[syndicated profile] neatscience_feed

Posted by thebrightspark

Is there such a thing as a plant that doesn’t photosynthesize (without dying)?

Thanks Robert for the question!

The short answer is yes! These plants have evolved a parasitic lifestyle, and have such tiny amounts of chlorophyll that they couldn’t photosynthesise if they wanted to. The only examples I’ve found are all in the genus Cuscuta, or “dodder”, with common names like “devil’s guts” and “devil’s hair”. Sounds pretty appropriate for a parasitic plant.

Once a dodder seedling has germinated, it has to attach itself to a host plant within about a week, or it will just die. It does this by detecting chemical signals in the environment and growing towards them. It can parasitise a huge number of plants, which sounds like a sensible survival mechanism to me — potatoes, alfalfa, clover, flax and ivy are among its victims.

Cuscuta europaea bgiu
Cuscuta europaea parasitising Sambucus ebulus

There are also various different kinds of photosynthesis which allow plants to survive in difficult circumstances, which means they aren’t actively photosynthesising all the time. Traditional photosynthesis is referred to as “C3” photosynthesis, and it’s extremely inefficient, as discussed in this post. However, there’s also “C4” and “CAM” photosynthesis, which improve on the process not by improving Rubisco — a chancy proposition, since it needs to be shaped exactly right to do its job — but by separating the processes out so that Rubisco catalyses the right reaction (remember that Rubisco can either oxygenate or carboxylate — photosynthesis requires it to carboxylate). Restricting photosynthesis like this can improve its efficiency and prevent loss of valuable water in desert environments.

Still, C3, C4 and CAM plants all photosynthesise. Only plants like dodder have (so far) bucked the trend — which is a good thing for us, as we owe our atmospheric oxygen supply to photosynthesising organisms.


[syndicated profile] lewis_and_quark_feed

Last week, I trained a neural network to generate the names of magic spells from the game Dungeons and Dragons, by giving it a list of existing spells and asking it to generate more like them. It obliged, with spells like “Charm of the Cods”, “Primal Rear”, and “Hail to the Dave”.

Blog reader Greg V suggested I try the same with the spells from Harry Potter. I used the list of spells from harrypotter.wikia.com, which includes not only the spells from the books, but also spells used in the movies and plays. The list included many with official names in questionable Latin (Arresto Momentum, Engorgio Skullus, Expelliarmus), and many more known only by their effects (Bubble-Head Charm, Endless Sandwiches, Twitchy-Ears Hex).

With about 560 spells to study, the neural network had a tendency to produce spells that were either exact repeats of existing spells or else terribly-mangled pseudo-Latin, but I did manage to find some apparently functional gems.

First, the charms. The Wiki quotes J.K. Rowling defining charms as “those spells which do not change the intrinsic character of the object on which the spell is cast". By that definition, the “Herring Charm” and “Cracker Charm” seen below do not manufacture herrings and crackers, but likely merely cause them to dance.

Herding Charm
Anti-Dining Charm
Creaking Charm
Clicking Charm
Revelling Charm
Hoot Charm
File-Baking Charm
Hair Logs Charm
Herping Charm
Pot-reversaters Charm
Herring Charm
Cracker Charm
Ant Charm
Ant Stacking Charm
Bubble-animating Charm

The neural network also learned to produce jinxes, hexes, and curses, as well as a few unpleasant-sounding charms. Hard to tell whether the neural network would have been a valuable ally at the Battle of Hogwarts, or primarily a weird distraction.

Corn jinx
Curse of the saris
Bedthing Curse
Tragha Fracking hex
Cars Jinx
Hero Curse
Furring Curse
Curse on Marvolo Curse
Crushing Charm
Anti-Shack Jinx
Fight Charm
Hork Charm
Smoking Charm
Terding Charm

It becomes clear, though, that the neural network doesn’t really understand what spells are, exactly. Here are a few that it invented. Note that “X to Y” type spells are transformation spells, so I’m not sure how turning a spell into a pug would work, exactly. It also seems to be searching unsuccessfully for the word “counterspell”.

