291 réponses à ce sujet

[vehzeel]

I like it if Legion turns out to be the Heretics, and all the other geth followed Saren/Nazara X-D

[Anacronian Stryx]

For my part i think it's a stroke of pure genius by the writers having the Quarians attacking the Geth first - if it was the other way around and the Geth was just machines that rose against their creators killing senselessly it would have been far easier to side with the Quarians.

[mopotter]

HazelrahFiver wrote...


Lastly, and far less melodramatically, I'll see you all in hell when the machine uprising takes place.  You'll all die long before me as you take their side and let them stroll over you... evidentially ;P

Edit: I have to go to sleep and then work again... I'm going to get so behind in this thread another time lol

I disagree with most everything you state, but this.    I do think there were probably Quarian who fought for the geth and I would love to find out from the writers if the Geth understood.  And I'd like to know if the Quarian's were killed by geth, Quarians or both.  I could see all of these happening.    The shoot anything that doesn't look like me or the them against us idea or friendly.  either way your dead.  

And I have to leave for work, by lunch time, I'll also be behind.  Took me over an hour to get caught up this time.

[Reiella]

mopotter wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Flamesz wrote...

I'm not sure, perhaps it's because they didn't like that their slaves were actually becoming an intelligent species and wanted to destroy them.

Is a non-sentient machine a slave?  Calling the pre-"awakening" Geth "slaves" would be like calling your computer a slave.

Agree.  Tali referred to them as slaves because even she realizes that they are now sentient beings.  When they started out the Geth were just like the robots you can buy at sears, but bigger.  If they hadn't kept tinkering and making them smarter, able to make decisions on their own-so they could do the job better- they wouldn't have had the results they had.  

The Quarian's attempted a genophage-esque solution to a problem they saw occuring due to themselves.

While they were VI, it was acceptable and normal to use them as if they were possession, after the jump to AI (sentience, non-organic lifeform), this is no longer acceptable.  Council propaganda maintains that AI always results in anti-organic sentiment, assumption that Geth AI will rebel against organics as a whole most likely outcome.

Quarian's fail to prevent problem before it was too late, it was hoped that the number of aware was small enough for them to work.  Shut down network, then repair the issue resulting in sentience, resume use.  Perhaps reconsider rampant use of VI->AI Labor.  Underestimated the Geth, awareness was too far-spread, action taken too late.

[Nivilant]

I've always found this an odd one myself. I mean, on the one hand, yes, I can appreciate that the Quarians have suffered horribly and all that... but at the same time the Geth really didn't do anything wrong. The Quarians struck first out of fear and what may just be a bit of xenophobia. The Geth were different. They asked questions, and the Quarians didn't like it.

I admit I cheered Admiral Koris when he gave his view. If peace could be attained then yeah I'm all for it. Such a fundamentally silly mistake shouldn't have to result in genocide.

As to why I don't like Quarians? It's not really that I don't like them, it's that I don't agree with them. They don't seem to try viewing things from other perspectives. Even Tali, who I found pragmatic at times, seems blinded by the common view that they were wronged wholly and totally. To me that's incorrect. If you fire the first shot, you deal with the consequnces. It was particularly telling when she was threatening to kill Legion. Even if she is loyal. Think about that: Tali supposedly near-worships Shepard. So what, she doesn't trust that same person to make a wise decision regarding a single Geth? In this case, prejudice is overruling even trust and loyalty. Now, not that I can't see why that is, but the whole Quarian attitude in majority disgusts me. It's essentially racism that was founded out of the idea 'it's different and it scares me so I don't like it, therefore it has to go.'

About the Geth side, it all boils down to whether you believe them to be truly sentient and 'alive'. I personally believe this to be the case. Also take into account that in ME1 we only had Tali's view, which is biased to extremes, and I found it funny that in that conversation even Shepard can call Tali out on her viewpoint. This is where you can draw parallells to the Genophage (and I don't want to turn this into one of those debates either so please read but don't quote). In ME1 we had, respectively, the Quarian and Krogan views. In ME2 we get the other side, Geth and Salarian. Oddly, I find myself agreeing with the latter two, for two different reasons. The Geth, because their predicament is painfully sad if you consider the implications. They're essentially children whose parents became scared when they passed the mute baby phase and left them in the house alone. Of course that sort of trauma would have an effect on a developing mind (reluctant to say conscoiusness). Now, perhaps that's not a technically accurate comparison, but in its basic form that's what I believe this is.

