Do we have freewill?

[Kaido]

I'll say it again. You are not free to jump out of an airplane (unless you're wearing a parachute). It is, by the way, thoroughly illegal to do so.

That's rules vs. behavior. You're free to do whatever you want...you're just not free to escape the consequences of those actions. Remember this dude who opened up the airplane door mid-flight? He wasn't "free" to do it because it was illegal...but he did it anyway:

Or this pilot who got high on shrooms & tried to turn off the plane mid-flight?

Pilot accused of trying to stop engines midflight after taking magic mushrooms asked ‘Am I dead? Is this hell?’

Joseph Emerson, 44, has been charged with more than 80 counts of attempted murder after allegedly trying to shut down the engines of the in-flight plane in October.

www.nbcnews.com

We all have freedom of choice to make good or bad decisions within the situations that we're in, hence why I like the term "moral agency": rules are an abstraction layer involved in the psychological chain of events involved in making choices, but not a behavioral layer in terms of what we literally can and cannot do. We're all free to make really dumb choices within any given context, haha! That was the point Captain Jack Sparrow was trying to get Will Turner to understand when they needed to save Elizabeth Swan from the pirates: societal rules (i.e. Turner's position within the hierarchy of society, which technically limited what he could do in that particular situation, as he wasn't a military man) are separate from "freedom of action" choices:

 

[repoman0]

I prefer this hypothesis over any other explanation I've read. We are just code. DNA data storage banished any vestige of doubt I had remaining. Sugar-phosphate instead of ones and zeros.

You are free to believe it of course but DNA data storage isn’t really evidence of it. The natural unit of information is a bit (see: all of information theory) and there are many mechanical, natural and biological mediums that can store it. Since DNA just passes down the information about how your body should build itself and function, of course it can store other types of information too.

I will add that to me the simulation thing is just religion. No evidence for it either way and another convenient way to throw our hands up and say “because God”.

 

[pmv]

Freedom of choice for how to choose to behave...not freedom from consequences! I read a quote recently that I really like, which went something along these lines:



Over the years, I've adopted the idea the true happiness requires taking 100% responsibility for our personal happiness in life. While we can't control everything that happens to us, we CAN choose how we react, which means that we can manage our consequences, whether or not we're personally responsible for what we're dealing with (ex. getting cancer, getting hit by a car in an accident, etc.). The most unhappy people I know are the ones who refuse to take any sort of personal responsibility over (1) their personal happiness, and (2) managing the consequences that are on their plate, regardless of the source of them.

We all exist within finite circumstances, which is why I like the concept of "moral agency", i.e. we get to choose to (1) change our situation (within the limitations of our means), and (2) decide how to act & react within our given circumstances. I was just surfing reddit & there were stories right next to each other about a guy who decided to shoot 14 people in Prague followed by another story about a guy who decided to donate his time to a local animal shelter by taking dogs for a walk on Christmas day because they didn't have anyone available to give them attention that day due to being short-staffed because of the holiday schedule. They both had their moral agency about how they chose to behave within their individual set of circumstances.

I've come to accept the fact that rejecting personal responsibility is simply living in denial (which we're all free to do! haha).

I really don't agree. For starters, that seems to assume people have perfect knowledge - how can someone make "correct" decisions when they aren't in possession of accurate information? We live by mental models constructed from the information we have been fed since birth. We are products of our era and culture.

For another it ignores the issue of neurological or other physical conditions, that can have a direct effect on both your perception and emotions (what I had is on record as potentially causing a long list of issues, from depression to psychosis and delusions, because of the direct physical effect it has on regions of your brain - at this point I have no idea how many of my past 'issues' were really under my control or not)

I don't see much scope for 'free will' there.

And if one accepts there's an absence of 'free will' when it comes to physical brain injuries, it makes the idea that 'free will' suddenly appears in a 'correctly' functioning brain all the more mysterious - what is it that's so special about the 'normal' human brain that suddenly brings this non-deterministic phenomena into existence?

I don't think there's much doubt about the idea that, say, if someone gets a bullet in the head, that the resulting effects are not a matter of their 'free will' or choice. So why are other, less severe, physical processes occurring in the brain not equally outside of one's choice? I'm not saying that free-will definitely doesn't exist, merely that there's a real mystery and a bit of a paradox there.

