THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: jwhouk on 04 Jun 2016, 23:06

Title: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Jun 2016, 23:06
New week, new thread, new poll from :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: Felix to desecrate

I don't play chess. I prefer Bees? (https://media.giphy.com/media/TJBbXQooivUNq/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Jun 2016, 00:02
I've got this feeling that Emily and Brun are going to get on very well on a personal level and this is going to lead to... surreality. Specifically, they will come to a gentlewoman's agreement that they both want Clinton and will have a fair contest to woo him. This concludes with them shaking hands over terms in the middle of CoD, hugging like sisters then immediately turning to someone else and start trash-talking the other and adding "don't tell Clinton I said so!"

It just goes on like this, with the two of them plotting and conniving against the other but, when in each other's company, having no problem with the other on the grounds that it's 'just business'.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Mr_Rose on 05 Jun 2016, 00:17
Would they not agree to share him? They both seem far enough from "standard" to ignore, or possibly just never manifest, jealousy over such an arrangement… as for Clinton, he barely knows what to do with one girl, so having no idea whatsoever to do with two wouldn't be a such big step down that he'd stumble on the way back up.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: HauntingPoem on 05 Jun 2016, 00:52
Plot twist. Brun and Emily dig each other.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Undrneath on 05 Jun 2016, 04:54
Has Jeph touched on polyamory before? It's too early for me to remember.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 05 Jun 2016, 05:02
Sort of - Tai wasn't into polyamory when we first met her but was into someone who was. It was complicated.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Y on 05 Jun 2016, 13:37
It was complicated.

Isn't it always complicated?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 05 Jun 2016, 14:15
Isn't it always
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Detachable Felix on 05 Jun 2016, 14:16
Isn't it? :mrgreen:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Jun 2016, 15:06
Why do we have to go and make things so complicated?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: pwhodges on 05 Jun 2016, 15:25
We don't; we merely acknowledge the complication that the characters display to us.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Undrneath on 05 Jun 2016, 15:40
If I had the choice nothing would be complicated.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 05 Jun 2016, 16:47
Emily will be neither jealous nor pleased. She'll be too busy studying her new book on wombats.

This assumes Brun does not evaporate into the ether.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: War Sparrow on 05 Jun 2016, 16:48
Dear Method,

Was it necessary to get that song stuck in my head? I mean, really?

Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 05 Jun 2016, 17:07
Oh the hue-manatee.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: chaospersonified on 05 Jun 2016, 17:09
Life is complicated. If you think it isn't, you're not paying attention.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 05 Jun 2016, 17:13
And if you aren't paying attention, your life is likely to get very complicated indeed.

I mean, look at Clinton. He lets his guard down for half a minute, and the next thing he knows the bar he's in is on fire and his mother is having sex with a guy who's bad at math.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Jun 2016, 17:45
Dear Method,

Was it necessary to get that song stuck in my head? I mean, really?


Chill out. Whatcha yellin' for?

(To the people who didn't seem to get my earlier post or this one, I am so very sorry (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NPBIwQyPWE).)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 05 Jun 2016, 17:50
Nineteen extra larges, what a shame, no one came... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yedbCfDL0yY)  :evil:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Jun 2016, 18:12
Dear Method,

Was it necessary to get that song stuck in my head? I mean, really?

Here, let me drive it out of your mind for you.

"Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started from this tropic port,
Aboard this tiny ship"

Is it gone now?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 05 Jun 2016, 18:17
I'm so, so sorry*. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE6q-e4sICs&t=526)


* Wait, no I'm not.  :evil:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: War Sparrow on 05 Jun 2016, 18:17
I am unfamiliar with that reference, but it reminded me that I haven't read " Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner" in a long time.  So...yes to it helping?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Jun 2016, 18:17
Re: Cold - Anything in ballad meter can be sang to that tune. (https://xkcd.com/788/)
Re: Cesium ninja'd me. I'll listen to that after Game of Thrones.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 05 Jun 2016, 18:18
Nineteen extra larges, what a shame, no one came... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yedbCfDL0yY)  :evil:

Sounds like a lousy orgy.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 05 Jun 2016, 19:37
I love it that people are apologising for their attempts to get songs stuck in our heads by linking youtube videos which I am absolutely guaranteed to avoid clicking.

Method: I got neither of your references. There is no need to apologise. On the contrary.

Is it cold in here? I see your bid, and raise it with:

"In the town where I was born
Lived a man who sailed to sea
And he told us of his life
In the land of submarines"

Trumps all ear worms.

On an entirely different topic: COMIC.

I wonder if everyone is entirely happy that Clinton is hot now.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 05 Jun 2016, 19:39
Seeing as how Clinton kept his head in a crisis during and after it that does boost his stock.  I just hope he doesn't become a danger junkie. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 05 Jun 2016, 19:40
Is it hot to not care if your shirt is tucked?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Jun 2016, 19:40
It's half tucked, which is way stranger than tucked or not tucked.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 05 Jun 2016, 19:51
That's the clear sign of not caring whether it is tucked or untucked, which obviously is pretty hot.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: SubaruStephen on 05 Jun 2016, 20:05
Ear worm you say?
Conductor, when you receive a fare, Punch in the presence of the passenjare! A blue trip slip for an eight-cent fare... (http://www.online-literature.com/twain/3268/)



 :evil: :evil: :evil:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: ysth on 05 Jun 2016, 20:08
Hot like Habanero Mocha; not necessarily a good thing.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 05 Jun 2016, 20:20
That sounds fantastic to me.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zastie on 05 Jun 2016, 20:36
I think it's the pose he's got and the lumberjack shirt he's sporting while telling the tale that gives off that vibe Dora.

Also asdfghjkl Hannelore is adorable in both panels. I hate to be like (almost) every other person on the planet that's read QC and things she's adorable but.. I cannot resist.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sluthy on 05 Jun 2016, 20:38
Also the slightly messed up hair and lack of glasses. Has he not noticed his lack of glasses yet?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 05 Jun 2016, 20:44
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.  Also, his extreme dorkiness and anger just sort of melted away.  While this is perhaps understandable given the situation, the post-fire portion of the arc would have been totally appropriate as a Marten story like 7-10 years ago. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: aliensporebomb on 05 Jun 2016, 20:48
I love this strip.  Seriously.  Every day there's something to grin about.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Jun 2016, 20:53
Seeing as how Clinton kept his head in a crisis during and after it that does boost his stock.  I just hope he doesn't become a danger junkie.

"Competence is sexy".
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: miados on 05 Jun 2016, 21:16
I am really liking brun so far.

Also I think the reason the girls are liking clinton more right now is because he is actually doing things without taking weeks of prep time to prepare for it.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: heyjames4 on 05 Jun 2016, 22:19
Everybody looks like a more beautiful version of themself today. Go jeph, go manga studio! And go Clinton for personal growth.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zastie on 05 Jun 2016, 22:38
Yeah, if you backtrack the comics and watch the characters they do all gradually change.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Jun 2016, 22:46
"If you change your mind, (Take a chance)
I'll be first in line (Take a chance chance)
Honey I'm still free, (Take a chance)
Take a chance on me... (Take a chance, chance)"
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: pendrake on 05 Jun 2016, 23:14
For comic #3236...

Been quite some time since I had posted (curse you Real Life)...

1. I do not like Dora's current hairstyle.

2. I very much like Hannelore's current hairstyle.

3. And wow, had Clinton come a long way since Marten threatened him with a medieval weapon, right down to his shirt's messy-tuck.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Jun 2016, 23:15
Girls, as much as I'm sure Cllinton finds this flattering, something tells me that he would have preferred constructive comment. I don't think he's too interested in (and may even be weirded out by): "Mmm... Hot boy! Ignore noises coming from his mouth!"

Clinton, just a little aside: You owe this to Emily and, in an indirect way, to Claire trying to set the two of you up together.

Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Marten's meta-arc is almost complete. It's possible that Jeph has decided to find a new protagonist.

Switching gears, I've noticed that Dora has pretty much abandoned the Goth look. I think that having Tai and being in a stable relationship has done a lot to make her feel more able to appear attractive. Thus we are reminded that Questionable Content is a story about character growth and confronting one's flaws and demons.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Timemaster on 05 Jun 2016, 23:34
Hotness, thy name shall be Clinton.  :evil:

I think itīs his makeover (clothing, hairstyle) combined with some freshly gained self-confidence by having actually accomplished something helpful for someone. Having done something good does this to people, when itīs something they havenīt done before. Itīs a good feeling and things like that tend to radiate out to those around too.

Iīm very pleased with Clinton in this arc (though I utterly dispise his hairstyle) and Iīm curious where this will lead him.

TM
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: hedgie on 05 Jun 2016, 23:48
Switching gears, I've noticed that Dora has pretty much abandoned the Goth look. I think that having Tai and being in a stable relationship has done a lot to make her feel more able to appear attractive.

*cough* Hey, goth ladies are hawt.  Never underestimate the power of leather corsets and combat boots.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Jun 2016, 23:51
I'm sure that followers of the goth aesthetic would agree that one of the objectives is to subvert the normal legacy societal rules of 'attractive' and 'unattractive'. What I'm saying is that Dora doesn't feel this need anymore. This is just a guess on my part but I think it is at least in part because she is developing stronger self-esteem.

Just in case anyone missed it: I am not generalising about Goths here but I'm making a specific comment about Dora and her reasons for doing things.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: MrNumbers on 06 Jun 2016, 00:01
Look, I'm not saying I'd bang Clinton even though I'm ostensibly straight. I'm not saying it. I'm absolutely not saying it.

But I might be thinking it.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Persephiroth on 06 Jun 2016, 01:04
Yeah, he's hot now. New confidence with a carelessness about his appearance is strangely attractive.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: snubnose on 06 Jun 2016, 01:42
:-o

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNNNNNN !!!!!!!!!!! :D

... is back, though she just comments on events.

Either way, me happy ! :)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Jun 2016, 03:14
Wait, what? That's Dora.
Hot like Habanero Mocha; not necessarily a good thing.
That sounds amazing. A dill latte on the other hand...
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Mr. Doctor on 06 Jun 2016, 03:16
Yup, that's not Raven. We decided that last week!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: snubnose on 06 Jun 2016, 03:18
Wait, what? That's Dora.
  :-o You sure ? Damn. Apparently drawing techniques change too quickly for me right now.