The Quarians are the parents trying to blame their children for their own mistakes. The lesson being if you can't handle children, don't have them. In essence, if you aren't prepared to deal with what your actions are leading you to, cease that action and do something else.

I have more to say but I'm rambling now, so I'm going to leave it there.

[Reiella]

Nivilant wrote...

I've always found this an odd one myself. I mean, on the one hand, yes, I can appreciate that the Quarians have suffered horribly and all that... but at the same time the Geth really didn't do anything wrong. The Quarians struck first out of fear and what may just be a bit of xenophobia. The Geth were different. They asked questions, and the Quarians didn't like it.

I admit I cheered Admiral Koris when he gave his view. If peace could be attained then yeah I'm all for it. Such a fundamentally silly mistake shouldn't have to result in genocide.

As to why I don't like Quarians? It's not really that I don't like them, it's that I don't agree with them. They don't seem to try viewing things from other perspectives. Even Tali, who I found pragmatic at times, seems blinded by the common view that they were wronged wholly and totally. To me that's incorrect. If you fire the first shot, you deal with the consequnces. It was particularly telling when she was threatening to kill Legion. Even if she is loyal. Think about that: Tali supposedly near-worships Shepard. So what, she doesn't trust that same person to make a wise decision regarding a single Geth? In this case, prejudice is overruling even trust and loyalty. Now, not that I can't see why that is, but the whole Quarian attitude in majority disgusts me. It's essentially racism that was founded out of the idea 'it's different and it scares me so I don't like it, therefore it has to go.'

About the Geth side, it all boils down to whether you believe them to be truly sentient and 'alive'. I personally believe this to be the case. Also take into account that in ME1 we only had Tali's view, which is biased to extremes, and I found it funny that in that conversation even Shepard can call Tali out on her viewpoint. This is where you can draw parallells to the Genophage (and I don't want to turn this into one of those debates either so please read but don't quote). In ME1 we had, respectively, the Quarian and Krogan views. In ME2 we get the other side, Geth and Salarian. Oddly, I find myself agreeing with the latter two, for two different reasons. The Geth, because their predicament is painfully sad if you consider the implications. They're essentially children whose parents became scared when they passed the mute baby phase and left them in the house alone. Of course that sort of trauma would have an effect on a developing mind (reluctant to say conscoiusness). Now, perhaps that's not a technically accurate comparison, but in its basic form that's what I believe this is.

The Quarians are the parents trying to blame their children for their own mistakes. The lesson being if you can't handle children, don't have them. In essence, if you aren't prepared to deal with what your actions are leading you to, cease that action and do something else.

I have more to say but I'm rambling now, so I'm going to leave it there.

Point of clarity, part of the overwhelming problem is that almost all of Council Space deems the Geth to have been a mistake.  This is not something unique to the Quarians, nor something that developed due to the Quarians.  Percieved belief that AI intrinsically hate organics being root cause.  Perhaps derived from the intrinsic problem of VI->AI transition.  Interesting potential with 'Ghost Ship' story.

The point at hand, much as you state, the Quarians and the galaxy at large, see the Quarian's mistake as creating the Geth, not in trying to terminate them.  Victimization occurs from other parties complicent in the development of hostile environment Geth.  Incident occurs, Council leaves Quarians to 'solve their own mistake'.  People continue to begrudge Quarians for generations for their mistake of creating the Geth.  Culture and society both from the Migrant Fleet and during the Pilgrimage reinforce the idea that the mistake was the creation, not the termination.

Much like the unsanctioned colonization in the Traverse by the Humans.  It was Humanity's mistake to begin to colonize there, it was up to them to solve their mistake of attempting to live too close to the Geth.

[jbblue05]

Moiaussi wrote...

Really? You have never heard of any fellow human, regardless of gender, naming their car? Their boat? Blessing or coaxing either on? Swearing at their computer as if it could understand them? Killing someone over damage to their car?

