So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question? Certainly they have long since - solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma - solved life and mobility throughout their universe - lost and forgotten their prehistory - etc They could sim anything they want. So why sim us? Because something happened to them, something very big, something serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately* trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of making the sim...
Too cerebral. It's interesting to me that the simulation hypothesis has so much in common with Buddhist philosophy. In fact, Buddhism already answers this sort of thing. Alan Watts, as a Zen Buddhist, presented the view that life is essentially a game played out at the cosmic level. All life is essentially the ultimate source of consciousness, God, the Atman.. whatever you want to call it. God desired to experience life as Alan Watts, and Richard Nixon, and dogs, and lions and gazelle in order to expand its experience, its awareness, of itself. Put another way, intelligent life is the part of the universe that endeavors to understand itself. We're the Universe's subconscious. We are the dreams of the ultimate mind. So, the equivalent Buddhist question would be - why would an incredibly advanced mind dream of us? Well, the answer to that is why do you dream the things you dream? It's a statement of desire, or of dread - because fundamentally life is a bit boring, and its much better if you're banging supermodels or running from zombies. So those things come up in dreams. Likewise, its incredibly boring being God. Imagine it. Never being surprised, needing nothing, all goals can be met without the slightest effort, and so on. It would be an incredible drag. Casting this notion into the framework of a simulation, one might say that this advanced civilization is simply bored. Imagine Star-Trek type technology, where you just hit a button and get a perfect steak. The SAME steak, every time. There is no need to cook, because you'll never beat the machine, and yet in the end.. it all ends up tasting plastic. Even with our meager technology, a great many people enjoy "roughing it" in the woods, camping and going low-tech. They enjoy getting away from TVs and phones and nonsense, and getting back to a more basic existence. No need for existential crisis. Just a desire for life to be flavorful.
So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
Certainly they have long since - solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma - solved life and mobility throughout their universe - lost and forgotten their prehistory - etc
They could sim anything they want. So why sim us?
Because something happened to them, something very big, something serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately* trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of making the sim...
Brings a smile, xorcist :) "The great unknowable" experiencing itself, through itself, by imposing arbitrary restrictions upon spliters of itself." Which conception gives rise to a fundamental existential question: "To what extent am I puppeteered/ pre-ordained, and to what extent (if at all) am I able to exercise 'free will'?" On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 03:02:34AM -0000, xorcist@sigaint.org wrote:
Too cerebral.
It's interesting to me that the simulation hypothesis has so much in common with Buddhist philosophy. In fact, Buddhism already answers this sort of thing.
Alan Watts, as a Zen Buddhist, presented the view that life is essentially a game played out at the cosmic level. All life is essentially the ultimate source of consciousness, God, the Atman.. whatever you want to call it. God desired to experience life as Alan Watts, and Richard Nixon, and dogs, and lions and gazelle in order to expand its experience, its awareness, of itself.
Put another way, intelligent life is the part of the universe that endeavors to understand itself. We're the Universe's subconscious. We are the dreams of the ultimate mind.
So, the equivalent Buddhist question would be - why would an incredibly advanced mind dream of us? Well, the answer to that is why do you dream the things you dream? It's a statement of desire, or of dread - because fundamentally life is a bit boring, and its much better if you're banging supermodels or running from zombies. So those things come up in dreams. Likewise, its incredibly boring being God. Imagine it. Never being surprised, needing nothing, all goals can be met without the slightest effort, and so on. It would be an incredible drag.
Casting this notion into the framework of a simulation, one might say that this advanced civilization is simply bored. Imagine Star-Trek type technology, where you just hit a button and get a perfect steak. The SAME steak, every time. There is no need to cook, because you'll never beat the machine, and yet in the end.. it all ends up tasting plastic.
Even with our meager technology, a great many people enjoy "roughing it" in the woods, camping and going low-tech. They enjoy getting away from TVs and phones and nonsense, and getting back to a more basic existence.
No need for existential crisis. Just a desire for life to be flavorful.
So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
Certainly they have long since - solved biology, live forever, down/up load their brains against trauma - solved life and mobility throughout their universe - lost and forgotten their prehistory - etc
They could sim anything they want. So why sim us?
Because something happened to them, something very big, something serious and existentially threatening. And now they're *desperately* trying to learn about death, life, humanity, the individual... something they lost but is still encoded in them just enough to let them think of making the sim...
