×
all 49 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]ToaKrakahttps://i.imgur.com/OQGHleQ.png 56 points57 points  (24 children)

See this essay that details how Light completely squandered his initial advantage of anonymity.

tl;dr:

Death Note is almost a thought-experiment—given the perfect murder weapon, how can you screw up anyway?

Mistake 1: Light’s fundamental mistake is to kill in ways unrelated to his goal. Killing through heart attacks does not just make him visible early on, but the deaths reveals that his assassination method is supernaturally precise. L has been tipped off that Kira exists. Whatever the bogus justification may be, this is a major victory for his opponents. (To deter criminals and villains, it is not necessary for there to be a globally-known single supernatural killer, when it would be equally effective to arrange for all the killings to be done naturalistically by third parties/police/judiciary or used indirectly to crack cases.)

Mistake 2: Worse, the deaths are non-random in other ways—they tend to occur at particular times! Just the scheduling of deaths cost Light 6 bits of anonymity!

Mistake 3: Light’s third mistake was reacting to the provocation of Lind L. Tailor. L narrowed his target down to 1/3 the original Japanese population, for a gain of ~1.6 bits.

Mistake 4: Light’s fourth mistake was to use confidential police information stolen using his policeman father’s credentials. This mistake was the largest in bits lost. This mistake cost him 11 bits of anonymity; in other words, this mistake cost him twice what his scheduling cost him and almost 8 times the murder of Tailor!

Mistake 5: If we assume Penbar was tasked 200 leads out of the 10,000, then murdering him and the fiancee dropped Light just 6 bits or a little over half the fourth mistake and comparable to the original scheduling mistake.

Endgame: At this point in the plot, L resorts to direct measures and enters Light’s life directly, enrolling at the university. From this point on, Light is screwed as he is now playing a deadly game of Mafia with L & the investigative team. He frittered away >25 bits of anonymity and then L intuited the rest and suspected him all along.

[–]wren42 16 points17 points  (5 children)

yeah, he should not have used heart attacks for the bulk of his killings. First step should have been to use the deathnote to acquire more traditional forms of power - money, political influence (possibly through proxies to avoid suspicion.) Market manipulation is a simple anonymous way to get started. (plane crash kills CEO of competitor to company you've invested in)

Quietly weeding out corrupt and immoral politicians and world leaders is a next logical step. You can do a lot more long term good reforming the system than just instilling general fear of punishment.

I'd actually like to read (maybe write) a rational fic with an honestly intelligent and utilitarian Light (not egocentric as depicted.) I know there are a few deathnote ratfics out there but haven't seen one that really captured me.

[–]Grand_Strategy 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Simple things like writing message in Death Note

"John Bloggs, CEO of company X, admits all his wrong doing, hands all the money back to people he owns it to and list all other people involved in his affairs. He then hung himself in his apartment".

Would do much more good than any random killing Light did. He could have criminal bosses donate millions to charities before dispatching of them, he could have politicians reveal all the dirty secrets and unravel complex networks of corruption.

[–]ansible 4 points5 points  (3 children)

That's nice and all, but doesn't satisfy Light's goals of becoming a god.

Yes, it would have been better if he had chosen to do all that. But becoming a god in a nominal low-magic universe is not easy, and without precedent.

[–]Grand_Strategy 9 points10 points  (1 child)

But his goal wasn't becoming a god. His goal was ridding the Earth of evil and corruption becoming a god was just a means to achieve this goal.He could achieve much better if he want different way.

[–]kleind305 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That's what he says, yes, but that's not supported in the text. He is lying to himself in that passage.

[–]wren42 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'm positing different goals, an actual utilitarian humanist looking to make a positive impact and improve justice in the world - Lights original stated goals, if not his actual motivation.

[–]ywecurLessWrong (than usual)[S] 8 points9 points  (8 children)

This doesn't mean it isn't rationalist fic though. It's a lot easier to point this out after the fact, I didn't notice much of these mistakes on my first watch.

[–]ToaKrakahttps://i.imgur.com/OQGHleQ.png 34 points35 points  (7 children)

What does the sidebar say?

Characteristics of Rational Fiction:

Nothing happens solely because 'the plot requires it'. If characters do (or don't do) something, there must be a plausible reason.

Any factions are defined and driven into conflict by their beliefs and values, not just by being "good" or "evil".

The characters solve problems through the intelligent application of their knowledge and resources.

The fictional world has consistent rules, and sticks to them.

In Rationalist Fiction: As well as the above,

Rationalist and scientific methods are used to demystify mysterious phenomena.

