40 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

And at a basic level that's how Geth software "thinks" and arrives at conclusions.

[khevan]

There are certainly arguments for and against either choice.



I personally think that the rewrite vs eliminate choice isn't a choice that falls neatly under the Paragon/Renegade continuum. Too many choices in these games have been forced into an artificial (and sometimes schizeophrenic) "morality" system that doesn't work as intended.



But that's drifting slightly afield of this discussion. I favor killing the heretic geth, for several reasons. The first one is that I'm something more of a realist (pessemist?), and I think it's better to guard against unknown danger rather than hope for the best. Much like the Rachni Queen in ME1, I think it's "safer" all around if the rachni never made a recovery (even with what's said in ME2, the rachni choice still could bite you in the ass!), and it's safer if the geth do not reunite their opposing factions.



I fear that Sovereign could have altered the "heretics," which could lead to a change in the "good" geth, a change that could be for the worse. I also fear that such a reprogramming may fail, in which case nothing has changed, except for the possibility that more geth could come to agree with the heretic philosophy, further increasing hostile geth numbers.



As for the "morality" part of the question, which is more moral, killing untold numbers of sentient beings, or altering them against their will to believe what you want them to believe. Either choice is "immoral" if looked at the right way. I choose the lesser of two evils, in my opinion. It's safer for the "true" geth, safer for the rest of the galaxy, and more noteably, safer for humanity if the heretic geth are eliminated. That's the only basis for my decision.

[upsettingshorts]

Indeed. One thing that gives me pause about the Rewrite choice is that pre-rewrite the Geth faction to which Legion belongs has arrived at the belief that all sentient beings should self determinate. This is good. I can work with that.

What if after the heretic Geth are re-integrated into the rest of them the influx of new data and perspective changes that conclusion? Then we've got serious problems.

If the heretic Geth are destroyed, the only Geth we're left with are the ones that believe in self-determination.

Plus in hindsight the decision comes to you in a way that is eerily similar to the endgame one - you START the mission at both the Heretic Base and the Collector Base thinking there is only one option: Stop em and blow the place up.  Then a surprise second way emerges in the middle of the action!

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 septembre 2010 - 09:05 .

[azerSheppard]

I'm pro Geth, so I save them even on renegade characters.



As to the "moral dillema" of the rewrite, I have this to say; Changing the mathematical value isn't exactly the same as brainwashing, we could compare it to changing the synaptic connections of our neurons.

It's "purely data", whilst "morallity" is emotional, althought it's data, it does not follow basic logical law. As Saren once said; "we organics fight, even if we have no chance of winning".



This emotion driven (irrational) thinking is very different to how the Geth process "data" works, they posses no emotion, just rationality.



We cannot for instance judge the actions of an animal immoral, because it does not posses the necessary "platform" and "data", doing so would be "racist". Same goes for the Geth.

[TekFanX]

I don't know if the argument of "they had contact with reapers" is really applying if you recruited Legion, rather than sell it.



Legion was on the derelict reaper for a longer period, hacked the datacore...it could be as infected as every heretic could be.

Also legion is hacking the virus, another infection-source.

From all things we know, Legion could be a heretics agent, stealing the virus back from the true geth in order to reprogram them.



EDI is hacking Collector-Ships and a reaper-IFF unleashes a virus into the Normandy's systems.



In my oppinion those questions somehow deal with the trust you have into synthetics, that's why the "trust them"-answers are paragon.



But I agree: the question of rewrite vs. destroy is tough.

In the end I decided for the small majority of Legions programs to rewrite the heretics.

[CroGamer002]

Reprogramming Geth Heretics is nicest thing you can do to them.

I mean they did genocide ME1 and helped Reapers that wanted to make genocide of whole galaxy for billionth time.

[Heimdall]

Solaris Paradox wrote...


It's going to be an interesting third game if all of this comes back in an interesting fashion. Wrex in charge of the Krogan, the Rachni Queen's promise to aid in the war, and now the geth Heretics rejoining the original geth collective.

Geth army?  Check

Rachni?  Check

Krogan?  Check

Saren! err I mean paragon Shepard!  Your army is ready!

[CroGamer002]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Solaris Paradox wrote...


It's going to be an interesting third game if all of this comes back in an interesting fashion. Wrex in charge of the Krogan, the Rachni Queen's promise to aid in the war, and now the geth Heretics rejoining the original geth collective.

Geth army?  Check

Rachni?  Check

Krogan?  Check

Saren! err I mean paragon Shepard!  Your army is ready!

lol
Exactly my toughs too.

[gunswordfist]

I chose rewrite because I expect to either get more allies or more enemies. I welcome both.

[Moiaussi]

azerSheppard wrote...

I'm pro Geth, so I save them even on renegade characters.

As to the "moral dillema" of the rewrite, I have this to say; Changing the mathematical value isn't exactly the same as brainwashing, we could compare it to changing the synaptic connections of our neurons.
It's "purely data", whilst "morallity" is emotional, althought it's data, it does not follow basic logical law. As Saren once said; "we organics fight, even if we have no chance of winning".

This emotion driven (irrational) thinking is very different to how the Geth process "data" works, they posses no emotion, just rationality.

We cannot for instance judge the actions of an animal immoral, because it does not posses the necessary "platform" and "data", doing so would be "racist". Same goes for the Geth.