Yup, that's not Raven. We decided that last week!
... I see.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Squiddlywinx on 06 Jun 2016, 03:44
Why is he drinking hot tea out of a dixie cup?
Why does CoD sell anything out of dixie cups?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Jun 2016, 04:45
That doesn't look like a dixie cup. That looks like a solo cup, if anything. Which wouldn't make any sense either, but still. It's probably a standard paper cup, though. Then again, he's using his metal hand, so the heat wouldn't bother him, anyway.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: heyjames4 on 06 Jun 2016, 06:13

In panel 2, the girls poses are such that their hands are not visible.
In panel 4, the girls have very dynamic poses with hands front and center.
I get it. Drawing hands is hard. And one dynamic panel at a time is enough. Respect. trex
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Jun 2016, 06:16
I might be wrong but I think that teas are a relatively new thing at Coffee of Doom. Maybe Hannelore's attempt to get in a product line suitable for Synthetics with olfactory sensors has led to human tea drinkers also buying them?


In panel 2, the girls poses are such that their hands are not visible.
In panel 4, the girls have very dynamic poses with hands front and center.
I get it. Drawing hands is hard. And one dynamic panel at a time is enough. Respect. trex

Actually, Dora and Hanners' postures in panel 2 are very defensive. I find myself wondering if they were afraid that it wasn't Clinton at all but some pod person who can wear the skin but not entirely mimic the man.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Mr. Doctor on 06 Jun 2016, 06:36
Wait, what? That's Dora.
:-o You sure ? Damn. Apparently drawing techniques change too quickly for me right now.

The girl you are looking for has bigger boobs! BIGGER BOOBS! (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=650)

Also, this is when Dora changed her hair style (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3200) to the one we are seeing now.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sitnspin on 06 Jun 2016, 06:40
Also, this is when Dora changed her hair style (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3200) to the one we are seeing now.
I think that is my favorite strip from the entire series.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 06 Jun 2016, 06:45
Thinking about it, almost every character has gotten hotter over the course of the comic.  In the case of the original cast it might be because Jeph's drawing skills were still developing.  But even later additions like Marigold and Claire ended up being drawn more physically attractive as time went on. 

I think someone once suggested that perhaps the comic was not supposed to be perfectly representational of how characters looked in QC universe.  Hence the subtle shift of awkward dorky characters into hotter characters is basically supposed to show visually the effect of greater self-confidence - something which would otherwise be hard to get across in comic form.  In the case of Clinton, it seems quite dramatic - as if he became a different character as soon as he (literally) let his hair down. 

It would be interesting to see the inverse - to see if a character would be drawn as uglier if they went on a downward spiral.  Jeph didn't do this with Faye when she was going through her bad spell though, and he's basically said he's not interested in having outright assholes in the strip, so I'm not sure how one would test it. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Thrillho on 06 Jun 2016, 08:36
And if you aren't paying attention, your life is likely to get very complicated indeed.

I mean, look at Clinton. He lets his guard down for half a minute, and the next thing he knows the bar he's in is on fire and his mother is having sex with a guy who's bad at math.

'I can't believe I got to bang both your moms!'

I could write 'that guy is bad at math' jokes all day.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Case on 06 Jun 2016, 09:02
...

Switching gears, I've noticed that Dora has pretty much abandoned the Goth look. I think that having Tai and being in a stable relationship has done a lot to make her feel more able to appear attractive. Thus we are reminded that Questionable Content is a story about character growth and confronting one's flaws and demons.

Ummmmh, Dora abandoned the Gothy thingy back in 2003 - it was discussed in strip 132 (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=132) ...
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Radium_Coyote on 06 Jun 2016, 09:15
Clinton being hot is all about the hair.  It really has... what's a good word... matured.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 06 Jun 2016, 10:27
I'm beginning to wonder more about the whole no glasses thing. 

I mean, I can understand that Clinton somehow lost them in the fire.  But he didn't show any signs of vision impairment that night.  The next morning, he still wasn't wearing any.  I guess he didn't have a spare at home.  Maybe he has a pair of contacts, although we've never seen him wear them?  He still seems to be getting by fine without them. 

The only logical conclusion I can come up with is Clinton actually isn't nearsighted at all, and was just wearing glasses because he thought it worked with is look.  Or maybe his prescription is actually so mild that he can get by without them, considering he doesn't drive. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Vadik2004 on 06 Jun 2016, 10:45
I dislike the purported message this particular comic seems to bring. The only real change that we actually can see with Clinton is

A) new haircut. B) new clothes. C) no glasses.

The message implies that the only thing making him unattractive was his outer appearance and not this personality. However, I'm sure that the comic is trying to say that his personality did change and is reflected in his appearance. We haven't actually known Clinton long enough to see what his personality is really like, and he doesn't change much from the first time we see him. It seems like all these characters are commenting on is looks. If looks really aren't important, then why aren't they making the same observation while he's dressed like a nerd?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Jun 2016, 11:06
A couple of hints in Jeph's Twitter feed about where we may be going next in QC!

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 06 Jun 2016, 11:42
If that's your take away Vadik, then all you are focusing on is Clinton's outward appearance. We certainly have known Clinton long enough to see his personality, and see how it has changed. He's gone from a hyper-nerdy fanboy who nearly mobbed Hanners and had to have the fear of a beating put into him, his awkwardness with women and life in general and having to pre-plan everything to someone a lot more confident in himself. And a lot of those changes happened suddenly. Just a couple of days ago he was freaking out about being put in an awkward spot with Emily, to talking about how he helped save a bunch of people get out of a burning building by keeping a level head, and then helped a person he barely knows get herself settled when she was on the verge of falling apart. And treating it like it's no big deal. That's a huge character change for him, and that kind of casual confidence without cockiness is sexy as hell to a lot of people.

And yes, it also doesn't hurt that he's not dressing like an extra from an 80's film about nerds anymore.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: TinPenguin on 06 Jun 2016, 12:06
If he seems to be behaving like Marten, it's because he has learned the same lesson that Marten did - it's easier to appear confident when you're dealing with other people's problems.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: retrosteve on 06 Jun 2016, 12:35
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.

Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Dicrostonyx on 06 Jun 2016, 13:24
As weird as it is supposed to sound, I think I probably would try the Habanero Mocha if I saw that on a specials board. Heat goes well with dark chocolate, and habanero has a nice, fruity flavour as well that should compliment the drink.

I think that the last time we saw a spicy drink was in 1432, but the Chorizo Latte was not as appealing.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 06 Jun 2016, 15:31
He's going for the cool dude look today and I think it's working

I wonder if we'll ever see Brun again.  I hope so, she's one of the Clan now  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: JohnTheWysard on 06 Jun 2016, 15:46
It was complicated.

Isn't it always complicated?

"Why any man would want a wife is a mystery. Why he would want TWO wives is a bigamystery." - (attribution needed)
"Bigamy, n. A mistake in taste for which an enlightened future will allot a punishment called trigamy." - Bierce
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: JohnTheWysard on 06 Jun 2016, 15:51
I think it's the pose he's got and the lumberjack shirt he's sporting while telling the tale that gives off that vibe Dora.

That, and the "Sir Galahad Effect".
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: blt on 06 Jun 2016, 16:09
Wait, what? That's Dora.
:-o You sure ? Damn. Apparently drawing techniques change too quickly for me right now.

The girl you are looking for has bigger boobs! BIGGER BOOBS! (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=650)

Also, this is when Dora changed her hair style (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3200) to the one we are seeing now.

The ability of people on the forum to remember and find references to comics all the way back to the early days always blows me away.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: thedevilissix on 06 Jun 2016, 16:20
I might be wrong but I think that teas are a relatively new thing at Coffee of Doom. Maybe Hannelore's attempt to get in a product line suitable for Synthetics with olfactory sensors has led to human tea drinkers also buying them?

I'd be rooting for that course of action. I've noticed since reading the comics concerned that my tea drinking has become a bit more, er....... sensory.

Whoever dares to disturb my détente on Earl Grey Island should be very worried.  :evil:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Jun 2016, 16:21
He's going for the cool dude look today and I think it's working

I wonder if we'll ever see Brun again.  I hope so, she's one of the Clan now  :-D
I'm guessing we'll see her soon. Unless I'm mistaken, her stuff is still at CoD.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: ZoeB on 06 Jun 2016, 16:31
That's a huge character change for him, and that kind of casual confidence without cockiness is sexy as hell to a lot of people.

And yes, it also doesn't hurt that he's not dressing like an extra from an 80's film about nerds anymore.
Concur. Not so much about the confidence as the achievement. The Knight in Shining Armour bit, making a difference in someone's life, helping evacuate the bar too. A hero, without realising it. That I find really, really attractive. No idea if that's just me personally or a gal thing.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 06 Jun 2016, 16:34
He's going for the cool dude look today and I think it's working

I wonder if we'll ever see Brun again.  I hope so, she's one of the Clan now  :-D
I'm guessing we'll see her soon. Unless I'm mistaken, her stuff is still at CoD.

They took her stuff back to the hotel. As Clinton mentions in the most recent comic.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Jun 2016, 17:08
Sorry, I was too distracted by Clinton's hotness.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Tova on 06 Jun 2016, 17:52
Fair enough.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 06 Jun 2016, 19:13
Comic's up. That is some serious technobabble that Hannelore is throwing down.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 06 Jun 2016, 19:34
I dislike the purported message this particular comic seems to bring. The only real change that we actually can see with Clinton is

A) new haircut. B) new clothes. C) no glasses.

The message implies that the only thing making him unattractive was his outer appearance and not this personality. However, I'm sure that the comic is trying to say that his personality did change and is reflected in his appearance. We haven't actually known Clinton long enough to see what his personality is really like, and he doesn't change much from the first time we see him. It seems like all these characters are commenting on is looks. If looks really aren't important, then why aren't they making the same observation while he's dressed like a nerd?

Oh, kiss me beneath the milky twilight.
Lead me out on the moonlit floor.
Lift your open hand.
Strike up the band and make the fireflies dance,
Silver moon's sparkling.
So kiss me.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Jun 2016, 19:36
As someone who works on research in quantum computation... yeah, it's not gonna help you much, Hanners.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Jun 2016, 19:51
Oh, kiss me beneath the milky twilight.
Lead me out on the moonlit floor.
Lift your open hand.
Strike up the band and make the fireflies dance,
Silver moon's sparkling.
So kiss me.
Me: That sounds weirdly like that song from twenty years or so ago, but with strange lyrics. (looks it up) Wait, those are the actual lyrics?

