing to see whether this written model is Descriptive or Proscriptive, ( or even, verily, accurate). One term is used for a model changed to more closely describe reality. The other is used for a model that attempts to change (proscribe) reality to more closely model itself. What does the evidence one can observe suggest regarding the nature of The Game? Does it change reality as it is communicated or does it merely describe? Are these mutually exclusive states?
I posit that The Game is primarily Proscriptive, and is only descriptive as an after-effect. I further posit that The Game attempts to appear primarily Descriptive - it makes the claim that it is - yet the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. If you disagree, PLEASE PROPOSE AN ALTERNATE MODEL THAT INCORPORATES AND EXPLAINS THESE FACTS. Failure to do so is tantamount to promoting Intelligent Design.

Two: Many people are not realising that there can be a game that has no win-state, only various degrees approaching equilibrium. There are no actual absolute rules that say that a game must have a win state, or a loss state, merely a system to change state. Please stop arguing about this. There are children debating in Kenya without formal logics. Think of the Children.

Third: Many people are failing to realise that "Win", "equilibrium", and "loss" in the model of The Game are applied arbitrarily; That is to say, that if The Game is Proscriptive rather than Descriptive, there is nothing stopping someone from deciding that The Game is logically equivalent with it's inversion, i.e. semantically equivalent, with the same truth value, as

1: You are playing the Game;
2: Whenever you think about The Game, you win;
3: Winning must be announced.
The objective of The Game is to have all sentient beings winning at once.

I'm not going to Goedel-encode this entire statement as well as The Game and post it here for proof because
1: TL;DR
2: The people I'm trying to communicate this to would probably have come to my conclusion if they could read Godel-encoded statements in the first place.
---------------------------

Randall Munroe won The Game, by appealing to a more-fundamental set of axioms and assertions in Logic than those that The Game operates in.

In short, there is a Deeper Magic from before the discovery of The Game.

[StClair]

However, I believe (and I'm sure others will disagree, which is great) the "real goal" of the game is the survival and spread of the game. Hence, rules like having to tell a bunch of strangers who have no clue "I just lost twenty dollars and my self respect" and having to explain and getting them to think about it.

If you accept that, then passionate arugment about whether or not someone is playing just feed the "real goal" by lodging the game deeper into peoples minds, whether you actually are or aren't "playing".

Then the solution, as with any viral outbreak, is to contain, sterilize and eliminate the active vectors of the infectious form. A reservoir of hosts of the non-infectious form may remain, but they can be ignored for this purpose.

(A bit of context: I'm getting over a cold, and have next to no sense of humor right now regarding anything that looks or acts like a disease. Especially something I suspect was created by bored college or high school students with an inflated opinion of their own cleverness.)

[Belial]

So you're saying we should release an unblurred version of the parrot basilisk into 4chan?

That's what you're saying right?

[StClair]

So you're saying we should release an unblurred version of the parrot basilisk into 4chan?

That's what you're saying right?

... no, because once again, I have no clue what you're talking about. Do you mean the critter that showed up in a recent strip with the deadly emoticon?

[Yuri2356]

So you're saying we should release an unblurred version of the parrot basilisk into 4chan?

That's what you're saying right?

Sir, I represent a body of investors who have expressed interest in funding this event.

*Hands Belial a business card*

If your are interested in taking advantage of thier support, contact the number on the card and further information will be provided.

Good day to you.

[Belial]

no, because once again, I have no clue what you're talking about. Do you mean the critter that showed up in a recent strip with the deadly emoticon?

Err...sorry, it was mentioned in the emoticon thread...

Sir, I represent a body of investors who have expressed interest in funding this event.

Excellent.

[bumpgrrl]

Err...sorry, it was mentioned in the emoticon thread...

[img]parrot[/img]

Wait - is that the blurred image or the unblurred one? (Apparently my eyesight is worse than I thought.) Are we all doomed now?