Spell to pug
Spell to Rum
Spell to hum
Spelly
Spell spell
Spell-Spell Spell
Anti-Spell spell
Curse of spell
Spell to cure Spell
Spell Reversal spell
Charm to Cure Curse of Charm
Hex Charm
Hex
Hex Hex
Hex Hax Hex

The animagus spell, in which you turn yourself into an animal of your choice, is notoriously difficult. As a mark of its very advanced difficulty-ness, the spell itself is four words long, and annoying to remember: Amato Animo Animato Animagus

Maybe it’s memorable if you know Latin. The neural network doesn’t know Latin, though. And it has a heck of a time trying to cast the animagus spell:

Animato Animagus
Arato Agio Animagus
Amaro Amamoco Animagus
Amato Anima Animatus Charm
Amato Animo Animagus
Amanto Dure Anto Animato Animagus
Amato Animato Animagus
Animagus Antmater Charm
Arato Anima Animagus
Amato Animo Animogo
Amato Anima Mumora
Animagus Anto Animato Animagus
Beper andmoto Animagus
Amato Anima Anima to Animato Animagus
Arinta AnimaconStrag spell
Repello Inimato Animagus

It’s unclear what the neural network’s chosen animal form might be. Ox?

Its favorite spell, though? Curse of the Bogies. Garbled variations of that spell kept showing up over and over.

Jend-curse of the Bogies
Regrowing hair to curse of the Bogies
Curse of the Bogiegs
Misten per to Spell-barrh Counter-curse of the Bogies
Fineey curse of the Bogiess
Curse on to barter op Dhe Bogee’s
Curse of the Bogiess Curse
Sounger-curse of the Bogiess Curse
Tebbed to curse of the Bogies
Curse of the Mogies
Hex of the Bogery curse

And I think these two might be secretly versions of Curse of the Bogies

Soungor-curse of the Cougee spell
Hern-pogey

And perhaps there’s evidence that I didn’t clean up the text I extracted from the Harry Potter Wiki as much as I might have. One SINGLE stray line of css code, and now the neural network has latched onto it, convinced that “MediaWiki” does something powerful.

RediaWiki:Inf oforo Diolecum Charm
MediaWiki:InfoboxColoure Revelloro
MediaWixi:I foritious

At other times, I couldn’t tell what the neural network was trying to do.

Horbing spell
Marica
Bubble-Reparifors
Mumbledore’s Reverore Inceacus Curse
Durser rabbity hair Logiot
Hork Lighty spell
Hord Ligery Spell
Mevitiblichainh’s grate Flare
Jigxe-sen tre Mucan to bog
Brothachcingowbelus
Brechaim hedbivicus Doobers Spell

However, I’m beginning to suspect that the neural network might be making fun of the names.

Stickee spell
Hurder-gerping Charm
Snombeling Charm
Dumbledory Spell
Hombledory Spell
Fubbledory Charm
Sbuggly wiggly
Bubbledor curse
Bribbedly
Bubberoaberdo
Bubbiro forjuling Charm
Mubble-ponde Charm
Sluggly wiggly
Jelly-Feelly
Pockongum Dookors Spell
Squggly-wing fart

There are more Harry Potter spell names that didn’t fit in this post - fill out this form and I’ll email them to you. This includes spells that definitely wouldn’t have appeared in the books, but maybe would have appeared in certain works of fan fiction.

Other neural network Harry Potter experiments:

Generating Harry Potter fan fiction summaries with word-rnn

Generating Harry Potter fan fiction summaries with char-rnn

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
Sometime around 1999 or 2001, I first heard "King of Spain" by Moxy Früvous. The UC Berkeley a cappella group DeCadence performed it during one of their lunchtime concerts near Sather Gate. (Four out of five weekdays one of the a cappella groups would do a noon concert -- DeCadence, Artists in Resonance, the Men's Octet, the California Golden Overtones -- and I caught as many of them as I could.) And then Steve Shipman introduced me to more of their songs and albums -- it was Bargainville, which ends with that haunting a cappella "Gulf War Song", that I was listening to on September 10, 2001.

