803 réponses à ce sujet

[Rekkampum]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Any logic is flawed if it rests on false assumptions. In this case Legion's logic may or may not be sound, but the conditions are unequal: the heretics accepted to work with the Reapers without understanding what they were, so they were open to manipulation. I would study Reaper technology in order to understand it and control it instead of letting it control me. That quite a bit different from working with the Reapers or to use Reaper technology without understanding it.   

Paul Grayson only proves the point. The technology did not put into itself into his head by its own will. TIM put it there.

No, first of all, you can't conclude without the proper information, and you're blanketing Geth thought. Not all Geth share the views of the heretics, first of all. Secondly, Geth Heretics view Reapers as the epitome of synthetic beings. Given their advanced technology, the view, even if fanatical, is not a "false assumption". 

Paul Grayson proves that no one exposed to Reaper technology over a prolonged period of time can control it, contrary to what human minds would like to think. Perhaps we could develop tech to resist it, but at this time no such breakthroughs have been demonstrated. I laugh when you say TIM put it in there, like he was the very surgeon or engineer involved. Please.<_<

Modifié par Rekkampum, 08 mars 2011 - 08:21 .

[Rekkampum]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Rekkampum wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Reaper technology does not carry a taint. It is just machines and knowledge. The flaw the Council made when using the mass relay network is that they made no attempt to understand it, or at least not determined enough an attempt. So with time, Citadel civilization grew complacent about it. But now we *know* why the Reapers left the mass relays. Knowledge is power. Understanding gives control.

Tell that to Paul Grayson or any other person who's been indoctrinated.

That they're being affected by technology being misused by bad people?

I'm pretty sure they already know it.

Also, Legion can't think irrationally, since it's walking supercomputer with over one thousand programs operating at once. I think it would be far safer to trust Legion's logic than a human's. Whether one does or doesn't is, of course, their personal choice.

A thousand programs that are wrong is simply a thousand wrong voices. Computers are not inherently correct.

You can poke a lot of holes in Legion's argument, starting from his argument against using technology developed by others even as it and all Geth are technology developed by others (the Quarians) and use technology based on the developments of others (mass effect technology) and is happy enough to utilize other races technologies (co-development for his Widow, re-utilization of the Heretic Virus).

Dean, you're clearly misinformed. The Geth never came to a consensus on that assignment, and therefore it was Shepard who was trusted to make the decision. Secondly, your Quarian argument is a nonstarter, especially seeing as the Quarians originally designed the Geth as slaves. Are they the slaves of Quarians now? Certainly not. Also, cooperation does not equal co-dependency. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...

No, first of all, you can't conclude without the proper information, and you're blanketing Geth thought. Not all Geth share the views of the heretics, first of all. Secondly, Geth Heretics view Reapers as the epitome of synthetic beings. Given their advanced technology, the view, even if fanatical, is not a "false assumption".

Which is actually the point: Geth can come to contradictory conclusions. They aren't automatically absolute arbiters of the truth, nor are their conclusions best.

Geth themselves make horrible analyzers of what's best for societal development in the first place, given that they are incompetent in understanding organic motivations.

Paul Grayson proves that no one exposed to Reaper technology over a prolonged period of time can control it, contrary to what human minds would like to think.

But Paul Grayson was supposed to break and be indoctrinated. That was the point of the experiment: to see it happen and study it as it happened. He was never supposed to resist it forever, nor was it ever expected. Resisting it was the probelm.

That's like having a gun test on body armor to study the gun, watching the body armor break, and then declaring that the experiment proves that the gun is always fatal and unstoppable. A does not follow B.

Perhaps we could develop tech to resist it, but at this time no such breakthroughs have been demonstrated.

You're demanding the cart come before the horse.

In Retribution, the experiments and data collection hadn't even concluded before Anderson broke down the door: in ME2, we hadn't even gotten our hands on the testing materials.

I laugh when you say TIM put it in there, like he was the very surgeon or engineer involved. Please.<_<

TIM actually indicated to be a technical genius in his own right, at least as a cryptographic analyst and programmer.