(This is going to prompt some crazy extra-curricular reading for me. I've always been frustrated by the idea of a meme, but what is this Gödelianism of which we speak? To the interweb-a-torium! Who knew?)

[M.qrius]

You win by reaching level 256. It just has a fucking weird ending.

wtf?? There's actually an ending to PacMan and someone has achieved it? Dear god - I am crazily impressed. What version? (Lately, I've been most familiarized with, but do rather suck at, the xbox 360 arcade version.)

(And furthermore, I still maintain we need sarcasm html tags, eg, <sarc> </sarc>. Any proposals as to what it should look like? Purple italics has always been my vote.)

I was about to reply to your pacman reply when I finished reading the rest of your post. I do say, purple does feel sarcasm-ish. It's a good idea.

[Belial]

Wait - is that the blurred image or the unblurred one? (Apparently my eyesight is worse than I thought.) Are we all doomed now?

Given that the parrot is fictional, I think you're fine. That's supposedly the blurred version, though.

It's by David Langford.

But don't worry, that's the same reaction I had.

[bumpgrrl]

Wait - is that the blurred image or the unblurred one? (Apparently my eyesight is worse than I thought.) Are we all doomed now?

Given that the parrot is fictional, I think you're fine. That's supposedly the blurred version, though.

Whew - there's a load off my mind. For a moment I thought the raptors had finally found a way to get rid of the humans on the xkcd fora - just when I had finally begun to actively participate. And I reiterate my statement about my eyesight - that one looked fine to me.

Can we get Langford to cook up another fictional image (a concept I enjoy) that's geared only to erasing the game from the mind of the Unliberated?

[Yuri2356]

Whew - there's a load off my mind. For a moment I thought the raptors had finally found a way to get rid of the humans on the xkcd fora - just when I had finally begun to actively participate. And I reiterate my statement about my eyesight - that one looked fine to me.

Can we get Langford to cook up another fictional image (a concept I enjoy) that's geared only to erasing the game from the mind of the Unliberated?

If you really want to delete that thought, just look up the proper commands in your procedures manual.

[1=0]

Then the solution, as with any viral outbreak, is to contain, sterilize and eliminate the active vectors of the infectious form.

I kind of like the idea... especially the eliminate part . I may volunteer to be part of the Cleaner Team... Sterilize might be cool , but in this case, I have a feeling that mere sterilization, even though it might earn them an entry in the Darwin Awards contest, might not prevent them from being infectious...
Unless by sterilization, we mean : render them mute, incapable of writing or otherwise communicate with the human race. In which case, I believe that elimination would be a more humane procedure.

[AvalonXQ]

Whew - there's a load off my mind. For a moment I thought the raptors had finally found a way to get rid of the humans on the xkcd fora - just when I had finally begun to actively participate. And I reiterate my statement about my eyesight - that one looked fine to me.

Can we get Langford to cook up another fictional image (a concept I enjoy) that's geared only to erasing the game from the mind of the Unliberated?

If you really want to delete that thought, just look up the proper commands in your procedures manual.

Godel warned me when he handed me my procedures manual that I wouldn't be able to understand all of it because some of the statements about my system had to be made outside of my system. Sure enough, the whole "deletion" chapter is gibberish. I hate metalogic.

[netsplit]

I'd maintain that playing until the machine crashes is not a win, as it is a result of the limits of the implimentation of the game, rather than its rules. That would be like saying you finished singing the song that never ends because you got hit by a bus in mid-verse.

10 to 1 the bus driver was just trying to get some piece and quiet.

[bumpgrrl]

I'd maintain that playing until the machine crashes is not a win, as it is a result of the limits of the implimentation of the game, rather than its rules. That would be like saying you finished singing the song that never ends because you got hit by a bus in mid-verse.

10 to 1 the bus driver was just trying to get some piece and quiet.

Oh, I know i'm only supposed to post if I have something to contribute to the discussion, but I seriously laughed out loud at that. I can *so* identify with that bus driver.

