📝 - Virus Eradication - Planning Thread

[Selfie-Gek]

First, that does nothing to alleviate the pain of this system.

Second, what if in doing so, we also clone the virus? Then we have two suffering Systems.

[toddumptious]

Thats the thing, this auto immune response is part of systems core, we clone system, we also clone this. It goes where system goes. We can’t remove or destroy it, we just need to make it think it has completed its prime directive, and then it will stop.

[Turbulentflow]

I think the dominoes image may. Have been a subtle hint we are running out of time. The first piece has already fallen and the rest is just a matter of time.

[Selfie-Gek]

@Rinha had brought it to my attention earlier that Feb 1st, Feb 8th and Feb 13th are future seed dates. Do we want to sacrifice these seed dates to cram as many memories into February as possible, or line up Feb 2nd-4th and Feb 6th-7th with our top 5 candidates?

[Vau1t]

Alright, since it seems like we’re coming down to the wire I’m going to propose two plans and we should select the most appropriate based on the response @toddumptious receives from Archie in the morning:

1. If the duplicated/trap date must be directly on a seed date:
   • duplicate our most likely memory on the next target date and place a no/value bloc on the date prior; ensure both dates are surround on either side with null dates to minimize losses
2. If the duplicated/trap date can be anywhere:
   • duplicate our top 5 most likely memories onto the next target date and its adjacent dates and place a no/value 3 days prior to and 3 days after the target date; surround are new dates with null dates

Both options give us a chance to try our strategy without an excessive loss of memory blocs while preserving as many preservations as we can. The added no/value dates allow us to observe whether or plan has worked: if the no/value bloc is consumed, our plan has failed and we must rethink our approach; if it is not consumed the virus has stopped its progression.

Discussion of most likely memories should take place in 📝 - Virus Eradication - Target Memory Accumulation and the top 1 or 5 memories will be slected there.

[Selfie-Gek]

We can have Archie open up dupes in empty seed dates in 2017, so that we only need to use limited preservations to bounce it back into our chosen battlefield. It won’t be able to spread past the empty dates.

I do think our best candidate should be on the seed dates, with other likely contenders surrounding.

[Item-Stealer]

i mean i dont see why it has to be on the seed date. the pattern just seems to be how the virus is searching and then deleting the mem blocks it’s after, right? maybe im getting smth wrong

[vector_cmdr]

We can’t even reach consensus on how to test the mechanism, let alone the date to attempt it with.
We’ve been circling around it for ~24 hours now. We need to give it some more serious thought.

[Vau1t]

Edited to reflect this. I missed a critical part of the propagation process that ends up saving us resources in the end.

[Selfie-Gek]

I think, as a form of desperation, it makes sense to combine both plans and order our candidates from most likely to least likely.

Most likely goes on seed date Feb 4th.

Second most likely goes on seed date Feb 6th.

Next two go on adjacent dates Feb 2nd and 3rd. There is still a chance it will consume those and be satiated and we won’t need to use more preserve dates.

Feb 7th should likely be “no/value” so we can watch and see if it stops with Feb 6th.

[toddumptious]

@Vau1t

based on the response @toddumptious receives from Archie in the morning

That’s even if I get a response

We have two trains of thought, it needs to be on a seed, or it doesn’t need to be on a seed.

We know enough about its behaviour and it’s next jumping points to plan/stack our dupes up for both variants of thought. We also seem to have a few memories now that have been brought up several times as high candidates to start stacking our dupes.

We can design two plans at this stage. One where it doesn’t matter if the memory is met on a landing point (a seed point), or a spread point. And the other where the desired dupe can only be eaten on a landing/seed point.

If I don’t get clarification in the morning from my email (or anyone else who has also emailed asking the same question) we at least can go with the safest plan and have it ready to fire off with all the dupes where they need to be (the dupe only on seeds plan)

And just for clarity this was the email I sent

[Vau1t]

If the duplicate/trap date needs to be on a seed this is wasteful. And we don’t get relevant information about the surrounding dates so it’s a wash anyway.

Without further information, the safest plan is to only test one memory on the seed date.

[Selfie-Gek]

The seed date idea seems to be more speculative. We’ll know if an adjacent slot works if it stops.

The alternative—only using the seed dates—seems more wasteful of preserved dates which is a known limited resource, as it pushes the fight further and further along its path.

We have a lot of empty space to work with in 2017. I think we should use it.

[Vau1t]

Updated my plan to include no/value blocs to give us a way to identify if our plan has succeeded.

(Thanks @vector_cmdr for pointing out an obvious flaw in my plan )

[Vau1t]

I think this is a good plan of action. I will likely not be awake when/if you get a response before the virus jumps so consider this my vote for whatever you determine to be correct based on the response.

[toddumptious]

The problem I have with the seed only theory is, this would imply the memory it is looking for, only exists on one of its planned jumping points. Which would narrow down what its after considerably, and make it very easy for us to figure out which memory to dupe as it reduces the candidacy pool considerably.

I personally think it matters not to the sub program wether its on a seed point or a spread point, it just wants to find what its looking for so it can clock off and go home.

It would be pretty weird of it to find its target on a spread and continue to jump around because it didn’t find it on a seed. That would be one incredibly picky autoimmune response.

[vector_cmdr]

Maybe I have the wrong end of the stick, but the seed only idea isn’t referring to it being found there - but setup there (per @the_architect initial email sets). [just clarifying]

[Vau1t]

For further clarification, and in the spirit of creating a concrete plan:

Option 1 (landing on a seed date matters):

• duplicate top memory from the other thread onto February 4, 2017
• create a new no/value date on February 3, 2017
• preserve August 24, 2016 to paralyze the virus again if the plan fails

Option 2 (landing on a seed does not matter):

• duplicate top memory from the other thread onto February 4, 2017
• duplicate the next four likely memories onto February 2, 3, 5, 6
• create a new no/value date on February 1, 2017, preserve August 24, 2016 to paralyze the virus again if the plan fails

[Selfie-Gek]

Feb 6th is the next target seed date after Aug 24th.

For Option 2, Feb 5th should stay empty so that it doesn’t consume the second seed date prematurely.

Though, now that I think of it, maybe that doesn’t even matter?

The no/value date should be Feb 7th, however, as Feb 1st is a later seed date.

[fort_wort_wort]

this does sound good. and we have to take some risk to get more info.