Italicized a line of the interview per te.
SCP-1751 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-1751
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-1751.
Two iffy things.
Autopsy revealed damage consistent with SCP-1751 symptoms as well as evidence of a very large aneurysm within Wernicke's area of his brain.
Does this mean that they found an aneurysm or a burst aneurysm? Both things should be simple enough to spot in an autopsy.
Specifically, SCP-1751 is the entire year of ██ AD, during which no known major historical events took place, though proximity to Nero's persecution of early Abrahamic sects has been noted.
I understand that this meme is SCP-worth… but, despite saying that it only involves Latin, it's a rather strong thing to say that:
SCP-1751 is a fixed point in time;
The Earth is larger than the Mediterranean Sea. It's not a fixed point in time, it's a living fossile meme. Or am I missing something important? : O
Edit: I mean:
Due to the fact that SCP-1751 appears to be a memetic infection of a specific point in time, and not simply text or some other human construct, containment of SCP-1751 has revolved around the suppression of public knowledge of it.
Memetic infections are transmitted by learning about them, yes, so this is a memetic infestation whose vector happens to be anything related to a year in history, but does it affect knowledge of local history? Or, say, studying Far East history of this period is also bad mojo?
Does this mean that they found an aneurysm or a burst aneurysm? Both things should be simple enough to spot in an autopsy.
The Earth is larger than the Mediterranean Sea. It's not a fixed point in time, it's a living fossile meme. Or am I missing something important? : O
Memetic infections are transmitted by learning about them, yes, so this is a memetic infestation whose vector happens to be anything related to a year in history, but does it affect knowledge of local history? Or, say, studying Far East history of this period is also bad mojo?
Fixed these. It's a burst aneurysm, and I had intended for it to be localized to rome, but I didn't make that clear. It's now referred to as a point in space-time and reflects the fixed localization. Thanks for catching those, I dropped the science ball there a bit.
Anytime. : 3
However, what Accelerando says down there is probably crucial. This does sound as an infohazard, although I struggle with the definitions myself… maybe an infohazard can be memetic but we don't understand the specific mechanisms that trigger it even when we simply describe the item, while a memetic may act as an infohazard because describing the item is able to transmit malignant information? I'm thinking about the Key. : O
I'm a little confused about its triggering , is it the year it's self , a event in the year that occured, also is it only the year/event being thought if or is it anything such as its SCP designation that can trigger the effects.
If mentioning the point in time affects you, then it's an infohazard, not memetic.
I didn't find the article very interesting. It's nothing new that I haven't seen from other infohazards, and the ending underwhelmed me. I'll admit the concept is neat, but that's it.
—-
Edit: oops, didn't mean to override your tagging there, Aelanna. I will argue that unless temporal is now for SCPs simply related to time, and infohazard can be used in conjunction with memetic, then I'll stand by my inclusions.
I rather like it, actually, but I'll agree that unless it's specifically contagious information, this really should be described as an infohazard. Do/can affected individuals effect others in some way?
It does raise some interesting questions for me, as well. Like what in hell happened at that time in Rome to cause this perceptual shift? It seems to suggest that something fundamental about reality may have changed around that time. Makes me think of Phillip K. Dick's story surrounding his novel "Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said," and how he found out that the action of the story had deep parallels to the book of Acts (Bible). Are we seeing a hole in spacetime here, some clever demon pulling the wool over our eyes to distract us from Christ's return?
Maybe that allusion isn't enough for others, but it's enough for me.
+1
Like FFB said, I personally think there's a lot of potential for an interesting story in what exactly is making this effect happen, but unlike him I think it would have been really neat to see that explored a bit more in the article.
That being said, what is here is enough to sate the temporal anomaly fan in me, so you get a +1.
I had an idea for a story behind this, or at least some mythology that could be dissected to add some idea. I've added a final excerpt out of the documentation mentioned in the description. I hope it's a bit more open now without ruining that desire to know more.
They called Latin a dead language; they were wrong. Latin's not dead… IT'S MAD.
I like this, it's a really original idea of the form for a skip to take. That said, the article could use some cleaning. A lot of the language is really… dramatic? ("reaped from universities globally"? My word!) It could use tightening is what I mean.
The core idea is a little bit interesting, but it's not compelling as presented. I think that in trying to paint a broad picture, the author tries to do too much: with the result that the narrative seems all over the place. I keep trying to reread it, but I can't find a groove.
If this is a keter infohazard that affects you when you think about something that is arguably a broad topic, and the Foundation's only counter merely delays the "critical symptoms", then why would they ever allow any kind of research? How can scientists test, or embedded agents monitor - something they can't safely think about?
I think you could cut this down to about 50% of its current content without sacrificing the essential weirdness or spookiness - and it might help tighten up the tone to where it needs to be to work.
Before I start reading, can I move those footnotes inside the collapsible? I think it'd make more sense for it to be in there than outside.
Is that possible? I think it would look better with them inside the collapsible, but I didn't think it did that. I'm definitely okay with this.
Done. You're okay with this?
E: Actually, I'd like to make a few more format changes. Nothing big, it's just that I wanna restructure that warning. Would you be okay with that? No content'd be changed.
That's perfect, thanks! I kind of like the way the warning is currently structured, but what did you have in mind?
Probably either
Informational Cognitohazard Warning!
The following documentation is directly affected by an anomalous linguistic infohazard. Procedure Ptolemaic Trepidation is now in effect; all unauthorized personnel will be terminated upon discovery.
or
Informational Cognitohazard Warning!
The following documentation is directly affected by an anomalous linguistic infohazard. Procedure Ptolemaic Trepidation is now in effect; all unauthorized personnel will be terminated upon discovery.
or
Informational Cognitohazard Warning!
The following documentation is directly affected by an anomalous linguistic infohazard. Procedure Ptolemaic Trepidation is now in effect; all unauthorized personnel will be terminated upon discovery.
Honestly, the thing that gets me is that it's all in the red header font. I'd defer to you, of course.
I liked it. Just a few things:
Is it really necessary to censor "Jabberwocky"? Because that's an odd thing to redact, especially since it helps whoever's reading the document understand the effect.
And "Ut non igne" means "(as/so that) not (with/by) fire". It's not really a coherent sentence, since "ut" is meaningless without a verb. If you want any help translating, I'd be happy to assist.
It's probably not too necessary, but I wanted to be careful with copyrighted stuff, though I suppose name-dropping doesn't count. Feex'd.
And yeah, I used google translate for that. xD I want it to say "Please don't burn me." and google translate spat that out and it seemed concise. If you could make that grammatically correct i'd love you forever.
"Non me incendete" is the closest to that, if you want to be concise. It means "Do not burn me". "Please don't burn me" would be "amabo te nisi incendias me" (literally "I will love you if you don't burn me," but that's how you say "please" in Latin).
Oh, and Jabberwocky is in the public domain. Lewis Carrol has been dead for a long time.
/forum/t-769357/scp-1751#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
