Makaze

Reserved. This was directed at me? Something I never expected to hear you say.

HORRIBLE. AN ABOMINATION.

I'm game. Can't play without a real time chat, though.

Woodshooter gets it.

Not here...

Too much posting...

Needs to clarify about what.

Seemed that way not too long ago... Does not like explaining. And (probably) got ninja'd.

Has a low tolerance for things outside of their interests. Funny. I made one.

Blood

I bet you say that to all the girls.

No. Do you consider yourself a sheltered person?

Beef, by a wide margin. Something about steak...

What is the best question you have heard? Portal 2. Whatever you look for in others. If you look for romantic interest first, then go with that angle. Answer it how you like.

**Mass Update!: The following codes have been updated to comply with better coding practices, drastically increase speed, and use the new soft coded options.** Major update: Plaintext BBCode 4.2.1 → 5.0.0 Major update: Post Auto-Saving + Management 3.1.1 → 4.0.0 Isolate Posts by User 1.0.8 → 1.0.9 Post Loss Prevention 1.0.5 → 1.0.6 Changes in. Plaintext BBCode 5.0.0 : Support has been dropped for the Serenes Forest-specific version of this code. If you wish to continue using it, uninstall then reinstall from scratch with the new link. dice_concise Dice Bot 0.1.7 → 0.1.9 History Extension + Concise Formatting 1.2.3 → 1.2.4 IP.Chat Ignore 1.1.3 → 1.1.6 IP.Chat Logs 1.2.9 → 1.3.1 IP.Chat Pings + Highlights 2.3.3 → 2.3.7 Changes in. dice_concise Dice Bot 1.2.9 : New options: See post. Changes in. History Extension + Concise Formatting 1.2.4 : New options: See post. Changes in. IP.Chat Pings + Highlights 2.3.7 : Deprecated options (delete with. Makaze Scripts Options Menu ):_ ipc_userPings _ ipc_audiblePing New options: The deprecated settings above will be overwritten with the defaults. New settings can be edited via the usual. Ping Settings .menu.

JavaScript: Makaze Scripts Options Menu 1.0.5 Creates, edits and deletes options for my scripts. Keyboard shortcuts: . Alt+Shift+O .to open/close Creating new options: Select. New option... .from the dropdown menu. Specify the option's. name ,. type , and. value . Click. Save Option .to submit. Editing options: ** Object .type options cannot be changed from this editor. Use their scripts instead.** Select the option from the dropdown menu. Change the option's. value . Click. Save Option .to submit. Deleting options:Select the option from the dropdown menu. Click. Delete Option .to submit. Images: How to Install

What is the nicest thing you have done for someone online? Helping me out with a technical problem. Do not meet a lot of helpful people online.

Bots

Secondary test post. Good, so it's working.

Test post.

That is bizarre. The logs page should be accessible so long as the logs script is installed.

What do you look for in others? No.

Got pulled in... Note to self: Do not make a large reply again.

