Quote from: ElBorak;1123166DMs play all the roles both good and bad but does not have anything close to the immersion that a player has with a character they are playing. IMO people who want to play only evil characters and do vile stuff are truly evil and are warning everyone around them and it would be wise to take the warning.

Meh. I'm not a fan of people who like to play "evil" characters too much, cuz in my experience they tend to be disruptive and play "stupid evil" characters who do moronic stuff, then whine when the town guards are forced to run their characters down (in freaking self-defense!), but I wouldn't go as far as to call such players "evil". They're just disruptive players who don't know how to play their characters properly and think that playing "evil" alignment or whatever is a free-pass to do 100% whatever they want in-game. I've rarely seen players like that pull truly despicable stunts in real life, though.

Play whatever rocks your boat and makes your day a bit brighter. I don't know how many movies I have seen which turned into some sort of revenge porn, for instance. I have also gone berserk while playing video games, once nuking everything in sight when I realized that I was losing in Civilization. And that's all fine. The whole point is that it isn't reality. Doesn't mean that everyone wants to be in your group when you go all serial-killer-y, so I guess that's the only caveat with roleplaying games; everyone has to be in on the feel of the game.

I sometimes do play someone pretty close to myself though, and I'm a pretty mellow guy. I don't have any issues with that either.

Quote from: Trond;1123270Play whatever rocks your boat and makes your day a bit brighter. I don't know how many movies I have seen which turned into some sort of revenge porn, for instance. I have also gone berserk while playing video games, once nuking everything in sight when I realized that I was losing in Civilization. And that's all fine. The whole point is that it isn't reality. Doesn't mean that everyone wants to be in your group when you go all serial-killer-y, so I guess that's the only caveat with roleplaying games; everyone has to be in on the feel of the game.

I sometimes do play someone pretty close to myself though, and I'm a pretty mellow guy. I don't have any issues with that either.

Test

The trick with evil characters is to not make them complete assholes. As VisionStorm notes above, some people take that 'evil' tag as an excuse to act like a murderous buffoon.

Lawful evil is generally my 'go to' for 'bad to the bone' PCs. Even then those should have traits which trade off their sins and make them attractive from a party-cohesion standpoint. Obviously, if you have a paladin in the party it's going to get tricky. But! Getting things done should allow you to put off a day of reckoning with Sir Loin of Beef.

Neutral evil and chaotic evil tend to be too self-absorbed or selfish to make good party teammates. A lawful evil PC can be convinced to put off gratification to sustain a party goal, but it's a lot harder with NE/CE.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1123164You better be sneaking into their offices and taking selfies with their Nobels!

Eh. I'll be honest... while they're super-geniuses in their respective fields, I'm not star-struck by them as "people" (you can infer from that what you will, heh). Plus they're like Antediluvians... they show up only rarely, to throw their weight around on the serfs.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1123164How did the model deal with weather fluctuation? I understand hospitalizations and bad weather have a major correlation and thus you'd have a rise during years with heavy winters and/or extra hot summers vs. "normal years" vs. years with mild winters and/or summers.

The answer: I have no idea. Now the extrapolation is clearly using some kind of metalogic based on the two-years worth of data where the correlation between the frequency and types injuries/ailments occurred it created some probable figure... But *consider* the deterministic implications of this.

Quote from: Spinachcat;11231643% deviation! Scary. Did you allow the AI to weight the various data points or was that done by humans? I find the data weighting choices to be fascinating and great for finding weird anomalies.

Standard Electronic Medical Records have a *whole lot* of datapoints to feed on. The AI did all the weighting itself. The fact is *none* of us could have done it - that was the whole point. There are too many variables for any of us to even try to make such a projection with wide open parameters. I mean we could do it on obvious stuff - flu-cases during "flu-season", and within a given age-range. But 3% deviation? *no way in hell* could we dream of that level of accuracy. So yeah... "General AI"? When that lands, it won't matter to most people. They can't fathom, and will never fathom the reality of "what is true" about "it" unless that AI decides to let them know. And even then, there is no reason to believe it since any specific reaction you have, it will likely have determined before you do it.