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:09:30PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
I think the problem is open, unless the simulators answer it. The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before the big bang?". Also, there is no sound axiomatic system for physics and other empirical stuff, it changes often on large scale.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before the big bang?".
It's turtles all the way down.... Actually, I like to think that the universe is infinite and forever, except current models predict heat death once entropy is reached in some enormous amount of time... But who fucking knows, really? John - -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFBBAEBCgArJBxrZXliYXNlLmlvL25peGVuIDxuaXhlbkBrZXliYXNlLmlvPgUC V+GO+QAKCRDjJCC+1Hp4x9+rCADEP4G7gKjtKDUwk9AwjpWiawl9DTqxM7LXvRNg VVm0w1eJ6a5rb+JEqJO3j/BvnJRtehUfoAAnO2Ir+oF4HZ3IzU2VCcEbpQ85PE69 3RKSKKrpfl4L0ejMY0hcnLPZy1LO8nfa7kmZTDcfPf4vVsGRknDh7CEnbJDwDc5u nljdgCYabyU2sD82JkbeKWtEV6lx/mEOQIf1ETce1a8WtkFiNnXOvAIh+0Bn+z9S qxtt/8fLDB88anEXphIRD4KaxfcDFX6W0vKpss6bu+NDLnxC8lKfU06N4Nce2wJs JRcLdAgMmyjVZ1tKYQCrO0aVRYVUSgFIyM7Am5+a5ZD8pgdc =l6uD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
It's turtles all the way down.... Actually, I like to think that the universe is infinite and forever, except current models predict heat death once entropy is reached in some enormous amount of time...
But who fucking knows, really?
Truth. I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.. I don't know. It's just difficult for me to swallow, because it has no analog, or precedent. Then again, maybe thats the whole gig. The only truly unique thing in the universe will be its fantastically drawn out, boring death.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, <xorcist@sigaint.org> wrote:
I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.
Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse forces, is the required result. It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, <xorcist@sigaint.org> wrote:
I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.
Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse forces, is the required result.
It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote:
btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.
There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski. Death by relativistic bombardment. https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killi...
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, <xorcist@sigaint.org> wrote:
I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.
Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse forces, is the required result.
It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
On Sep 20, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote: btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.
There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski. Death by relativistic bombardment.
I was trying to get a copy of this book a while back but it's out of print and used prices were high (like $30).... I don't suppose anyone has an ePub they could shoot me? Or is it worth $30 for a 1995 paperback, maybe so... BTW Mirmir I've read and enjoyed Accelerando and Diaspora... I'll have to check out the Jean le Flambeur stuff.... John
https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killi...
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, <xorcist@sigaint.org> wrote: I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.
Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse forces, is the required result.
It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
On 09/21/2016 04:15 AM, John Newman wrote:
On Sep 20, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 09/20/2016 09:22 PM, Tom wrote: btw, I'd suggest reading Phil Plaits 'Death from the Skies!'. In this book he examines a couple of scenarios how the universe might end (among a couple other ways how we could die). Very fun read.
There's The Killing Star by Charles R. Pellegrino and George Zebrowski. Death by relativistic bombardment.
I was trying to get a copy of this book a while back but it's out of print and used prices were high (like $30).... I don't suppose anyone has an ePub they could shoot me? Or is it worth $30 for a 1995 paperback, maybe so...
I just have old hard copy. Maybe you can get it through a library. Or find a torrent, maybe.
BTW Mirmir I've read and enjoyed Accelerando and Diaspora... I'll have to check out the Jean le Flambeur stuff....
'Quantum Thief' opens with prisoner's dilemma selection. Make numerous digital copies, select for copies that cooperate, repeat. "As always, before the warmind and I shoot each other, I try to make smalltalk."
John
https://www.reddit.com/r/Frisson/comments/1j08oq/text_excerpt_from_the_killi...
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 06:07:56PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 3:48 PM, <xorcist@sigaint.org> wrote: I find it difficult to believe in the heat death of the universe. The Big Crunch makes sense to me. The universe expands for a time, and collapses. Like breathing. But continual expansion with the universe turning into some cold, undefinable soup.
Current model really fucking cold heat death will occur. Yet if gravity is true, yes, no matter infintismal amount, you cannot blow past to escape it. Thus collapse, or at least steady state in case of repulse forces, is the required result.
