0391: "Anti-Mindvirus"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Nexus_1101
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:59 pm UTC
Location: Brighton, England, UK
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Nexus_1101 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:14 pm UTC

by giving yor friend the wrong rules you have given them a game not the game.
but jus knowing you are playing, like rolling the dice going round the monopoly board and not buying anything.
HOSTING -> Heroquest
:idea: CHAOS BONUS :idea:

Code: Select all

IF (NOTFORUMGAME()) {
    postcount.add(1);
}

User avatar
DeadCatX2
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:22 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby DeadCatX2 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:15 pm UTC

winmine wrote:Saying "I've won the game" or getting someone else to say the same does not make you win. The game is a metaphor for self-defeating thoughts. Bad memories, etc. You have always been playing the game, and you always will be.

Isn't The Game a concept derived from 4channers? If so, I wonder about the accuracy of your statement; such depth is typically unfathomable to those types.

User avatar
Splurgy
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Splurgy » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:18 pm UTC

I wish this was true. I'm vaguely considering hypno-therapy to rid myself of The Game, but I know I'd be reminded sooner or later.

User avatar
Solari
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:09 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Solari » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:22 pm UTC

I had never heard of the game until this point, and after reading almost all the posts of this thread my only question becomes: what's so important about this game that it even matters if you win or lose? Seems like losing does nothing more or less than winning, so why care? It's all mental; it's not like you'll lose an eye. I could lose twenty dollars and my self respect a million times a day and life would be exactly the same... save the fact I was thinking/worrying over something extremely pointless.

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Yuri2356 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:28 pm UTC

1=0 wrote:
Yuri2356 wrote:
1=0 wrote:Then I am afraid the goal will never be attained as I am not playing.
The game then has lost, since it will not reach its goal.


Oh, you're playing. You're just doing it wrong.


Afraid not... Actually, just to play it safe and be certain, I went and told a friend about the game, and even game them the rules... all but one sentence.
This means they know (about) the game, don't play it, can't play it. This means the goal of the game will not be attained.


So you took measures to ensure that this person will never encounter the correct rules for the rest of their life and won't just die at some point in the future thus removing them from the samplewhich is used to judge weather or not the entire world is playing The Game?


I had never heard of the game until this point, and after reading almost all the posts of this thread my only question becomes: what's so important about this game that it even matters if you win or lose? Seems like losing does nothing more or less than winning, so why care? It's all mental; it's not like you'll lose an eye. I could lose twenty dollars and my self respect a million times a day and life would be exactly the same... save the fact I was thinking/worrying over something extremely pointless.

Thought experiment.

Some people just like that sort of thing.

zmef
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:20 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby zmef » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:30 pm UTC

Solari wrote:I had never heard of the game until this point, and after reading almost all the posts of this thread my only question becomes: what's so important about this game that it even matters if you win or lose? Seems like losing does nothing more or less than winning, so why care? It's all mental; it's not like you'll lose an eye. I could lose twenty dollars and my self respect a million times a day and life would be exactly the same... save the fact I was thinking/worrying over something extremely pointless.


I said the same thing when I first heard of it. Its just fun. Its impossible to explain why or how it is fun. One has to play to get it. And then its a love/hate relationship.
"I never lose. I just choose not to win."

FTH
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:27 am UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby FTH » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:35 pm UTC

I say you're all wrong and the comic is really about this: http://ryan-fleury.blogspot.com/2008/02 ... aiman.html

Thank you. Now go on :P

User avatar
Kudos
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:57 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Kudos » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:35 pm UTC

I realize that by thinking about winning The Game, I lost twenty dollars and my self respect.

I still felt like I had won. For that reason I do not feel that this comic was evil, because it allowed me to experience something impossible.

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby rrwoods » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:36 pm UTC

rrwoods wrote:For me, it's an ongoing experiment about mental associations and how to make them (or not make them). I guess the question should be "what prize to the players get", where "prize" is equivalent to "any concievable benefit".

EDIT: There's also the hilarity of such quotes as "I just lost twenty dollars and my self respect" followed by (someone else) "I have no idea what you're talking about, but I think I'm winning".