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Rekkampum wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Reaper technology does not carry a taint. It is just machines and knowledge. The flaw the Council made when using the mass relay network is that they made no attempt to understand it, or at least not determined enough an attempt. So with time, Citadel civilization grew complacent about it. But now we *know* why the Reapers left the mass relays. Knowledge is power. Understanding gives control.

Tell that to Paul Grayson or any other person who's been indoctrinated.

That they're being affected by technology being misused by bad people?

I'm pretty sure they already know it.

Also, Legion can't think irrationally, since it's walking supercomputer with over one thousand programs operating at once. I think it would be far safer to trust Legion's logic than a human's. Whether one does or doesn't is, of course, their personal choice.

A thousand programs that are wrong is simply a thousand wrong voices. Computers are not inherently correct.

You can poke a lot of holes in Legion's argument, starting from his argument against using technology developed by others even as it and all Geth are technology developed by others (the Quarians) and use technology based on the developments of others (mass effect technology) and is happy enough to utilize other races technologies (co-development for his Widow, re-utilization of the Heretic Virus).

Dean, you're clearly misinformed. The Geth never came to a consensus on that assignment, and therefore it was Shepard who was trusted to make the decision.

Nearly 50% of the Geth in legion alone were in consensus about using the virus, and Legion certainly accepts the use of it even when Shepard decides. Their standard wasn't all-supported in themselves, nor did they stand by it even when someone else was advocating the oppositie (which, when it comes down to it, is the point of standards: to stand in the face of opposing opinion).

Secondly, your Quarian argument is a nonstarter, especially seeing as the Quarians originally designed the Geth as slaves. Are they the slaves of Quarians now? Certainly not.

And I never said they still were.

They do, however, continue to develop on the technical legacy of the Quarians, which they did not develop themselves. This is not fundamentally distinct from developing on the top of the Protheans technology, which is developed on top of the Reapers technology ultimately.

Also, cooperation does not equal co-dependency.

And I never said it did. Co-dependency really doesn't come into the argument at all.

[Rekkampum]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Geth themselves make horrible analyzers of what's best for societal development in the first place, given that they are incompetent in understanding organic motivations.

The Geth aren't organic, so your point is irrelevant. Their motivations and societal needs will naturally be different.

But Paul Grayson was supposed to break and be indoctrinated. That was the point of the experiment: to see it happen and study it as it happened. He was never supposed to resist it forever, nor was it ever expected. Resisting it was the probelm.

That's like having a gun test on body armor to study the gun, watching the body armor break, and then declaring that the experiment proves that the gun is always fatal and unstoppable. A does not follow B.

No it doesn't. It simply restates the obvious. No one's broken free of indoctrination willingly, whether directly or indirectly induced. Your comparison was unfounded.

TIM actually indicated to be a technical genius in his own right, at least as a cryptographic analyst and programmer.

A genius sure. I have no qualms stating that. But bioengineer? Hardly. That's for supplying evidence that shows he wasn't the one directly involved in the process.

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Geth themselves make horrible analyzers of what's best for societal development in the first place, given that they are incompetent in understanding organic motivations.

The Geth aren't organic, so your point is irrelevant. Their motivations and societal needs will naturally be different.

Since you misunderstand my point, I'll clarify for you:

Your prior position that Legion's position that we, as a socieity, should not use Reaper technology because we did not develop it, is flawed, not least because Legion's position (which you supported on the basis that Legion is logical) is weakened by the fact that Legion doesn't know what it's talking about in that it is not an expert on organic socieities and development.

Legion being disinclined towards copying others technology does not make him correct, or applicable towards organics, which undermines the point about his status as a robot.

No it doesn't. It simply restates the obvious. No one's broken free of indoctrination willingly, whether directly or indirectly induced. Your comparison was unfounded.

Except Grayson succumbing to indoctrination was the point of the test.