Logic is only as good as the premises on which the conclusions are based. Humanity (and from Saren's comment, the other non-geth races) have been around long enough to realize that even though there may seem no chance of winning, while there is life there is hope. If you surrender and die, then you no longer have the possibility of any salvation, whereas if you keep fighting (which sometimes includes surrendering and living), there is still the possibiltiy of victory even if you don't know at the start how it will be achieved.

Saren's logic could have been perfectly reasonable.. if we had already gotten to the point fighting was no longer a valid option. However he advocated surrender even before the real fight began, and despite the fact it should have been obvious that surrendering did not mean living. The Collectors prove that surrender does not equal iviing. When surrender means being bred for a lack of free will, you may as well fight and maybe die.

Taking this back to the Geth, it is the same thing. Re-writing means re-programming away any dissention. It is a removal of free will. If the counter merely corrected the Heretic's logic circuits but allowed them to think independantly of the rest of the collective so they could make their own decision whether to rejoin or not, or to stay heretics even if that meant fighting and dieing, it would be different, but that was not the case.

[Moiaussi]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Saren! err I mean paragon Shepard!  Your army is ready!

Not quite. Saren wrote off the abilities of everyone else and surrendered on behalf of the Council before the first shot had even been fired. The armies he was building were to support the enemy, and from what we know from ME2, would more than likely have ended up Reaper smoothies rather than actual armies.

Consider: If the Collectors were gathering hundreds of thousands of humans to slowly build a reaper, what could they have done with much faster growing/multiplying Krogan?

[In Exile]

azerSheppard wrote...
As to the "moral dillema" of the rewrite, I have this to say; Changing the mathematical value isn't exactly the same as brainwashing, we could compare it to changing the synaptic connections of our neurons.
It's "purely data", whilst "morallity" is emotional, althought it's data, it does not follow basic logical law. As Saren once said; "we organics fight, even if we have no chance of winning".

Putting on my neuroscientist hat for a second, this is really, really incorrect. Morality, if you want to get into the mechanical aspects of it, is a lot like appetite. In fact, it seems to be governed by the mental processes that govern disgust. The actual story is far more complicated, of course, but if we are going to speak about the physicality of emotions and morals and so on, there are good reasons to believe it is reducible to information processing .

The problem is that for whatever reason, there is this presumption that information processing has to be done in absence of emotion. Which as it turns it, is not actually the case. Take people - emotions and you actually wind up with more irrational behaviour, not less.

This emotion driven (irrational) thinking is very different to how the Geth process "data" works, they posses no emotion, just rationality.

Speaking from the standpoint of machine learning, this input-output approach to learning (the perceptron view) is just wrong. To get even rudimentary machine learning, you need a very dynamic and self-reflective system, and while it's absolutely impossible at this stage to speak about what an AI might be like, looking at is as a purely input output machine is wrong. Mathematically impossible, in fact (wiki the perceptron if you're curious).

[azerSheppard]

[quote]
Putting on my neuroscientist hat for a second, this is really, really incorrect. Morality, if you want to get into the mechanical aspects of it, is a lot like appetite. In fact, it seems to be governed by the mental processes that govern disgust. [/quote] 

Our morals, our beliefs and even our understanding of "good and evil" reside as data within the brains. This data is formed by our life experience, upbringing, education etc..
Morals are nothing more than rules we create after processing that data, we can 'like" idea's, action or "dislike" them by refferencing our data.

Darwin believed that morals were the consequence of humanoids biology and social characteristics;
Growing increase in intelligence => social interaction => empathy => caring for others(understanding what would make them "happy", and doing it)
Natural selection took care of the rest.
However, this is NOT apliable to the Geth, they are created intelligence and thereby did not follow the same process,no evolution.

I'm not saying that the Geth are purely input output machines, infact they seem to be very capable of abstract thinking, going as far as to discuss philosophy with Shepard. The fact that they cannot reach a 100% consensus is proof of that. (Heretics choosing to serve reapers, whilst others did not)

[quote]
The actual story is far more complicated, of course, but if we are going to speak about the physicality of emotions and morals and so on, there are good reasons to believe it is reducible to information processing .
[/quote]

Never said it was not. Just said it didn't follow the basic logical rules.
Animals would sacrifice one of their young to save the others, that is logical thinking, (trolly problem).
But what about an elephant mother who commits suicide because of the loss of her single decendant? That's irrational thinking, thats emotional thinking.


[quote]
The problem is that for whatever reason, there is this presumption that information processing has to be done in absence of emotion. Which as it turns it, is not actually the case. Take people - emotions and you actually wind up withmore irrational behaviour, not less.


[/quote]Please explain.
If humans didn't have emotions, we would be living in a utopia.

[/quote]

Modifié par azerSheppard, 04 septembre 2010 - 12:52 .

[MissSeptember]

I think the writers' chose to reward renegade actions.

When they created the Paramour Trophy, and award adultery for any player that cheats on their love interest from Mass Effect 1, who they still love, this is a Renegade Award.

And they avoided making the trophy possibilities of a choice between Paramour or Faithful, and that excludes the Paragon action of staying true to our love. They did not include the possibility of faithfulness or romancing Liara within the core Mass Effect 2 game to stay true and earn all trophies... but cheat and you can steal them?

(I am unsure if they included the possibility of romancing other love interests from ME1. I do not think they did.)

I dare to ask.. What horrible logic went behind this?

Modifié par MissSeptember, 01 août 2012 - 02:28 .

[Ozzy]

I ended up destroying them. Seemed to be the right way to go about it and I just don't think you could know just how effective rewriting them would turn out once they reintegrated. Better to be safe than sorry.