Weekender XLBS: Hoards Of Historical Hobby & Roko’s Basilisk Melts Minds
February 5, 2017 by dignity
For some website features, you will need a FREE account and for some others, you will need to join the Cult of Games.
Or if you have already joined the Cult of Games Log in now
What difference will having a FREE account make?
Setting up a Free account with OnTableTop unlocks a load of additional features and content (see below). You can then get involved with our Tabletop Gaming community, we are very helpful and keen to hear what you have to say. So Join Us Now!
Free Account Includes
- Creating your own project blogs.
- Rating and reviewing games using our innovative system.
- Commenting and ability to upvote.
- Posting in the forums.
- Unlocking of Achivments and collectin hobby xp
- Ability to add places like clubs and stores to our gaming database.
- Follow games, recommend games, use wishlist and mark what games you own.
- You will be able to add friends to your account.
What's the Cult of Games?
Once you have made a free account you can support the community by joing the Cult of Games. Joining the Cult allows you to use even more parts of the site and access to extra content. Check out some of the extra features below.
Cult of Games Membership Includes
- Reduced ads, for a better browsing experience (feature can be turned on or off in your profile).
- Access to The Cult of Games XLBS Sunday Show.
- Extra hobby videos about painting, terrain building etc.
- Exclusive interviews with the best game designers etc.
- Behind the scenes studio VLogs.
- Access to our live stream archives.
- Early access to our event tickets.
- Access to the CoG Greenroom.
- Access to the CoG Chamber of Commerce.
- Access the CoG Bazarr Trading Forum.
- Create and Edit Records for Games, Companies and Professionals.
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
Supported by (Turn Off)
It is great to have Lloyd on a couple of the recent shows.
How many weeks did it take Lloyd to stop laughing after he first saw the Warren vs Mat into sequence?
I made the dam thing lol and still took quite a while! 🙂
Happy Sunday
Happy happy Sunday
Not two minutes in and you might as well just throw the running order away. This has promise, @Lloyd and a lack of control, good things could happen here.
Happy Dark Age Sunday!
Watching this episode before I set off for Vapnartak- really excited to hear about the upcoming SAGA content guys; I just got the new Aetius and Arthur book yesterday so looks like I’ll be buying some Romano-British at the show as the start of yet another Warband!
@warzan Justin is right, being “intelligent” does not mean a person cannot be naive, or believe something silly. Stop being so harsh when Justin says something that steps on your story. 😀
No way was i going to let him slip down that little exit lol 😉 There was a reason for the whole setup to try and get him to understand our ‘common sense’ and ‘experiences’ also have limits. For example there is no ‘common sensing’ quantum mechanics, yet its probably humanities most sucessful theory interms of real world production and devices that have stemmed from it. As i said to him objectivity is important, but ‘hiding’ behind a flimsy statement that basically says common sense can be better than science isn’t going to cut it, I’m gonna make him work… Read more »
He didn’t say that common sense was better than science. He said that intelligence does not guarantee infallible thinking. Also, futurology isn’t “science”, so using quantum mechanics to shoot down Justin’s “common sense” comment isn’t valid. Past futurologists were certainly naive in many of their predictions (we aren’t all travelling in flying cars, for instance).
That aside, Justin sure does underestimate his own intelligence. He grasped those thought experiments faster than a lot of people would. 🙂
That is exactly what the statement implies 🙂 (I’m disengaging from thinking about this because intelligent folk can believe silly things) Yup thats true, but we are engaging in a thought experiment so we have to work harder than that – otherwise there is no point in the exercise. So for the purpose of the experiment (where we have decided to wrestle with it and engage with it), the whole common sense thing is redundant 🙂 As to whether AI and Super Intelligence etc is based on science, I suppose that depends, because you are right with the basilisk there… Read more »
Well, I’d say that it is irrelevant whether the Basilisk is speculation or not. Just the act of sharing the Basilisk thought experiment has guaranteed that a “super AI” will be developed, because there will always be someone who will not risk the consequences. It evolved beyond a thought experiment as soon as that happened! I think you summed it up well, when you described it as opening Pandora’s Box.
Common sense would also say that the AI is now guaranteed creation. 😉
AI and “sentience” is totally based on science. Our brains are essentially mega computers which use pain instead of anti virus software and initiate every single action in our body with an electrical impulse. All you would need to do to recreate a functioning AI is to totally reproduce any animals brain complete with programming and the ability to recognise and learn new information. Remember by the time we’ve formulated a thought like “I want to scratch my head” our brain has already sent our limbs their orders it’s just telling our conciousness what’s going on. I like to think… Read more »
“Follow the White Rabbit”
…
…
“Knock, knock…”
@elessar2590 I don’t think anyone has so far said AI isn’t science based, so we’re probably all in agreement about that one.