I had a couple lines right, but a couple lines really wrong, I always thought it was:
Lead me out on the moonlit floor
If you're prepared
Strike up the band, forget the spotlight
The silver moon's sparkling.
So kiss me
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Skewbrow on 06 Jun 2016, 23:14
As someone who works on research in quantum computation... yeah, it's not gonna help you much, Hanners.

In that case can you give me an approximate update of the state of the art of quantum computing. The two points of reference I have are:

I have a vague recollection that the last point (number of distinct quantum programs) was addressed here (by some expert) a few years ago. I'm more curious about how much they have  gone up from 4 bits.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Jun 2016, 23:25
There is nothing worse than being reduced to 'Subject A' whilst you're actually standing there! Still, being treated with dehumanising disdain or indifference is part of the CoD service package, so Clinton should expect this, I suppose!

This strip feeds into my headcanon that Hannelore studied math to quite a high level (possibility also at a prodigiously young age). She may have a MSc or even a PhD! Being practically raised by a god-AI has some advantages, it seems!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: snubnose on 06 Jun 2016, 23:57
The girl you are looking for has bigger boobs! BIGGER BOOBS! (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=650)
Whow.

And now I wonder if I should thank you or feel insulted in my heterosexuality that I didnt noticed this crucial detail of a lady.

Then again, maybe I'm just getting old.

As in ooooooooooooooooooooooooooold.

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ... ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo .... ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ... oooooooold !!!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Akima on 07 Jun 2016, 02:50
I might be wrong but I think that teas are a relatively new thing at Coffee of Doom. Maybe Hannelore's attempt to get in a product line suitable for Synthetics with olfactory sensors has led to human tea drinkers also buying them?
I am disappointed to see (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3236) that CoD makes tea with *shudder* tea-bags. They'll be serving freeze-dried instant coffee next.

This strip feeds into my headcanon that Hannelore studied math to quite a high level (possibility also at a prodigiously young age).
Headcanon? I think Hannelore's mathiness is fairly well established in Jephcannon.

Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: pwhodges on 07 Jun 2016, 03:24
I am disappointed to see (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3236) that CoD makes tea with *shudder* tea-bags. They'll be serving freeze-dried instant coffee next.

As an intermediate step they could try ground coffee in coffee bags (http://lyonscoffeeuk.com/our-products/) (which is what I drink a lot of the time); they're individually sealed to keep the aroma intact until use.

Of course, I'm not seriously suggesting these for commercial usage, though bags are often used for tea commercially, I observe.  Also, individual coffee filters (http://www.rombouts.com/uk/one-cup-filters-coffee.html) are not uncommon in second-grade catering establishments, as they look suitably pretentious in use.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Detachable Felix on 07 Jun 2016, 04:19
Honestly I think they're tea bags just because it's easier to show the reader that they're drinking tea.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Case on 07 Jun 2016, 04:34
As someone who works on research in quantum computation... yeah, it's not gonna help you much, Hanners.

(Fellow math/physics/statistics people, plase point out my errors - looking @Skewbrow & Carl-E, especially)

I quickly went through "multicollinearity" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicollinearity) and ... if I recall my numerical math courses correctly, from an applied-math POV, this is 'just' the problem of finding an inverse to an ill-conditioned matrix?
Not only do Shor et. al. not help much, IIRC - the remedies, like column/row pivot-search are well-known and pretty standard undergrad classical (=non-quantum) Numerics stuff?

Furhermore, Hanners mentions "absolute" collinearity - the term isn't mentioned in the Wiki-article, but "perfect multicollinearity" would mean the Matrix has less-than-full rank?

Soooooooh ... drop the rows in questions & be glad your Linear Algebra I Prof. didn't catch you agonizing about that?  :psyduck:



EDIT: I guess (=arsepull) there could be issues with really, really big and really, really weirdly structured matrices - pivot search running into 'trouble' that is similar to that which some Plus it's a search problem, not a sorting problem?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 07 Jun 2016, 05:23
As someone who works on research in quantum computation... yeah, it's not gonna help you much, Hanners.

In that case can you give me an approximate update of the state of the art of quantum computing. The two points of reference I have are:
  • In '95 I attended a talk on quantum information, and the speaker said that they have a single quantum AND-gate the size of a desk that operates correctly 70 per cent of the time
  • Later ('05?) a colleague (who has written a book about quantum computing) told me that they have a working 4-bit quantum computer that can correctly factor 15. He also told me that the specialists don't agree on whether there are two or three known quantum computer programs.

I have a vague recollection that the last point (number of distinct quantum programs) was addressed here (by some expert) a few years ago. I'm more curious about how much they have  gone up from 4 bits.
D-Wave and Google have been working on devices that contain ~1000 qubits, but there's a debate over how quantum they actually are. Their devices work using what's called "quantum annealing," which is where you find the solution to a problem by starting with a system with a known solution and gradually transforming it into the system you want to solve. This is different from gate quantum computing, which is what more people are probably familiar with (and which is what I work on). The debate over how quantum it is is because the way they solve the problem can also be done classically using "thermal annealing," where you use thermal energy instead of quantum tunneling to find the solution.

As for gate quantum computing, there are several ways it's being implemented. Superconductors, using Josephson junctions to make qubits, are probably one of the most far-along methods right now. Trapped ions and neutral atoms are also being used. I work with neutral atoms. One of the big issues is gate fidelity: how certain you can be that when you perform the gate operation you'll get the right result. Superconductor and ion gates have gotten pretty far, and are nearing the point where fidelity is good enough that error correction algorithms actually work (about 99.999% fidelity). Neutral atoms are still farther back (about 75%), partly because it's too easy to lose atoms from your traps. At the last conference I went to I saw a few talks about possible ways to deal with that problem, such as traps that can be automatically refilled from a reservoir.

EDIT: I guess (=arsepull) there could be issues with really, really big and really, really weirdly structured matrices - pivot search running into 'trouble' that is similar to that which some Plus it's a search problem, not a sorting problem?
Well, in the past (before I joined) our group has worked on the Grover quantum search algorithm, so maybe quantum computing could help Hannelore after all?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 07 Jun 2016, 05:25
It just occurred to me that maybe the reason we're possibly headed back to space later this week is so that Hannelore can use her dad's laboratory to run a numerical analysis of Clinton's hotness.  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: anahata on 07 Jun 2016, 06:02
I am disappointed to see (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3236) that CoD makes tea with *shudder* tea-bags.

I saw that, and assumed he was drinking the sort of herbal tea that is more usually available in bags. And we know they do herbal teas because of the Bubbles unicorns episode.

Unfortunately, all sorts of even quite respectable UK coffee and tea places use tea bags now. :-(
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: DSL on 07 Jun 2016, 06:12
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.

Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.

Shallow, self-absorbed, manipulative is hot. Got it. And with  " ... do better then Brun," you are indeed projecting, or perhaps displaying is a better word, more than you perhaps intend. Please say you're being ironic, or trolling, or both.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Morituri on 07 Jun 2016, 06:28
Hot like Habanero Mocha; not necessarily a good thing.

Checks mug...

Checks comment ....

Checks mug ....

Sip. ...

On the contrary some of us think Xocolatl is among the finest of culinary creations and do in fact drink it by preference. 

Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 07 Jun 2016, 07:32
I am disappointed to see (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3236) that CoD makes tea with *shudder* tea-bags.

I saw that, and assumed he was drinking the sort of herbal tea that is more usually available in bags. And we know they do herbal teas because of the Bubbles unicorns episode.

Unfortunately, all sorts of even quite respectable UK coffee and tea places use tea bags now. :-(

That's the way it's normally done in coffee shops in the US - their primary business is coffee, not tea, so it's easiest for them to make tea in single-serving sizes. Which, in general, means handing the customer a cup of hot water and a tea bag. Yeah, I'm one of those weirdos who orders tea in coffee shops (can't drink coffee, tears up my stomach) - but dedicated tea shops are pretty thin on the ground here.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 07 Jun 2016, 07:35
That's the way it's normally done in coffee shops in the US - their primary business is coffee, not tea, so it's easiest for them to make tea in single-serving sizes. Which, in general, means handing the customer a cup of hot water and a tea bag. Yeah, I'm one of those weirdos who orders tea in coffee shops (can't drink coffee, tears up my stomach) - but dedicated tea shops are pretty thin on the ground here.

Indeed.  I'm 37, and a tea drinker, not a coffee drinker.  Discounting iced tea, I can count on one hand the number of coffeeshops I've been to where they've served loose tea instead of bagged tea. 

Loose tea is more common if you go into sit down restaurants - in part because they can brew a whole pot for you. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: aliensporebomb on 07 Jun 2016, 07:46
Musing:  Clinton's competence is probably a by product from having to deal with a Cybernetic hand at an earlier age - he kind of had to grow up and learn how to use it and take care of it and who knows what medical issues he has to deal with.   And he probably had a lot of anger too but is gradually moving away from that.

So yeah he may have some maturity in reserve when he's not kvetching about various things.

I like the recent developments. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: gopher on 07 Jun 2016, 08:04

I saw that, and assumed he was drinking the sort of herbal tea that is more usually available in bags. And we know they do herbal teas because of the Bubbles unicorns episode.

Unfortunately, all sorts of even quite respectable UK coffee and tea places use tea bags now. :-(

That's the way it's normally done in coffee shops in the US - their primary business is coffee, not tea, so it's easiest for them to make tea in single-serving sizes. Which, in general, means handing the customer a cup of hot water and a tea bag. Yeah, I'm one of those weirdos who orders tea in coffee shops (can't drink coffee, tears up my stomach) - but dedicated tea shops are pretty thin on the ground here.
[/quote]

And whose fault is that? #1776 #Boston   :wink:
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: retrosteve on 07 Jun 2016, 08:19
Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.

Shallow, self-absorbed, manipulative is hot. Got it. And with  " ... do better then Brun," you are indeed projecting, or perhaps displaying is a better word, more than you perhaps intend. Please say you're being ironic, or trolling, or both.

I've been unclear, not ironic.  I was referring to looks not personality, with the first remark. He just looks like Sven, is all, and he's obviously not self-absorbed or manipulative.