It is sad that not even sci fi knows how to harvest from forcibly diminishing Kelvin, as to revert requires similar energy. But we will have fun till then, provided we get beyond Sol or the galaxy.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:40:06AM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
Maybe you can get it through a library.
Interlibrary loan, works wonders.
Openlibrary took me to worldcat which did track the book down to a library thats about 15 miles from me. Which isn't too bad, maybe I can get my local library to get it yanked. Or metro my lazy ass down there. thanks! John
On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:34 AM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote: 'Quantum Thief' opens with prisoner's dilemma selection. Make numerous digital copies, select for copies that cooperate, repeat.
"As always, before the warmind and I shoot each other, I try to make smalltalk."
I just grabbed a torrent of the trilogy (waiting on the paperbacks I ordered). Phoa! Cool fucking book, Im only about 50 pages into the Quantum Thief but the world building is fucking great.... I loved when Jean said he needed "root of this body!" to stop their escape ship getting destroyed. Seems like will be great read. thx ;) John
On 09/22/2016 06:23 AM, John Newman wrote:
On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:34 AM, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote: 'Quantum Thief' opens with prisoner's dilemma selection. Make numerous digital copies, select for copies that cooperate, repeat.
"As always, before the warmind and I shoot each other, I try to make smalltalk."
I just grabbed a torrent of the trilogy (waiting on the paperbacks I ordered). Phoa! Cool fucking book, Im only about 50 pages into the Quantum Thief but the world building is fucking great.... I loved when Jean said he needed "root of this body!" to stop their escape ship getting destroyed.
Well, they're under attack by Archon-rootkit nanomissiles! "I am root, and the body is a world-tree, an Yggdrasil. There are diamond machines in its bones, proteonomic tech in its cells. And the brain, a true Sobornost raion-scale brain, able to run whole worlds." He throws many new words at readers, defined only in context. But they all make sense, if you've read Stephenson, Stross, etc. Raions are planet-scale computer clusters that Sobornost have created for running their sims.
Seems like will be great read.
thx ;)
John
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before the big bang?".
It's turtles all the way down.... Actually, I like to think that the universe is infinite and forever, except current models predict heat death once entropy is reached in some enormous amount of time...
But who fucking knows, really?
Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning there was nothing, and it exploded"? As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often. For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian phenomenon Baba Vanga (Баба Ванга), who allegedly could predict future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people they will die soon. I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care. Call me a crazy nut for the above. The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On September 18, 2016 8:36:52 AM EDT, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
The main problem is this scales upwards till infinity via arguments of the form "who simulates the simulator?" and "who made what was before the big bang?".
It's turtles all the way down.... Actually, I like to think that the universe is infinite and forever, except current models predict heat death once entropy is reached in some enormous amount of time...
But who fucking knows, really?
Didn't Terry Pratchett claim in Disc World that the world is run on top of giant turtle? And depicted the big bang as "In the beginning there was nothing, and it exploded"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
As for the "standard model" of "real reality", it changes often.
For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian phenomenon Baba Vanga (???????? ??????????), who allegedly could predict future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people they will die soon. I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.
Call me a crazy nut for the above.
The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga
Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but, really, who fucking knows.... There is no doubt the "standard model" changes, but I like to think these "advances" are based on slightly harder science than Baba Vanga :P John
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/21/2016 10:36 AM, John Newman wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:04:25PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:33:24PM -0400, John wrote:
For me a plausible counter example appears a late Bulgarian phenomenon Baba Vanga (???????? ??????????), who allegedly could predict future with high accuracy and see in the past. She survived practicing in times of advanced socialism, not telling ill people they will die soon. I can't figure out how this doesn't break causality, neither care.
Call me a crazy nut for the above.