EBWOP: Also because doing silly things for silly reasons (or no reason at all) helps keep you young.
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

User avatar
Silent Five
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:31 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Silent Five » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:41 pm UTC

It's not as easy as that, I'm afraid. The Game is bigger than any of us, now.

Has anyone else had moments of real-life hostility over participation or "non-participation" (in scare quotes because it doesn't exist) in The Game? I had a girlfriend who, every time someone lost twenty dollars and my self respect around her, would smirk and say she wasn't playing. We would all argue that she was, she just wasn't acknowledging it, and the conversation would eventually deteriorate into me calling her smug and insufferable and her calling me argumentative and easily led, and then we'd have to be angry at each other for a few hours. I was surprised that she got so vehement about it.

ericmoritz
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:21 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby ericmoritz » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:25 pm UTC

Dang it, I've been winning for nearly two months.... Curse you!!!!

nekomata
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:43 am UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby nekomata » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:27 pm UTC

It is as easy as that though. The creator of The Game may well have said that you have no choice but to play, but you have the choice as to whether or not to agree with them. Or you could just start paying me money. Your choice :twisted:

User avatar
DragonHawk
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:20 am UTC
Location: NH, US, Earth
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby DragonHawk » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:34 pm UTC

Yuri2356 wrote:What shows me is that there are a lot of people who experience a reflexive hatred towards any preceived failure.

What the above shows me is that people who are fans of "The Game" don't get that there are many others (such as myself) Who Just Don't Give A Flying Fuck and find the obsession by some over "The Game" to be annoying. The concept of "The Game" itself I found to be mildly amusing when I first encountered it. The people who seem to have a deep need to continuously tell others around them that they lost or they're playing or whatever, that's just frigging irritating.

Reminds me of this tagline phrase: "I've got no problem with God. It's his fan clubs I can't stand."

They either try to impose a way to win, or take their ball and go home.

I just invented a new game. It's called "Yuri2356 is a nerf-herder". The rules are, if you're Yuri2356, you're playing this game, you're a nerf-herder, and you just lost. Still want to play?
-----
Silent Five wrote: ... the conversation would eventually deteriorate into me calling her smug and insufferable and her calling me argumentative and easily led, and then we'd have to be angry at each other for a few hours. I was surprised that she got so vehement about it.

It takes two to tango.
-----
Just to be clear, I've got no problem with people "playing" "The Game". More power to you. Seriously, if you enjoy it, good for you. Just don't ask me to enjoy it, too.

I don't like Guitar Hero, either. I guess I'm a non-conformist geek. Does that make me normal, or abnormally abnormal?
Last edited by DragonHawk on Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:35 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Ben'); DROP TABLE Users;--

GENERATION 42: The first time you see this, copy it into yοur sig on any forum and stick a fork in yοur еyе. Social experiment.

tobbez
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:16 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby tobbez » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:35 pm UTC

DeadCatX2 wrote:
winmine wrote:Saying "I've won the game" or getting someone else to say the same does not make you win. The game is a metaphor for self-defeating thoughts. Bad memories, etc. You have always been playing the game, and you always will be.

Isn't The Game a concept derived from 4channers? If so, I wonder about the accuracy of your statement; such depth is typically unfathomable to those types.


There actually is depth below the brutal surface at times, and some of those times it may even be a type of depth you may not understand nor recognize.
Also, how would you know that without actually beeing one?

On a side note they actually do one thing (that's actually important for evolution of ideas) pretty well: combining old ideas into new ones. Not really saying that it's useful generating anything useful, though.
...But I digress. Over and out.

User avatar
Justinlrb
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:59 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Justinlrb » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:36 pm UTC

I was winning until just now. Thanks a lot.

User avatar
Azrael001
Posts: 2385
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:15 am UTC
Location: The Land of Make Believe.
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Azrael001 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:46 pm UTC

Just don't associate The Game with thinking about breathing. Then every time you lose you have got to pay attention to it and it is even more annoying.
23111

ReinSeiun
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:36 pm UTC
Location: Woodstock NY
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby ReinSeiun » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:50 pm UTC

winmine wrote:Saying "I've won the game" or getting someone else to say the same does not make you win. The game is a metaphor for self-defeating thoughts. Bad memories, etc. You have always been playing the game, and you always will be.