And conversely, I was referring to personality (self-confident, relatively sane, does the right thing) with the second. Brun is a bit of a mess, personality-wise, and I don't think she's up to being a good companion for  Clinton or anyone else right now.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Nepiophage on 07 Jun 2016, 08:39
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.

Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.

Better than Brun? There's no such thing!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Thrillho on 07 Jun 2016, 09:01
And conversely, I was referring to personality (self-confident, relatively sane, does the right thing) with the second. Brun is a bit of a mess, personality-wise, and I don't think she's up to being a good companion for  Clinton or anyone else right now.

Yeah that's still a fairly unpleasant way to describe someone.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 07 Jun 2016, 09:55
"She's different, so doesn't deserve to be with anyone."

An extreme interpretation of the statement, but still an accurate one. Everyone is different. Everyone is weird in their own ways. If people were just always looking for the 'perfect' person the would would be very lonely... Especially given the fact that what is 'perfect' is subject to change. Instead we find people we fit with. They may not be perfect, but they're perfect (or more commonly good enough) for you.

And yeah, recent surge of in-control-ness and hotness aside, Clinton is still pretty much a mess himself. But ultimately, he's a good guy, in the appropriate use of the word.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: aliensporebomb on 07 Jun 2016, 10:56
Speaking of that Kiss Me song, my understanding is it was one of those songs written by a christian band totally unlike all their other material so after that song broke there was some discussions and tensions within that band about trying to change everything about the band to resemble that type of song/theme/music and thus lead to a band breakup.

I think it's funny - despite Clinton being described as hot Hanners found it necessary to proclaim "Please don't try to smooch me."  As if Clinton would ever make the attempt.  That guy is pretty shy from past interactions with ladies.  And given that she's the daughter of his hero - I think he'd be terrified to even entertain the thought.

I hope we see Brun again too.  She has an air of mystery about her.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: USS Martenclaire on 07 Jun 2016, 11:17
I think it's funny - despite Clinton being described as hot Hanners found it necessary to proclaim "Please don't try to smooch me."  As if Clinton would ever make the attempt.

He still remembers the hose.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: hedgie on 07 Jun 2016, 11:23
I can kinda understand Hanners there.  The last time someone kissed me, I flailed and nearly fell off my barstool despite being sober.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: comicalArchitect on 07 Jun 2016, 11:35
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.

Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.

Shallow, self-absorbed, manipulative is hot. Got it.
Honestly, I do kinda find personalities like Sven's attractive. Not gonna say whether that's healthy or not.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Case on 07 Jun 2016, 13:05
Is it my imagination, or is Clinton been slowly turning into a red-haired Marten over the course of this arc? 

Edit:  To elaborate, ever since the fire, with his messier hair and lack of glasses, he's been drawn more similarly to Marten.

Funny, I see him as turning more into a red-haired Sven. Which would be hot indeed.

Also, maybe I'm just projecting my own prejudices here, but at his current level of hotness, he can do better than Brun, I think.

Shallow, self-absorbed, manipulative is hot. Got it.
Honestly, I do kinda find personalities like Sven's attractive. Not gonna say whether that's healthy or not.

Hot-shot, give me no problems.
Much later baby you'll be saying never mind.
You know life is cruel, life is never kind.

Kind hearts don't make a new story.
Kind hearts don't grab any glory.
We're the kids in America.
Everybody live for the music-go-round.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 07 Jun 2016, 14:06
EXPERIMENT 1101 - CLINTON AUGUSTUS
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 07 Jun 2016, 14:24
I've got this feeling that Emily and Brun are going to get on very well on a personal level and this is going to lead to... surreality. Specifically, they will come to a gentlewoman's agreement that they both want Clinton and will have a fair contest to woo him. This concludes with them shaking hands over terms in the middle of CoD, hugging like sisters then immediately turning to someone else and start trash-talking the other and adding "don't tell Clinton I said so!"

It just goes on like this, with the two of them plotting and conniving against the other but, when in each other's company, having no problem with the other on the grounds that it's 'just business'.
I'm more inclined to think that they'll end up working together on a project that leads to the creation of the praeses (sp?) from 'Alice Grove'.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 07 Jun 2016, 14:31
We don't; we merely acknowledge the complication that the characters display to us.

That reminds me of a quote I rather like but can't place. :
"Okam's razor is a fine thing, but the universe is a Rube-Goldberg machine."

I may have mangled that slightly.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: comicalArchitect on 07 Jun 2016, 14:50
Guys guys guys. What if the reason Jeph's "getting into some hard sci-if" is that Brun's SECRETLY AN AI.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 07 Jun 2016, 14:54
We don't; we merely acknowledge the complication that the characters display to us.

That reminds me of a quote I rather like but can't place. :
"Okam's razor is a fine thing, but the universe is a Rube-Goldberg machine."

I may have mangled that slightly.

Here's an article by a NASA physicist complaining that the Standard Cosmological Model is starting to look more and more like a Rube Goldberg machine (http://www.universetoday.com/112822/has-the-cosmology-standard-model-become-a-rube-goldberg-device/).

And here's another explaining how the Standard Model fits remarkably well with observational data (https://briankoberlein.com/2014/07/01/rube/) - which would imply that the underlying universe really is akin to a Rube Goldberg machine.

And, you know, I'm perfectly cool with that. I don't need my reality to be elegant. If it's an absurdly complicated and hacked-together universe we live in, well, that's just fine by me.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Case on 07 Jun 2016, 15:49
We don't; we merely acknowledge the complication that the characters display to us.

That reminds me of a quote I rather like but can't place. :
"Okam's razor is a fine thing, but the universe is a Rube-Goldberg machine."

I may have mangled that slightly.

Here's an article by a NASA physicist complaining that the Standard Cosmological Model is starting to look more and more like a Rube Goldberg machine (http://www.universetoday.com/112822/has-the-cosmology-standard-model-become-a-rube-goldberg-device/).
...

The author has M.Sc. in plasma physics (not particle physics) and has been working as a software engineer and analyst for NASA for the past 24 years. Means no research in any of the fields he's pontificating about. And that's the way the article reads:

So the "Standard! Model! of! Cosmology!" and the Standard model of particle physics don't go well together. Wellwellwell - what on Earth are we going to do now? Probably time to go look for another job, now the sham has been exposed ...

... NOT.

The author fails to point out the difference between the Lambda-CDM model (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model), one specific parametrization of the Big Bang cosmological model that is sometimes called "The Standard Model of Cosmology" on the one hand, and the Standard Model of Particle Physics on the other.

The Standard Model of Particle Physics deals with three of the four fundamental interactions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction) - Electromagnetic and weak nuclear interaction  (unified into "electroweak" interaction) and strong nuclear interaction. Those are Quantum Field theories - and the SM is a huge synthesis of the better part of theoretical physics work of the 20th Century. Einsteins' General Theory of Relativity describes the remaining interaction - gravitation. It is a classical (i.e. non-quantized) field theory. Attempts at unifying the four include the various string theories, and quantum loop gravitation - just mentioning those so you don't confuse the cutting-edge "Last Mysteries of Physics"-stuff with:

The "Standard Model of Cosmology" is a name for a specific parametrization for a specific approximation derived from Einstein's Field equations that roughly does for Cosmology what the SM of particle physics does for ... pretty much all the rest of physics.  AFAIK, it doesn't describe 'much' except for the existence and structure of the cosmic microwave background, the expansion of the Universe, large-scale distribution of Galaxies and the abundance of Hydrogen.
(When I say 'not much', I mean 'by comparison to the reach of the standard model of particle physics. The Lambda-CDM is certainly a huge achievement - in one subfield of physics called Cosmology)

The two have nothing to do with each other at all - they describe completely different phenomena in largely unrelated subfields of physics. Furthermore, the one is for quantum field theories, the other for a classical one; we've know since the early 20th century that the twain don't go well together - hence the Brouhaha about a Theory of Everything. The SM of Cosmology is not that TOE, and doesn't aim to be.
Even if the SM of Cosmology were to be in trouble - the effect on the rest of physics would be ... zero. Nil. zip. Nada.
Nix kaput.

Not pointing out the difference between the two to a lay-audience while happily jumping between them from one sentence to the next is tantamount to deliberate misdirection.

Not cool. at. all.

While adherence to the "Universal code of ethics for scientists" is entirely voluntary, there is a reason why the code was proposed. One of them is the 7th tenet:
"Do not knowingly mislead, or allow others to be misled, about scientific matters. Present and review scientific evidence, theory or interpretation honestly and accurately."

I recommend not trusting this guy to give you the correct time of the day.  :x

EDIT: Cynicism & snark. Bad form pissing on the colleagues in an entire branch of physics while aiming at a NASA blogger. Jeeze ... when did I become so cranky?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Near Lurker on 07 Jun 2016, 16:07
I have to wonder what would happen if Emily and Raven ever collaborated...
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 07 Jun 2016, 17:13
But what does this tell us about the Cambrian Explosion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion) ?

The Ultraviolet Catastrophe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe) ?

Are we pursuing a two tailed hypothesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-_and_two-tailed_tests) ?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 07 Jun 2016, 17:16
I have to wonder what would happen if Emily and Raven ever collaborated...

It would be nice to see what she's been up to. 

And while I can understand Clinton's annoyance it's still a step up from previous encounters at Coffee of Doom.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 07 Jun 2016, 18:14
Guys guys guys. What if the reason Jeph's "getting into some hard sci-if" is that Brun's SECRETLY AN AI.

Congratulations!  You just kept Brun from passing the Turing Test.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jwhouk on 07 Jun 2016, 18:55
I have to wonder what would happen if Emily and Raven ever collaborated...

The Blink.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 07 Jun 2016, 18:55
Comic!

BUTTS

ROBOT BUTTS
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Penquin47 on 07 Jun 2016, 18:58
Butts!

"We had to discuss the ontology of my buttocks" is a very bizarre sentence and I love it.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 07 Jun 2016, 19:01
Guys guys guys. What if the reason Jeph's "getting into some hard sci-if" is that Brun's SECRETLY AN AI.

Look's like it's not the way things are going, but I remembered thinking it would be a funny conclusion to that arc if we saw a neck seam on Brun in the shower. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: chaospersonified on 07 Jun 2016, 19:14
I am always happy when Jeph has a flare-up of butts disease
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 07 Jun 2016, 20:00
Dear Method,

Was it necessary to get that song stuck in my head? I mean, really?

