On 12/18/2009 02:31 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:02 PM 12/17/2009, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Sounds good. But magicians don't usually start by working to convince
everyone that they are incompetent liars. That's a label nobody wants
to start with.
I have experienced the exact opposite. They are very good at starting
with that label, they amplify it and play with it.
Eh, hold on -- they do it for a few seconds, a few minutes, perhaps more
than a few minutes. They patter away, with an ace of hearts glued to
the back of their jacket where all can see it, or whatever.
But very soon, far sooner than the "timeout" after which the audience
leaves in disgust, they do something which reveals they are monumentally
clever after all.
Imagine, instead, a magic show where the magicians did nothing but show
tricks that didn't work, or do slight of hand where all could see the
hidden card on the back of the hand, or attempted to juggle but dropped
the balls -- imagine that they did this for the ENTIRE FIRST HALF of the
show.
Then there's the intermission.
Then, only after the intermission, they show that they can really pull
off some fine stunts.
Only problem -- the hall's kind of empty at that point, because an awful
lot of folks didn't come back after the break.
That would be a show where the magician started by CONVINCING the
audience that he was an incompetent liar.
It's been more than seconds, minutes, days -- it's been years -- Steorn
has yet to show the "clever" part. All they've shown is the boobery.
...
Sure, sure, sure. The bit about magicians is all true. But what makes
you think that Steorn fills the bill of a "skilled magician"? What
EVIDENCE is there that anyone at Steorn is competent to pull off any
kind of convincing demo of anything?
The level of competence required for the "convincing demo" -- if we
allow actual fraud -- is low. I'm sure I could build it, just give me a
little money.
Hah! Indeed, I'm absolutely sure you could. But, you're not an
"average Joe off the street". What makes you think anybody at Steorn is
as competent as you? Your definition of a "low level of competence"
probably doesn't match most folks'.
I'm serious here. I have seen no evidence of such competence at Steorn.
In the absence of such evidence, I see no reason to believe it's present.
Assuming incompetence is all "staged", and that more apparent
incompetence just proves it's "staged better" -- well, it's an
assumption, and I can't really see any reason for retaining it.
...
But this argument of ours will be entirely moot in short order, when
we see how this absurd non-demo plays out in its final weeks.
I don't think so: so there must be our "bet." I bet it won't be resolved
in a few weeks. I don't see that they are anywhere near the necessity of
closing down and cashing out. So my bet would be on continued murkiness
and mystery, that's what my theory predicts.
Oh, I agree that Steorn's fate won't be resolved. They are extremely
competent at explaining away problems, at drawing things out, and at
staying in business, and I'm sure they will continue to do such things.
What I think *will* be resolved is the question of whether they're
just teasing us with this wretchedly awful demonstration, in preparation
for rolling out something far better some time in the very near future.
The "bet" I would make is this:
The current demo will continue to be of horribly low quality, and there
will be no deus ex machina which suddenly makes their machines run
better. Not now, and not any time in the next few months.
If I've understood what you have said previously, you think the
opposite; you expect them to pull a "better rabbit" from the hat, and
suddenly upgrade their machines to something which will stymie their
critics.
* * *
In other words, I will go on record as stating that the current wretched
demo, as it currently exists, is the *best* *they* *can* *do*, or very
close to it. Consequently, we will not see anything better before the
scheduled end of this demonstration, and we will not see anything
substantially better in the coming, say, six months, either -- let us
say, before June.
And *that* assertion -- that nothing better will be forthcoming -- is
what will be either proved to be true, or disproved, in relatively short
order.
I really believe that if they had anything better they would already
have rolled it out (but of course, what they have but aren't showing is
something we won't know for a long time, if ever).