Sure, forcing yourself to forget something, moving on from a painful memory or bad thought, excluding it completely - that's a coping skill that works just fine for a lot of people. But not all people.

There are people who require that something be processed and accepted in order to have it no longer control their lives, rather than just forgetting about it and moving on. They examine, conceptualize and deconstruct the painful moments and bad thoughts of their lives so they are free to think about those moments -without- the moments causing them pain. I'm willing to bet these are the same sorts of people who refuse to play the game, especially if that metaphor you mentioned is accurate.

Forcing myself to forget about things is actually somewhat painful to me, because when they come up again (and then do) they'll be just as painful as the first time, instead of having their pain reduced by a proper rational and intuitive thought.

Deconstructing the pain in the same way that the comic just deconstructed the game is my chosen method of going through life.

zecro wrote:Now put that in perspective. You are in a crowd and someone announces they lost twenty dollars and my self respect. Several other people announce it as well. They do not know you are playing the game and you feign ignorance (they do not explain it as nobody asks). You have some choices to make: say you lose twenty dollars and my self respect and become one of them, ignore the game and feel superior for not stooping to something to crass, ignore the game and feel excluded because you don't want to lose or admit you lost.

The Game takes nothing to play except your a little bit of thought and your pride.

TL;DR: if you don't think losing The Game is negative, playing The Game is not taxing on your honor or self-esteem and signifies your association with a subculture.


My own refusal to ever play the game has nothing to do with "I can only lose" and some misguided sense of pride, and everything to do with attempts by others to force my inclusion in the game beyond my consent. I decide what arbitrary rules I follow, not other people.

Besides - for some people including themselves in the game can be just as damaging, or even more so than that feeling of exclusion you're trying to emphasize. Constantly thinking "damn, I just -lost-" can damage self-esteem in some people a lot more. Constant negative thoughts beget more negative thoughts, a negative outlook and negative feeling. And positive thoughts beget positive thoughts, a positive outlook and positive feeling.

That, and there are certain subcultures I don't want to belong to in the first place. =p

User avatar
1=0
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:01 pm UTC
Location: earth
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby 1=0 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:05 pm UTC

Nexus_1101 wrote:by giving your friend the wrong rules you have given them a game not the game.
but just knowing you are playing, like rolling the dice going round the monopoly board and not buying anything.


1) I didn't give him wrong rules, I told him I was giving him all the rules except for one sentence. By telling him about the game and explaining what I was doing, I let him take part in my efforts to defeat the game, he will tell people he knows about the game, therefore they won't tell him the rules...
Since the people who define(d) this game set these rules and claims, I decide to bend & break the rules. I actually enjoy breaking rules (so long as none gets hurt).

2) In this case, I ain't rolling no dices, I ain't moving no pawn, I refuse being someone else's pawn in a game decided by someone else.



Silent Five wrote:I was surprised that she got so vehement about it.


And I am surprised and sad that you felt so vehement about it you even let your conversation deteriorate and let it influence your relationship.

DragonHawk wrote:It takes two to tango.


Actually, considering the aim of the game is to have it be played by everyone (or was it the entire planet) it will take more than two :)
And I know at least three people who won't tango.
I feel diagonally parked in a parallel universe.


Image

nekomata
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:43 am UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby nekomata » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:13 pm UTC

With regards to the rules of The Game being broken, they are in that they can't complete the aim of The Game (to have everyone on earth playing The Game). This then got me onto thinking about how the rules could be fixed, which led on to the following additional rules:
- If you find someone who isn't playing the game, you must exlain the rules to them. If they then refuse to start playing the game, you must kill them.
- You must contribute to advertising the rules of the game through various media.
- If you find someone cheating in The Game, you must kill them.
- You must contribute to the making of The Game legal in your area of residence.
- You must encourage your country to go to war against countries that refuse to legalise The Game.