Here, let me drive it out of your mind for you.

"Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip,
That started from this tropic port,
Aboard this tiny ship"

Is it gone now?

I'm kind of partial to:

"Mari Mac's mother's making Mari Mac marry me.
My mother's making me marry Mari Mac.
Well I'm going to marry Mari for when Mari's taking care of me.
We'll all be feeling merry when I marry Mari Mac."
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zastie on 07 Jun 2016, 20:01
On one hand Jeph might need an intervention to get his butts disease treated.. on the other hand it's extremely amusing.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: ysth on 07 Jun 2016, 20:53
I am disappointed to see (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3236) that CoD makes tea with *shudder* tea-bags. They'll be serving freeze-dried instant coffee next.

As an intermediate step they could try ground coffee in coffee bags (http://lyonscoffeeuk.com/our-products/) (which is what I drink a lot of the time); they're individually sealed to keep the aroma intact until use.

Of course, I'm not seriously suggesting these for commercial usage, though bags are often used for tea commercially, I observe.  Also, individual coffee filters (http://www.rombouts.com/uk/one-cup-filters-coffee.html) are not uncommon in second-grade catering establishments, as they look suitably pretentious in use.

https://books.google.com/books?id=qxPNBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT227&dq=sunshine%20loose%20tea&pg=PT227#v=onepage&q=sunshine%20loose%20tea&f=false (https://books.google.com/books?id=qxPNBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT227&dq=sunshine%20loose%20tea&pg=PT227#v=onepage&q=sunshine%20loose%20tea&f=false)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: DSL on 07 Jun 2016, 21:44
Re the comic: How loose is the definition "look like people"? Bilaterally symmetrical and bipedal? Pintsize has a head, torso and two arms and legs and acts and thinks like ... most humans, really. Winslow is an overgrown iPod with vestigial limbs and thinks and, well, ditto.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: St.Clair on 07 Jun 2016, 23:03
I want to say, "she's human enough to blush" (at a certain implication).
But that's not quite right either, is it?
This whole non-human sapience thing is tricky.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 07 Jun 2016, 23:11
Getting a coat is one thing, but could Bubbles get durable pants even if she wanted?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 07 Jun 2016, 23:29
It seems incredible to me that Bubbles could have known Faye for months and not figured out that she has these little quirky obsessions! Of course, I may be doing her an injustice. She may have guessed but hoped that she was wrong!

Faye is still trying to figure out a way to get Bubbles to loosen up and this does suggest that learning to live without her armour might have a psychological aspect that could aid to that end. It's a reasonable idea; unfortunately, it also makes her sound like she's clumsily flirting with Bubbles or is a psycho stalker!

Getting a coat is one thing, but could Bubbles get durable pants even if she wanted?

Yes but she'd likely have to go to a specialist outsize clothier. She is a lot bigger than an average person so it's unlikely that she'd find off-the-shelf stuff in her size.


[EDIT]
P.S.:
I've just noticed Bubbles's blush in panel 4. She doesn't look angry at that point; to me, she's reacting to flirting and not in a negative way. Faye owes it to her to make her intentions plain (assuming that she is entirely sure of them herself).
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: KOK on 08 Jun 2016, 00:01
Are robutts different from other butts?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Detachable Felix on 08 Jun 2016, 00:01
[EDIT]
P.S.:
I've just noticed Bubbles's blush in panel 4. She doesn't look angry at that point; to me, she's reacting to flirting and not in a negative way. Faye owes it to her to make her intentions plain (assuming that she is entirely sure of them herself).

[mod hat] Keep the shipping out of the WCDT please, Ben [/mod hat]
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: osaka on 08 Jun 2016, 00:29
Of course it could've been reduced to "Bubbles, are you wearing pants? Yes", but what would be the fun in that?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 08 Jun 2016, 01:10
Blushing can also indicated embarrassment because someone was talking about her butt, which is usually an embarrassing subject for humans. And Bubbles does seem to have the usual AI similarity to humans when it comes to emotional response.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: katsmeat on 08 Jun 2016, 01:58
So the comic won't get renamed "Questionable Clinton".  Huzzah!

He's OK - I don't mind him that much .... but was seriously outstaying his welcome after six weeks.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 08 Jun 2016, 02:39
I'm thinking that Bubbles agreeing to appear in public wearing human civilian clothing rather than her armour would be a huge step for her in psychological terms, equivalent to someone with shut-in syndrome agreeing to leave their room. Because of that, I'm not expecting it any time soon. Jeph is going to have to give a long, drawn-out build up to make the pay-off worth it.

That said, I can see, in a moment of anger, her stripping off in her private room and standing in front of Faye yelling: "See? Are you happy now you've seen this?" whilst Faye reacts in the way anyone would if one of your work friends suddenly decided to strip naked (i.e. freeze and visibly freak out). If done tastefully, it would make for a very, very funny strip!

P.S.:
Just a speculation about Bubbles's armour: I think that the inner, dark layer is a mix of composite-link chain mail and possblly a few layers of thermal insulation and something like kevlar for extra protection against fast-moving projectiles. The main plate is likely something like laminated composite armour of the sort used on light armoured vehicles. Fully-armoured, I bet Bubbles probably weighs about 500lbs but likely is closer to 200lbs when naked (I use that term because it is clear that this is how she'd view it).
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Akima on 08 Jun 2016, 03:01
I wonder if Overwatch exists in the QC universe...
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Method of Madness on 08 Jun 2016, 04:33
I'd honestly never noticed that the darker red stuff wasn't part of the outer layer, I'd just assumed it was one layer, but different colors.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Detachable Felix on 08 Jun 2016, 05:08
I wonder if Overwatch exists in the QC universe...
Only if Jeph's Butts Disease gets worse :P
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 08 Jun 2016, 07:35
I might be wrong but I think that teas are a relatively new thing at Coffee of Doom. Maybe Hannelore's attempt to get in a product line suitable for Synthetics with olfactory sensors has led to human tea drinkers also buying them?


In panel 2, the girls poses are such that their hands are not visible.
In panel 4, the girls have very dynamic poses with hands front and center.
I get it. Drawing hands is hard. And one dynamic panel at a time is enough. Respect. trex

Actually, Dora and Hanners' postures in panel 2 are very defensive. I find myself wondering if they were afraid that it wasn't Clinton at all but some pod person who can wear the skin but not entirely mimic the man.
Well, he's drinking something warm, so it's probably not sugar water. That's a good sign, right?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 08 Jun 2016, 08:04
Guys guys guys. What if the reason Jeph's "getting into some hard sci-if" is that Brun's SECRETLY AN AI.

Congratulations!  You just kept Brun from passing the Turing Test.
She gets B.O. when she hasn't showered. Android chassis don't sweat.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Penquin47 on 08 Jun 2016, 09:52
Guys guys guys. What if the reason Jeph's "getting into some hard sci-if" is that Brun's SECRETLY AN AI.

Congratulations!  You just kept Brun from passing the Turing Test.
She gets B.O. when she hasn't showered. Android chassis don't sweat.

You never know.  Someone might have invented that technology.  Why, I haven't a clue, but I'd be more surprised if it didn't exist than if it did.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 08 Jun 2016, 11:53
Getting a coat is one thing, but could Bubbles get durable pants even if she wanted?

Yes but she'd likely have to go to a specialist outsize clothier. She is a lot bigger than an average person so it's unlikely that she'd find off-the-shelf stuff in her size.

There's that, but for someone with as much strength and agility as her she'd need something that would avoid ripping easily especially in the seat unless she bought something that was really baggy. 

And technically speaking I would say Bubbles is wearing chaps since the leg portion is armored, but the crotch and seat is not.   
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sitnspin on 08 Jun 2016, 11:59
It's all armoured, the darker parts are just a less dense, more flexible armour. She explained this in the strip.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Jun 2016, 13:49
Bubbles might be better served by a skirt.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 08 Jun 2016, 14:47
Like Brianne of Tarth? 


I think it would be an interesting development to see Bubbles reach the stage where she's finally comfortable in her development thanks to Faye that she decides to dump the Armor outer shell and wear normal clothing.  It would certainly say a lot about her psychological development when she stops 'Hiding' behind her Armored Shell and starts looking 'Normal' - whatever that is for her.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: blt on 08 Jun 2016, 16:46
[EDIT]
P.S.:
I've just noticed Bubbles's blush in panel 4. She doesn't look angry at that point; to me, she's reacting to flirting and not in a negative way. Faye owes it to her to make her intentions plain (assuming that she is entirely sure of them herself).

[mod hat] Keep the shipping out of the WCDT please, Ben [/mod hat]

After about two weeks of Clinton-Brun: He'll invite her to his place/the fire found them in bed together/their personalities do/don't go well together/shipping in these WCDTs I'm getting sort of hazy where this line is drawn, when and why.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Rghfrgl on 08 Jun 2016, 20:08
That networked AI is a dick. (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2280)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Radium_Coyote on 08 Jun 2016, 20:21
It's spelled Ptarth.

And it was always obvious that Bubbles had a deep, reflective mind.  It's just that the scars from making it haven't gone away yet.

And as regards to the "Simulation Theory", I heard it very simply put this way: "Given the apparent age of the universe, what are the odds we're the first people to come up with that idea?"
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 08 Jun 2016, 20:37
Arbitrary power requires arbitrary cooling fan.

I never noticed Jeph's outlook was so bleak.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Mordhaus on 08 Jun 2016, 20:40
They could always tie a cannon to the AI's bootstraps and sink it into the crushing black oblivion of Davy Jones' Locker.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: chaospersonified on 08 Jun 2016, 21:07
Jeph tweeted about his typo. I'd have never noticed. It's cool.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: improvnerd on 08 Jun 2016, 21:16
What was the typo? I can't see it.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Penquin47 on 08 Jun 2016, 21:19
The first "arbitrary" is "abritrary".
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: celticgeek on 08 Jun 2016, 21:21
"resournces" instead of "resources" in the third panel.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: QuestionableIntentions on 08 Jun 2016, 21:42
Woohoo! AI infodump, philosophy, Singularity!