The wikipedia page about her, likely with a lot of disinformation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga
Hmm... I am pretty (extremely) cynical about such things, but, really, who fucking knows.... There is no doubt the "standard model" changes, but I like to think these "advances" are based on slightly harder science than Baba Vanga :P
I tell people that anyone who has ever kept a dream journal for a substantial length of time will learn that time is not what we think it is. In my case, I was rather shocked to find descriptions of several people I had not /yet/ met in real life, and how we would interact some months later. On another occasion, I found a detailed description of events - the date confirmed as correct per the a note that the moon was full - that one week later neither I nor anyone else involved remembered, in a regular journal. Mind = blown. None of this can or should persuade anyone but me that something damned strange is going on with this "reality" thing. But I was and remain so persuaded. Now the question is, what does it mean and what can I do with/to/about it? So far the only answer I get is "just be aware that you don't know what you think you know about how reality works." And worse - maybe Phil Dick was right. :o/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4txcAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqMDAH/jxReYDZO5JssTmINwrcnhUE JXfpJ7lBcn2wVP8Lz5i3LA2QS6R07uD/7oDvCWTZDfePc8qyOuYuvUgOsaVoXMEK RUJsayFbVCyzQG7dS0kdalTlinfo5fxZp4ZS0X18je+Rrq/YPQ/M1zANDkqg8UV9 9vWZzCzEWnIEQjcH94yx+fYgeBdzddialfAxaxWovM0sKh7vXUmw/eFpNrSBKaIg ZtA5231xvAowc2gi0D9goF4hvbBL6mAk6lObumSSpjA8OouIsnzYT4v2yXIQWYdj 2R6LjeuVZ5WceD7HuhmE//rcG7nBrzbyem+twZY4F3rJvX2HUo0xV54HZjfRZ/o= =kx2c -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 03:15:40PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
None of this can or should persuade anyone but me that something damned strange is going on with this "reality" thing. But I was and remain so persuaded. Now the question is, what does it mean and what can I do with/to/about it? So far the only answer I get is "just be aware that you don't know what you think you know about how reality works." And worse - maybe Phil Dick was right.
Apologies for the offtopic noise, but this thread remotely reminds me of the old joke: Two unborn twins talk just before Birth: -- Is there life after Birth? -- Very unlikely. Nobody ever came back.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/17/2016 10:09 PM, grarpamp wrote:
So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
Why have I spent an ungodly number of hours watching Mandelbrot plots render, tweaking the scale and XY coordinates, iteration depth, coloring rules, etc? Can a mandelbug imagine a thing made of meat examining it like a stained specimen on a microscope slide, or why it would want to do that? Same question IMO. Years ago I was a compulsive meditator. One time I got all the way outside the Universe and the first thing I noticed was a dingy brass plaque riveted to the bottom of it that said "For Amusement Purposes Only." Some old Taoist sage or other supposedly dreamed that he was a butterfly. Then a butterfly dreamed that he was some old Taoist sage or other. Some hundreds of years later a melancholic drug addict asked, "Is all that we see or seem but a dream within a dream?" Then some propagandists made a music video about a music video about a dream within a dream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXZyTx4TzLg :o) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX4ekdAAoJEECU6c5XzmuquN4H/3a7pwx2hxzKPV65OXhx1YCK s6MTx8zelY3by2nxwHMioF6sR86JiujNI3UsO4nk36XuAyJne6CtURXkHNtitS5F HknlWk23CiX4SOT+3PNyXfyQrZqCRsBmtYSIwEt4zr1Tmk7wGaDNYBW3p84O5V7m uu3KBEW67YfZd9G7cEjHOHRtp9pIcf4UIrJN3eOC+6IBxVFXH0HpzGLSMsO04Ci7 6BZCAw2SeMjvWuyqKP8TUNPL98gnkwt2O/Kb/oWSajIVsb2N3ftnP9ijvfRqIJ2S qOUlDXB9V8uXz1Oax+kYkDPxjZYNKYrzF9broYHCEdUDxT27+DXOGe9gDfOuVKc= =l6rr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 09/17/2016 08:09 PM, grarpamp wrote:
So many people have proposed we're simulated... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
Now why would such an extremely advanced civilization / collective want to simulate us? Is this an unanswered question?
Maybe they're so advanced that there's no way to express their reasons (or whatever) in ways we could comprehend ;) But, stuff comes to mind: Diaspora by Greg Egan [1998] http://www.gregegan.net/DIASPORA/DIASPORA.html Accelerando, by Charles Stross [2005] http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/accelerando/accelerando-... Jean le Flambeur trilogy, by Hannu Rajaniemi [2010-2014] https://www.goodreads.com/series/57134-jean-le-flambeur
participants (9)
-
Georgi Guninski -
grarpamp -
John -
John Newman
-
Mirimir -
Steve Kinney -
Tom -
xorcist＠sigaint.org -
Zenaan Harkness