But they'll make a helluva a GM.

Quote from: tenbones;1123291Eh. I'll be honest... while they're super-geniuses in their respective fields, I'm not star-struck by them as "people" (you can infer from that what you will, heh).

I infer they're total douche nozzles of uber-schlong-dorkness! Even more reasons for super secret selfies with their preciouses!

Quote from: tenbones;1123291But *consider* the deterministic implications of this.

I am properly terrified.

Makes me wonder what else your model could predict if queried. I wonder how much non-medical decision making could be foretold based on their medical data. I wonder what oddball questions would get a 80% correct answer based on just understanding patient health.

Quote from: tenbones;1123291The AI did all the weighting itself.

That is very interesting...and scary. That's the difference between the small fry garage band stuff I do and the true main stage AI work. We might have a couple dozen variables, but nothing of the scope your project had.

Quote from: tenbones;1123291But they'll make a helluva a GM.

What if it wants to LARP....

I do quite a bit of post-apocalyptic gaming, and not once in my life have I put an arrow in someone's chest over a crate of 40 year old cans of soup. If we are what we pretend to be, I'm pretty bad at what I do.

Quote from: asron819;1123337I do quite a bit of post-apocalyptic gaming, and not once in my life have I put an arrow in someone's chest over a crate of 40 year old cans of soup.

Yet. (Dun dun dunnnnnn!!!!) :eek:

Quote from: asron819;1123337I do quite a bit of post-apocalyptic gaming, and not once in my life have I put an arrow in someone's chest over a crate of 40 year old cans of soup. If we are what we pretend to be, I'm pretty bad at what I do.

If you want to know what 40 year old canned goods can turn into, go check out a 'vintage' MRE channel on Youtube. Egads. :eek:

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1123341If you want to know what 40 year old canned goods can turn into, go check out a 'vintage' MRE channel on Youtube. Egads. :eek:

Steve1989MREInfo is my favorite.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1123344Steve1989MREInfo is my favorite.

Mine too, but we're getting off track here

In any case, isn't the whole POINT of roleplaying games to pretend to be something you're not?

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1123459Mine too, but we're getting off track here

In any case, isn't the whole POINT of roleplaying games to pretend to be something you're not?

It's a big part of it, but not the whole. You could play yourself (or someone similar) in very outlandish and weird situations. So I guess the point is to experience things that you don't in normal life (in addition to socializing etc.)

Quote from: Trond;1123463It's a big part of it, but not the whole. You could play yourself (or someone similar) in very outlandish and weird situations. So I guess the point is to experience things that you don't in normal life (in addition to socializing etc.)

Maybe I do it differently. I always figure everyone's character has a little bit of themselves anyways (to make them relatable). Like, one PC of mine might have my bad temper, another might have my fascination with chemistry, a third my idealism, etc.

So it's me, and not me, at the same time. Does that make any sense? I think I'm rambling here.

Quote from: tenbones;1123143And it was accurate within 3% over the span of an *entire year* - without knowing anything other than what it extrapolated from established patterns.

The longer the time span the higher the accuracy. I'd be more impressed if the daily accuracy was within 3%.

Quote from: Bren;1123492The longer the time span the higher the accuracy. I'd be more impressed if the daily accuracy was within 3%.

Sure. But we're really in the infancy of all this. We're pulling some 4-billion rows of EMR data sliced in thousands of different ways *everyday*. So this was just a test run. When this sucker goes live, it will probably consume the last decade of data we currently keep archived, in a week, and I'm willing to put my hesitant chip down that we'll have this level of accuracy. And if not - give it a year, two tops.

And at that point... a lot of my co-workers will find themselves shifting to other responsibilities if not other jobs... or be let go entirely. Galactus help them.

Me? I'll likely be the Meatbag Assistant to the AI God of Healing.