In 2014 it came to light that band member Jian Ghomeshi had a fairly sordid history, and for a while I couldn't listen. Now I seem to have the ability to listen again; that change I don't have as much insight into as I'd like.

Just now Leonard and I were singing bits of "King of Spain" to each other; he sang:

Royalty
Lord, it looked good on me

I said "What?!" Because back around 2000 and through all the years to the present, I heard those lyrics as:

Royalty
Lord of the good ennui

So for the entire time I've been with Leonard, he and I have interpreted that song slightly differently. He heard the narrator figuratively wearing royalty like clothing, like a fashion statement, which connects to the silk he mentions in the next line, and which logically connects to the garment swap later in the song. Through my mondegreen, I heard an emphasis on the narrator's malaise and boredom (a reason for the prince-and-pauper swap) and a connection to the literal meaning of an additional French loanword, laissez-faire, that he uses later.

A quick web search tells me that Leonard's version is the consensus, that to join intersubjective reality I would let go of "Lord of the good ennui". I shall bury it here, with due ceremony. Goodbye, old mondegreen friend! You were a lot of fun.

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
The principle at stake in California v. Johnson: due process requires that we be able to examine the evidence used to convict someone. Kern County got a $200,000+ grant and started using closed-source software to perform a new kind of DNA testing for criminal forensics. You are not allowed to audit the software to check for bugs, but the company founder will fly in and testify in court to say he attests to the validity of the results it finds. Uh, no, we need to check, and the ACLU and EFF have just filed amici curiae* briefs before California's Court of Appeal for the Fifth District, saying so.

Man at lectern in front of screen displaying 'Winning Raffle Numbers: 12345 12345 12345 12345', photo (used by permission) by Mike Pirnat at the PyCon PyLadies auction in 2017As I've written and even testified, we need more auditability, transparency, and security in software governments use in laboratories and field tests. Heck, we need it in software governments use to make decisions more generally -- lotteries for visas, school assignments, parole and prison sentencing, and so on.

So I was delighted to learn of bill Int 1696-2017, currently before New York City's City Council. Summary:

This bill would require agencies that use algorithms or other automated processing methods that target services, impose penalties, or police persons to publish the source code used for such processing. It would also require agencies to accept user-submitted data sets that can be processed by the agencies' algorithms and provide the outputs to the user.

I applaud James Vacca, chair of the council's Committee on Technology, for introducing and sponsoring this bill, and for citing/shouting out to danah boyd, Kate Crawford, and Cathy O'Neil as people whose work has shaped this legislation. The New York Times says: "As a committee chairman, he plans to convene hearings before he leaves office in December." I'm looking forward to attending those hearings.

If you live in New York City, you can contact your councilmember and suggest they cosponsor this bill. If you live elsewhere, consider telling your local elected officials that they oughta introduce legislation like this. When writing or calling, if you're a programmer or other technology expert, say so -- our voice matters.

I have more links in the algorithmictransparency tag on Pinboard.


* Many years ago, Seth Schoen made me an illustration that we still have somewhere. Reconstructed from memory:

[one smiling stick figure, male, near a courthouse] Sum amicus curiae.
[one smiling stick figure, female, near a courthouse] Sum amica curiae.
[many smiling stick figures of various genders, near a courthouse] Sumus amici curiae.
[one stick figure, male, holding a finger to his mouth as though shushing you, near a courthouse] Tacit! Sum inimicus curiae!

Edited Tuesday Sept. 19th to add: The Committee on Technology is holding a public hearing to discuss Int 1696-2017 on Monday, October 16th.

