After thinking about this a bit more, this says something about Voldemort's perfect occlumancy in that while he could convincingly become a lot of different characters, there were still parts of his underlying person (CEV?) that genuinely were so unlike other people he couldn't easily fake not having them.
(Which I guess is semi-confirmed in-story in that it says occlumancy and veritaserum enters the mind through specific surfaces that can be defended, but powerful methods like unbreakable vows/parseltongue/the mirror can't be blocked with it)
Iirc when they discover filch is a squib Ron explicitly says this is what a squib is ("like muggle born wizards, but in reverse and much rarer").
1Another nitpick, but footnote 14 is wrong: Tonks was a metamorphmagus, not using polyjuice.
Actually now I want to write a spin off short story about this. It always bothered me that hpmor Dumbledore didn't really get any onscreen moments of awesome, I want to write a story set early in the Voldemort war where, for the first time, a relatively young inexperienced Voldemort has someone pull a successful plot against him by being proactive and he barely escapes (and rewrites some of his list with lessons).
Minor comment but Quirrel doesn't have a time turner; he just figured out a way to hack the protective shell around Harry's (which, given it was made to protect against interference by an eleven year old, it's pretty reasonable he can do).
My open question is: how did Dumbledore know Voldemort was Tom Riddle? When he set himself up as dark Lord he presumably didn't intend to leave a trace (he didn't with his David Monroe persona). Did Dumbledore discover it in some plot? Did he conclude it because Voldemort openly use parseltongue somewhere? Was it in the prophecies?
This assumes speed limits were correctly calibrated at some point. I think the actual cost of road deaths (which are arguably the top single cause of QALY loss even at current historically low rates) is high enough that I suspect it was originally set way too high and is still unreasonably high given the costs.
I think this describes how Eliezer's grudge against academia has set back AI alignment (even the parts that aren't related to his organization, since his cultural influence has made this a wider norm).
Partly street design to reduce speeding, partly encouraging other mode shares over private cars (see e.g. here https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/how-helsinki-and-oslo-cut-pedestrian-deaths-to-zero )
(Disclaimer: I'm ideological about disliking cars, which makes me less objective than I'd usually prefer to be on LW)
Translating this to the mental script that works for me:
If I picture myself in the role of the astronauts on the Columbia as it was falling apart, or a football team in the last few minutes of a game where they're twenty points behind, I know the script calls for just keeping up your best effort (as you know it) until after the shuttle explodes or the buzzer sounds. So I can just do that.
Why is there an alternative script that calls to go insane? I think because there's a version that equates that with a heroic effort, that thinks that if I dramatize and just try harder (as shown by visible effort signalling), that equates with making a true desperate effort that might actually work in a way that just calmly doing my best to the end won't. But since I know that script is wrong, I can just not play it.
(Why does that script exist? I think for signalling reasons - going insane over something is a good way to shallowly signal I think it's significant. But it's not a good way to solve the underlying problem when it's the underlying problem that needs solving, so I just choose not to do it when that's the case.
A similar example: If I imagine seeing a news article about a child going missing, it's easy for me to picture myself remarking "oh that's terrible, I'm crying just imagining the parents". If I imagine a child of mine or of a close friend going missing, my mental script's next step is "okay track down where he was, call the police, think of more action steps". Because there I care more about finding the child than about signalling that I care about finding the child).