The story shows rationalist techniques, which can be applied by readers.

The story is like a puzzle; readers can reach the same solution as the characters by using the information provided earlier in the story.

So:
- The story as a whole is rational; and
- L is a rationalist, but Light (unfortunately) is not, in the grand scheme, despite his minor experimentation on the minutiae of the Death Note's rules (IIRC).

[–]I_Hump_Rainbowz 26 points27 points  (1 child)

It is a rationalist fiction that follows the irrational bad guy?

[–]Grand_Strategy 13 points14 points  (4 children)

Nothing happens solely because 'the plot requires it'. If characters do (or don't do) something, there must be a plausible reason.

Could the reason been "He didn't expect there was a super intelligent detective guy who tracks people like him and have never ever prior to Kira existence been revealed"?

rational fiction doesn't mean not making mistakes. It isn't fiction about robots, people can be rational and still make mistakes miscalculate or simply don't have whole picture.

[–]tonytwostep 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Yea, I think u/ToaKraka agreed in his comment that it's Rational Fiction. He's saying it's not Rationalist, because Light, while clever, is clearly is not a rationalist (many of his major decisions, like the one to kill Lind L Taylor, are driven by pride, not by a rationalist/logical thought process).

[–]Grand_Strategy 6 points7 points  (1 child)

We should have some better names Rational and Rationalist get confusing a lot :)

[–]CeruleanTresses 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, maybe instead of "rationalist" we could say, for example, "optimizer?" Since that term implies the character reliably acts to best advance their goals, whatever those goals happen to be.

[–]gwern 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Could the reason been "He didn't expect there was a super intelligent detective guy who tracks people like him and have never ever prior to Kira existence been revealed"?

In-universe, L is globally famous, and everyone recognizes his name, which is why he needs to take such precautions to hide his face and voice etc. All the police know him instantly, IIRC.

Even if you grant that Light reasonably didn't know about L or suspect L would come after him, he certainly knew L was brilliant after L revealed how he had tricked Light with the Taylor TV trick, so mistakes 4 & 5 can't be covered by ignorance. Mistake 1 & 2 also do not require you to be worried about superintelligent adversaries, as timing and correlation attacks are rather ordinary things in computer security and law enforcement. Mistake 3, the TV trick, is a little more excusable since very few people would arrange something so clever - but merely responding to such an obvious provocation by getting angry is itself a serious mistake and demonstrates the hubris that would kill Light! No superintelligent detectives required.

[–]ywecurLessWrong (than usual)[S] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

But Light did not intentionally reveal that he was connected to the police, did he? How did L even know that he had done that?

[–]ShiranaiWakaranai 26 points27 points  (6 children)

He did intentionally reveal it. He purposely showed that Kira knew inside police information.

This wasn't technically a mistake, but rather a gambit/sacrifice. Light was hoping that by revealing that Kira has police connections, L would suspect the police, and the police would suspect L, and may then drag L up to the surface for light to kill. And it did work (in the anime), Light eventually got to kill L thanks to this gambit.

Light's true mistake is bothering to fight L in the first place. Just let L keep bragging about being unkillable.

[–]gameboy17Canterlot Campaign 15 points16 points  (4 children)

Ignoring L would have been the right move, but Light's megalomania would never let him do that. Light is smart, but anything but rational.

[–]ShiranaiWakaranai 9 points10 points  (3 children)

The silly thing is, if he's such a megalomaniac, why kill with heart attacks?

If I let the megalomaniac in me out, I wouldn't kill with heart attacks at all. I would pick a time every week (say, Sunday at 1:56pm GMT). Then I would write "X dies BY LIGHTNING on Sunday at 1:56pm GMT" for every X I wanted to kill. So every week there would be a mass lightning strike killing tons of criminals at the same time.

It would then become blatantly obvious that this was an act of god, smiting evil with purifying light.

[–]696e6372656469626c65I think, therefore I am pretentious. 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Wouldn't work. The Death Note is only capable of manipulating probability up to a certain extent. A mass lightning strike is so far beyond its known limitations that it would just default to a heart attack anyway.

[–]TexasJefferson 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Each individual lightning strike seems within the established power. I don't think it would evaluate the massed effect in making the determination as the rule seems to be there to stop not-centrally-killing-related paths to instant godhood by, e.g., having a random criminal invent FTL travel or free energy.

[–]gameboy17Canterlot Campaign 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm guessing he just didn't think of it and went with heart attacks because that's what it defaults to anyway.

[–]Grand_Strategy 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I agree fighting L was the biggest mistake. During his TV announcement if Light just ignored him that would delay investigation by years. He would know then that L. is on his track but by simply ignoring him he would not allow him to pin point his location that much.

