tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post2096823896351092486..comments2024-03-27T01:28:28.346-07:00Comments on False Machine: A Review of the Gloomspite Gitz Battletome for Age of Sigmarpjamesstuarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-46072439177038782002019-02-17T01:52:32.718-08:002019-02-17T01:52:32.718-08:00I am still thinking about this.I am still thinking about this.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-12984343392142684632019-01-31T17:04:23.160-08:002019-01-31T17:04:23.160-08:00Patrick, why do you equate misery with failure? An...Patrick, why do you equate misery with failure? Anything challenging, and life in general, is going to entail suffering.<br /><br />I think you may be considering traits of personal relevance, and then assuming that your experience overrules generalized knowledge.<br /><br />It may help to consider an example with less direct personal relevance. Imagine an epileptic who experiences a seizure when perceiving certain visual patterns. This involves some stable aspect of makeup, either biological or psychological. It is a trait that varies between, rather than within, people. It should be obvious, both to deliberation and common sense, that the internal configuration of this epileptic alone does not cause seizures any more than the visual pattern alone causes seizures. You see the pattern, and nothing happens. The effect is interactive, and it is the variation of the internal and external aspects together which determines the variation in outcome. Taking a test to learn about this epileptic susceptibility would be adaptive for individuals. They could then take steps to avoid the pattern.<br /><br />Does this condition make the epileptic's life less convenient in some ways compared to someone without the same builtin feature of existence? Sure. Life's not fair.<br /><br />Now imagine two epileptics with the exact same condition. They can make different life choices, and also use different frameworks to make sense of their experiences. They can set the horizons of their focus in different ways, approach different situations, and adopt different reference levels.<br /><br />The same is true for any stable trait.<br /><br />This assumes that the trait itself actually reflects some true aspect of reality, rather than being the imaginative fancy of some intellectual (such as, perhaps, the Myers-Briggs example above). But if the trait lacks actual existence, that means people have more, rather than less, freedom (though perhaps less knowledge with which to make informed, adaptive choices about the future, for those holding beliefs about the false entity).Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-59411540262103095962019-01-31T13:00:23.406-08:002019-01-31T13:00:23.406-08:00Bredndan, in response to your comment beginning &q...Bredndan, in response to your comment beginning "I am undeniably an optimist,"<br /><br />I don't think your analysis makes any sense in any real life actually-existing situation.<br /><br />"In general, people can't actually be winners or losers, they can only take actions that are wins and losses." - That's only possibly true in a lab or the mind of a logician. In reality everyone who has ever lived was bound into specific circumstances and faced a life of limited time and resources, which ended at a particular time.<br /><br />Are you going to go to someone, for instance, dying of cancer at the age of 35, a virgin, poor, with rock bottom self esteem and no friends, and say; "In general, people can't actually be winners or losers, they can only take actions that are wins and losses." <br /><br />You would sound insane. It's like telling leper in medieval europe that they only feel like a monster because society despises them and parts are dropping off, or telling a jew hiding from nazis that their absolute terror and despair is 'an arbitrary choice of focus' because up till now, life was pretty ok, and if they survive it might get better.<br /><br />I think probably there are few or no arbitrary choices of focus in life as it is lived.<br /><br />And saying stable traits can't 'cause' things sounds like another elaborate get-out that doesn't make any sense in life as it is actually lived. What causes meteorites to smash into the ground. Gravity. But its a stable trait. Where is the unstable trait. There aren't any, all the physical events proceed from universal laws. So there are no causes.<br /><br />"I feel depressed."<br /><br />"Well you have high neuroticism and are relatively anti-social, the combination of these strongly suggests you will be spending a lot of time lonely and miserable."<br /><br />"Ah, so they are causing my misery."<br /><br />"No, they are just... things. Things that are. They don't cause anything. The cause of you being miserable is that you don't go out and make friends and you think about your inner problems a lot."<br /><br />"So why do I do that?"<br /><br />"Well you... choose to? And its driven by your personality? But your personality isn't technically a 'cause', it just sets strong limits on what will actually happen with your life."<br /><br />This sounds nuts to me.<br />pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-55903083905221984222019-01-28T23:40:59.775-08:002019-01-28T23:40:59.775-08:00Prometheus, I think I have failed to make myself c...Prometheus, I think I have failed to make myself clear. Probably my fault. I agree with you about individuals and aggregation, as I wrote above:<br /><br /><em>The personality determinist is right ... but only when looking at the behavior of aggregates (not of individuals).