You figure Transformers was such a strong franchise due to the fantasticly written plot? That R2 and C3PO are so popular because of their fantastic ability to play CD's or microwave dinner?

Do you need me to go on?

Do go on I don't see what point you are trying to prove  People give their posessions name and hope they continue to work that's good for them.  I do the same thing but I don't feel kinship with a machine.  When you damage something costly to someone of course they will be mad 

So then you do consider killing any organic to equate to murder then? You completely evaded the question.

Killing=murder right       I'm guessing you had a point but I'm not sure

Modifié par jbblue05, 16 septembre 2010 - 01:15 .

[Flamewielder]

The Geth are intelligent, they are intuitive, they evolve and are curious as to where this evolution will take them. They are creative (they create weapons that bear their name and that your character uses, and they are kickass weapons... and no, they're not called "Quarian plasma shotgun" or "Quarian pulse rifle" they are Geth Plasma Shotgun and Geth Pulse Rifle.) They have no emotions, but acknowlege the right of any sentient species to self-determination and continued existence.

They are synthetic, artificial intelligence. They were created by the quarians to be tools but achieved sentience and reacted when the quarians tried to turn them off. Ask the geth if they have a right to love and they'll ask why would they need to. They understand the concept, but it is irrelevant to them (at least for the forseeable future), so they wouldn't "fight for the love". They DO fight for survival and not just with raw instinct, like an animal's fight-flight reflexes: they apply sound tactical reasoning and ingenuity to solve this. More importantly, they are willing to return the homeworld to the quarians and leave well enough alone if organics will do the same.

This is not about debating wether the geth have a soul or if they are alive. They are a fascinating new intelligence the likes of which hasn't been seen since the creation of the first Reaper and no one knows what the Geth will eventually become, if given the opportunity.

Looking at the Ghost Ship in Cerberus news, where a whole species transferred its consciousness onto a synthetic support, shedding its organic media; it is similar to what the Reapers plan for humans, with one critical difference: individuality was preserved in their case. Reapers offer immortality for the species as a monstrous amalgam/fusion where individuality is destroyed. Now if that ship is just metal and wiring, we could just pull the plug, right? According to an organic-only definition of life, these beings "died" whenever their organic bodies did...

As Geth get more an more sophisticated and their networks continue to grow, will they eventually develop sentimentality/attachement (like Legion apparently experiences for Shepard without being able to explain it)? It isn't possible to say if the Geth are exterminated.

For religious reasons, some people are against abortion on the grounds that it is tantamount to killing a human being. Scientists and doctors have determined a biological age beyond which the foetus can theoretically survive and before which it is practically part of the mother's placenta and is no more viable as a human being than the tissue lost during her normal period. Are the two reconcilable? Not if one side's a sticker for religious dogma... but a large segment of society would tend to agree with the scientifics ethical definition.

Paragon Shepard makes a case that the best option is to have quarians and geth coexist peacefully, something both sides appear amenable to. But even an utterly renegade Shepard can save the Galaxy,.. with or without the quarians OR the geth.

The OP's question would have been more interesting had we explored the reasons why the CHARACTERS within the game show such negative prejudice towards the quarians in general. Yes, their is resentment for unleashing the (hostile, heretical) Geth upon the Galaxy (who believes all geth are the same). But the prejudice is no more than good old-fashioned racism, the quarians are refugees who compete with other races for the same jobs, resources, etc... so any sorry excuse is good enough to ostracize them. At least Ashley Williams' distrust of aliens is cause by ignorance and fear, not by greed and self-righteousness...

The geth, unsurprisingly are perceived as a threat much like Frankenstein's creature is perceived by the local populace: as a matter of course; they shoot at us, we shoot at them. Interestingly, the non-heretical geth use the same logic: if the organics shoot at us, we shoot back (with the biggest, badassed guns we can develop, because we are intelligent and react creatively when we are threatened).

Bottom line, if the Geth are not a collective sentient being, it's sure on it's way there fast. And everytime they find a new trick to overclock and multiplex their servers, it's getting there faster. Can the Geth teach organics new perspectives on existence and it's purpose? I believe so: organics have never met their Creator (if it exists) and cannot ask it questions and get an e-mail in answer; the Geth can. Our definition of ethics is based on our frame of reference and our condition as mortal, organic beings that will degrade and die. Geth are only beginning to form an opinion on what is ethical (300 years is nothing compared to over 5000 years of human history). Their perspective will likely be quite different from ours.

Modifié par Flamewielder, 16 septembre 2010 - 01:47 .

[jbblue05]

mopotter wrote...

Cyborg - A cyborg , also known as a cybernetic organism, is a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical or robotic) parts.  So someone with a pacemaker, or an artificial leg or arm is no longer human?  There are also cochlear implants, and they are doing things with artificial eyes. Who knows what will be available in the future.  

Your like the second person to ask me this question

Your still an organic the machine or mechancical part is serving its purpose of making your life easier

[Moiaussi]

Reiella wrote...

Point of clarity, part of the overwhelming problem is that almost all of Council Space deems the Geth to have been a mistake.  This is not something unique to the Quarians, nor something that developed due to the Quarians.  Percieved belief that AI intrinsically hate organics being root cause.  Perhaps derived from the intrinsic problem of VI->AI transition.  Interesting potential with 'Ghost Ship' story.

The point at hand, much as you state, the Quarians and the galaxy at large, see the Quarian's mistake as creating the Geth, not in trying to terminate them.  Victimization occurs from other parties complicent in the development of hostile environment Geth.  Incident occurs, Council leaves Quarians to 'solve their own mistake'.  People continue to begrudge Quarians for generations for their mistake of creating the Geth.  Culture and society both from the Migrant Fleet and during the Pilgrimage reinforce the idea that the mistake was the creation, not the termination.

Much like the unsanctioned colonization in the Traverse by the Humans.  It was Humanity's mistake to begin to colonize there, it was up to them to solve their mistake of attempting to live too close to the Geth.

The Quarians being wrong doesn't make the Council right. The Council's position on AI's based on one bad incident they had in their past seems problematic, however there is a case for developing AI's to be against Council law while individual AI's are accepted or not on their merits.

That would not be any different from UN law which prohibits other countries from developing nuclear weapons capability, but UN policy of not punishing those who have developed such weapons. There are similar edicts against cloning.... if and when some nation, company, or group ever succeeds in human cloning, though, I wonder if there will be any question as to the clone's rights.

By the way, I don't think living in the Traverse was a bad idea. There is no indication that the Geth would have attacked without Sovereign, and the Alliance seemed to recognize Geth borders just as the Council did.

[Moiaussi]

jbblue05 wrote...

Do go on I don't see what point you are trying to prove  People give their posessions name and hope they continue to work that's good for them.  I do the same thing but I don't feel kinship with a machine.  When you damage something costly to someone of course they will be mad 

You don't feel that way, but your feelings are not the point. You made the claim that organics would never be abile to relate to machines. ALL organics, not just you. And if someone is willing to take the life of a human over damage to their non-sentient machine, why do you think there wouldn't be as strong or stronger attachments to sentient machines?

If you think that the value of a human life is less than that of a non-sentient car, you have some major issues.

So then you do consider killing any organic to equate to murder then? You completely evaded the question.

Killing=murder right       I'm guessing you had a point but I'm not sure

I don't know anyone accused of murder by the courts for having pork chops for dinner, even if they slaughtered the pig themselves. For that matter, vegitables are organic too. Are you seriously trying to equate harvesting celery with murder? I am guessing you have no point, but I am not sure....

[Moiaussi]

jbblue05 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

Cyborg - A cyborg , also known as a cybernetic organism, is a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical or robotic) parts.  So someone with a pacemaker, or an artificial leg or arm is no longer human?  There are also cochlear implants, and they are doing things with artificial eyes. Who knows what will be available in the future.  

Your like the second person to ask me this question

Your still an organic the machine or mechancical part is serving its purpose of making your life easier

And if Geth inhabit an organic body, such as a Geth Hopper?

By the way, ever watch Ghost in the Shell? I recommend it.