[–]DCarrier 14 points15 points  (5 children)

The ending of the manga made no sense. It's not fresh in my mind, so here's something I wrote when it was:

Why didn't Light know that Near knew that he knew that he knew that something was up?

In the final showdown, what did Light think that Near thought that Light was thinking? Near wouldn't have come unless he replaced the Death Note with a fake. Light would know that, and thus wouldn't come unless the Death Note that was replaced was also a fake. Near would know that, and thus wouldn't come unless he replaced both the fake and the real one. That should continue forever making the final confrontation impossible, but somehow, Light missed that last step, and Near missed the one after that.

Another way to look at it is Aumann's agreement theorem. They both had common knowledge. They both knew the other was pretty smart. So how could each expect to win the confrontation? Once they see the other fail to back out, they should start worrying themselves.

In general, the whole thing seemed to me like a bunch of people that thought they were smart doing stupid stuff. It was an attempt at a rationalist fic by someone trying to write characters that were smarter than they were.

[–]gwern 4 points5 points  (4 children)

From what I recall, the chain of reasoning breaks down because of Light's ultimate mistake in underestimating Near's ruthlessness in using the DN on someone (to control Mikami); this leads to Light's mistaken confidence in terminating the reasoning at 'Near's ploy is replacing Mikami's DN with a fake to disarm him but Mikami can't be tricked as easily as that' and so explaining why Near is willing to show up (Light mistakenly thinks Near is mistaken in believing the swap worked). The reasoning cannot continue indefinitely once you think you have found a mistake in your enemy and have deduced his object-level plan; that breaks the symmetry in reasoning. Errors and mistakes and bad luck are always highly likely. Of course, rather than being one level below Light in the hierarchy, Near was one level above, and willing to show up for the same reason, and won. This is ironic and adds some literary qualities to the otherwise confusing ending, because Near wins only by abandoning L's refusal to kill and by exploiting Light's belief that L's successor would live up to L. (I cover this in one of my other DN essays, on the ending.)

[–]DCarrier 0 points1 point  (3 children)

But if Near wasn't willing to kill, then why would he expect to win the confrontation? If he wouldn't have expected to win, then wouldn't Light have known something was wrong the moment Near came? And if that was going to happen, then why even bother to plan the confrontation?

[–]gwern 2 points3 points  (2 children)

The non-killer Near was expecting to win because of the switched notebook, according to Light. According to Light, he was going to lose because Near had underestimated Mikami's cleverness and diligence. Near did expect to win, but Light was wrong about the reason, wrongly believed Near was wrong, and wrongly went as Near expected.

As for why kick the entire duel off in the first place, I don't recall what the trigger was.

[–]DCarrier 0 points1 point  (1 child)

And this non-killer Near who underestimated Mikami and expected to win, why did he think Light would expect to win?

Each of them must have expected the other to be dumber than they are, and they expected the other to expect them to be even dumber, etc. But that means if you follow it back for enough, at some point there's an expectation that they'd just walk in for no reason.

[–]gwern 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And this non-killer Near who underestimated Mikami and expected to win, why did he think Light would expect to win?

Because he would simply trust Mikami as part of his plan, which is the assumption of a single error which breaks symmetry. After a single error, the recursion is over, it's done, it doesn't infinitely regress. A single error ends the regression at that level and the plots unfold and they see which of them made the error. (Light did.)

[–]696e6372656469626c65I think, therefore I am pretentious. 17 points18 points  (0 children)

One of the best (IMO) ways of putting it is that Death Note is an attempt at Level 2 Intelligent fiction that almost succeeds (some may argue that it largely does succeed), and while that doesn't automatically qualify it as rationalist fiction, it certainly makes it a lot closer to rational fiction than most other mainstream works.

[–]Jiro_T 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I think it's a bad idea to define "rationalist fic" as "good rationalist fic"; for one thing, that turns every dispute about quality into one about category. If the series is supposed to show character acting rationally, but the author misses some things, it should still count as a rationalist fic, although perhaps a poorly done rationalist fic.

[–]Grand_Strategy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is great point. I agree with you 100% I think if attempt is genuine and some mistakes are made its good enough.

[–]SnowGN 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Not even close.

I'm sure that more hardworking and insightful people than me have weighed in a hundred times over already in different parts of the internet, but Light was an idiot, and he was an idiot from the very first second he started killing convicted criminals. He was a lazy, stupid, idiot.