Thirdly, your argument seems to depend on subjective moral judgements as to what was the 'correct' choice for someone to make in response to their circumstances. Most choices are not nearly as stark as "shoot 14 people at random or take some puppies for a walk'. I'm not sure what throwing in such random moral judgements has to do with the topic of free will.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I will add that to me the simulation thing is just religion. No evidence for it either way and another convenient way to throw our hands up and say “because God”.

You're obviously free to think that, but I would counter your point by saying at least there's a possibility to test for the hypothesis, whereas religions actively discourage any kind of examination (primarily because the act of examination erodes the religion itself).

 

[pmv]

I will add that to me the simulation thing is just religion. No evidence for it either way and another convenient way to throw our hands up and say “because God”.

It does absolutely seem like a variant of religion - one maybe more suitable to our current era and culture?

It certainly strikes me as more intuitively plausible than the traditional God stories, presumably because I've been moulded by our current culture and conditions of life.

God as a collective, an advanced civilisation and scientists-in-white-coats messing with us as recreation or an experiment makes far more sense to me than the traditional 'great patriarch in the sky, imposing arbitrary rules and punishing us for who-knows-what reason'' hypothesis.

 

[Kaido]

I really don't agree. For starters, that seems to assume people have perfect knowledge - how can someone make "correct" decisions when they aren't in possession of accurate information? We live by mental models constructed from the information we have been fed since birth. We are products of our era and culture.

For another it ignores the issue of neurological or other physical conditions, that can have a direct effect on both your perception and emotions (what I had is on record as potentially causing a long list of issues, from depression to psychosis and delusions, because of the direct physical effect it has on regions of your brain - at this point I have no idea how many of my past 'issues' were really under my control or not)

I don't see much scope for 'free will' there.

And if one accepts there's an absence of 'free will' when it comes to physical brain injuries, it makes the idea that 'free will' suddenly appears in a 'correctly' functioning brain all the more mysterious - what is it that's so special about the 'normal' human brain that suddenly brings this non-deterministic phenomena into existence?

I don't think there's much doubt about the idea that, say, if someone gets a bullet in the head, that the resulting effects are not a matter of their 'free will' or choice. So why are other, less severe, physical processes occurring in the brain not equally outside of one's choice? I'm not saying that free-will definitely doesn't exist, merely that there's a real mystery and a bit of a paradox there.

Thirdly, your argument seems to depend on subjective moral judgements as to what was the 'correct' choice for someone to make in response to their circumstances. Most choices are not nearly as stark as "shoot 14 people at random or take some puppies for a walk'. I'm not sure what throwing in such random moral judgements has to do with the topic of free will.

Those are good points! It gets even more complicated based on perspective: terrorists like Osama Bin Laden thought he was in the right & doing the right thing when attacking other people. More recently, to Hamas, they thought their attack was "righteous". To Israel, they thought that killing 20,000 Palestinians in retaliation is "righteous":

Israel-Hamas war's staggering toll reaches a grim milestone: 20,000 dead

More than 20,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza during Israel’s war against Hamas, health officials said Friday.

apnews.com

My thoughts are:

1. We are free to choose how to act & react within any given situation in our life. Some people choose to be Hitler & some people choose to be Mother Theresa. We are not, however, free from the consequences of our choices. If we jump off a cliff, gravity WILL win! Anyone is capable (free) to do whatever they want whenever they want, within their situation & their capability, based on what actions they are willing to take.

2. We are free to choose from a spectrum of positive or negative choices within each of those situations, based on moral agency (from our perspective) & whatever amount of limited knowledge we have available (within the situation & within our mental capabilities). For example, the GTA 6 hacker was sentenced life in hospital confinement because he was engaged in illegal behavior, but he was operating off a limited internal perspective due to what was diagnosed as acute autism.

From there, it gets complicated! One interesting story I heard last week was from my buddy's son, who works at our local grocery store. They have a policy that workers cannot confront shoplifters due to liability (the thief getting hurt, the worker getting hurt, or another shopper getting hurt as a result). A man had a basket full of $500+ of groceries, walked through the self-checkout register section without paying, and started to walk out.