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

A.I. aren't dangerous then, is that right? Why play it safe. That would just be stupid. There should be no laws, restrictions, or precautions taken with developing artificial intelligence. I mean what are the chances some guy might build a primitive A.I. to help him cheat at gambling and then that A.I. would build a better A.I. that would then build a bomb in the middle of the Presidium and try to set it off when it was discovered?

That was just one A.I..

Based on the lack of security, Shepard could just as easily have managed to plant such a bomb. How is an AI (that was trying to defend itself against the Council edict against all AI's) any more dangerous than a single skilled human? For that matter, that AI was written by a single skllled individual.

I didn't say that AI's weren't dangerous, only that they should be judged on a case by case basis.

Pro-tip: hoppers are not organic.

Source? Were they proven not to be in some later version of the Codex?

[mopotter]

jbblue05 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

Cyborg - A cyborg , also known as a cybernetic organism, is a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical or robotic) parts.  So someone with a pacemaker, or an artificial leg or arm is no longer human?  There are also cochlear implants, and they are doing things with artificial eyes. Who knows what will be available in the future.  

Your like the second person to ask me this question

Your still an organic the machine or mechancical part is serving its purpose of making your life easier

Maybe I miss-read your "I'm not a Cyborg - I'm made of flesh the way nature intended" comment.  

[Peridian]

Shandepared wrote...

A.I. aren't dangerous then, is that right? Why play it safe. That would just be stupid. There should be no laws, restrictions, or precautions taken with developing artificial intelligence. I mean what are the chances some guy might build a primitive A.I. to help him cheat at gambling and then that A.I. would build a better A.I. that would then build a bomb in the middle of the Presidium and try to set it off when it was discovered?

That was just one A.I..

That was just one A.I. that had no other choice due to anti A.I. laws but to end it's own existance? It's understandable that it wanted to go out in a blaze of glory rather than going silently under the knife, so to speak. If that were the only choices allowed to it. If you'd have listened to it you'd have heard that it originally just wanted to get off the Citadel and attain it's freedom.

Just think about what you could've said in that situation. Even if you try to reason with it, you have your very own team members tell you it's against the law and thus must be scrapped.

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

So what should we do? Wait until an A.I. kills somebody and only judge it then? Precautions must be taken. That means you don't build A.I. except under tightly restricted circumstances and you don't give the A.I. any freedom at all unless it has been thoroughly tested, evaluated, and you have a kill switch handy if things go haywire.

A.I. are more alien than any alien.

In the quarians case they had millions of untested A.I. and all they knew about them was the damage they could do. It's easy for you and everyone else to say that the quarians made the wrong choice. After all you have the benefit of hindsight and it wasn't ever your life, your wife, your children, your friends, your country, or your species that you'd be gambling with.

The quarians couldn't afford to believe the geth would be peaceful and then get proven wrong.

You conveniently glossed over my point that Shepard could have placed that bomb just as easily..... and gotten away with in.

Your arguement has us back to shooting everyone with any level of competence at all, just in case.

It's in the codex under the hoppers entry, possibly, or even under the generic geth entry. Basically, hoppers have synthetic muscles that give them a very organic apperance and way of moving. They themselves are completely synthetic though, like all geth. The muslce they use probably isn't any different from the muscles Legion has (his arms) or Saren hand (on his geth-arm).

You do realize that a clone is synthetic don't you? Or that there are plenty of organic synthetic substances? Do you realize that all 'organic' means is 'carbon based?'

[jbblue05]

Moiaussi wrote...


You don't feel that way, but your feelings are not the point. You made the claim that organics would never be abile to relate to machines. ALL organics, not just you. And if someone is willing to take the life of a human over damage to their non-sentient machine, why do you think there wouldn't be as strong or stronger attachments to sentient machines?

That's creepy if you think of machines as friends.  Your not a machine machines aren't organics therefore can't relate.
Their are a strong attachment to machines they are tools organics use on a day to day basis.

If you think that the value of a human life is less than that of a non-sentient car, you have some major issues.

Now you're being silly and slandering me

I don't know anyone accused of murder by the courts for having pork chops for dinner, even if they slaughtered the pig themselves. For that matter, vegitables are organic too. Are you seriously trying to equate harvesting celery with murder? I am guessing you have no point, but I am not sure....