You don't change society by killing people who've already been tried and found guilty. Society's already caught them. Meaning that they were neither truly dangerous (since they got caught) or capable of distorting the system any longer. When's the last time we've seen an evil billionaire go to prison??? Light said that he wanted to make the world better, but I saw no evidence of a plan to do that, aside from killing people who committed obvious crimes and were stupid enough to get caught doing it. What a stupid plan. What a waste of time.

No, to change things, you pinpoint the points of distortion in society (there are dozens, hundreds of these people - not the thousands to tens of thousands Light was killing. But it's hard to find them, and it takes a lot of hard, hard research. You never hear about the really evil people. And then you go to town on them, and do it in such a way (using the Death Note's more obscure powers over controlling the actions of people in the moments prior to death), that you never get caught. You don't let people even begin to suspect that there's a supernatural killer on the loose.

But, no, that would have been a boring story to watch. A competent Light would never even have attracted L's direct interest.

[–]696e6372656469626c65I think, therefore I am pretentious. 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Several points:

  1. Light was operating on a theory of deterrence. He wasn't literally trying to kill all the criminals out there; he was trying to kill enough of them that the rest would start fearing the wrath of this mysterious god capable of striking down evildoers with heart attacks, and stop committing crimes because of that fear. At the same time, he was attempting to create a social and cultural setting in which crime would have been discouraged to a far greater degree than it currently is, and criminals pursued and punished with a far greater fervor. (This secondary aim is the main reason Kira exists, aside from Light's own hubris.)
  2. In the very first episode of Death Note, Light mentions killing non-criminals that are nonetheless "leeches on society" (or a similar term; I don't remember the particular phrase he used) using accidents and diseases. This is more or less what you say he should have done in your comment, but you don't seem to have realized that he did this as well. People simply focus on the "Kira" aspect of his killings because, well, that's what stands out the most, and because that was what L focused on.
  3. The reason Light didn't target high-ranking, influential people at the beginning of the series was because Kira was a relatively new phenomenon that, despite having some public support, didn't have nearly enough to pull this kind of thing off. Had Light showed willingness to kill, not just lowly criminals, but high-ranking people as well, there would have been a backlash from practically every country in the world. This not only makes it much more likely for Kira to get caught, it also interferes with his plan to create a society that accepts Kira as their god. Note that in the second arc of the story, Light (or rather, Mikami under Light's direction) does in fact target people in high places, because at that point Kira has accumulated enough public support that he can get away with that.
  4. Calling Light a "lazy, stupid idiot" is more than a little exaggerated, and I don't like that kind of rhetoric; it's the sort of thing you might find on SpaceBattles. (In fact, what immediately came to mind upon reading your comment was the massive Cauldron debates they like to have, most of which contain very little in the way of actual content, but a great deal of "lol Cauldron was fuckin' dumb".) Using high-intensity words too frequently drains them of their meaning; if you're calling Light Yagami an "idiot", what word will you use for actual idiots?

[–]appropriate-username 4 points5 points  (14 children)

Characteristics of Rational Fiction:

Nothing happens solely because 'the plot requires it'. If characters do (or don't do) something, there must be a plausible reason.

I'm sorry but "the gods are bored" is not really adequate explanation for giving a weapon of mass destruction to a random megalomaniacal Japanese high schooler. It's the quintessential handwavium "let's just get on with this" backstory.

Also, what are the odds that Japan has someone of equal intelligence investigating stuff like what Light was doing?

Any factions are defined and driven into conflict by their beliefs and values, not just by being "good" or "evil".

Sure.

The characters solve problems through the intelligent application of their knowledge and resources.

Yup.

The fictional world has consistent rules, and sticks to them.

More or less...Though the death note rules aren't all known in advance so the story doesn't 100% pass this bar.

In Rationalist Fiction: As well as the above,

Rationalist and scientific methods are used to demystify mysterious phenomena.

The only thing that can even be barely argued in this direction is Light's somewhat blundering verification that the notebook sort of seems like it does what it should. No attempt whatsoever is made to scientifically confirm/experiment on anything that happens (how the fuck does Ryuk float?!?!?!).

The story shows rationalist techniques, which can be applied by readers.

Maybe. It has some clever deduction stuff which may be possibly called rationalist techniques, sure.

The story is like a puzzle; readers can reach the same solution as the characters by using the information provided earlier in the story.

Yup, except for the unmentioned DN rules.

So....It's tied for my #1 favorite anime but it does fail or almost completely fail some points above which is why I'd say it's aspiring to be rational but not quite there and definitely not rationalist. Too many failed points.