</em><br /><br />I was trying to communicate that your first comment was additionally throwing out a lot of babies with that bathwater. Why throw away tools that are good for something just because they have shortcomings (self-report, etc.)? Better to learn what the limitations mean.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-13928600254241742282019-01-28T22:04:05.489-08:002019-01-28T22:04:05.489-08:00Necropraxis, I believe these tests are junk scienc...Necropraxis, I believe these tests are junk science when used by an individual to learn about himself and don't see any point discussing it with you since your opinion is so far from mine.<br /><br />I wanted to emphasize to P.S. that these tests which are designed through analysis of mass populations are useful only to organize thinking about mass populations and their subgroups.Prometheushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16821646138464670168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-7171010622173576042019-01-28T17:03:38.377-08:002019-01-28T17:03:38.377-08:00Businesses are neither the primary creators nor th...Businesses are neither the primary creators nor the primary users of personality tests, so what is good for them has little impact on what tests do and do not exist. (The main factor is what reputable academic journals will publish and to a lesser degree how various institutional funding bodies award grants.)<br /><br />Like all measurement instruments, personality tests vary in quality, involve measurement error, and have other idiosyncratic limitations. Self-report alone can bias results in various ways, but self-report is hardly the fatal flaw that many (mostly people without psychometric training) make it out to be. The biases can be handled in a number of ways and in any case the ultimate validity of any test can be established in a number of independent ways.<br /><br />Also, it is worth keeping in mind that psychological measures of stable personality traits are only one class of psychological measures. There is a lot more going on in people's heads than just stable traits.<br /><br />Skeptical cynicism can be just as lazy as credulity.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-7807997136808221802019-01-28T15:56:06.146-08:002019-01-28T15:56:06.146-08:00"Thinking you can't fail a personality te..."Thinking you can't fail a personality test is like saying you can't fail at life, "<br /><br />... If you believe these Personality Tests are truthful and complete. I wouldn't even add 'accurate' to a Test's validity, you just have to consider the unjustifiable precision of the Big Five Test based on self-reporting(!!)<br /><br />These tests are designed to be useful in clumping large populations into crude groups so corporations or governments can get a handle on them. They have no value at the individual level IMO. Think of how many institutions fell for the Myers-Briggs Test which is discredited now (at least by those pushing The Big Five Test). The Myers-Briggs gives every type a glowing happy feeling reading the description of their virtues. This is where I agree with you a truthful and complete Personality Test would describe the world as it is, filled with sinners, degenerates and idiots. The results would be painful reading for most of us, so they don't exist being bad for the business.Prometheushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16821646138464670168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-42084342054959088022019-01-22T13:46:19.742-08:002019-01-22T13:46:19.742-08:00Hmm, I think I still disagree but you got me so de...Hmm, I think I still disagree but you got me so deep in your damned logic box that I will have to think about how.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-37936726789187358152019-01-22T13:45:49.942-08:002019-01-22T13:45:49.942-08:001D4 chan is convinced it was the terrible reaction...1D4 chan is convinced it was the terrible reaction to the Matt Ward Space Marine codex and specific hatred of certain writers from the fans that did it.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-31573668714755679062019-01-21T13:23:33.546-08:002019-01-21T13:23:33.546-08:00I am undeniably an optimist, but I'd contest t...I am undeniably an optimist, but I'd contest the rationalist label. <br /><br />(Apologies in advance for the discharge of working memory that follows, but this was on my mind for unrelated reasons, and it is relevant, so here you go.)<br /><br />Of course one can fail at particular things, sometimes dramatically, and sometimes to the degree where the failure is arguably failing at life (such as the unambiguous case of being responsible for a mistake that directly leads to death).<br /><br />Most failures, however, are just as much an exercise in the narrowing of horizons as they are in any facts. Consider the case below.<br /><br />Person A plays five games in sequence, with results lose, lose, lose, win, and then lose. Is the person a winner or a loser? If you focus on averages, or on misses, the person is a loser. If you focus on hits the person is a winner. Limiting horizon to the individual game forces a negative interpretation in four out of five iterations, but that limitation is an arbitrary choice of focus. (Incidentally, this is a general framework which can fit many different kinds of choice or valuation dilemmas, including exploratory behavior, self control, investment, and mating strategy.)