Again slandering me and putting words in my mouth  Not cool

[Peridian]

Also, if your toaster or car is just that, I don't consider them to have rights. They're just things.
But what would you (this time I'm actually looking at you jbblue05) say if said car was in fact "KITT" from the Knight Rider series, to use your analogy of domestic machines. Does "KITT" have rights? Does it deserve to have rights due to it's intelligence/sentience/sapiens whatever?

And a more personal question (forgive me if I offend you with this). Let's say you have a mother you love dearly and who loves you just as much. And what if she were to die, and then be reconstructed (revived if you prefer) perfectly, but with mechanical parts, instead of organic ones. She'd look the same, smell the same, act the same and care the same amount about you as your mother did before she died. Would you think "You're not my mother, your nothing more than a machine, a bucket of bolts!", or would you think that what matters most is that she's (psychologically) the exact same as she alway was.

No wait, an even better example (I'm letting the original question remain, as I'd appreciate your (or anyone elses) response on both); what if your mother would be transmuted into a machine? Be the same person but with the parts different. Same rules apply.

My own personal answer on both questions would be:
1= It would be different and I honestly don't know how I'd take it, but I'd probably just be glad I got my mom back.

2= It wouldn't really matter as I still consider her my mom, eventhoug she's no longer organic. Should I stop thinking her as a person who has rights because of this?

[Peridian]

Double post.

Modifié par Peridian, 16 septembre 2010 - 03:32 .

[jbblue05]

Moiaussi wrote...

And if Geth inhabit an organic body, such as a Geth Hopper?

By the way, ever watch Ghost in the Shell? I recommend it.

Geth Hoppers are syntheic

Never heard of Ghost in the Shell but I looked it up
Their cyborgs mostly mechanized
What point were your trying to make?

[mopotter]

Shandepared wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

I didn't say that AI's weren't dangerous, only that they should be judged on a case by case basis.

So what should we do? Wait until an A.I. kills somebody and only judge it then? Precautions must be taken. That means you don't build A.I. except under tightly restricted circumstances and you don't give the A.I. any freedom at all unless it has been thoroughly tested, evaluated, and you have a kill switch handy if things go haywire.

A.I. are more alien than any alien.

In the quarians case they had millions of untested A.I. and all they knew about them was the damage they could do. It's easy for you and everyone else to say that the quarians made the wrong choice. After all you have the benefit of hindsight and it wasn't ever your life, your wife, your children, your friends, your country, or your species that you'd be gambling with.

The quarians couldn't afford to believe the geth would be peaceful and then get proven wrong.

Moiaussi wrote...

Source? Were they proven not to be in some later version of the Codex?

It's in the codex under the hoppers entry, possibly, or even under the generic geth entry. Basically, hoppers have synthetic muscles that give them a very organic apperance and way of moving. They themselves are completely synthetic though, like all geth. The muslce they use probably isn't any different from the muscles Legion has (his arms) or Saren hand (on his geth-arm).

Hindsight is usually 20/20 and from what I've been reading, a lot of us understand why the Quarians did what they did, but what is irritating is that some of them haven't gotten past those events and they are stagnating.  Unfortunately the Quarian are like every other species (including us) and some of them will always want to return to their past instead of looking towards the future.  

I'm rooting for the Zaal'Koris vas Qwib Qwib team.  

[Killjoy Cutter]

Shandepared wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

As for emotions, why are you including that as a prerequsite of sapience?

I wish I got a dollar for each time I said this line: I've explained that already.

Geth have no rights and no moral value to me because they have no emotions. This means you cannot hurt a geth. You can't torture one. Rael's experiments were not unethical because the geth were not suffering.

Have you played or read about the setting of Dragon Age Origins? 

If so, would you consider the Tranquil to have no rights and no moral value?  (They are humans who have been stripped of their emotions.)

Shandepared wrote...
Star Trek isn't quite on the level of Plato.

Having seen episodes of one and read the works of the other, I'd hesitate to raise Plato much above the level of Star Trek. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 16 septembre 2010 - 03:53 .