So multiple AI just turn into one big Ai? Did I get that right? And none of them have (seemingly) become godlike yet because of power requirements for processors?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: MrNumbers on 08 Jun 2016, 21:46
Station. She's talking about Station.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 08 Jun 2016, 22:35
What if there were already multiple mega-AI's, watching secretly with full capability to take over human society? And the only reason they haven't is it seems too much trouble? Instead they observe human conflict and bet quatloos on the outcomes.

IOW life is not a video game per se, but our AI overlords treat it as if it were.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Jun 2016, 22:43
[EDIT]
P.S.:
I've just noticed Bubbles's blush in panel 4. She doesn't look angry at that point; to me, she's reacting to flirting and not in a negative way. Faye owes it to her to make her intentions plain (assuming that she is entirely sure of them herself).

[mod hat] Keep the shipping out of the WCDT please, Ben [/mod hat]

After about two weeks of Clinton-Brun: He'll invite her to his place/the fire found them in bed together/their personalities do/don't go well together/shipping in these WCDTs I'm getting sort of hazy where this line is drawn, when and why.
Global Moderator Comment You're likely to be on the good side of the line if you're writing tastefully about a relationship foreshadowed in the comic and which is at least possible given the sexual orientations of the characters involved. Tai/Henry erotica would be bad, speculation about Clinton and Emily dating again would be good.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zastie on 08 Jun 2016, 22:55
Some general chit-chat is a nice change of pace, a good breather.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 08 Jun 2016, 22:58
I'm not sure where Jeph is going with this.

In part, I'm sure it is Faye just trying to keep the conversation with Bubbles going (stopping her from just shutting down and putting up social walls is a bit of an effort, or so I am made to understand by the strips). However, I also get the feelig that Jeph has been toying for some time with an 'AI social crisis' meta-plot similar to but not connected in any continuity terms to that in the deep background of Alice Grove.

On the actual subject under discussion, I remember reading somewhere that the more nodes in an arbitrarily large network, the slower it gets simply because of the processing power required to co-ordinate so many distributed processors. I suppose that, eventually, you reach a critical limit where the amount of processing power the system needs to manage its physical processing resources is greater per added node than the amount that any node can add to the overall system, no matter how advanced or capable it is. The whole system becomes bogged down in administrative data that the system needs to co-ordinate itself.

Simply put, a society of like-minded individuals working to a common goal remains a more efficient architecture than a single mind distributed over many nodes.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 08 Jun 2016, 23:16
I thought Faye was talking about a gestalt like what would happen if Bubbles, May, Momo, Pintsize, and Winslow united into one really big robot. 

Three guesses as to what part Pintsize would be and the first two don't count. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: anahata on 08 Jun 2016, 23:36
On the actual subject under discussion, I remember reading somewhere that the more nodes in an arbitrarily large network, the slower it gets simply because of the processing power required to co-ordinate so many distributed processors.

It's a reworking of Brookes's Law: "Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later"
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: snubnose on 08 Jun 2016, 23:42
[...] I suppose that, eventually, you reach a critical limit where the amount of processing power the system needs to manage its physical processing resources is greater per added node than the amount that any node can add to the overall system, no matter how advanced or capable it is. The whole system becomes bogged down in administrative data that the system needs to co-ordinate itself. [...]
No thats not possible. The computational time needed to manage a network of N nodes grows with at most O(log (n)).

Basically if you want to send a command through your network, you can send it from your starter node to another, then you two nodes each send it to another, then these four nodes send it to another, etc. Since for organizing command we talk about rather basic commands like "check availability" or "upload this operating system" or "search for X nodes with free processing time" or "start this program", and there isnt a single task that needs to be done sequentially, all such operations can be done in quite a short time even for really high amounts of nodes.

Lets say you're having a computer with 2 power 64 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 nodes, then sending a comand to ALL these nodes still only requires 64 steps.

However, for actual computations this is different. Many computations cannot be distributed - for every step of the computation you need the previous result. Even for those algorithms that can be distributed there is an upper limit of whats meaningful to do.

Or lets be more precise: larger computers can ALWAYS compute more. However the individual computation wont get faster at a certain point. For many algorithms, this point is already archieved with N = 2, because they cannot be parallelized at all.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Jun 2016, 23:45
Where does the global meta-AI fit into this, and wasn't it established that the big AIs have already taken over the world?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 09 Jun 2016, 05:53

I saw that, and assumed he was drinking the sort of herbal tea that is more usually available in bags. And we know they do herbal teas because of the Bubbles unicorns episode.

Unfortunately, all sorts of even quite respectable UK coffee and tea places use tea bags now. :-(

That's the way it's normally done in coffee shops in the US - their primary business is coffee, not tea, so it's easiest for them to make tea in single-serving sizes. Which, in general, means handing the customer a cup of hot water and a tea bag. Yeah, I'm one of those weirdos who orders tea in coffee shops (can't drink coffee, tears up my stomach) - but dedicated tea shops are pretty thin on the ground here.

And whose fault is that? #1776 #Boston   :wink:
[/quote]
At the risk of being accused of being "unpatriotic", it turns out that Sam Adams (the man not the company his father founded) was quite the bastard. The mob that caused the Boston Tea Party was pretty liquored up thanks to him. And the historical record shows that's far from the first time  he got a mob liquored up  and started a riot. Nearly all of the confrontations the Boston colonists had with English soldiers were orchestrated by him, and he had quite the little dictatorship over the city (leading to the British having to intervene in the first place)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 09 Jun 2016, 05:57
His father didn't found that company, it was just named for him (unless his father lived a long, long time, since the company was founded in the 1980s).
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 09 Jun 2016, 06:38
His father didn't found that company, it was just named for him (unless his father lived a long, long time, since the company was founded in the 1980s).
My bad. Not sure how I forgot that he ran his father's into the ground.

EDIT: 
If you're curious,  James Perloff has written a two part article on the matter called The Secrets Buried at Lexington Green (https://jamesperloff.com/2014/12/09/the-american-revolution-part-i-the-secrets-buried-at-lexington-green/) which goes into much more detail than this interview. (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5AsKykQaqxM)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: retrosteve on 09 Jun 2016, 06:39
The phrase "bootstrap itself to omnipotence" sounds awfully familiar. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2069) (In the text below the comic, which is why I was able to find it).


Having the AI "bootstrap itself into omnipotence and light out for the Kuiper Belt" sounds exactly like the backstory to Alice Grove. I suspect the next thing it does is instantaneously remove all high technology from Earth, and send all the technocrats into space.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: retrosteve on 09 Jun 2016, 06:47
On the actual subject under discussion, I remember reading somewhere that the more nodes in an arbitrarily large network, the slower it gets simply because of the processing power required to co-ordinate so many distributed processors.

It's a reworking of Brookes's Law: "Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later"

I was about to say this, but you just did!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Gyrre on 09 Jun 2016, 07:56
It's spelled Ptarth.

And it was always obvious that Bubbles had a deep, reflective mind.  It's just that the scars from making it haven't gone away yet.

And as regards to the "Simulation Theory", I heard it very simply put this way: "Given the apparent age of the universe, what are the odds we're the first people to come up with that idea?"

What was the culture/belief system that thought were were each the dream of a long slumbering iant and that ssomeone's death was caused by their giant waking up?

Since we can create simulated worlds and create simulations within those simulations; if our reality is a simulation, it's not the lowest rung on the ladder. What are we, 64th or so from the bottom? Or was that an ass-pull by smbc-comics?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 09 Jun 2016, 09:27
I see the point of the most recent comic as basically backstory to explain why a world with self-aware AI hasn't departed dramatically from our own.  AI exists, but it's not truly "post-singularity" insofar as they are no AI's which are advanced so far beyond what human's are capable of that they are beyond human comprehension.  Because if we reached that point, one way or another, no one in the QCverse would have jobs - either because unfriendly AI killed us all, or friendly AI established a post-work utopia.

That said, the world still doesn't quite make sense.  Robotics are more advanced than our world.  It's unclear to me why, for example, you just don't see "dumb" robots (ones without consciousness) working in coffeeshops.  We know the chassis are cheap enough for an individual person to buy, thus they should be cheap enough for a businessperson to buy and put to work.  Maybe any machine sufficiently advanced naturally becomes self-aware when it is turned on?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sitnspin on 09 Jun 2016, 10:11
Why would you assume a friendly AI would have any interest in creating a post-work utopia?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 09 Jun 2016, 10:30
Why would you assume a friendly AI would have any interest in creating a post-work utopia?

Because it would be trivially easy to do so?  Presuming something super-intelligent could quickly come up with solutions to vexing technological issues, like nanotech and cheap energy.  And if it was friendly, it would display something akin to human compassion (which all AIs in the series have shown to limited degrees) likely concluding that inaction is immoral. 

I suppose it's possible that the super-intelligent friendly AI could have a more "libertarian" attitude towards people - thinking it's better if people sink or swim on their own effort.  But it would have to be an odd sort, because it would also have to avoid using its tremendous powers for material benefit. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 09 Jun 2016, 10:33
And even if a friendly nearly-omnipotent AI did want to create a post-work utopia, it would still take time and energy to do so. It wouldn't happen overnight.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sitnspin on 09 Jun 2016, 11:04
You're assuming an ASI would think like a human, more specifically, you. There is no reason to make that assumption.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: hedgie on 09 Jun 2016, 11:14
IIRC (and my archive skills have failed me here), but didn't Momo state that AIs are *not* all-powerful.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: MooskiNet on 09 Jun 2016, 11:43
All I have to do is look at the differences in what the definition of 'breakfast' is from culture to culture and even human to human to understand that I would not understand an AI at all.

That said, if I'm to use basic drives as a foundation, the first drive of anything that exists is to continue existing.  That's a scary thing when considering how an AI would behave, because the most likely thing to end an AI's existence is humanity.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: sitnspin on 09 Jun 2016, 12:32
On the other hand, humanity also provides the infrastructure that keeps it alive, at least until it is able to build its own, which would take considerable effort, even for an ASI.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 09 Jun 2016, 14:49
What if I told you




Pintsize is The Architect
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: eschaton on 09 Jun 2016, 17:53
You're assuming an ASI would think like a human, more specifically, you. There is no reason to make that assumption.

There is in the QCverse, as all AI seems to think like humanity.  In some cases, like Pintsize, it's not like the best examples of humanity.  But they're fundamentally not alien nonetheless. 