[–]DCarrier 17 points18 points  (7 children)

I'm sorry but "the gods are bored" is not really adequate explanation for giving a weapon of mass destruction to a random megalomaniacal Japanese high schooler. It's the quintessential handwavium "let's just get on with this" backstory.

I'd say the rule only applies to the story itself, and not the backstory. The point is that the characters have actual control. Things happen because of what they do, and not just because of what the author wants. But they obviously have no control over the backstory, since it already happened.

Edit: Though I should add that three different death gods get involved. The first one gets a pass. The others are more of a problem. Sure we've established that it's something that can happen, but deciding exactly when is still a literal deus ex machina.

[–]wren42 12 points13 points  (2 children)

agreed, setup doesn't count. HPMOR plops a rationalist into an already magical world. it doesn't require a rational explanation for every element of that world.

[–]appropriate-username 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Harry does at least attempt to investigate magic though so there's at least an attempt to give it some sort of rational basis. Further, discounting the scar "defense of love" thing which isn't really brought up in HPMOR IIRC, Harry is a random kid in the magical world, not someone specially chosen to be given an unstoppable force. He's not someone an outside force picked to be the main character, in other words.

[–]wren42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not sure if you finished hpmor, but it does address Harry's "specialness", though it's arguable whether it is internally or externally caused (there's a direct cause, but also "prophecy")

[–]appropriate-username 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Ok, how about why Light gets Misa? There's no real reason why she'd meet with him and fawn over him throughout pretty much the entire series, except to give him a super-loyal accomplice because he needs one because plot and fan service.

The scope of Light and L's actions pretty much fits into that first rule but the world around them tends to twist to suit the drama.

[–]gwern 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Misa isn't that unrealistic. You know about how death row inmates and serial killers (to say nothing of Charles Manson) get very serious fans and conjugal visits. And what is Light but a serial killer on a vast, global scale?

[–]696e6372656469626c65I think, therefore I am pretentious. 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ok, how about why Light gets Misa? There's no real reason why she'd meet with him and fawn over him throughout pretty much the entire series, except to give him a super-loyal accomplice because he needs one because plot and fan service.

I'm pretty sure Misa was more of a hindrance to Light than a boon, at least at the beginning. Saying she existed solely to be convenient to him is... disingenuous.

[–]DCarrier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed.

[–]keturaOrganizer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I've heard it said that the premise of a work is unassailable. This is to say that one can't really argue that it's irrational that a guy from another planet gets his power from the sun, is invulnerable, and flies, as that's part of the premise. The story is "what happens given that superman exists and he's on earth", and if the dominos that fall from that don't fall properly, then it's irrational. It's sort of like arguing that HPMOR is unrealistic because "magic exists", even though the story itself gives us no concrete explanation for the phenomenon. That's part of the premise; so long as the magic is more or less consistent and the actors involved use it in a not-stupid manner, then it doesn't impact the rationality of the work. If this weren't true, then no rational fiction could possibly exist that was set anywhere but "Earth, present day or recent past".

Similarly, the premise of death note is "Light gets the Death Note". This part is unassailable. So what if it was a bored demigod, what matters is the ramifications of that event.

Even if that weren't true, I'd argue that an immortal being that literally feeds on human deaths deciding on a whim to fuck with humanity sounds like the most natural result in the world. What's unrealistic is that this seems to be the first time it's happened (at least in a long time).

[–]Grand_Strategy 1 point2 points  (3 children)

It's tied for my #1 favorite anime

What is it tied with? If you don't mind me asking.

[–]appropriate-username 1 point2 points  (2 children)

My anime rankings list has a "loved" tier and a "god" tier, where the god tier is shared by only two shows, Death Note and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya. They are very different but I find them both approximately equally captivating. Obligatory plug for /r/haruhi.

[–]Grand_Strategy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is good list. It's not often one sees Death Note in Loved and Code Geass in hated. But I absolutely agree on your assessment of that anime. Main character is smart, genius level intelligence but far too many things there happen out of the blue, because that would be cool, or because he needs rescue and in the last moment someone enters a scene to save him. Will check the others if I have some spare time.

[–]tonytwostep 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The fictional world has consistent rules, and sticks to them. More or less...Though the death note rules aren't all known in advance so the story doesn't 100% pass this bar.

I don't think any RF story tells all the rules of its system in advance. In fact, Harry discovering the rules of magic via experimentation one of the central plot points of HPMOR.

I agree that sometimes the rules are introduced late enough that readers can't reach the same solution as the characters using previously-provided information, so DN wouldn't qualify as Rationalist, but it pretty clearly meets the RF criteria.