<br /><br />In general, people can't actually be winners or losers, they can only take actions that are wins and losses. Interpretation of the sequence of facts lies entirely in the imagination (both individual and consensual), the same place where goals, money, promises, and other such things live.<br /><br />The personality determinist might take the recursive rhetorical step and argue that personality itself determines how people construe the horizon and whether within that horizon they focus on hits or misses. The personality determinist is right (there are individual difference measures of risk tolerance, prevention focus, and so forth), but only when looking at the behavior of aggregates (not of individuals).<br /><br />Stable intrapsychic personality traits (the things that you think of as inside your head, traits such as intellect or impulsivity, to which tests like this assign scores) actually can't cause anything within an individual. This can be difficult to accept at first, but is relatively easy to prove analytically. By hypothesis, a stable trait doesn't change. Restating, that means the trait has no variation. Something lacking variation cannot be a cause, because causation involves change in A leading to change in B. If A never changes, it is incoherent (meaningless, actually) to talk about a potential causal relationship originating in A. So if a trait is stable within you it cannot cause anything individually. <br /><br />This doesn't say anything for or against a reasoned (or thoughtless) pessimistic outlook, but you can't blame such an outlook on your personality, because the relevant concepts won't bear the weight. The responsibility lies elsewhere.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-47920816724965738582019-01-21T10:52:45.598-08:002019-01-21T10:52:45.598-08:00I wonder when GW stopped crediting writers–and why...I wonder when GW stopped crediting writers–and why. Evan Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14951417464125973886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-39431538532579973362019-01-21T09:31:06.276-08:002019-01-21T09:31:06.276-08:00That sounds like exactly the kind of thing a posit...That sounds like exactly the kind of thing a positive rationalist with high extroversion, high openness and low neuroticism might say.<br /><br />Thinking you can't fail a personality test is like saying you can't fail at life, when the results of those failures are all around us. It pushes 'positive framing' to the point of delusion.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-80419684021589461362019-01-21T06:36:56.868-08:002019-01-21T06:36:56.868-08:00That was very on point, thanks. I suppose I am mes...That was very on point, thanks. I suppose I am mesmerised by Warhammer, rather than fascinated by it. ( I don't know how distinctive are the two concepts). The Slavic dolls are intriguing. I find it easier to approach from a 'high' art perspective (mannequins and all that) rather than from a toy one. I suppose if I had grown up playing with these sorts of dolls that might be different. Thanks for the discussion, Patrick, that was helpful to me.Γιάννηςhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01126579663203703504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-90592480999169494432019-01-20T16:10:32.715-08:002019-01-20T16:10:32.715-08:00Nah most traits involve tradeoffs. You can't w...Nah most traits involve tradeoffs. You can't win or lose these tests. All you can do is get more information about yourself, which can help you plan future endeavors with greater likelihood of effectiveness.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-36444492229093017042019-01-20T15:18:59.090-08:002019-01-20T15:18:59.090-08:00Still pretty bad https://drive.google.com/open?id=...Still pretty bad https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-e-HMdmlZ5eGTF8mG9QkxxihKPzQYxQe basically I am a trash person.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-77895197511097473722019-01-20T15:07:45.686-08:002019-01-20T15:07:45.686-08:00Here's an idea... let's keep changing the...Here's an idea... let's keep changing the software so they have to update the hardware. We can sell more miniatures that way...Structured Answerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16099134783225642045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-40549703351358314902019-01-20T12:12:48.452-08:002019-01-20T12:12:48.452-08:00Actually a friend just found it for me; it's t...Actually a friend just found it for me; it's the 538 one. (Should have been obvious from the comparison in the figure.) I'd suggest taking the sapa project one. It has a much greater population of responses for norming against and is run by actual personality psychologists. The 538 one doesn't seem to have much discrimination at the high end of at least several of the dimensions. I also got 100 on openness. And 96 on extra, which is highly implausible.Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-77933955391038971482019-01-20T11:56:12.027-08:002019-01-20T11:56:12.027-08:00Which big 5 questionnaire did you take? Was it the...Which big 5 questionnaire did you take? Was it the sapa dash project dot org one?Necropraxishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716340801054739658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-80972640570888768272019-01-20T07:15:32.713-08:002019-01-20T07:15:32.713-08:00As a point of comparison, consider this world of a...As a point of comparison, consider this world of almost-exclusively-slavic women carefully making exquisite unique sad-but-beautiful display dolls <br /><br />https://www.instagram.com/marinabychkova/pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-57955118394133677382019-01-20T07:13:47.735-08:002019-01-20T07:13:47.735-08:00Finding yourself in things you like is an unusual ...Finding yourself in things you like is an unusual idea to me, I don't think I've ever thought about it that way.<br /><br />My best guess would be;<br /><br />Object orientation.<br />World Building or modelling imaginary worlds.<br />Competition.<br />Craft, kleinplastik or working on small things.<br /><br />That gets you all the way down the classic male interest tree of being into objects, being into imaginary worlds, liking competing with your friends.<br /><br />Just the competition with objects is most wargames. less competition and no objects is most RPGs (though a lot of Warhammer nerds are also into RPGs).<br /><br />Then you have stuff for people with a high internal emotional volume, like the high gothic and extreme drama feeds into that, (as opposed to a 'flatter' imagined world).<br /><br />Then the combination of being a legacy company and using that to maintain a v high level of quality. So GW was first on the scene with a lot of things, and got a lead on everyone else, which they have largely maintained, meaning they usually have the best models and even if they don't they have a sensed and remembered history of usually having the best models which means they have real-estate in all the fans heads and are given preferential 'first thought' treatment by anyone who has been a fan since interacting with them isn't just doing something you like now by also linking up with your personal history of it.<br /><br />TLDR; its probably pressing a bunch of buttons in your head, many of which are a combination of a specific personality sub-set and cultural expression (though that's a bit of a truism for anything cultural).pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-24217894207752199692019-01-19T11:47:04.967-08:002019-01-19T11:47:04.967-08:00I was recently pondering why I find GW work fascin...I was recently pondering why I find GW work fascinating myself. I mean, I can tell a fair bit about what's good about it, in conception and execution, but I am not sure what I find of myself in it. Γιάννηςhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01126579663203703504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-31409812117604095342019-01-19T10:31:50.346-08:002019-01-19T10:31:50.346-08:00I think my first awareness of Warhammer was early ...I think my first awareness of Warhammer was early in secondary school where someone had a White Dwarf and let me read it on the bus. The older brother of a neighbour had a stack of them, which seemed utterly ancient to me, and let me read through them. It would have been maybe around 13?<br /><br />With the second thing, its a combination of the two. They have just always been a part of my life and a defining feature of my friend group/personality type. Both I would have to say.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-63919573348117251512019-01-19T08:53:09.424-08:002019-01-19T08:53:09.424-08:00Ah okay, you mean you knew about Warhammer before ...Ah okay, you mean you knew about Warhammer before the age of 15 as well? But anyway, I think I wanted to ask if you've found their work consistently fascinating, or if their dominant position on the market makes for a consistent pull on the interest of British gamers. Γιάννηςhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01126579663203703504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-70921047386246993502019-01-19T04:59:42.842-08:002019-01-19T04:59:42.842-08:00They feel kinda bony.
The crucial pointto consid...They feel kinda bony. <br /><br />The crucial pointto consider with skeletons is this: In order to fight on the battlefield and wield the same sorts of weapons humans wield they need to have strength comparable to that of humans. They weigh about a sixth as much as a human. How fast can they run? How high can they leap? Are they like shrieking bony grasshoppers of shrieking bony doom? Capable of and thematically suited to forming castells of scale and complexity comparable to driver ant bivouacs? Almost certainly yes. GW needs to amend all reference to skeletons to include these undeniable facts.Tom Fitzgeraldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14893168729760333884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-27542625588893974502019-01-19T04:24:09.598-08:002019-01-19T04:24:09.598-08:00I've always thought that GW battle games are m...I've always thought that GW battle games are much more about mashing two armies together and seeing what kind of fun and weird stuff happens rather than an actual genuine tabletop wargame. Who wins or loses isn't really important.noismshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09933436762608669966noreply@blogger.com