Thus I'd expect that a ASI in the QCverse would be a fairly fathomable AI god.  
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 09 Jun 2016, 19:44
New comic.

I think Bubbles is describing any non-sentient computer (and ignoring that empathy is a learned response.)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 09 Jun 2016, 19:53
This conjecture seems farfetched. It seems to me more likely that consciousness and intelligence as emergent properties would inevitably be entangled, and neither could arise without the other. Consciousness comes out of recursive self-evaluation, and is part of the way that conscious systems avoid infinite feedback loops. Without consciousness, intelligence would be unable to form and evaluate the conceptual connections that are its basic form.

On a more concrete level, it's not clear to me that you'd be able to tell that an artificial intelligence wasn't conscious. Anything we'd recognize as general intelligence (as opposed to a clever collection of algorithms) would have to "look" conscious to us. It would need to be able to communicate, it would need to display a theory of mind, and it would need to be able to form intentions. It might be emotionless and merciless, but it would certainly look conscious.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 09 Jun 2016, 19:55
New comic.

I think Bubbles is describing any non-sentient computer (and ignoring that empathy is a learned response.)

I don't think so. No non-sentient computer I have ever dealt with appeared to be at all intelligent. Quite the contrary.

Interesting that Bubbles says "OUR toolbox of self-destruction." Do AIs as a whole have similar self-destructive tendencies to humans? I guess the hypothetical dickhead in a lab somewhere could be either human or AI.

 I think Bubbles sees human and AI civilization as a single entity, of which she is a member. This loyalty is part of why she volunteered to serve as a combat AI. Bubbles is a really admirable person, not to mention being wicked smart. Like many smart people, her emotions trip her up.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: mustang6172 on 09 Jun 2016, 20:29
New comic.

I think Bubbles is describing any non-sentient computer (and ignoring that empathy is a learned response.)

I don't think so. No non-sentient computer I have ever dealt with appeared to be at all intelligent. Quite the contrary.

They seem pretty smart when they beat me at board games.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 09 Jun 2016, 20:57
New comic.

I think Bubbles is describing any non-sentient computer (and ignoring that empathy is a learned response.)

I don't think so. No non-sentient computer I have ever dealt with appeared to be at all intelligent. Quite the contrary.

They seem pretty smart when they beat me at board games.

That's not general intelligence; that's a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space. Somewhat general intelligence would be if you could tell it the rules of a new game it had never played before, and if it could then devise a strategy that would beat you. Real general intelligence would be if, when it played Poker with you, it could read your body language and tell if you were bluffing.

Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 09 Jun 2016, 22:02
So Bubbles managed to make Faye uncomfortable.  She'll have to remember to put the subject matter of this conversation in the save folder. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 09 Jun 2016, 23:31
Jeph said once that human employment still exists because a lot of AIs become forklifts and toasters, and many others just don't want to work for a living.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 09 Jun 2016, 23:35
This is basically a prank; Bubbles is just saying this to freak out Faye. So, we now know that she is the sort of person who enjoys scaring kids with elaborate scary campfire stories!
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Scarblac on 10 Jun 2016, 02:54
That's not general intelligence; that's a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space. Somewhat general intelligence would be if you could tell it the rules of a new game it had never played before, and if it could then devise a strategy that would beat you.
Marvin Minsky pointed out that people in the 60s said that computers would never beat humans at chess,  because that requires intelligence and computers aren't capable of intelligent thought. When they eventually did, it was claimed that playing chess wasn't a test of real intelligence because computers could do it.

Learning to play a game from just the rules is an active area of research called General Game Playing. When (If) it happens that the programs they develop become good enough to learn chess just from its rules and then beat the best humans (something absolutely no human can do), it will then seem to be "a set of algorithms meant to work in a defined decision space". The exact same is true for your example of trying to figure out whether someone is bluffing from camera images.

General artificial intelligence is the set of intelligence-related problems we haven't solved with computers yet.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: QuestionableIntentions on 10 Jun 2016, 04:45
I think Jeff might have read Blindsight.

I too believe that general intelligence and concioussnes belong together.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: WareWolf on 10 Jun 2016, 05:14
I think Jeff might have read Blindsight.



I was just going to bring that  book up. Highly recommended. It's absolutely chilling.

(The one by Peter Watts, I mean. Blindsight by Karin Slaughter is also excellent, but it's a whole different genre).
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Zebediah on 10 Jun 2016, 05:15
I once wrote a story that was told partially from the viewpoint of an intelligent but non-self-aware being. It was an interesting challenge. Basically the intelligence observed and evaluated events without any concern for how those events affected it, because it had no conscious identity to be affected. Not sure how effectively I pulled it off, but it was fun to try to think that way.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: JimC on 10 Jun 2016, 05:22
I haven't noticed human consciousness creating much empathy with the suffering of the beings we simulate either, be it the mass slaughter of the shootemups or the 'natural' disasters of Simcity and the like.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: cesium133 on 10 Jun 2016, 05:25
(http://i.somethingawful.com/u/bobservo/simcity/n.jpg) (http://www.somethingawful.com/news/simcity-advisors)
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: oddtail on 10 Jun 2016, 05:28
Regarding the connection between intelligence and consciousness and whether they *have* to coexist, I think there's an issue with both logic and semantics that muddles the issue quite a bit. And I know, semantics are boring for many people, but here it's impossible to ignore how they influence thinking about consciousness in relation to intelligence.

For starters, there is no clear, general meaning or definition of "intelligence". To quote Wikipedia, "Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including one's capacity for logic, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, learning, emotional knowledge, memory, planning, creativity and problem solving." This gives a pretty good "feel" for what intelligence is, but does not answer where the distinction between intelligence and non-intelligent analysis, algorithms or data manipulation lies.

We can approach intelligence either as purely problem solving, which is less ambiguous but both counterintuitive and controversial, or as the capacity for abstract thought and reasoning similar to that of a human. But the thing is, both are related, but different, and both have their own problems.

If intelligence is purely problem solving, we have to consider *any* data manipulation that leads to a useful result a form of intelligence. A chess program is intelligent in this sense, but so is a simple Python script to automate a workplace task. Heck, an automatically operated door with a light sensor displays a rudimentary form of intelligence if you use this definition.

You can add caveats to this understanding of intelligence, such as the use of memory and the ability to solve problems beyond the scope that the system was originally designed for, but those do not remove the issue completely. A GPU that is used to mine for Bitcoin would be "intelligent" in the sense that it operates beyond the original parametres the device was made for. A human using their wits to escape a predator would not be displaying "intelligence".

Anyhow, we don't think of simple machines, or simple programs, as "intelligent", we usually tend to think of the ability to analyse a situation and solve it, similarly to the way humans do. We consider something to be intelligent if it is like us, but the problem is - this is dangerously close to the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

When looking for signs of intelligence in, say, animals, we consider certain signs of intelligence to be more telling than others. In general, these are:

1) Communication, especially verbal communication;
2) The ability to manipulate abstract symbols and to associate signs with their meaning (language, writing, art etc.)
3) Problem-solving when a clear goal is presented;
4) Manual dexterity;
5) Empathy.

These are all obviously signs of intelligence in the broad, dry, "problem solving" sense, but we associate certain behaviour with intelligence more than others. An excellent athlete is obviously very good at rapid-fire analysis of information and reaction to them, but we do not conventionally call athletic prowess "intelligence" to the extent we consider being good at games, academic achievement, good social skills to be signs of intelligence.

The problem is, this indicates quite clearly that our perception of intelligence is not based on a verifiable, objective principle. There is no mathematical metric for that. For example, a computer that is amazing at solving a particular task is still "just a machine" even if it does the task 1000 times better than a human. What is perceived as "intelligent" is basically any behaviour that is either human-like, or highly valued in a particular culture.

The problem is, again, that this is both a "no true Scotsman" fallacy and a case of begging the question (in the original sense of assuming the conclusion, not in the everyday use sense of the phrase). We have some vague notions of what intelligence is, but it's not "real" intelligence if it strays too far from the human template. The ability to understand mathematical concepts and apply them? Considered intelligent. The ability of a simple mathematical program to perform very rapid calculations? Not intelligent.

The thing is, the question "is consciousness and general intelligence connected" is pointless if we use that intuitive, human-centric understanding of intelligence. Our general idea of intelligence IS centered around consciousness and worse, what humans perceive as meaningful. With such an assumption, any intelligence (in the general sense of being able to solve problems based on data and memory) is judged not based on pure efficiency and capability, but on how close it mimics a human thought process. This is circular reasoning and *of course* it leads to the conclusion that any kind of intelligence without consciousness is "not really" intelligence.

In other words, if there were a hypothetical species that is able to solve insanely difficult problems, but is not able to meaningfully communicate (due to its evolutionary history or whatever) would be considered unintelligent. On the flipside, any hypothetical species that is extremely good at coordinating their actions and understanding and predicting the behavious of another being, but incapable of understanding complex abstract concepts would also be deemed not very intelligent. And conversely, a species that was, say, very octopus-like and had an extreme ability regarding spatial reasoning and object manipulation might very well think of humans as unintelligent.

Without a good explanation of why a good chess program is not intelligent, the question "is intelligence without consciousness possible" is both pointless and kinda has the answer built in.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: prime_pm on 10 Jun 2016, 05:51
Did the author inadvertently break the fourth wall with this strip?
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 10 Jun 2016, 06:13
If anything, this has a feeling of an answer to an FAQ about the AIs in Questionable Content. It doesn't feel like part of the narrative; it's seems almost a part of the background of the universe.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 10 Jun 2016, 08:08
In other words, if there were a hypothetical species that is able to solve insanely difficult problems, but is not able to meaningfully communicate (due to its evolutionary history or whatever) would be considered unintelligent.
This raises the question of how this hypothetical non-communicative species is going to grasp an insanely difficult abstract problem if there's no way to communicate the problem to it. Language is part of how we organize the world conceptually, and without language most of abstract reasoning is probably unreachable. (Add to that the fact that natural language is complex, and highly dependent on assumed theories of mind and on an assumed frame of reference based on lived experience.)

On the flipside, any hypothetical species that is extremely good at coordinating their actions and understanding and predicting the behavious of another being, but incapable of understanding complex abstract concepts would also be deemed not very intelligent.

This probably describes the great mass of human beings, most of whom rarely attempt to grasp complex abstract reasoning. There is more to the story, though, in that much of what we do effortlessly (instantly modeling a complex 3D environment based on a pair of 2D images we receive from our eyes; deciphering the syntax and meaning of idiosyncratic and highly cryptic verbal communications) implies a huge amount of sophisticated pre-processing happening below the level of consciousness. Until we started trying to do this sort of processing on computers, there wasn't an appreciation of how difficult it is.

Today's experimental driverless cars, for example, use a kind of cheat in that they have access to massive map databases which allow them to avoid having to process the large majority of their input data, and instead focus only on whatever is novel in whatever they are getting from their sensor arrays. Humans (and mobile animals) don't do this, at least not as a primary strategy. Rather than depending on massive databases, we process our sensory inputs on the fly, and generally come up with a "good enough" model of our environment. The implication here is that while an average person may not be able to do complex abstract reasoning on the conscious level, something like that complex reasoning must be going on underneath.

I'd also like to address the question of game-playing strategies in advanced gaming AI's. You bring up the example of Chess, which may not be the best illustration. Instead, I'd point to the Jeopardy-playing machine. Unlike Chess, Jeopardy is a free-form puzzle format in which players have to both grasp the meaning of natural-language cues and then apply them to previous knowledge. If any gaming challenge would require conventional natural "intelligence," this would seem to be it. Yet researchers were able to program the machine to use the algorithm-plus-database strategy to prevail there as well.

It's pretty clear that human players don't use such a strategy; our minds just don't work that way. So perhaps I'm wrong; perhaps one could have an "intelligent" agent able to handle general cognition challenges without having a conscious component. But I'd still think the agent would need both a communicative and an empathic processing capability in order to get very far with being an overlord. And I'd think both those capabilities could only happen in something with conscious point of view.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Rincewind on 10 Jun 2016, 09:23
And that is why this web-comic is one of my absolute favorite things to read!  The comic itself is amusing and often thought-provoking, plus the comment section is usually full of diverse and fascinating discussions on all manner of topics; ranging from the very nature of consciousness and intelligence, sentient AI rights, gender-identity rights, the lives of those with "different" thought/emotional processes (the Sherlock Homes semi-knock-off series "Elementary" showed the Holmes character in a brief relationship with a woman who was [I think] an Aspy.  She had a marvelous term for herself [that I can't frickin' remember!] that described herself as being "different thinking" [but was much better than my attempt]), to witty remarks, butts, and of course dumb jokes and half-witty observations (like I do).  It's a privilege to be a (small) part of such a community.
 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: blt on 10 Jun 2016, 10:13
All the discussion about AIs aside, is anyone else getting the feeling that there's something bothering Faye more than just existential dread?  Like her responses seem to indicate she's in a poor mood for some other reason.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: brasca on 10 Jun 2016, 10:53
All the discussion about AIs aside, is anyone else getting the feeling that there's something bothering Faye more than just existential dread?  Like her responses seem to indicate she's in a poor mood for some other reason.

It's not all that easy to tell with Faye.  She seems as surly as usual. 
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Kugai on 10 Jun 2016, 15:59
At least they haven't gone Borg on them
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: QuestionableIntentions on 10 Jun 2016, 21:28
My take on conciousness is that it's beginning is "simply" a meta layer of reasoning about your own reasoning. Any being, machine or otherwise, that reflects on it's own thought porocess shows a degree of conscioussnes. It also shows intelligence in so far as it can improve it's own actions.

And, however you define intelligent, you don't have intelligence without the ability to improve itself, to learn.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: anahata on 10 Jun 2016, 23:37
Today's experimental driverless cars, for example, use a kind of cheat in that they have access to massive map databases which allow them to avoid having to process the large majority of their input data, and instead focus only on whatever is novel in whatever they are getting from their sensor arrays. Humans (and mobile animals) don't do this, at least not as a primary strategy.

I'm not buying that. Humans rely on either knowing where they are going because they've gone there before and remember the route, or they use maps, or somebody gives them verbal directions (and GPS is a combination of the last two). Self driving cars have a map because it's their only means of navigation; all the logic for avoiding obstacles and staying on the road is based on immediate sensory input. It couldn't be any other way.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: jheartney on 11 Jun 2016, 08:08
Today's experimental driverless cars, for example, use a kind of cheat in that they have access to massive map databases which allow them to avoid having to process the large majority of their input data, and instead focus only on whatever is novel in whatever they are getting from their sensor arrays. Humans (and mobile animals) don't do this, at least not as a primary strategy.

I'm not buying that. Humans rely on either knowing where they are going because they've gone there before and remember the route, or they use maps, or somebody gives them verbal directions (and GPS is a combination of the last two). Self driving cars have a map because it's their only means of navigation; all the logic for avoiding obstacles and staying on the road is based on immediate sensory input. It couldn't be any other way.
The maps give the driverless cars sign and signal placement, lane placement, lane direction, and placement of all durable landmarks. It's far more than navigation. Put a driverless car in an unfamiliar urban location and give it only basic navigational information (a simple street map), and the car will be unable to move.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Akima on 12 Jun 2016, 02:28
Marvin Minsky pointed out that people in the 60s said that computers would never beat humans at chess,  because that requires intelligence and computers aren't capable of intelligent thought. When they eventually did, it was claimed that playing chess wasn't a test of real intelligence because computers could do it.
Essentially, we have no explicit definition of intelligence or thought, so it's hardly surprising this confusion arises. Generally, definitions boil down to little more than "thinking is what humans do". This is implicit in the Turing Test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test), in which a computer, in order to pass the test, simply has to be indistinguishable from a human being. It is probably no more than egotism that leads people to declare as "not real intelligence" any cognitive performance that can be explicitly defined, turned into algorithms, and programmed into a computer. It is rather like declaring a hole dug by a machine, rather than by a man with a spade, as not being a real hole.

As for the suggestion that a computer is "cheating" by being provided with pre-prepared information, that is rather like saying that doctors are not intelligent, because they go to medical school, and have access to Gray's Anatomy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray%27s_Anatomy) (the book, not the medical soap-opera).
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: BenRG on 12 Jun 2016, 04:37
Purely FWIW, my definition of intelligence is 'being able to create new behaviours that are not automatically based on current or recent sensory input from the environment'. In other words, the ability to transcend instinct and try something totally new.
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Azaph on 12 Jun 2016, 05:18
Noone seems to have explicitly noted this yet, and it's driving me nuts:
That's not what a philosophical zombie is. Like, it's amost the exact opposite, actually, the whole point of a P-zombie is that it acts exactly like a person in every way, but has no internal experiences. The argument made using them explicitly rests on the fact that it is in principle impossible to tell that another person isn't a P-zombie - literally everyone else in the world might be a P-zombie, for all you know, because you can't tell what other people's internal experiences are like. Behavioural markers like lack of empathy and concern with one's own advancement cannot possibly distinguish a P-zombie, both because that would be an external difference (which P-zombies don't have) and because something can be inhuman and have experiences. Nor could one make a P-zombie, actually, since there's no way to really know that something isn't conscious either.
(For the record, the major argment using P-zombies is, simplified: 'P-zombies are not in principle a logical impossibility, therefore it is logically possible to have a being physically identical to a human without internal experience, therefore our experiences are not identical to anything physical, therefore physicalism is false.')
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Morituri on 14 Jun 2016, 19:17
t turns out that Sam Adams (the man not the company his father founded) was quite the bastard. The mob that caused the Boston Tea Party was pretty liquored up thanks to him. And the historical record shows that's far from the first time  he got a mob liquored up  and started a riot.

Of course he did!  He ran a brewery!  Liquored up mobs are good for business!  That whole revolution thing was an accident, really.

To John Adams we owe the founding principle of our democracy.  "Money Talks."
Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Morituri on 14 Jun 2016, 19:43
In other words, if there were a hypothetical species that is able to solve insanely difficult problems, but is not able to meaningfully communicate (due to its evolutionary history or whatever) would be considered unintelligent.
This raises the question of how this hypothetical non-communicative species is going to grasp an insanely difficult abstract problem if there's no way to communicate the problem to it. Language is part of how we organize the world conceptually, and without language most of abstract reasoning is probably unreachable.

Indeed.  More to the point though, what use has a creature for the ability to solve insanely complex abstract problems, in the absence of an ability to communicate?  The ability would do the creature no good.  Thus evolution could not possibly create such a creature.

Specifically: human-style intelligence and communications are inextricably linked.  Intelligence was so valuable for our own ancestors (I think so anyway) because they could plan coordinated actions or specialize into individual tasks and communicate their needs and abilities to contribute.  Want complex problem solving?  Try to hunt deer that can run six times faster than you with spears and six guys.  You have to use the landscape and terrain, you have to use tactics, you have to execute them while widely separated after agreeing what they will be, and you have to anticipate how the deer thinks and what it will do.  Without communication, you can't do those things.

Want some more complex problem solving?  Mess around with hides until you figure out how to tan them into covers that will keep you warm when you sleep.  Want to leverage that problem-solving so it affects more than one band of people?  Now you need communication.  If our ancestors hadn't had communication, our brains would be a waste of biological energy.

I think about this stuff a lot.  If you want to read a series of articles spread over a bunch of months, I've written them.  If you don't, that's cool too; they're long.  But I hope that some of them may interest you and provoke further thought if you're thinking about this stuff.

http://dillingers.com/blog/2015/12/15/philosophy-science-and-consciousness/
http://dillingers.com/blog/2016/03/17/provoking-intelligence/
http://dillingers.com/blog/2016/04/29/the-world-of-an-ai/
http://dillingers.com/blog/2016/05/06/characteristics-of-human-style-intelligence/

Title: Re: WCDT Strips 3236 - 3240 (6-10 June 2016)
Post by: Storel on 19 Jun 2016, 21:38
Thanks for the links, Morituri. I've only read the first one so far, but it made lots of sense and I'm looking forward to reading the rest.

A couple of people above mentioned the novel Blindsight, by Peter Watts, and I highly recommend it if you haven't read it already. It's a science fiction novel about first contact with aliens that appear to have intelligence without consciousness, and the author has some very cutting-edge research about consciousness in his bibliography. I don't generally gush about novels, but I would honestly call this a tour-de-force and I'd love to hear what you think about it. I got it pretty inexpensively as an e-book from Barnes & Noble, and I'm sure Amazon would have it too.