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
The principle at stake in California v. Johnson: due process requires that we be able to examine the evidence used to convict someone. Kern County got a $200,000+ grant and started using closed-source software to perform a new kind of DNA testing for criminal forensics. You are not allowed to audit the software to check for bugs, but the company founder will fly in and testify in court to say he attests to the validity of the results it finds. Uh, no, we need to check, and the ACLU and EFF have just filed amici curiae* briefs before California's Court of Appeal for the Fifth District, saying so.

Man at lectern in front of screen displaying 'Winning Raffle Numbers: 12345 12345 12345 12345', photo (used by permission) by Mike Pirnat at the PyCon PyLadies auction in 2017As I've written and even testified, we need more auditability, transparency, and security in software governments use in laboratories and field tests. Heck, we need it in software governments use to make decisions more generally -- lotteries for visas, school assignments, parole and prison sentencing, and so on.

So I was delighted to learn of bill Int 1696-2017, currently before New York City's City Council. Summary:

This bill would require agencies that use algorithms or other automated processing methods that target services, impose penalties, or police persons to publish the source code used for such processing. It would also require agencies to accept user-submitted data sets that can be processed by the agencies' algorithms and provide the outputs to the user.

I applaud James Vacca, chair of the council's Committee on Technology, for introducing and sponsoring this bill, and for citing/shouting out to danah boyd, Kate Crawford, and Cathy O'Neil as people whose work has shaped this legislation. The New York Times says: "As a committee chairman, he plans to convene hearings before he leaves office in December." I'm looking forward to attending those hearings.

If you live in New York City, you can contact your councilmember and suggest they cosponsor this bill. If you live elsewhere, consider telling your local elected officials that they oughta introduce legislation like this. When writing or calling, if you're a programmer or other technology expert, say so -- our voice matters.

I have more links in the algorithmictransparency tag on Pinboard.


* Many years ago, Seth Schoen made me an illustration that we still have somewhere. Reconstructed from memory:

[one smiling stick figure, male, near a courthouse] Sum amicus curiae.
[one smiling stick figure, female, near a courthouse] Sum amica curiae.
[many smiling stick figures of various genders, near a courthouse] Sumus amici curiae.
[one stick figure, male, holding a finger to his mouth as though shushing you, near a courthouse] Tacit! Sum inimicus curiae!

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
The principle at stake in California v. Johnson: due process requires that we be able to examine the evidence used to convict someone. Kern County got a $200,000+ grant and started using closed-source software to perform a new kind of DNA testing for criminal forensics. You are not allowed to audit the software to check for bugs, but the company founder will fly in and testify in court to say he attests to the validity of the results it finds. Uh, no, we need to check, and the ACLU and EFF have just filed amici curiae* briefs before California's Court of Appeal for the Fifth District, saying so.

Man at lectern in front of screen displaying 'Winning Raffle Numbers: 12345 12345 12345 12345', photo (used by permission) by Mike Pirnat at the PyCon PyLadies auction in 2017As I've written and even testified, we need more auditability, transparency, and security in software governments use in laboratories and field tests. Heck, we need it in software governments use to make decisions more generally -- lotteries for visas, school assignments, parole and prison sentencing, and so on.

So I was delighted to learn of bill Int 1696-2017, currently before New York City's City Council. Summary:

This bill would require agencies that use algorithms or other automated processing methods that target services, impose penalties, or police persons to publish the source code used for such processing. It would also require agencies to accept user-submitted data sets that can be processed by the agencies' algorithms and provide the outputs to the user.

I applaud James Vacca, chair of the council's Committee on Technology, for introducing and sponsoring this bill, and for citing/shouting out to danah boyd, Kate Crawford, and Cathy O'Neil as people whose work has shaped this legislation. The New York Times says: "As a committee chairman, he plans to convene hearings before he leaves office in December." I'm looking forward to attending those hearings.

If you live in New York City, you can contact your councilmember and suggest they cosponsor this bill. If you live elsewhere, consider telling your local elected officials that they oughta introduce legislation like this. When writing or calling, if you're a programmer or other technology expert, say so -- our voice matters.