You can't point to the expected and intended results of a test (Grayson being indoctrinated) and claim that it proves the technology involved is inherently anything because it did exactly what it was intended to do.

A genius sure. I have no qualms stating that. But bioengineer? Hardly. That's for supplying evidence that shows he wasn't the one directly involved in the process.

...that isn't evidence of that sort.

It's evidence that he's an expert of another sort, not a proof or disproof that he's an expert in the first.

[Rekkampum]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
Nearly 50% of the Geth in legion alone were in consensus about using the virus, and Legion certainly accepts the use of it even when Shepard decides. Their standard wasn't all-supported in themselves, nor did they stand by it even when someone else was advocating the oppositie (which, when it comes down to it, is the point of standards: to stand in the face of opposing opinion).[/quote]

Sorry but without a citation no accurate statistic can be given on the precise number of Geth following a particular order. Secondly, the last statement is one of opinio, not scientia. Since, as primarily logic-based programs that operate without the benefit of empathy, their understandings of standards and ours are enttirely different and will naturally conflict. Also, it's clear that their inaction was a plot device, since the story does revolve around Shepard, so blame the writers, not the imaginary characters, for the inconsistency.


[quote]They do, however, continue to develop on the technical legacy of the Quarians, which they did not develop themselves. This is not fundamentally distinct from developing on the top of the Protheans technology, which is developed on top of the Reapers technology ultimately.
[quote]

No, they don't. Anyone comparing Geth and Quarian architecture and technology will notice the glaring differences in both the aesthetic and functionality. 

[quote]And I never said it did. Co-dependency really doesn't come into the argument at all.
[/quote] 

You actually suggested it, in your earlier statement about people sharing their technology, as though that somehow meant they had forfeited their independence as a society. 

[Rekkampum]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Your prior position that Legion's position that we, as a socieity, should not use Reaper technology because we did not develop it, is flawed, not least because Legion's position (which you supported on the basis that Legion is logical) is weakened by the fact that Legion doesn't know what it's talking about in that it is not an expert on organic socieities and development.

No, now you're interpolating. My position is that there is no sufficient evidence either for or against using it, and all decisions are at best speculations or opinio. I was actually responding to the claim that it wasn't "tainted", when history shows that Reaper technology carries a blatant adverse effect on those exposed to it over prolonged periods of time.

Nonsense. I haven't said it was inherently anything. All I said was that it indoctrinates people over an extended period of time. That's an observation. To note, even TIM must have shared this view a priori if the purpose had nothing to do with counteracting the effects of it.

It's evidence that he's an expert of another sort, not a proof or disproof that he's an expert in the first.

Of course it isn't. But is it evidence that justifiably suggests he could be, as you insinuated? No.

Modifié par Rekkampum, 08 mars 2011 - 09:20 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...


Sorry but without a citation no accurate statistic can be given on the precise number of Geth following a particular order. Secondly, the last statement is one of opinio, not scientia. Since, as primarily logic-based programs that operate without the benefit of empathy, their understandings of standards and ours are enttirely different and will naturally conflict. Also, it's clear that their inaction was a plot device, since the story does revolve around Shepard, so blame the writers, not the imaginary characters, for the inconsistency.

Citation? You mean like Legion? In his own loyalty mission? When you can ask him his opinion right before making the call?


And the geth not understanding organics is not a personal opinion: that's the geth's own position. Again, derived from talking to Legion.

No, they don't. Anyone comparing Geth and Quarian architecture and technology will notice the glaring differences in both the aesthetic and functionality.

...no, I am not comparing Geth  and Quarian architecture.

Geth technology is, however, undisputably an evolution of purely Quarian technology. That it is different now doesn't change what it was based off of: the whole-sale copying (and altering) of someone else's technology.

Which is exactly what we can do with the Collector base.

You actually suggested it, in your earlier statement about people sharing their technology, as though that somehow meant they had forfeited their independence as a society. 

...no, that's not what it suggested. It suggested that sharing technology and utilizing other peoples' is abandoning pretense at pure technological self-development.

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Your prior position that Legion's position that we, as a socieity, should not use Reaper technology because we did not develop it, is flawed, not least because Legion's position (which you supported on the basis that Legion is logical) is weakened by the fact that Legion doesn't know what it's talking about in that it is not an expert on organic socieities and development.

No, now you're interpolating. My position is that there is no sufficient evidence either for or against using it, and all decisions are at best speculations or opinio. I was actually responding to the claim that it wasn't "tainted", when history shows that Reaper technology carries a blatant adverse effect on those exposed to it over prolonged periods of time.

That isn't inherent 'taint' though. That's simply Reaper technology doing what it was intended to do by the people who were using it.

We can also find examples of Reaper technology that does not indoctrinate over time. IE, pretty much every re-purposed Reaper technology to date, from EDI to the Thannix to the Reaper IFF.

Reaper systems that were made to indoctrinate going on to indoctrinate people does not mean that all Reaper systems indoctrinate (we have multiple examples that don't), or that redeemable technology is not extractable from them (which we still have examples of).



Nonsense. I haven't said it was inherently anything. All I said was that it indoctrinates people over an extended period of time. That's an observation. To note, even TIM must have shared this view a priori if the purpose had nothing to do with counteracting the effects of it.

Of course it isn't. But is it evidence that justifiably suggests he could be, as you insinuated? No.

Sure it is: people who are demonstratably skilled in multiple areas have higher reasonability of being an expert in another. Much like how someone who knows three languages is far more plausibly to know five.

[Lunatic LK47]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
We can also find examples of Reaper technology that does not indoctrinate over time. IE, pretty much every re-purposed Reaper technology to date, from EDI to the Thannix to the Reaper IFF.

Except EDI and Thannix were taken from Sovereign's corpse, and whatever cognitant functions Sovereign had were literally Saren's dust.

Reaper systems that were made to indoctrinate going on to indoctrinate people does not mean that all Reaper systems indoctrinate (we have multiple examples that don't), or that redeemable technology is not extractable from them (which we still have examples of).

Only if a Reaper ship is blown to smithereens. A million-year-old dead Reaper managed to indoctrinate the crew when it was intact.

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

We can also find examples of Reaper technology that does not indoctrinate over time. IE, pretty much every re-purposed Reaper technology to date, from EDI to the Thannix to the Reaper IFF.

Reaper systems that were made to indoctrinate going on to indoctrinate people does not mean that all Reaper systems indoctrinate (we have multiple examples that don't), or that redeemable technology is not extractable from them (which we still have examples of).

The Normandy is the first actual deployment of the Thanix. It is new tech even to the Turians. Likewise with EDI and the IFF.

How do we know there are no long term ill effects relating to tech that hasn't been in use long term? It probably is safe, and may be neccessary against the Reapers even if it isn't, but the reality is that it is too soon to be certain.

[Ieldra]

[quote]Rekkampum wrote...
[quote]Ieldra2 wrote...

Any logic is flawed if it rests on false assumptions. In this case Legion's logic may or may not be sound, but the conditions are unequal: the heretics accepted to work with the Reapers without understanding what they were, so they were open to manipulation. I would study Reaper technology in order to understand it and control it instead of letting it control me. That quite a bit different from working with the Reapers or to use Reaper technology without understanding it.   

Paul Grayson only proves the point. The technology did not put into itself into his head by its own will. TIM put it there.
[/quote]

No, first of all, you can't conclude without the proper information, and you're blanketing Geth thought. Not all Geth share the views of the heretics, first of all. Secondly, Geth Heretics view Reapers as the epitome of synthetic beings. Given their advanced technology, the view, even if fanatical, is not a "false assumption". [/quote]
I was referring to Legion's reasoning: "Taking technology from another binds you to the path chosen by the other".