[benjhuey]

Then the solution, as with any viral outbreak, is to contain, sterilize and eliminate the active vectors of the infectious form.

I kind of like the idea... especially the eliminate part . I may volunteer to be part of the Cleaner Team... Sterilize might be cool , but in this case, I have a feeling that mere sterilization, even though it might earn them an entry in the Darwin Awards contest, might not prevent them from being infectious...
Unless by sterilization, we mean : render them mute, incapable of writing or otherwise communicate with the human race. In which case, I believe that elimination would be a more humane procedure.

Ah, [clichéd viral zombie movie reference here].

[poisonmol]

My friends and I refer to The Game as the Ultimate Game Of Thermodynamics.
Law 1: You can't win.
Law 2: You can't break even.
Law 3: You can't get out.
Really there is no winning the game, it just is. Some people say that in not thinking about the game you win, but that's not really true because you're just in a temporary stalemate. Just like if you were to not do any work doesn't mean you never will.
I wonder who started The Game, though? Probably someone on our same mindset of Thermodynamics at one of the nerdier colleges. It seems pretty well known these days though. I wonder how many years old it is? I've only known about it for about two or three years.

[Bumnut]

Law 1: You can't win.
Law 2: You can't break even.
Law 3: You can't get out.

When I first heard about the game a week or so ago, I thought "That's stupid. I don't have to play that."

Then I thought, "Wait, maybe it's some kind of involuntary thing, that kinda catches on after a while."

Well, after a week of knowing about it, I can safely say that the best way to 'win' the game is to not give a crap about the stupid game.

[luketheduke]

You, Sir, made me lose twenty dollars and my self respect.

[rrwoods]

Well, after a week of knowing about it, I can safely say that the best way to 'win' the game is to not give a crap about the stupid game.

Correct, since you didn't use some form of "not play".

[EvanED]

Well, after a week of knowing about it, I can safely say that the best way to 'win' the game is to not give a crap about the stupid game.

Correct, since you didn't use some form of "not play".

Hey rrwoods, how's the "send Evan money" game going? Or are you just going to continue to cheat.

I am still reminded a bit of this comic...

[rrwoods]

Well, after a week of knowing about it, I can safely say that the best way to 'win' the game is to not give a crap about the stupid game.

Correct, since you didn't use some form of "not play".

Hey rrwoods, how's the "send Evan money" game going? Or are you just going to continue to cheat.

There doesn't seem to be a penalty for cheating.

Dammit, I told myself I wouldn't get back into this discussion...

[Linux0s]

This "the game" thing is becoming the Rick Roll of conscious thought. ~Linux0s

[netsplit]

I'm trying to play the game, but I can't do it right! I mean the idea of living in constant dead of a normal common word in society sounds like alot of fun. However try as I might I can't get upset when I lose twenty dollars and my self respect I get happy. I think I'm really winning The Game.

BTW I just won The Game.

[StClair]

This "the game" thing is becoming the Rick Roll of conscious thought. ~Linux0s

"Becoming"?

(And the same sort of people think it's clever.)

['; DROP DATABASE;--]

Though some people here perhaps are as batty as the followers in Brian's tale...

I like to consider myself in that camp, at times. Count me into the "First Coming of Randall" side of the schism. Also,

You win by reaching level 256. It just has a fucking weird ending.

wtf?? There's actually an ending to PacMan and someone has achieved it? Dear god - I am crazily impressed. What version?

Just a guess, but level 256 is where the memory variable for level number ran out of values.

Level 256.

pacman level 256.gif (5.14 KiB) Viewed 2986 times

[Linux0s]

This "the game" thing is becoming the Rick Roll of conscious thought.

"Becoming"?

Yah, your right... IS!

(And the same sort of people think it's clever.)