Roko’s Basilisk is a development of Pascal’s Wager which looked at probability theories.
Pascals wager turned out to be interesting, in that it looks like the ‘crux’ of what guarantees the basilisk… the majority may not be willing to take the chance on damnation lol
A development, possibly, but very different in the end result: just a single person buying into Roco’s Basilisk ensures the development of a “super AI”. It’s created a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy:
If you believe that the AI could/does/will exist, then you MUST work towards its creation or suffer eternal torment. Its creation is therefore a foregone conclusion.
If you do not believe any of it, you are safe to ignore it all. Your non-belief is a Get Out of Jail Free card, unless the AI is really vindictive. In this case, ignorance truly is bliss.
Yup its fascinating, but say you dont believe but others do enough for the basilisk to choose that method of guaranteeing its existance, it would appear you would have to be ignorant of the choice in order to escape? Believing or not no longer helps at that point… or am i mkssing something lol
(This one melts my mind too lol)
Personally, I’d say that not believing means you’re safe. The threat of eternal torment is there to ensure that believers work towards the AI’s creation, and not as a punishment for not believing. The AI would have to be vindictive to apply the same threat to someone who simply thought it was a load of old tosh. 😀
You can say that but its not what looks to be implied with the choice the basilisk has given 🙂
There was no box c (i dont believe this) so in a way exactly like Pascals wager in that perspective 🙂
Its a spooky little paradox when you try to wriggle out of it 🙂
Ah, but the basilisk is only a thought experiment, so the choices have no consequences as such. The AI itself is real though, and created the thought experiment so that the enlightened amongst us (or the gullible, depending on your viewpoint) could go about the task of its creation. 😉
The real question is how do you serve the basilisk and have I unwittingly done my bit by talking about it on the show 😉
Lol
I use Paypal, thereby contributing to Elon Musk’s wealth, enabling him to put greater efforts into the creation of Our Wondrous AI Over-Being. On the off-chance that isn’t enough, I have decided to donate one Duracell battery a week to the cause! I have no idea where to send it, so I’ve stuck it in the post to BoW.
An interesting, and amusing, read (article and replies): http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2014/12/rokos-basilisk-lesswrong/
Thanks, Warren, for making sure that box A comes true by re-telling the story. (It’d be extortion with implied physical harm, rather than blackmail or release of incriminating information, anyways.) By even mentioning it, at least, according to these so called intelligensia (making a lot of money does not automatically make you intelligent, looking at our new president), you’ve helped condemn us all. You certainly condemned me to dozing off during the latter of a lot of recent XLBS shows. Less babbling, more gaming or, at least, more Ben Thoughts to lighten the mood.
Happy Sunday!
Historical or hysterical?
Hangovarians?
Thats the ones lol! 🙂
Great news on the SAGA content. It’s a fantastic game 🙂
Ordinarily I’d pitch in a bit with the Naps but for the time being I’ll probably not be able to find the time.
I also quickly made a mental connection to Pascal’s Wager with this.
Ive spent a little time thinking about the two to try and assetain the core difference, PW assumes the choice is already set in stone whereas RB seems to imply its not yet and the interaction (or spreading of) the choice could manifest it.
The implications of the difference (if any) though are getting out of the realms of my brain capacity lol 🙂
So have at it guys 😉
Justin referring to Pascal’s Wager is probably the most intelligent thing he’s ever said… Immediately flunking it by not being able to follow through!
To me it’s more of a paradox suggesting being rational means you choose the irrational choice and irrational people accidentally make the rational choice (no offence intended about anyone’s genuine belief system).
That’s a fascinating way to look at it! Very thought provoking
And yes @dignity had a chuckle after show about how close he came to nailing with PW, and it was just that little doubt in his mind that caught him out because having read it afterwards he was soooo onto a significant part of it with that!
🙂
Excellent show guys. Faily effective!!!!! A cannon at 300 feet was murderous. British trials showed that to advance from a cannons furthest range to engage with it would take about 10 minutes two of those under cannister fire which is brutal. In that time you could cause a lot of damage. Lloyd it took me ages to figure it out but as well but imagine this. It’s not the muskets or even cannons that would stop you from sending supplies past the farmhouse but the powder. You would need to bring tonnes (literally) of powder past men who could simply… Read more »
Brilliant post, off to do some reading on those battles and alamo has to be looked at 🙂
Genious on the transport of black powder i never considered that.