I have more links in the algorithmictransparency tag on Pinboard.


* Many years ago, Seth Schoen made me an illustration that we still have somewhere. Reconstructed from memory:

[one smiling stick figure, male, near a courthouse] Sum amicus curiae.
[one smiling stick figure, female, near a courthouse] Sum amica curiae.
[many smiling stick figures of various genders, near a courthouse] Sumus amici curiae.
[one stick figure, male, holding a finger to his mouth as though shushing you, near a courthouse] Tacit! Sumus inimicus curiae!

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
The principle at stake in California v. Johnson: due process requires that we be able to examine the evidence used to convict someone. Kern County got a $200,000+ grant and started using closed-source software to perform a new kind of DNA testing for criminal forensics. You are not allowed to audit the software to check for bugs, but the company founder will fly in and testify in court to say he attests to the validity of the results it finds. Uh, no, we need to check, and the ACLU and EFF have just filed amici curiae* briefs saying so.

Man at lectern in front of screen displaying 'Winning Raffle Numbers: 12345 12345 12345 12345', photo (used by permission) by Mike Pirnat at the PyCon PyLadies auction in 2017As I've written and even testified, we need more auditability, transparency, and security in software governments use in laboratories and field tests. Heck, we need it in software governments use to make decisions more generally -- lotteries for visas, school assignments, parole and prison sentencing, and so on.

So I was delighted to learn of bill Int 1696-2017, currently before New York City's City Council. Summary:

This bill would require agencies that use algorithms or other automated processing methods that target services, impose penalties, or police persons to publish the source code used for such processing. It would also require agencies to accept user-submitted data sets that can be processed by the agencies' algorithms and provide the outputs to the user.

I applaud James Vacca, chair of the council's Committee on Technology, for introducing and sponsoring this bill, and for citing/shouting out to danah boyd, Kate Crawford, and Cathy O'Neil as people whose work has shaped this legislation. The New York Times says: "As a committee chairman, he plans to convene hearings before he leaves office in December." I'm looking forward to attending those hearings.

If you live in New York City, you can contact your councilmember and suggest they cosponsor this bill. If you live elsewhere, consider telling your local elected officials that they oughta introduce legislation like this. When writing or calling, if you're a programmer or other technology expert, say so -- our voice matters.

I have more links in the algorithmictransparency tag on Pinboard.


* Many years ago, Seth Schoen made me an illustration that we still have somewhere. Reconstructed from memory:

[one smiling stick figure, male, near a courthouse] Sum amicus curiae.
[one smiling stick figure, female, near a courthouse] Sum amica curiae.
[many smiling stick figures of various genders, near a courthouse] Sumus amici curiae.
[one stick figure, male, holding a finger to his mouth as though shushing you, near a courthouse] Tacit! Sumus inimicus curiae!

[syndicated profile] sumana_feed
I was talking with a fellow consultant about what to do if you have a gig getting you down. Especially when you realize that the client isn't being helpful, and there's a bunch of learning curves that are exhausting you, and you still have several weeks to go.

In my master's in tech management coursework, I learned the lens that thriving is a function of a person times their environment. I think those of us who are used to trying harder, overcoming obstacles, etc. can be -- kind of out of self-protective instinct -- bad at noticing "this environment is so crappy it makes it systematically hard for me to achieve and thrive". Especially with short-term projects. At first, things like "I feel tired" or "ugh, new thing, I don't want to learn this and be bad at it (at first)" and "I'm worried that person doesn't like me" or "they missed the email/meeting/call and now it's harder to execute the plan" are identical to problems that we are reasonably sure we can overcome. Maybe we notice patterns about what's not working but think: I can take initiative to solve this, myself, or with my few allies.