Either The Game will complete its aim when non-gamers are wiped out, or the gamers will all be safely locked away in padded cells. Do you really want The Game to be fixed? :twisted:

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Yuri2356 » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:27 pm UTC

DragonHawk wrote:What the above shows me is that people who are fans of "The Game" don't get that there are many others (such as myself) Who Just Don't Give A Flying Fuck and find the obsession by some over "The Game" to be annoying. The concept of "The Game" itself I found to be mildly amusing when I first encountered it. The people who seem to have a deep need to continuously tell others around them that they lost or they're playing or whatever, that's just frigging irritating.


Over-use of anything can annoy people. If some folks have been abusing the game, and that pisses you off, that's fine. If you then proceed to ignore it because you don't want to encourage or associate with the jerks who do it, that's fine too.

My rant was just about people who insist on bringing winning into something explicitly defined as a no-win scenario, especially one as trivial as The Game, and how that reflects a rather common set of behaviors in people. I presented it in a fairly harsh way, so I'm sorry if it felt like an attack. It's just that I hate the "People who [X] are mindless Sheep" line of rhetoric, which

I guess what it comes down to is weather or not you considder refusing to engage in the announcing part of the game to be 'winning', or just 'not giving a fuck'.



I just invented a new game. It's called "Yuri2356 is a nerf-herder". The rules are, if you're Yuri2356, you're playing this game, you're a nerf-herder, and you just lost. Still want to play?


The cultivation of brightly coloured foam is an ancient and noble trade, whose techniques have passed down through countless generations before arriving in my hands. From the context, you almost make it sound like some sort of fictional insult...

Aside from that this would appear to be nothing more than a personalized copy of The Game, which I already enjoy playing, so why wouldn't I carry on with it?

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby rrwoods » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:33 pm UTC

I suppose I don't see what the big deal is. "I don't enjoy the game" is a perfectly acceptable phrase which may apply to certain people. Said people will not announce their losses, nor will they care if they lose. This is fine to me. I don't harp on people who don't announce they've lost -- after all, how could I know? "I don't play the game" is simply a lie, by the definition of the game. What's the problem?
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

ReinSeiun
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:36 pm UTC
Location: Woodstock NY
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby ReinSeiun » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:39 pm UTC

rrwoods wrote:I suppose I don't see what the big deal is. "I don't enjoy the game" is a perfectly acceptable phrase which may apply to certain people. Said people will not announce their losses, nor will they care if they lose. This is fine to me. I don't harp on people who don't announce they've lost -- after all, how could I know? "I don't play the game" is simply a lie, by the definition of the game. What's the problem?


Definitions are funny things - they only apply if they're accepted, and it's been brought up earlier in the thread how it's possible to not accept the rules of the game, and how if you accept the rules of the game, and insist everyone else do universally, you fall into a bunch of really tricky, sticky problems.

User avatar
Loupis
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:50 pm UTC
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Loupis » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:45 pm UTC

I've only been playing for four years, but I honestly do appreciate being released from this prison!
Image

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby rrwoods » Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:50 pm UTC

ReinSeiun wrote:Definitions are funny things - they only apply if they're accepted, and it's been brought up earlier in the thread how it's possible to not accept the rules of the game, and how if you accept the rules of the game, and insist everyone else do universally, you fall into a bunch of really tricky, sticky problems.

[ this discussion is fun ]

I suppose I have a problem with "definitions only apply if they're accepted". Surely, the game exists, in one of the above given definitions, at least conceptually. The fact that it doesn't even have a name, other than simply "the game", helps to get this idea across.

If you don't accept that this definition applies to the game, that's fine. But if the definition is well-formed, then it applies to a concept. For example, say you and I have different definitions of the word "apple" -- I say all apples are green, and you say all apples are red. Our psycho friend says all apples are magenta. But that doesn't change the fact that there exists a concept that has the "more accepted" definition of what an apple is. In fact, that would be true even if no one in the universe accepted that definition -- assuming the type of tree from which apples grow exists and continues to bear fruit, then we have this concept whether we call it an apple.

By the same token, if you refuse the definition of the game -- even if everyone in the universe refused the definition of the game -- that would not negate the existence of the concept.

Please let me know if I'm not being clear; this is much more difficult to put into words than I thought it would be.
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

ReinSeiun
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:36 pm UTC
Location: Woodstock NY
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby ReinSeiun » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:04 pm UTC

rrwoods wrote:[ this discussion is fun ]


Indeed it is. The thing is - what you're describing is very similar to the correspondence theory of truth, the idea that definitions can apply in a vacuum regardless of belief, that there's some rational ideal that the definitions apply to separate from human knowledge and human action.

And while it may seem like I'm describing something like the consensus theory of truth (which develops silly examples like what you've used) I'm actually describing a branch off of the pragmatic theory of truth.

Definitions exist not only because they're accepted, but also because they work. Definitions for words and concepts change over time to reflect the culture and society they're in - but not arbitrarily. They shift because people start using (which is the key word here) the words differently. No matter how much we may dislike it, the definition of irony is shifting to make it a synonym with coincidence. Even websters' dictionary recognizes this alternative definition now - and why does it do so? Because people have been consistently using the word like that. At first, they were wrong to do so, but eventually enough people have made that use mainstream, so it's now recognized.

In the same way, the game tries to define itself as universal, but this definition breaks down. Simply because there are examples of people like me and many others in this thread who simply refuse to play. The proof of the failure of the definition is right here, in the fact that we can usefully refuse to follow it. Of course, the game is a special case, but only because it claims to be universal in the first place, something so easily refuted.

User avatar
radtea
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:57 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby radtea » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:20 pm UTC

You guys are funny.

We didn't have a concept of "force" until Newton defined it. The facts that Newton organized under his definition were available, but no one had organized them into a simple concept susceptible to closed-form definition. Concepts are made things, and until someone makes them they don't exist, even though the elements of existence to which they ultimately refer, do.

And speaking of definitions, I'm surprised no one has noticed that "the game" isn't even a game.

GAME: an organized human activity that is organized according to rules that one or more players voluntarily agree to let govern their actions.

If you think "game" means something else, please do suggest it. There is no human activity normally called a "game" that doesn't fall under a reasonable construal of the definition given above, and nothing we'd want to call a "game" that fails to fall under it. Calvinball clearly falls under it, for example, and gladiatorial contests just as clearly do not.

One of the essential characteristics of a game as the term is normally understood is that it can be quit. If you can't quit, it's not a game.

"The game" by this definition is obviously not a game, because of its stupid insistence that even people who are not playing it, are. As they have not voluntarily agreed to play, they are not playing, and the first rule is simply a falsehood, which makes it difficult for "the game" to fulfil the definition of "game", or anything else for that matter. So far as I know we lack a concept for "an excuse for nitwits to behave rudely by insisting that others are engaged in an activity that they are not, in fact, engaged in." "The game" would certainly fulfil that definition.

As such, aficionado's of "the game" are in the same category as people who believe that sitting is a sport and science is a religion.
Coming on Midsummer's Day to a Web Browser Near You: http://www.songsofalbion.com

User avatar
Jach
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 8:38 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Jach » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:22 pm UTC

Argh, I was losing a lot last week too... Have you condemned me to suffer more losses this week?
I love reading quotes.

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby rrwoods » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:25 pm UTC

radtea wrote:As such, aficionado's of "the game" are in the same category as people who believe that sitting is a sport and science is a religion.

I agree with everything up to this sentence. "The game" may not be a game, but that's irrelevant to whether a given person is playing. I don't support that "the game" is a game as the word is usually used (getting into the "acceptance of definitions" territory again), but that doesn't keep me from saying that, by definition, everyone is playing.
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

User avatar
dharmamama
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:37 am UTC
Location: lower left side of each post

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby dharmamama » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:32 pm UTC

nekomata wrote:With regards to the rules of The Game being broken, they are in that they can't complete the aim of The Game (to have everyone on earth playing The Game). This then got me onto thinking about how the rules could be fixed, which led on to the following additional rules:
- If you find someone who isn't playing the game, you must explain the rules to them. If they then refuse to start playing the game, you must kill them.
- You must contribute to advertising the rules of the game through various media.
- If you find someone cheating in The Game, you must kill them.
- You must contribute to the making of The Game legal in your area of residence.
- You must encourage your country to go to war against countries that refuse to legalise The Game.

Either The Game will complete its aim when non-gamers are wiped out, or the gamers will all be safely locked away in padded cells. Do you really want The Game to be fixed? :twisted:


Cloudchaser wrote:After coming to understand what it was by reading these forums, I couldn't escape the similarity I saw to certain religions.


Ditto wrt this post.

User avatar
benjhuey
Posts: 3328
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:35 am UTC
Location: A collection of rocks

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby benjhuey » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:38 pm UTC

Wikipedia doesn't want an entry about The Game because it doesn't want to lose The Game.

Besides, everyone knows that the only way to indisputably win anything is through violence. That's why, whenever a dispute about whether or not I'm really playing The Game arises, I slap someone in the face.
多么现在棕色母牛?

AvalonXQ
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 5:45 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby AvalonXQ » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:39 pm UTC

radtea wrote:GAME: an organized human activity that is organized according to rules that one or more players voluntarily agree to let govern their actions.


Too broad. By this definition, most group performance art (plays, choirs) and most training (martial arts, classes) would qualify. In fact, most human activities fall under this definition -- even ordering food at McDonald's involves voluntarily agreeing to participate in an organized human activity. Now, I know that the purpose of the definition was to exclude "The Game" from it, and I've gone off on a slight tangent. So be it.
How about this.
GAME: People voluntarily acting according to an arbitrary set of rules toward an objective which is also a construct of these rules.
By adding the requirement that the players are trying to win, where winning is internal to the game, I think we get closer to an accurate description of the phenomenon.

EDIT: Oh, by the way, I'm not playing the game. I've already won it.
Last edited by AvalonXQ on Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:45 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Alan
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:09 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Alan » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:45 pm UTC

on an unrelated note, it's a damn shame that nobody will take a man in a captain's hat seriously.


People seem to think you can't be called The Captain unless you drive a boat.

By the way, your hat looks good on you.

Bumnut
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:28 am UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Bumnut » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:45 pm UTC

I'm rather surprised that a forum full of high-functioning Asperger's folk find such a simple bit of metacognition so fascinating. It's like it's the first time you've ever gotten in touch with how your mind works.

If this were a football forum or a video games forum or something, it'd be fine. But we're supposed to be nerds here people. There are certain standards to be upheld.

Get over it.

Here's a new game:

G0 = 'The Game'

Every time you think about Gn, you must create a new game, Gn+1, where you must not think about thinking about Gn.

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby rrwoods » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:47 pm UTC

Bumnut wrote:Every time you think about Gn, you must create a new game, Gn+1, where you must not think about thinking about Gn.

I hate you.
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

User avatar
benjhuey
Posts: 3328
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:35 am UTC
Location: A collection of rocks

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby benjhuey » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:53 pm UTC

AvalonXQ wrote:
radtea wrote:GAME: an organized human activity that is organized according to rules that one or more players voluntarily agree to let govern their actions.


Too broad. By this definition, most group performance art (plays, choirs) and most training (martial arts, classes) would qualify. In fact, most human activities fall under this definition -- even ordering food at McDonald's involves voluntarily agreeing to participate in an organized human activity. Now, I know that the purpose of the definition was to exclude "The Game" from it, and I've gone off on a slight tangent. So be it.
How about this.
GAME: People voluntarily acting according to an arbitrary set of rules toward an objective which is also a construct of these rules.
By adding the requirement that the players are trying to win, where winning is internal to the game, I think we get closer to an accurate description of the phenomenon.

Metaphorically, couldn't it be said that life is just a game since much of our lives consist of arbitrary rules anyway? I see what you're trying to do here and agree with it, but isn't any conformity simply following a set of predetermined rules of socialization? Kinda maybe? Eh? :wink:
多么现在棕色母牛?

Alan
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:09 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Alan » Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:57 pm UTC

If I refuse to annouce when I lost then I am not playing the game.