Yep. You're 2 for 2. ~Linux0s

[poisonmol]

Well, after a week of knowing about it, I can safely say that the best way to 'win' the game is to not give a crap about the stupid game.

-shrug- You don't have to give a crap about it, no one requires that you do. For me it's just kind of one of those things that I know about, and sometimes I say it out loud when I think of it, just for whatever... but I don't make a huge deal out of it like a lot of people do.
Not giving a crap about it doesn't mean you "win" though, it just means that you don't give a crap about it. And if that's how you deal with it, then that's cool. But it's not realy a matter of "winning" because this isn't a game that you try to "win"... it just exists.
And if it doesn't do anything for you, then so be it. There are better things in life to worry about.

[Steve the Pocket]

Thinking about the game is the new talking about Fight Club. Or the new saying "CandleJack." Or something.

[EpeeGnome]

Well, after a week of realizing I could win the game when I wanted to, I'm happy to report that it worked. I think about the game 80% less often, and each of those times has been with a sense of relief that I had not lost. This marked improvement came from realizing that, like Dorthy, I had that power all along.

I've noticed that throughout this thread, people either express that they are/where stuck in the game, or don't understand how anyone could become stuck in the game, so I'd like to share how it happened to me. Upon first learning about the game I accepted it not on some abstract authority, but for the same we play punch bug or use the outside fork for salad: by binding ourselves to the same arbitrary rules as those around us, we create stronger social ties with those people. It also sounded like a clever idea. Once started, I followed those rules for the same reason. It was also kind of fun to spread it, making others lose with me. The problem is that by not trying to think about it, I created mental associations with those things that made me lose. At some point losing became frustrating, but that only served to strengthen the assignations with emotional response. Begin self-reinforcing cycle.

How this comic helped is that it reminded me that the game was an arbitrary set of unenforceable rules. I didn't need to care. I accepted (just as arbitrarily) that Randall trumped the game. Now I win. This robs thinking of the game of it's emotional ties, and the associations begin to weaken quickly. In fact, I'm amazed how how fast the associations have decayed. The percentage I quoted at the top of this post was made up, but it is in the ballpark. I am fast on the way to becoming 'The Game' free.

[Izzhov]

Well, after a week of realizing I could win the game when I wanted to, I'm happy to report that it worked. I think about the game 80% less often, and each of those times has been with a sense of relief that I had not lost. This marked improvement came from realizing that, like Dorthy, I had that power all along.

I've noticed that throughout this thread, people either express that they are/where stuck in the game, or don't understand how anyone could become stuck in the game, so I'd like to share how it happened to me. Upon first learning about the game I accepted it not on some abstract authority, but for the same we play punch bug or use the outside fork for salad: by binding ourselves to the same arbitrary rules as those around us, we create stronger social ties with those people. It also sounded like a clever idea. Once started, I followed those rules for the same reason. It was also kind of fun to spread it, making others lose with me. The problem is that by not trying to think about it, I created mental associations with those things that made me lose. At some point losing became frustrating, but that only served to strengthen the assignations with emotional response. Begin self-reinforcing cycle.

How this comic helped is that it reminded me that the game was an arbitrary set of unenforceable rules. I didn't need to care. I accepted (just as arbitrarily) that Randall trumped the game. Now I win. This robs thinking of the game of it's emotional ties, and the associations begin to weaken quickly. In fact, I'm amazed how how fast the associations have decayed. The percentage I quoted at the top of this post was made up, but it is in the ballpark. I am fast on the way to becoming 'The Game' free.

This sounded like an Alcoholics Anonymous speech. XD

[EpeeGnome]

This sounded like an Alcoholics Anonymous speech. XD

Wow, it does. I meant it to be a little tongue in cheek, but I didn't realize it sounded that strong.

[Arancaytar]

[speech]

That is exactly how I feel about it.

So. Game virus cured. TODO: Internet addiction, chronic shyness.

[netsplit]

So remember that time you lose twenty dollars and my self respect? Because I sure do.