I cannot believe I caught dragged into this... I guess it was inevitable with Chiki here... The scenario I was referring to was the one you gave in the quote given below. That is why I was confused. You see, I found a disparity between that meaning for choice and this quote: By this definition of choice, it is impossible for Jones to make a choice in the first place. Jones can have no will of his own. Mind control creates hard determinism for the subject even if the universe itself is soft. He may think he makes a choice, but it has no meaning because he, personally, did not actuate it. Dondon's definition has been dead since the start of the thread. We agree that when one gets the initial feeling, they are not able to not feel however they happen to feel in reaction. We do not agree on mine. If you wish to discuss his, you will have to find someone else to do it with. Interestingly, habituation has been proven to give inconclusive results with anger, in particular. Many if not most individuals find themselves more enraged and convicted the more think about their dislike. While the action may inspire less instance-specific rage each time, the hatred grows with each time. Hence I intentionally differentiate it from rage, which is also a feeling of intense dislike. Rage might succumb to habituation, but hatred lives on beyond individual stimuli. Rage is a present sensation while hatred is in the head. Is this not making sense to you? Addressing this here since it relates to what follows. I agree with that model. It seems to make sense. Does it contradict my simplification to impulses? No. In order for this computer to create the preference order, it has to have some criteria by which to sort. Where do these criteria come from? They are not specified in the model itself. They must be outside of it; outside of the process; innate to the mind. While I may have simplified things, the result is the same. There is a question that needs asking about impulses. You assumed that a heroin addict's impulse to use was strongest. How do you determine the strength of an impulse? I am not using impulse in the physical sense, but rather in a metaphysical sense. As I see it, whichever impulse wins out was the stronger. For example, people who beat their heroin addiction often have a stronger drive to use than to get clean. Those are the ones who do not get clean. The ones who get clean had a stronger impulse to reason. That is doubly true for heroin addicts because the impulse to use is so strong that is can cloud and warp reason. If it were any other way, their computer-model minds would have created a preference order that favored using and they would not have gotten clean. Unless you have another way to determine preference order? I have come to the conclusion that you cannot do otherwise without reflecting. I will explain below. As I have understood it, soft determinism is differentiated from hard determinism in that it asserts that some decisions are not determined by factors outside the subject's control, while others are. In other words, under soft determinism, there are some actions taken by people that are considered determined, and yet other actions by those same people that are considered free. Given Person A and a set of impulses, Person A's decision would be said to have been determined if they would make the same choice in the same scenario every time. Most often, these are scenarios where they are thrust into a situation without a chance to consider any other option then their strongest impulse. For example, if Person A has not been presented with other options, they will choose the only option they see as available to them, every time. Person A's decision would also be said to have been determined if their choice was influenced by a particularly strong stimulus. For example, Person A may fly into a fit of rage and their actions will become exceedingly predictable as a result. Person A's decision be said to have been free if they would not make the same choice in the same scenario every time. Personally, I would not call their decision a choice unless it were free, as in the last option, because that is the only scenario where the end result (supposedly) has the subject's will as a deciding factor rather than the other way around. Walk through a decision with those distinctions in mind. Without reflection: Assume: Premise 1: Person A's only impulses are to experience pleasure and to stay healthy. Premise 2: Person A has a concept of chocolate; they know that it is pleasurable, but also that it is unhealthy. Premise 3: Person A's impulse to experience pleasure is stronger than their impulse to stay healthy. Premise 4: Person A is incapable of reflecting on their decision before making it. 1: Person A is presented with a choice. To eat chocolate, or not to eat chocolate. 2: Seeking pleasure > staying healthy. Person A (or rather, Person A's body) eats the chocolate as a result of their impulse to seek pleasure. Put into the same situation with the same factors, Person A would make the same choice every single time. With reflection: Assume: Premises 1-3. Premise 5: Person A is capable of reflecting on their decision before making it. 1: Person A is presented with a choice. To eat chocolate, or not to eat chocolate. 2: Person A reflects on their choice. 3: They decide to balance their impulses and eat only a morsel of chocolate; staying healthy will result in long-term pleasure. | OR | They decide to eat the chocolate; they really want it. | OR | They decide not to eat the chocolate; they must stay healthy. Put into the same situation with the same factors, Person A would not make the same choice every single time. Or, that is the argument behind soft determinism, anyway. I can see no way, even theoretically, for the person to deviate from their determined inclinations without the reflection and consideration. If they could make choices that contradict their innate preferences, then what would cause them to do so? Provided the environment remains the same, why would they behave differently in the same situation? I'm getting at the point that if you would never deviate, then there is no reason to assert that you could deviate. The situation remains determined so long as you are a slave to impulse instead of conscious weighing. An extension of this is that hard determinism and soft determinism are incompatible. Hard determinism dictates that all actions are determined. Soft determinism dictates that some actions are free. The only compatibility to be had between the two comes from the idea that in the subjective, conscious scope, one consciously considers the choices and thinks "I decide to do this", which requires reflection by definition. It does not always lead to it, but it has the ability to. The idea is that if you reflect with the intention of alleviating those feelings, you can do so through that reflection.

The trickiness is in the pudding. I have it log away entire logs as a single string instead of by message.