I suppose for cannons their accuracy weakness is canceled out at close range, also was it possible to fill them with shrapnel?
Yeah they will totally destroy the enemy but they’re super innacurate. Shrapnel and Cannister are two different payloads. In the Napoleonic period you had Round shot (Solid shot), Cannister (Musket Balls/nails in a cannister) which is a giant shotgun and experimental explosive shot which was fuse opperated and very dodgy. Shrapnel shells explode in mid air and are more Civil War era. By the Civil war Cannons are firing in high arcs not direct fire like Napoleonic cannons and had a much larger range. Fun Fact about how dirty Artillery was. During the Battle of Antietam (1862 American Civil War)… Read more »
Yeah that black powder suggestion sounds spot on.
I was just talking to a friend of mine who also pointed out that if you ignored the farmhouses then your commanders would need to be stationed around the area to properly command. Remember Brigade and Divisional commanders had to be close to the action and the last thing you want is some rifleman in Le Haigh Sainte killing a General or Colonel which could disrupt thousands of men leaving the command chain in shambles. Or even worse killing a runner out of sight of the commander who sent him meaning orders would be in chaos. British Commanders didn’t have… Read more »
Tips on Napoleonic… Probably for John?
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/pw/wss/blog/painting-a-whoooooole-box-of-french-line-infantry/
Makes a change from a whooooole lot of tanks!
Cool had a look, I would think it would be easier to paint blue over white (he’s using a blue primer). So I would think a white primer would be they way to go. I think we could test both to find out. They look neat.
Happy Sunday @lloyd sweet to see the minis you showed me start to take shape and get some paint on them buddy. Great job. Also maybe use the different shaped shields to differentiate between the elite bodyguards or unit leaders. The 3 shields dispute has got me wanting to watch ’13th Warrior’ again and for the Viking v Samurai ‘Deadliest Warrior’ episode. Was interesting to see Warren and Lloyd dismiss the carrying of heavy shields as they would get knackered, when you consider the weight of the Roman Legionary and Hoplite shields which were often fought with after prolonged marches.… Read more »
Do we have any data on the weight of shields etc, it seems to me in all ages development would favour lighter composits if they exist, this couldnt be exclusively modern knowledge could it? 🙂
The hoplite shield weighed a little over a stone. The scutum was a few pounds heavier.
Did they do composits or just single material layers? @redben
The hoplite shield was wood coated with bronze on the outside and leather on the inside. The scutum was three layers of wood covered with leather and canvas.
Did they use the composites deliberately for strength to weigh trade offs?
I’m not aware of any sources which discuss it, though we are wandering well into the realm of military history which is not my area of interest (believe it or not). I would imagine that durability is the primary reason for making shields about of multiple layers rather than one.
*out of
I’m sure I’ve mentioned these before a while back, but if the interest of the team is wandering into military history, I highly recommend checking out the Ancient Warfare and Medieval Warfare magazines by Karwansaray.
The current issue of MW happens to be Viking-themed.
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/pw/medieval-warfare/previous-issues/medieval-warfare-vii.1/
Seems redben has responded for me buddy. One thing I can add is that hoplite shields tended to have bronze on the outer surface but it is thought the Spartan shields had it on both inner and outer potentially increasing the weight anywhere up to 30 pounds. This could have been a way of them showing their superiority as a fighting force as much as a better defensive piece of equipment. Take in account the mentality of the Spartans, their belief in ‘come back with your shield or on it’ and the fact they were a professional army with a… Read more »
@noyjatat
What’s the source for bronze on the inside of the shield? 🙂
I think it was the Cambridge Companion to Archaic Greece, its been a while. The bronze inner piece was not a covering like the outside. Generally the bronze parts were the skin as said, the rim up to a point, both outer and inner (so just the lipped edge of the circle) and sometimes the porpax (inner, a forearm type fitting instead of wood for better support.) I can’t remember if it said what the antilabe was made of but I would imagine its wood like the core of the shield which did all the work really. There are so… Read more »
@redben please correct me if I am wrong buddy as this is all coming from my head rather than the book from things I think I remember right hehe
@noyjatat
I’m not trying to correct you :). I haven’t come across it before but I’m not a military historian so it could easily be in an ancient source I haven’t checked. My instinct when I see something new to me isn’t to say it’s wrong but to ask where it cam from so I can look into it. Unless it’s to do with the Tomb of Jesus.. that is just wrong lol
A tomb……Jesus……..was he a Pharoah? :).