[quote]Paul Grayson proves that no one exposed to Reaper technology over a prolonged period of time can control it, contrary to what human minds would like to think. Perhaps we could develop tech to resist it, but at this time no such breakthroughs have been demonstrated. I laugh when you say TIM put it in there, like he was the very surgeon or engineer involved. Please.<_<[/quote]
That was the point of it, wasn't it? TIM put it in Grayson's head to see what would happen. Getting Grayson to be influenced was EXACTLY the point of the experiment.

Also, assuming all Reaper technology is the same and will always indoctrinate is just like saying that because a gun can kill you a computer will, too, or more notably, that a bioweapon will kill you whether it gets into your body or not. There are indoctrination devices that do....well...indoctrinate, and there are other elements of Reaper technology that don't do these things. Did you forget both EDI and the Thanix cannon incorporate parts of Sovereign?

"Reaper technology is too dangerous to handle" is a simplistic generalization, and it is also wrong. Driven by the images of the game, people are letting their fear eat up their common sense. Studying Reaper technology should start with identifying indoctrination devices. Besides, indoctrination is carried by radiation, so anything that protects from that will also protect from indoctrination. The incredible stupidity of studying the stuff without adequate protection is more to blame for the results than the technology itself. Dr Chandana knew things could be dangerous. Setting up camp in that derelict Reaper, no scientist in his right mind would ever do that. Just as in the real world, people had to learn about the effects of radiation poisoning, but nowadays scientists are extremely careful with it. 





[/quote]

[Rekkampum]

]Citation? You mean like Legion? In his own loyalty mission? When you can ask him his opinion right before making the call?

Thought you meant something else.

Geth technology is, however, undisputably an evolution of purely Quarian technology. That it is different now doesn't change what it was based off of: the whole-sale copying (and altering) of someone else's technology.

That's innovation, actually. Geth, being synthetics, would have no use for the functions that most of Quarian technology would offer, so even if it is based on their tech, to call it whole-sale copying would be ridiculous.

Which is exactly what we can do with the Collector base.

Statement of belief, hence conjecture.

...no, that's not what it suggested. It suggested that sharing technology and utilizing other peoples' is abandoning pretense at pure technological self-development.

Not if you aren't being dependent on it. The key word is innovation. That's how technology of any form evolves. 

That isn't inherent 'taint' though. That's simply Reaper technology doing what it was intended to do by the people who were using it.

We can also find examples of Reaper technology that does not indoctrinate over time. IE, pretty much every re-purposed Reaper technology to date, from EDI to the Thannix to the Reaper IFF. 

Reaper systems that were made to indoctrinate going on to indoctrinate people does not mean that all Reaper systems indoctrinate (we have multiple examples that don't), or that redeemable technology is not extractable from them (which we still have examples of).

I don't believe it's "inherently" anything, so point is moot. Also, EDI and the Thanix Cannon, along with other technology is only partially based on Reaper technology, not directly. Also, the IFF had a virus in it, so poor comparison. 

Your last statement of course is true, but it doesn't mean that the CB technology isn't capable of indoctrinating people. Therefore, arguments can be made either for against. 

]Sure it is: people who are demonstratably skilled in multiple areas have higher reasonability of being an expert in another. Much like how someone who knows three languages is far more plausibly to know five.

Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion. TIM's technological expertise does not extend to the biological, and he wasn't directly involved in the Lazarus Project. He only financed it. Am I to assume a philologist is more likely to be an expert in Quantum Mechanics? No. 

Modifié par Rekkampum, 08 mars 2011 - 10:21 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
We can also find examples of Reaper technology that does not indoctrinate over time. IE, pretty much every re-purposed Reaper technology to date, from EDI to the Thannix to the Reaper IFF.

Except EDI and Thannix were taken from Sovereign's corpse, and whatever cognitant functions Sovereign had were literally Saren's dust.

Reaper systems that were made to indoctrinate going on to indoctrinate people does not mean that all Reaper systems indoctrinate (we have multiple examples that don't), or that redeemable technology is not extractable from them (which we still have examples of).