Several papercraft pieces I made out of gold-colored wrapping paper, some alike and some differentThe data points accumulate and we chat with other people and, in the process, learn more data points and shape our data points into narratives and thus discover: this is a bad environment, structurally. But by the time we really figure out the effect a short-term project is having on us, it's supposedly the home stretch.

I'm looking back at gigs that I found draining, where, eventually, I had this realization, although I have never quite framed it this way before now. On some level I realized that I could not succeed by my own standard in these projects/workplaces, because there was so much arrayed against me (e.g., turf war, a generally low level of skill in modern engineering practices, lack of mission coherence, low urgency among stakeholders) that I could not do the things that it is kind of a basic expression of my professional self/competence to do.*

So I had to change what it was I aimed to achieve. For example, I've had a gig where I was running my head into the wall constantly trying to bring better practices to a project. I finally talked with an old hand at the organization and learned the institutional reasons this was practically impossible, why I would not be able to overcome the tectonic forces at play and get the deeper conflicts to resolve any faster. So we changed what I was trying to do. Running a daily standup meeting, by itself, is a thing I can do to bring value. I changed my expectations, and made mental notes about the pain points and the patterns, because I could not fix them right away, but I can use those experiences to give better advice to other people later.

An editor recently told me that, in growing as an editor, he'd needed to cultivate his sense of boredom. He needed to listen to that voice inside him that said this is boring me -- and isn't that funny? Parents and teachers tell us not to complain about being bored -- "only boring people are bored", or -- attributed to Sydney Wood -- An educated man is one who can entertain a new idea, another person, or himself. But pain is a signal, boredom is a signal, aversion and exhaustion are signals. Thriving is a function of a person times their environment.

Also, the other day I read "Living Fiction, Storybook Lives" (which has spoilers for Nicola Griffith's excellent novel Slow River).

How come I spent many years living a rather squalid existence... yet managed to find my way out, to the quite staid and respectable life I have now, when others in the same situation never escaped? In the course of writing the book, I found that the answer to my question was that the question itself was not valid: people are never in the same situation.

It takes substantial introspection and comparison to figure out: what kind of situation am I in, both externally and internally? Is it one where I will be able to move the needle? It gets easier over time, I think, and easier if I take vacations so I can have a fresh perspective when I come back, share my stories with others and listen to their stories, and practice mindfulness meditation so I am better at noticing things (including my own reactions). Maybe "wisdom" is what feels like the ability to X-ray a messy blobby thing and see the structures inside, see the joints that can bend and the bones that can't. In some ways, my own motivation and mindfulness are like that for me -- I need to recognize the full truth of the situation I'm in, internally and externally, to see what needs changing, to see how I might act.

The thing that gets me down most, on exhausting projects, is the meta-fear that nothing will improve, that I am stuck. When I realize that, I try to attend to that feeling of stuckness. Sometimes the answer is in the problem.


* As Alexandra Erin discusses, regarding her political commentary via Twitter threads: "I do the work I do on here because I feel called to it. For the non-religious, I mean: I have a knack for it and I find meaning in it."

[syndicated profile] lewis_and_quark_feed

Neural networks are a type of machine learning program that learns from examples they’re given, rather than relying on a human programmer to invent rules.

In an earlier experiment, I trained a neural network to write new names for Dungeons and Dragons spells based on a list of 365 examples. That’s a really small dataset for a neural network to work with, and I ended up struggling to find training parameters that would strike a balance between word-for-word mimicry of the original list of spells, versus a series of completely made-up words. By filtering extensively through the nonsense, I was able to come up with a short list of interesting new spells. (My favorites were Barking Sphere and Gland Growth).

However, blog reader Jo Scott was kind enough to collect the entire 4th edition list of spells - more than 1,300 spells in all. She explained that she’s playing a character who’s an artificer trying to create an autonomous spellcasting golem - essentially, a magical AI - and she’d like to have more weird spells for the golem to invent. (Her Dungeon Master okayed this and thus only has herself to blame when she has to deal with some of the spells listed below.)