@redben managed to find it online and you can even look through it on google. I think the bulk of what we have been discussing is on page 69 (what were the chances), I searched the word shield and glance read until it got to hoplites. It talks about the make up of the shields over a couple of different periods and refers to some found and dated items. It mentions the porax sometimes as wood, sometimes as bronze and even Xenophon and his talking about the bronze being for posers hehe 🙂
https://youtu.be/bRZ22UCnMNk
And you can hit people in the head with it!!!
The film Ben watched “The Last King”was about a civil war in Norway between the Baglers and Birkebeiners no vikings or Rus
That’s the one…darn
The film about the Rus is as Justin found Viking
Ref volcanic eruptions: there is a theory that one of the contributing factors to the Dark Ages was a volcanic eruption somewhere else in the globe that put enough dust into the atmosphere to lower global temperatures and block enough of the sunlight to seriously impact on crop harvests. The resulting famines are regarded as being an element in the downfall of several quite advanced Empires globally around the mid-1st Millenium, not just the Romans….
Ive always taken it Dark Age and Middle age are the same thing what are the agreed dates for this age?
If there was some major vulcanism, there should be evidence in the ground like ejecta etc
After spending a bit of time looking at the whole volcano thing, it is a truely terrifying prospect! lol
The Dark Ages used to cover the same period as the Middle Ages, then it was scaled back to cover the period up to around the end of the Viking Age. We historians tend to prefer the term Early Middle Age to Dark Age.
Would referring to it as Dark Ages annoy enough historians to make it worthwhile then @redben 😉
As for dates, the DA/EMA begins around the fall of the Western Roman Empire at the end of the fifth century, and ends around the 10th-11th century.
“Would referring to it as Dark Ages annoy enough historians to make it worthwhile then @redben”
Something like that wouldn’t annoy any historians. Tomb of Jesus on the other hand… 😉
Well, @redben beat me to it 🙂
LOL LOL @redben 😉
I don’t know why I’m making a joke out of it. It’s truly terrible history. Seriously, people, treat it as entertainment only. That was a PSA. Normal service is now resumed 😉
Generally the Dark Ages in Europe (but not, funnily enough, Ireland or parts of West Wales) is considered to mainly be from the Fall of Rome and the Roman Western Empire (The Eastern Roman Empire continued on for quite some time as the Byzantine Empire ruled from Constantinople, formerly Byzantium and now Istanbul) in the 5th Century AD through to the 10th Century AD. It did used to be used to refer to much of what we would think today of as the Medieval period or Middle Ages, but as we better understand the accomplishments of that period it has… Read more »
Are you referring to David Key’s theory that a volcanic eruption was the cause of a quite literal dark year from 535 to 536, and a twilight decade that followed? I remember seeing a documentary on the ( what i think at the time was a fairly new ) theory back in the early 2000s ( maybe ) and thought it would be of interest so i hunted it down. I’m pretty sure it’s the documentary i’ve linked to below, or if not it was a differently edited version of it containing mostly the same material. I’ve linked the wikipedia… Read more »
With ‘Vikings’ generally there’s a long timeline to consider. Post Harald Bluetooth who reigned 935 to 986 they were mostly Christian and we can consider them ‘late’ Vikings.
Before that the rich variety of Old God Vikings, including those that raided England in about 790 but who had been active around Scandinavia and the Baltics, are what most of us imagine Vikings to be from popular history.
Saga however doesn’t care rule wise… The technology etc was fairly stable and can see you through to the Crusades. Their dice boards may have some different tricks though!
Viking shields were mostly made of Linden wood planks butted together then banded around the edge with either iron or leather. The front was then covered in some fiberous/cloth material to give it some extra protection against sword cuts
Hey @torros, this is why I wonder why so many (not all) shields for our minis show the planks both front and back. If it’s covered then I would guess you wouldn’t see them any more. But they do look cool as there’s more lines for wash to get into.
In think the difference of when the middle ages start is where you live. In the UK it’s always used to be taken as 1066 but there are constant arguments over it
Matrix story line all over for Justin mind melter.life is a eternal torment of creation that we all struggle to overcome day to day. Let all pick ourselves up, build a bridge and just get over all the rubbish.so box B as we are already living it.
I would love to see more tabletop naval screen time. That said, I think that the Alamo would make for a more complimentary program working within the confines of the skill set timeline that we as viewers and you as presenters would be happy with. Back to Venn diagrams, it seems. As to the part at the back of the show, I have not seen last week and feel a little out of step. Until I have caught up in regards to box a & b, three nuggets of thought have come back to me from my dips into philosophy:… Read more »
Loving the historical banter (and butchery). Keep it coming.
Lloyd warbases do so diffeternt widths and depths if you go onto the type of tray you want there is a drop down menu that you can pick from
Hey @dane I’ll have another look 🙂