My buddy's son called out to him and said excuse me sir, you have to pay! The man looked back, smiled, waved, and walked out the door. There's no guard. There's a policy in place NOT to confront thieves. The cops can't make it there in time when called. There's no effective way to ban people from stores. Stores are already getting sued & banned over things like facial recognition cameras & AI technology:

Jacksons Food Stores facing lawsuit over facial recognition technology

The retailer is accused of violating a Portland, Oregon, city ordinance that forbids private entities from using the tool in areas of public accommodation.

www.cstoredive.com

Rite Aid banned from using facial recognition software after falsely identifying shoplifters | TechCrunch

Rite Aid has been banned from using facial recognition software, with the FTC highlighting the drugstore's "reckless" use of AI surveillance.

techcrunch.com

To that man's perspective, I'd imagine he felt justified stealing prohibitively-priced food from a multi-million-dollar corporation. From his perspective, he knew that he could (1) walk out of the store scot-free, (2) not get chased by cops, and (3) not even show up on a "wanted" or "banned" poster in the store or around town & obviously felt justified in stealing to the point where he literally smiled & waved when confronted, being fully confident that not only would no one tackle him, but no one would even block the door on his way out or hassle him in the parking lot!

So from my perspective:

1. Anyone is technically free to do anything they want anytime they want, within their capabilities. Every single one of us neffing here on ATOT is here by choice because there's a million other things we could be doing, whether it's going on reddit instead or going to work or school or doing chores or volunteering at a local animal shelter or soup kitchen. We are free to choose our individual actions in life, but again, we aren't free from the consequences of those actions.

2. Within each situation, we can make good or bad (to us) choices. Some people operate off an even more limited set of information due to things like being sociopathic or psychopathic or any other number of conditions that affect their mental & emotional capacities.

So perhaps a more refined version is:

* We all have the freedom to choose our actions in life. Within each situation, we have moral agency for a spectrum of good or bad choices, based on our individual perspectives & available capacities.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

You are free to believe it of course but DNA data storage isn’t really evidence of it. The natural unit of information is a bit (see: all of information theory) and there are many mechanical, natural and biological mediums that can store it. Since DNA just passes down the information about how your body should build itself and function, of course it can store other types of information too.

I will add that to me the simulation thing is just religion. No evidence for it either way and another convenient way to throw our hands up and say “because God”.

I don't believe shit. Do you even hypothesize bro? And fuck right off with the throwing the hands up, and because god, hyperbole. If your going to try to pick a fight, do it with me, not a strawman.

 

[repoman0]

I don't believe shit. Do you even hypothesize bro? And fuck right off with the throwing the hands up, and because god, hyperbole. If your going to try to pick a fight, do it with me, not a strawman.

Overreact much? No one is picking a fight and I generally like your posts. This is called having a discussion.

Also only the first part of the post was really directed at you anyway but multi-quote on mobile is a PITA. Not that the simulation<->god comparison is actually hyperbole anyway. The concepts are far more similar than different IMO. The hypothetically testable a hundred or thousand years in the future as @[DHT]Osiris pointed out is only a minor distinction to me. They probably thought the og god would be testable too if only they had flying machines that could go above the clouds into heaven.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Overreact much? No one is picking a fight and I generally like your posts. This is called having a discussion.

I went with aggression as part of the persuasion attempt for this conversation. Given your dialogue tree response, I can already see persuasion will fail. 🤣

My debating style in the social forums changes from observing well codified debating tactics in the tech forums, to - "because fuck you that's why". Everyone here is cool, yourself included.🍻 When I seem emotional I'm not. It's straight up me "letting my hair down". Can't really do that in tech. I apologize for my levity, when you were just trying to engage in an intellectually stimulating discussion.

I'll try to restrain myself to the following response.

The idea that we are a simulation does not in any way impede scientific inquiry. Not even into alternative explanations for existence. What it does is fire my imagination in a way none of the other explanations I've ever read have. That we are art imitating life is powerful fodder.

Cheers!

 

[Muse]

That's rules vs. behavior. You're free to do whatever you want...you're just not free to escape the consequences of those actions. Remember this dude who opened up the airplane door mid-flight? He wasn't "free" to do it because it was illegal...but he did it anyway:

Or this pilot who got high on shrooms & tried to turn off the plane mid-flight?

Pilot accused of trying to stop engines midflight after taking magic mushrooms asked ‘Am I dead? Is this hell?’