Using the new dataset I was able to train a much better-performing neural network. It simply had many more examples of spells to work with; that is, more examples of the words and letter combinations that appear in D&D spells, and thus was able to deduce better rules about how to create them.

For comparison, here’s what the neural network trained on the original spell dataset was producing after it had looked through the spell list 30 times. This is raw, unfiltered output from the neural network.

Original dataset

Wome on frr
Eser Wold
Sereisk
Lelent Warder
Cleater Secfen
Spiritul Plage
Arawen
Speak with Alanc
Plonting Cloud
Aurars
Ensntalice
Stige Dling
Comenthon of Prost
Monsen
Scink
Warrifg
Resser RestractiGn
Cloud
Sreeat
Glasp
Blenss
Bline Ons
Dood to Stone

Aside from a couple of spells that just might work, most of the list is magicky-sounding nonsense, sometimes barely pronounceable.

By contrast, this is what the neural network was producing after it had been trained on the dataset that included all the 4th edition spells:

Full dataset

Curse Word
Crackling claus
Tidal treket
Swirk with
Wall of Storm
Acter Lor distertion
Glib ton
Grasping Mane
Tweel Strike
Revitalizing Strike
Truneming fortune
Fall of the Wild
Tunesrite
Trickstrak empester
Phantasmal assault
Tidalt Atight
Hadabol
Leging Blade
Bund Wind
Dance of Sack
and Prime
Poxsare
Dumination
Mass Cure Fortion

They’re not ALL winners, but the difference is dramatic. This is why, although I can often have fun with small datasets, the really large ones (100,000+ metal bands, or 19,000 IPA beers) tend to produce the most consistently convincing results.

Even this more-sophisticated neural network is not without some oddities. For example, you’ll notice in the results below that it seems to have a particular fondness for bears. And it has invented the name “Dave” which is now, for some reason, its favorite.

I leave you with a selection of Dungeons and Dragons spells generated by the latest neural network.

Mister of Light
Storm of the gifling
Song of goom
Forceful Boor
Chorus of the dave
Maine storm
Frames of Death
Song of the doom goom
Death’s Death’s Proud Bear
Wall of Distraction
Date wards
Plant of Peace
Shield of Farts
Song of the darn
Ward of Snade the Pood Beast
Ice shop
Primal Rear
Summon Storm Bear
Divine Boom
Soul of the bill
Charm of the dave
Spirit of the Spirit
Fire shop
Song of blord
Song of distraction
Forceful Force
Spirit Boating
Song of the ball
Hail to the Dave
Crusading Disk
Summon ass
Call to the Daring
Treeking of Star
Grasping Light
Clinging blade
Primal Prayer Bear
War Cape
Find Strike
Song of the Unworthy
Gate Sail
Icon of Thorns
Song of the door
Star warper
Stone of Death
Chilled arrow
Storm of the dave
Fark Mate
Charm of the cods
Death of the Sun
Greater flick
Curse Clam
Claming Blow
Cursing wink
Conjure Mare
Remorse?
Conjure Bark
Darkworm Colt
Daving fire
Healing of Bat
Mordenkainen’s lucubrabibiboricic angion

There are more of these because I had way too much fun generating spells, but to include them all here would make this post ludicrously long. As usual, you can get the extended list by entering your email at this link (even if you’re already on my mailing list). Just for fun, the extended list isn’t QUITE as filtered to remove all the sweary words.

Also, I thought it would be fun to generate D&D character names for a future project. If you go to this form (no email required), you can enter your character’s name, race, and class. Once I have enough of these, I’ll give them to the neural network and see what happens. Edit: wow, over 3500 responses so far! (Check them out at this link) Keep them coming!

NEW POLL! Neural networks want to hear your character’s backstory! Submit as many as you like. https://goo.gl/forms/ReInNw0Tz0mwzTLO2

Profile

firecat: red panda looking happy (Default)
firecat (attention machine in need of calibration)

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213 141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 23 Sep 2017 02:39 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios