115 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Saaziel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Saaziel wrote...


So how would you measure the merit of speculations and weigh hypotheticals prior to actual testing ?

Basic risk management, of course.

How likely is a factor?
How serious is a factor?
Is it possible to decrease the likelyhood of a factor occuring? If so, what does the likelyhood change to?
Is it possible to mitigate the severity of a factor? If so, what does the severity change to?

All these seem arbitrary at best. Likelyhood & seriousness are subjective when applied to anything but maths. And then only in terms of likelyhood.

If you want to get down to it, all evaluative frameworks are arbitrary. Morality is arbitrary.

Arbitrary does not mean not-real, however.

Not to mention the fact that we're interested in is gauging the merit of speculations; Its tautologically flawed to add a possibility to increase or decrease a set of factors who's possibility we're trying to establish in the first place. Moreover we'd have to gauge those possibilities as well.

It's not.

I honestly don't know how this would work, you'll have to provide me with an example , preferably from the Mass effect universe.

...

I'll be frank ; I think you just Wikipedia'd something you thought was relevant but isn't. I can see it working strictly for maths ,but it doesn't apply here.

Welcome to the wonderful world of how the military manages risks.

http://www.scribd.co...Risk-Management

I assure you, I didn't study it for the sake of this thread.

Even then, general success , as you put it , doesn't warrant trust in matters specific.

When Cerberus has as good a record as anyone at succeding, and limiting their failures, in terms of dangerous technology, that's a pretty grounded basis.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 02 juin 2011 - 12:54 .

[CaptainZaysh]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

 Good can come from the Collector base sure but I still didn't risk it. Indoctrination is a terrible terrible thing. The Rachni, Saren and Dr. Kenson were three interesting examples of indoctrination and we know how badly things almost went with them.

If Dr Kenson hadn't studied Object Rho, the Arrival wouldn't have been delayed.

[Saaziel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you want to get down to it, all evaluative frameworks are arbitrary. Morality is arbitrary.

Arbitrary does not mean not-real, however.

I never said anything was none-real.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Saaziel wrote...

I honestly don't know how this would work, you'll have to provide me with an example , preferably from the Mass effect universe.

...

I'll be frank ; I think you just Wikipedia'd something you thought was relevant but isn't. I can see it working strictly for maths ,but it doesn't apply here.

Welcome to the wonderful world of how the military manages risks.

http://www.scribd.co...Risk-Management

I assure you, I didn't study it for the sake of this thread.

I'm calling your bluff.

You have no idea how this works or what its for. Going back a few week on similar topics , you never mention this , never made a point of it. In fact the first time you brought this up was less than a day ago. You don't know how it works because you can't make a proper example using this thread's topic ,like i asked . And you could not, because its not applicable in situations like these.

Prove me wrong ; Manage the Risk of Reaper tech.

Modifié par Saaziel, 02 juin 2011 - 05:16 .

[Saaziel]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Right, Shepard says that in-game if you keep the base too.

Its possible , i've not played in a while so. Regardless this point is not relevant to the topic at hand.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Which is how things were throughout ME2 and resulted in a successful Collector Base mission.

That isn't the point i was making . I was establishing the 3 possibilities Sheppard was faced with and when on the collector base. It had nothing to do with the legitimacy of any of those action or aftermath.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

They knew about the Reaper IFF because of that study.

I think the information came from the Collector vessel actually. Moiaussi pointed that out before, I'll take his word on it.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
The Alliance tried their hand at researching Reaper tech in the Arrival DLC.  They did no better so that point is moot. 

Alliance versus Cerberus is tantamount to a False dicotomy in my opinion. Especially so when regarding Reaper tech: Withholding  Reaper tech from Cerberus doesn't translate to giving it to the Alliance by default.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
And despite the indoctrination, had the IFF not been found and just destroyed instead, the Collectors would not have been stopped and getting through the Omega 4 would've been impossible. 

Which is irrelevant. Stopping the collectors is secondary to stopping the Reapers.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
That's why not destroying it holds water because the Collector Base brings up the same issue.  If everyone destroyed everything Reaper just because it was Reaper or could carry indoctrination or because it did something evil

No one seems to actually read any of the post made , or they build up a strawman doing so. I don't think anyone wants to destroy Reaper tech outright. Studying it must be done properly though .

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
So a Japanese car is not a Japanese car if every part of the car isn't their own original idea?  

They can't take credit for it , in my opinion.

Modifié par Saaziel, 02 juin 2011 - 05:40 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Saaziel wrote...


I'm calling your bluff.

You have no idea how this works or what its for. Going back a few week on similar topics , you never mention this , never made a point of it. In fact the first time you brought this up was less than a day ago. You don't know how it works because you can't make a proper example using this thread's topic ,like i asked . And you could not, because its not applicable in situations like these.

Prove me wrong ; Manage the Risk of Reaper tech.

Which Collector Base thread would you like to be referenced to?

I've applied risk management in arguing against hyperbolic scenarios in a number of them: particularly against arguments about the devastating risks of the Illusive Man keeping the base. I've argued the likelyhood of such scenarios (such as 'TIM wants to kill all aliens'), I've argued on grounds of mitigation of likelyhood (working to stop TIM afterwards), I've argued against severity (how bad a problem various worries actually are, such as indoctrination risk), and I've argued at how to diminish such problems (indoctrination-detection schemes, AI/VI scouts immune to such, the ability to go back and clear such indoctrinated people).

I don't need to make a point that I'm using a risk management process to, well, use a risk management process to inform an argument. My arguments have continually reflected it, by countering exagerated, overstated, or unfounded fears and proposals. (The application of the concepts of risk marginalization and mitigation.) The reference to the process itself is irrelevant to its application.

[Saaziel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Saaziel wrote...


I'm calling your bluff.

You have no idea how this works or what its for. Going back a few week on similar topics , you never mention this , never made a point of it. In fact the first time you brought this up was less than a day ago. You don't know how it works because you can't make a proper example using this thread's topic ,like i asked . And you could not, because its not applicable in situations like these.

Prove me wrong ; Manage the Risk of Reaper tech.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Which Collector Base thread would you like to be referenced to?

The threat of Indoctrination if Reaper tech is found and studied on the Collector base.

I assume that by "referenced to" you mean that you'll link a post where you made the risk management already , yes? And that this Risk management you made of this threat will reflect the framework i would find in the Army Fm3 link .

Dean_the_Young wrote...
I've applied risk management in arguing against hyperbolic scenarios in a number of them: particularly against arguments about the devastating risks of the Illusive Man keeping the base. I've argued the likelyhood of such scenarios (such as 'TIM wants to kill all aliens'), I've argued on grounds of mitigation of likelyhood (working to stop TIM afterwards), I've argued against severity (how bad a problem various worries actually are, such as indoctrination risk), and I've argued at how to diminish such problems (indoctrination-detection schemes, AI/VI scouts immune to such, the ability to go back and clear such indoctrinated people).

I don't need to make a point that I'm using a risk management process to, well, use a risk management process to inform an argument. My arguments have continually reflected it, by countering exagerated, overstated, or unfounded fears and proposals. (The application of the concepts of risk marginalization and mitigation.) The reference to the process itself is irrelevant to its application.

No, what you've done is stated your opinion, period.

And i shouldn't have to tell you this but : Your opinion isn't better than anyone else by default. Your arguments may be consistent or sound , but they still relied on wild speculations & educated guesses of  what can and cannot be done or what is or isn't possible in the Mass Effect universe .A fictional setting no less !  For this alone, mentioning Risk management as a sort of impartial measuring device is utter none sense at best, or a gross miscalculation of your own importance/ entitlement at worst.

Modifié par Saaziel, 02 juin 2011 - 08:05 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Saaziel wrote...
Its possible , i've not played in a while so. Regardless this point is not relevant to the topic at hand.

Just making the point that as a reason for exploding the base, it's not as strong.

That isn't the point i was making . I was establishing the 3 possibilities Sheppard was faced with and when on the collector base. It had nothing to do with the legitimacy of any of those action or aftermath.

Ah, that was the point I was making though.  It's a bit of a continuity break to stop working with them after a successful mission when no one else is doing anything and we still have no way to beat the Reapers.

I think the information came from the Collector vessel actually. Moiaussi pointed that out before, I'll take his word on it.

They knew they needed a Friend-Foe system for Omega4 access because of the Collector vessel.  They knew of the Reaper IFF because of Cerberus.

Alliance versus Cerberus is tantamount to a False dicotomy in my opinion. Especially so when regarding Reaper tech: Withholding  Reaper tech from Cerberus doesn't translate to giving it to the Alliance by default.

It doesn't matter who gets it, they'd all have to potentially encounter the dangers of indoctrination.  That's the point I was making.  Cerberus got wrong what anyone would've gotten wrong regarding indoctrination, but their efforts were essential to every major success in Mass Effect 2.

Which is irrelevant. Stopping the collectors is secondary to stopping the Reapers.

You should know by now that the Collectors are an arm of the Reapers and would've wiped out humanity without anyone knowing had they not have been stopped.  Instead of the Reapers invading the Earth and dominating, it would've been the Collectors with their seeker swarms... they would've been gone without a trace.

No one seems to actually read any of the post made , or they build up a strawman doing so. I don't think anyone wants to destroy Reaper tech outright. Studying it must be done properly though .

And no one stands a better chance at this point of studying it properly than Cerberus, who have made the mistakes with it that new people would already.  They don't repeat things that don't work, they always try something new.

They can't take credit for it , in my opinion.

Then no one can take credit for anything advanced in the future as it's all based on pre-existing ideas and tech.  But for the sake of actually being able to use the notion of a group doing something they can take credit for, the SR2 was a Cerberus project and a Cerberus success.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 02 juin 2011 - 08:22 .

[TexasToast712]

As long as there are no Reapers nearby to try indoctrination then Reaper tech can be studied safely.

[Dean_the_Young]

Saaziel wrote...

I assume that by "referenced to" you mean that you'll link a post where you made the risk management already , yes? And that this Risk management you made of this threat will reflect the framework i would find in the Army Fm3 link .

You can assume all you'd like. You'd be disappointed, since you've fixated on a claim I haven't made. I use the risk management methods to fuel my arguments: the method itself isn't my argument. Results of it are.

No, what you've done is stated your opinion, period.

And i shouldn't have to tell you this but : Your opinion isn't better than anyone else by default. Your arguments may be consistent or sound , but they still relied on wild speculations & educated guesses of  what can and cannot be done or what is or isn't possible in the Mass Effect universe .A fictional setting no less !  For this alone, mentioning Risk management as a sort of impartial measuring device is utter none sense at best, or a gross miscalculation of your own importance/ entitlement at worst.

Or, as a third option, it could be a practical, sensible option to pursue, especially in light of how many known variables I often refer to (such as, for example, limitations of indoctrination, practical limits of Cerberus capabilities, etc.). Now, I could go with your position that consistent, sound thesis based on in-universe realities and implications that can be applied are suddenly invalid and equal to any other scenario... or I could go with another position that anyone should weigh consistent, sound, educated conclusions above others that lack such traits not because I created them, but because they are consistent, sound, and educated in their formation.

Since not all alternatives are equal, you'll understand why I'll go with the one with a larger history of successful practice.

[Saaziel]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Just making the point that as a reason for exploding the base, it's not as strong.

I don't think it is either.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
They knew they needed a Friend-Foe system for Omega4 access because of the Collector vessel. They knew of the Reaper IFF because of Cerberus.

They still could have gotten it with an intact Derelict. The IFF is presumed copied before Sheppard makes the trip. The "Failed" suicide mission has a cut scene with Joker & the Illusive man revolving this.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
It doesn't matter who gets it, they'd all have to potentially encounter the dangers of indoctrination. That's the point I was making. Cerberus got wrong what anyone would've gotten wrong regarding indoctrination, but their efforts were essential to every major success in Mass Effect 2.

Actually the Geth seem to have an Immunity.

They had direct interactions with Nazara and the Heretics only joined its cause due to a divergence in calculation, not indoctrination. The events in ME2 suggests that the introduction of a computer Virus into the Geth network could cause similar reactions. Without this virus however , the Geth could , presumably , perform any number of research.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Instead of the Reapers invading the Earth and dominating, it would've been the Collectors with their seeker swarms... they would've been gone without a trace.

But the Derelict Tech was at that time more valuable as a mean of defeating the Reaper than what the content of the Collector base could ever have been fathomed to be.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Then no one can take credit for anything advanced in the future as it's all based on pre-existing ideas and tech.

Modifying something to a "better" state could be praiseworthy , but only in that regard. I personally wouldn't make a big deal out of it either way.

Modifié par Saaziel, 02 juin 2011 - 10:24 .

[Saaziel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

 it could be a practical, sensible option to pursue, especially in light of how many known variables I often refer to (such as, for example, limitations of indoctrination, practical limits of Cerberus capabilities, etc.).

Then do so. ( What are you wait for ?)

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Saaziel wrote...
I don't think it is either.

Yay.

They still could have gotten it with an intact Derelict. The IFF is presumed copied before Sheppard makes the trip. The "Failed" suicide mission has a cut scene with Joker & the Illusive man revolving this.

That's where they got it from.  But Cerberus had that Derelict Reaper and didn't destroy it like apparently a Paragon player would have.  The moral of that story being that had Cerberus viewed the derelict Reaper as an "oh beware the indoctrination" device and blew it up instead of trying to study it, we would not have been able to beat the Collectors.

Actually the Geth seem to have an Immunity.

They had direct interactions with Nazara and the Heretics only joined its cause due to a divergence in calculation, not indoctrination. The events in ME2 suggests that the introduction of a computer Virus into the Geth network could cause similar reactions. Without this virus however , the Geth could , presumably , perform any number of research.

Indoctrination itself (especially the slow kind) is a divergence in calculation, that's what happened to Saren.  Even the Geth run some risk of becoming a heretic.  A virus disabled the Normandy and allowed the Collectors to board.  The Reapers aren't above using viruses and the heretic Geth do show that they can be manipulated just as easily (if not easier) than organics. 

But the Derelict Tech was at that time more valuable as a mean of defeating the Reaper than what the content of the Collector base could ever have been fathomed to be.

True and that's what Cerberus was trying to do, and they're the only group trying to defeat the Reapers in Mass Effect 2.

Modifying something to a "better" state could be praiseworthy , but only in that regard. I personally wouldn't make a big deal out of it either way.

Yeah, but still a Cerberus success.  Like movies adapted from books.  Sure the book is the source material, but the movie is still an undertaking that can go wrong if not done correctly.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 02 juin 2011 - 11:23 .

[Saaziel]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Indoctrination itself (especially the slow kind) is a divergence in calculation, that's what happened to Saren.

I believe Saren was indoctrinated well before he became a Cyborg. There is , to my knowledge, no explicit documentation as to what Indoctrination is constituted of.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Even the Geth run some risk of becoming a heretic.

Yes. However it don't believe it is portrayed as something similar to Indoctrination. Heretics follow the Reapers of their own , for the lack of a better word , Free will.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
A virus disabled the Normandy and allowed the Collectors to board. The Reapers aren't above using viruses and the heretic Geth do show that they can be manipulated just as easily (if not easier) than organics.

True. But the Normandy it self isn't , or wasn't , sentient. Only after EDI integrated in the ship's systems could the Parallel be made. And then only in a limited fashion. Geth , for instance, form a consensus of many sentient "beings" to enact decisions , EDI on the other hand is a single entity. It is possible that for indoctrination to have an effect on the Geth , it would have to affect a majority of the "beings /Programs" in the system. How this could be achieved is hard to imagine considering the locality or lack-thereof of a Geth consensus.

Modifié par Saaziel, 02 juin 2011 - 11:50 .

[SkittlesKat96]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

 Good can come from the Collector base sure but I still didn't risk it. Indoctrination is a terrible terrible thing. The Rachni, Saren and Dr. Kenson were three interesting examples of indoctrination and we know how badly things almost went with them.

If Dr Kenson hadn't studied Object Rho, the Arrival wouldn't have been delayed.

True, good can come of it, I still stand by the point though that indoctrination is some nasty business

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Saaziel wrote...
I believe Saren was indoctrinated well before he became a Cyborg. There is , to my knowledge, no explicit documentation as to what Indoctrination is constituted of.

It was slow, it started as slight suggestion... then over time it turns into complete control.  That's how slow indoctrination works.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Yes. However it don't believe it is portrayed as something similar to Indoctrination. Heretics follow the Reapers of their own , for the lack of a better word , Free will.

All indoctrinated people feel that way... at first.

True. But the Normandy it self isn't , or wasn't , sentient. Only after EDI integrated in the ship's systems could the Parallel be made. And then only in a limited fashion. Geth , for instance, form a consensus of many sentient "beings" to enact decisions , EDI on the other hand is a single entity. It is possible that for indoctrination to have an effect on the Geth , it would have to affect a majority of the "beings /Programs" in the system. How this could be achieved is hard to imagine considering the locality or lack-thereof of a Geth consensus.

It would definitely take a virus type of indoctrination device to work against the Geth.  But the Reapers do seem to have the technology necessary.