Joseph Emerson, 44, has been charged with more than 80 counts of attempted murder after allegedly trying to shut down the engines of the in-flight plane in October.

www.nbcnews.com

We all have freedom of choice to make good or bad decisions within the situations that we're in, hence why I like the term "moral agency": rules are an abstraction layer involved in the psychological chain of events involved in making choices, but not a behavioral layer in terms of what we literally can and cannot do. We're all free to make really dumb choices within any given context, haha! That was the point Captain Jack Sparrow was trying to get Will Turner to understand when they needed to save Elizabeth Swan from the pirates: societal rules (i.e. Turner's position within the hierarchy of society, which technically limited what he could do in that particular situation, as he wasn't a military man) are separate from "freedom of action" choices:

View attachment 91019

Saying you're free to do forbidden things is a misuse of the language. There are cultural implications when you use the word "free." You took liberties there you were not entitled to. Using your logic you are free to buy a gun (legally or not) and shoot somebody, you just have to suffer the consequences. That's not freedom in my book.

You admit that you have your personal perspective with regards to freedom. But that's a limited perspective. There is another, a greater kind of freedom that your perspective does not perceive.

 

[Kaido]

You admit that you have your personal perspective with regards to freedom. But that's a limited perspective. There is another, a greater kind of freedom that your perspective does not perceive.

Absolutely...but that doesn't stop people from being free to make dumb or terrible choices. So I think we have not one but two nuanced definitions to consider:

1. Absolute freedom of choice to behave at-will
2. Societal & moral constraints of freedom based on culturally agreed-upon rules (standards of conduct, laws, etc.)

For the purposes of this thread ("do we have free will"), I think absolute behavioral freedom is the one in question here. For example, every single one of us is here on ATOT by choice. We could be doing a million other things if we wanted to. We have the agency of choosing what to do with our time.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Saying you're free to do forbidden things is a misuse of the language. There are cultural implications when you use the word "free." You took liberties there you were not entitled to. Using your logic you are free to buy a gun (legally or not) and shoot somebody, you just have to suffer the consequences. That's not freedom in my book.

You admit that you have your personal perspective with regards to freedom. But that's a limited perspective. There is another, a greater kind of freedom that your perspective does not perceive.

The original argument posited is that we don't have free will at all, not freedom from consequence. Based on the stated logic that hypothetical individual never had a choice to do anything but buy that gun and shoot that person, regardless of consequences (thus rendering the consequences, and all law, irrelevant).

 

[Muse]

The original argument posited is that we don't have free will at all, not freedom from consequence. Based on the stated logic that hypothetical individual never had a choice to do anything but buy that gun and shoot that person, regardless of consequences (thus rendering the consequences, and all law, irrelevant).

I was taking Kaido's comments out of the context of the thread, just addressing his personal use of the word "free," which he, characteristically, described in great detail.

Obviously, if you accept the premise that everything we do is beyond our power to influence much less change, then much of the common experience of mankind is put in the shadow and can be disregarded as superfluous. In fact, probably most of it. It's kind of weird. To me, determinism is not only absurd, those who engage in adopting it are self destructive.

 

[PowerEngineer]

Saying you're free to do forbidden things is a misuse of the language. There are cultural implications when you use the word "free." You took liberties there you were not entitled to. Using your logic you are free to buy a gun (legally or not) and shoot somebody, you just have to suffer the consequences. That's not freedom in my book.

You admit that you have your personal perspective with regards to freedom. But that's a limited perspective. There is another, a greater kind of freedom that your perspective does not perceive.

Oh my! If you are defining true freedom of choice (or free will) as choices that have to be free of consequences then I am afraid that there are very few (if any) of those available to us. Societal consequences are just frosting on the cake of mother nature's consequences. It might even be argued that a choice without any consequences (good or bad) is effectively pointless and a waste of precious time.

The original argument posited is that we don't have free will at all, not freedom from consequence. Based on the stated logic that hypothetical individual never had a choice to do anything but buy that gun and shoot that person, regardless of consequences (thus rendering the consequences, and all law, irrelevant).

The original argument posited the the choices we make might be determined by the chemical/biological processes in our brains rather than being somehow "free" of these constraints. Whether deterministic or "free", it does not follow that the consequences anticipated for the range of available choices isn't a factor in what choice is finally made.

 

[Kaido]

I was taking Kaido's comments out of the context of the thread, just addressing his personal use of the word "free," which he, characteristically, described in great detail.

For my next trick, I'll be applying free will to my next Instant Pot recipe!

Edit: Just kidding, I'm making crack chicken...again

 

[Kaido]

Oh my! If you are defining true freedom of choice (or free will) as choices that have to be free of consequences then I am afraid that there are very few (if any) of those available to us

That's the great part about living in denial! You can completely ignore the consequences of your actions & do whatever you want, haha!

 

[Kaido]

The original argument posited the the choices we make might be determined by the chemical/biological processes in our brains rather than being somehow "free" of these constraints. Whether deterministic or "free", it does not follow that the consequences anticipated for the range of available choices isn't a factor in what choice is finally made.

 

[Muse]

For my next trick, I'll be applying free will to my next Instant Pot recipe!

Edit: Just kidding, I'm making crack chicken...again

I think I have your crack chicken recipe. Haven't made chicken anything since before the pandemic, IIRC. Been thinking about some, though... Speaking of free, I had 1/2 a dozen chicks when I had a job on a dairy. Raised 'em from tiny chicks but couldn't imagine killing and eating them because they were my best friends. When I came home every day after work they treated me like I was their mom. I don't remember what happened with those chicks, but I sure didn't eat them. OK, here's the relevant song:

 

[sdifox]

For my next trick, I'll be applying free will to my next Instant Pot recipe!

Edit: Just kidding, I'm making crack chicken...again

But this time, with real crack!

 

[Kaido]

I think I have your crack chicken recipe. Haven't made chicken anything since before the pandemic, IIRC. Been thinking about some, though... Speaking of free, I had 1/2 a dozen chicks when I had a job on a dairy. Raised 'em from tiny chicks but couldn't imagine killing and eating them because they were my best friends. When I came home every day after work they treated me like I was their mom. I don't remember what happened with those chicks, but I sure didn't eat them. OK, here's the relevant song:

My current version:

• 1/2 cup of water
• 2 pounds of trimmed boneless skinless chicken breast, cut into 3 pieces per breast
• One packet of Hidden Valley Ranch powder (I've tried different brands & this one is by FAR the best)
• One 8oz block of cream cheese
• Microwave bacon

Add the water to the pot, then the chicken, powder, and cream cheese. Cook on high pressure for 15 minutes. While that's cooking, microwave the box of bacon in batches between paper towels & pat dry to get crispy after cooking, then break into small pieces by hand. When the Instapot is done, do a quick release & shred the meat. I've done various methods over the years (I make a LOT of shredded meats! Chicken, turkey, beef, pork, etc.) & I've found that the Instant Pot brand of meat claws actually work the best:

Amazon.com

Then throw the shredded chicken back in the pot, along with the crumbled bacon, stir, and enjoy! I used to add in shredded cheese, but I found I prefer it crispy on top, so like if I'm doing a crack chicken sandwich on a burger bun, I'll sprinkle the cheese on top & zap it in the airfryer or oven broiler to melt. I use it on burger buns, slider buns, baked potatoes, and even quesadillas:

How to Make Kickass Quesadillas | The Food Lab

It's good to recognize your flaws, but it's also good to recognize your skills. If there's one thing I know I'm good at, it's making kickass quesadillas. Not authentic, not fancy, not gourmet; just tasty. I mean, let's be honest: You can microwave some pre-shredded cheese on a tortilla, fold it...

www.seriouseats.com

 

[Muse]

My current version:

• 1/2 cup of water
• 2 pounds of trimmed boneless skinless chicken breast, cut into 3 pieces per breast
• One packet of Hidden Valley Ranch powder (I've tried different brands & this one is by FAR the best)
• One 8oz block of cream cheese
• Microwave bacon

Add the water to the pot, then the chicken, powder, and cream cheese. Cook on high pressure for 15 minutes. While that's cooking, microwave the box of bacon in batches between paper towels & pat dry to get crispy after cooking, then break into small pieces by hand. When the Instapot is done, do a quick release & shred the meat. I've done various methods over the years (I make a LOT of shredded meats! Chicken, turkey, beef, pork, etc.) & I've found that the Instant Pot brand of meat claws actually work the best:

Amazon.com

Then throw the shredded chicken back in the pot, along with the crumbled bacon, stir, and enjoy! I used to add in shredded cheese, but I found I prefer it crispy on top, so like if I'm doing a crack chicken sandwich on a burger bun, I'll sprinkle the cheese on top & zap it in the airfryer or oven broiler to melt. I use it on burger buns, slider buns, baked potatoes, and even quesadillas:

How to Make Kickass Quesadillas | The Food Lab

It's good to recognize your flaws, but it's also good to recognize your skills. If there's one thing I know I'm good at, it's making kickass quesadillas. Not authentic, not fancy, not gourmet; just tasty. I mean, let's be honest: You can microwave some pre-shredded cheese on a tortilla, fold it...

www.seriouseats.com

This is what I had from you for your Crack Chicken, from Nov. 21, 2022:

Updated Crack Chicken recipe:

1. Chop up a pack of bacon with kitchen shears or a knife & saute on high in the IP for 10 minutes. Do not drain.

2. Add half a cup of water, 2 pounds of boneless skinless chicken breasts cubed up into palm-size chunks, an 8oz block of cream cheese, and a packet of Ranch Dressing dip mix powder. Cook for 15 minutes on high on manual with a quick pressure release.

3. Use tongs or a slotted spoon to remove the chicken onto a cutting board. Use forks, meat claws, an electric hand mixer, or an electric stand mixer to shred to your liking. Add back into pot. Add in a cup of shredded cheese & stir until melted.

 

[repoman0]

I went with aggression as part of the persuasion attempt for this conversation. Given your dialogue tree response, I can already see persuasion will fail. 🤣

My debating style in the social forums changes from observing well codified debating tactics in the tech forums, to - "because fuck you that's why". Everyone here is cool, yourself included.🍻 When I seem emotional I'm not. It's straight up me "letting my hair down". Can't really do that in tech. I apologize for my levity, when you were just trying to engage in an intellectually stimulating discussion.

I'll try to restrain myself to the following response.

The idea that we are a simulation does not in any way impede scientific inquiry. Not even into alternative explanations for existence. What it does is fire my imagination in a way none of the other explanations I've ever read have. That we are art imitating life is powerful fodder.

Cheers!

Fair enough all around! Cheers!

 

[Kaido]

This is what I had from you for your Crack Chicken, from Nov. 21, 2022:

Updated Crack Chicken recipe:

1. Chop up a pack of bacon with kitchen shears or a knife & saute on high in the IP for 10 minutes. Do not drain.

2. Add half a cup of water, 2 pounds of boneless skinless chicken breasts cubed up into palm-size chunks, an 8oz block of cream cheese, and a packet of Ranch Dressing dip mix powder. Cook for 15 minutes on high on manual with a quick pressure release.

3. Use tongs or a slotted spoon to remove the chicken onto a cutting board. Use forks, meat claws, an electric hand mixer, or an electric stand mixer to shred to your liking. Add back into pot. Add in a cup of shredded cheese & stir until melted.

The only change I've made is that I no longer add shredded cheese into the mix, I add that after on top & then broil it if the person wants it (or not). Both methods are good! I'll have to try doing the saute method for regular bacon (that's my secret for Instapot chili!).

 

[Muse]

The only change I've made is that I no longer add shredded cheese into the mix, I add that after on top & then broil it if the person wants it (or not). Both methods are good! I'll have to try doing the saute method for regular bacon (that's my secret for Instapot chili!).

I mistakenly bought a 2lb package of bacon, not realizing I already had an unopened one in the freezer. I typically go through bacon very very slowly. I figure I should look for something to speed up my consumption of bacon, therefore. Nothing comes to mind. Maybe the crack chicken? I'm not sure I comprehend how you deal with the bacon in this recipe. You say "a pack of bacon" in your recipe from 11/22. Is that a pound of sliced bacon?? In the new one you say "Microwave bacon." I'm drawing a blank on that. What is microwave bacon?

 

[sdifox]

I mistakenly bought a 2lb package of bacon, not realizing I already had an unopened one in the freezer. I typically go through bacon very very slowly. I figure I should look for something to speed up my consumption of bacon, therefore. Nothing comes to mind. Maybe the crack chicken? I'm not sure I comprehend how you deal with the bacon in this recipe. You say "a pack of bacon" in your recipe from 11/22. Is that a pound of sliced bacon?? In the new one you say "Microwave bacon." I'm drawing a blank on that. What is microwave bacon?

Bacon wrapped ham