Only if a Reaper ship is blown to smithereens. A million-year-old dead Reaper managed to indoctrinate the crew when it was intact.

So, if we just don't take it from a completed, functional Reaper, it should be good.

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...
That's innovation, actually. Geth, being synthetics, would have no use for the functions that most of Quarian technology would offer, so even if it is based on their tech, to call it whole-sale copying would be ridiculous.

Good thing no one is calling current Geth technology whole-sale copying, isn't it?


Now, since we've agreed that technology can be modified and adapted from its original users and their intents, we've also implicitly agreed that the same can be done with Reaper technology... not least because we already have, but hey.

Statement of belief, hence conjecture.

No, we can re-adapt the technology. The proof of which being, we already have re-adapted technology of both Collector and Reaper levels.

Saying we will is (founded) conjecture. Saying we can is a fact proven by prior demonstration.

I don't believe it's "inherently" anything, so point is moot.

Then why were you arguing that position when it was dismisser earlier?

Also, EDI and the Thanix Cannon, along with other technology is only partially based on Reaper technology, not directly. Also, the IFF had a virus in it, so poor comparison.

Thanix is copy-paste Reaper technology concepts. It's not innovative, it's duplicative.

EDI is a readaptation of the sort we can continue to do, while the IFF's virus was manageable and in no way outweighed the benefits of the IFF.

Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion. TIM's technological expertise does not extend to the biological,

Fallacy of unfounded statement.

Yes, I can do it as well.

and he wasn't directly involved in the Lazarus Project. He only financed it. Am I to assume a philologist is more likely to be an expert in Quantum Mechanics? No. 

More likely than who is the real question.A philologist is more likely to be familiar, if not expert, in quantum mechanics than a non-college graduate, but less so than an actual philologist.

It's all academic, anyway, since you were picking a semantic quibble that didn't change the intent of the original post.

[Rekkampum]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Now, since we've agreed that technology can be modified and adapted from its original users and their intents, we've also implicitly agreed that the same can be done with Reaper technology... not least because we already have, but hey.

Redundant. There are just as many reasons suggesting it can't be done as there are for the possibility. We'll see how crucial the CB is when the game releases. 

Then why were you arguing that position when it was dismisser earlier?

No one's arguing it. You're assuming I am simply by my choice to outline information that demonstrates that the technology could be used against us, and to show that those who did make that decision were equally valid. Especially since our prior experience with active Reaper tech has foreshadowed the opposite.

Thanix is copy-paste Reaper technology concepts. It's not innovative, it's duplicative.

Wrong. The Cannon had to be made smaller to suit the Normandy, hence improved in design. No one's made an assumption about it's worth. Especially EDI's, which has already been demonstrated.

More likely than who is the real question.

Probability is nice, but it is still too premature to draw such conclusions, especially when they aren't based in any facts, which was the point of the comment. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Rekkampum wrote...


Redundant. There are just as many reasons suggesting it can't be done as there are for the possibility. We'll see how crucial the CB is when the game releases.

Redundancy is good. Past adaptation of Reaper technology to our own advantage is absolutely relevant in evaluating the prospects of taking advantage of the Collector base.

Wrong. The Cannon had to be made smaller to suit the Normandy, hence improved in design.

That's not conceptual innovation. That's just scaling up and down an existing design.

[Rekkampum]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Redundancy is good. Past adaptation of Reaper technology to our own advantage is absolutely relevant in evaluating the prospects of taking advantage of the Collector base.

Certainly. 

That's not conceptual innovation. That's just scaling up and down an existing design.

 Perhaps not on as grand a level as we'd like, but modest enough.

[jeweledleah]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Also, assuming all Reaper technology is the same and will always indoctrinate is just like saying that because a gun can kill you a computer will, too, or more notably, that a bioweapon will kill you whether it gets into your body or not. There are indoctrination devices that do....well...indoctrinate, and there are other elements of Reaper technology that don't do these things. Did you forget both EDI and the Thanix cannon incorporate parts of Sovereign?