If I refuse to acknowledge knowing about the game then you can't accuse me of playing it.

I have installed anti-virus and version control software in my brain.

Any time the game is mentioned I will say I've never heard of it and won't you please explain it. After the explanation is done I will say sorry I must have tuned out for a minute there. Could you repeat that? This loop will continue until the person tires of explaining the game.

I can implement the trigger for this rule using simple pattern matching for phrases like "I just lost twenty dollars and my self respect" without actually knowing anything about the game.

You have a license to use this anti-virus software. You'll have to find your own solution for version control.

I am now reverting to a memory version from a few minutes ago.

Zake
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:25 am UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Zake » Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:04 pm UTC

This is a fascinating thread on several levels. First, theres two types of posters (or, if we're being memetic geeks, 10 types); those who post along the lines of "YAY Randall freed us!" and those who post along the lines of "Randall is WRONG because here are the rules...!!" The latter group are "dogmatists" who reject the idea of the comic being able to contradict the set rules which constitute the Game. The former group consider that the comic, either through the cultural magnitude of XKCD or through simple assertion, addresses the Game and overrides it.

Which alludes to a deep philosophical basis for the Game which is surprising for a brainchild of 4chan or somesuch. The Game is a set of rules which are utterly unenforceable and automatically include anyone who knows them; as such, it can be thought to exist in an an abstract sense (much as the fact that three plus two equals five "exists in an abstract sense") as independent of its cultural backing or comical assaults. Modifying the Game, in this sense, would be impossible as the result would simply be addressing a different Game (much as trying to change the aforementioned equation to "three plus four equals six" simply addresses a different equation) and and countermanding the original Game (either by noncompliance or by accepting the assertion of the comic) is definable as "playing the Game wrong," will ye or nil ye.

On the other hand, the range of possible Games is essentially infinite, and some we always lose (or play wrong) and some we always win (or at least play correctly.) So it about evens out. We could, for example, postulate the Five Counter-Games (much like the Meta-Game mentioned by a previous poster) the rules of which go:

Rule one of the Five Counter-Games: Everyone is always playing the Five Counter-Games, whether or not they are aware of them.
Rule two of the Five Counter-Games: You lose the Five Counter-Games by, I don't know, being mean or something.
Rule three of the Five Counter-Games: If someone "loses" the Game while playing the Five Counter-Games, they do not say so, or indicate it to others by any intentional means (internet chat, hand signalling, farting, etc).

Which means that, whenever someone plays the "Game" correctly, they play all five of the Counter-Games incorrectly, so on balance they're doing more Game-wrong than Game-right. All of which I mean simply to illustrate the philosophical absurdity of thinking that "playing the Game wrong" has any meaningfulness.

Which, given Game's lack of Gameplay, and how no social construct can really enforce internal behavior, the only reasons to play the Game (or, for the pedant, to play the Game correctly) are A) Going along with an age-old meme because you think its hip and cool, or B) Because you think its hilariously funny to suddenly say "FUCK I lost twenty dollars and my self respect!", just like thousands, if not millions, have done before you.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby Belial » Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:07 pm UTC

You heard the man. The game is over. Go home.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
DragonHawk
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:20 am UTC
Location: NH, US, Earth
Contact:

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby DragonHawk » Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:14 pm UTC

rrwoods wrote:Said people will not announce their losses...

I thought one of the Rules of The Game was that losses had to be announced? If so, and everyone is playing (as you assert), and not everyone is announcing their losses (self-evident), what are those people doing? Not playing by the rules? If so, can't we also ignore the rule that says everyone is playing?

This has devolved into a debate about semantics, which is usually a sure sign that a discussion is heading nowhere useful. Can I just say you're wrong and leave now?
Ben'); DROP TABLE Users;--

GENERATION 42: The first time you see this, copy it into yοur sig on any forum and stick a fork in yοur еyе. Social experiment.

mig-mog
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:13 pm UTC

Re: "Anti-Mindvirus" Discussion

Postby mig-mog » Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:16 pm UTC

3 myriadth.
XKCD's right; we won!

Edit:
Image
Last edited by mig-mog on Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:27 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: orthogon and 109 guests