"Reaper technology is too dangerous to handle" is a simplistic generalization, and it is also wrong. Driven by the images of the game, people are letting their fear eat up their common sense. Studying Reaper technology should start with identifying indoctrination devices. Besides, indoctrination is carried by radiation, so anything that protects from that will also protect from indoctrination. The incredible stupidity of studying the stuff without adequate protection is more to blame for the results than the technology itself. Dr Chandana knew things could be dangerous. Setting up camp in that derelict Reaper, no scientist in his right mind would ever do that. Just as in the real world, people had to learn about the effects of radiation poisoning, but nowadays scientists are extremely careful with it. 

I took out the book information becasue its not available in game and therefore has no bearing on in game decisions.

the issue I have with your arguments is that you pretty much fall into the oposite of luddite - you think all technology is good, all science is neccesary and all methods of study are fine as long as they result in progress.

we're not just keeping technology for study.  we're keeping it in hands of someone who has proven, even without the aditional book information that THEY cannot be trusted with technology, not unless you are ok with questionable techniques and live sentient subject experementation. 

A gun on its own is merely a tool.  a gun in hands of someone who's willing to shoot people in front of him standing in line to get coffee?  too dangerous.  would I rather keep the gun?  of course!  but the option to keep it comes only with the strings attached, strings of letting untrustworthy ruthless psychopathic person play with it.  he'll probably use that gun for good purpose too.  but he'll destroy a lot of innocent bystanders on the way.

is that gun our best chance of survival?  no.  is it our only chance of survival?  no, its not.  its just one weapon in an arsenal of weapons.  It may end up being equivalent of cain.  but you can win the battle without cain, it will just take a bit more effort.

so decision to destroy the base is not about fear of technology, but rather a reluctance to leave it in very specific hands.  deciding on whether the risk is worth it?  that's up to each individual Shepard and their judgement.  but not taking that risk is not a bad thing, its merely deciding that you'd rather explore other available options.

[Dean_the_Young]

Well, that departure lasted a good... five hours.

[jeweledleah]

assumptions make a fool of you and me. I didn't say I was leaving, I said I was done with you trolls. no wonder you're having hard time seeing beyond your nose.

[Bluko]

The Collector Base is like the Ring of Power.

Yeah it's kind of cool and will likely give you spiffy powers/tech, but ultimately it will corrupt Shepard and turn them into Gollum. But this is Mass Effect so Shepard will just turn into a psychotic Terminator instead.

Going to go with Elrond here and "DESTORY IT!", you know so T.I.M. doesn't become the new Dark Lord with his own army of Reapers, etc. Evil space stations should always be blown up.  Sure the Rebel Alliance could have used the Death Star, but blowing it up seemed to work pretty well for them.

Also not to pick on those saved the base, but if talk to your crew afterwards all of them will question your judgement about not blowing it up. Remember you don't keep the Collector Base, T.I.M. does. Sorry but I wouldn't trust that dude to run a Hot Dog stand.

Modifié par Bluko, 09 mars 2011 - 02:50 .

[DPSSOC]

Bluko wrote...
Also not to pick on those saved the base, but if talk to your crew afterwards all of them will question your judgement about not blowing it up.

Which is weird cause I'm pretty sure Mordin and Legion actually encourage you to keep it in the moment.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 09 mars 2011 - 03:29 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Bluko wrote...

Sure the Rebel Alliance could have used the Death Star, but blowing it up seemed to work pretty well for them.

Because they could never capture it.

Bluko wrote...

Also not to pick on those saved the base, but if talk to your crew afterwards all of them will question your judgement about not blowing it up.

Actually, no. Some of them do that, but others, such as Legion, Garrus, Mordin and even (IIRC) Jacob just express their concerns that now that the Base is in our grasp, it should not be misused. Legion's suggestion not to make Reapers of ourselves is especially hilarious (as always). It is, BTW, normal to have "after-jerks" in your knees after making it out alive from a suicide mission.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 09 mars 2011 - 04:00 .