200 réponses à ce sujet

[InvincibleHero]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

If we're going to do this based on definitions, then this is how they are defined by the Oxford English Dictionary:

Sentient - able to perceive or feel things.

The Geth can perceive the world around them, therefore they are sentient.

There's no room for misunderstanding here: the Geth are able to perceive the world around them via sensory input (the same as any organic being would) and so they have met one of the requirements for sentience. Sentience only requires one of the two conditions, therefore they are sentient.

 Not that I am a rabid 'only organics can be sentient/conscious/free etc.' poster, but that smacks of a VERY low standard for what counts as 'sentient'. People use the term to put them on an equivalent moral worth as organic life and even human/alien minds; but even a basic robot with a camera can 'perceive' the world, the question is whether they have a subjective experience of that perception, which we can not easily prove either way

I pretty much agree Toby. I am not arguing that people should not place x amount of value in the geth just they don't satisfy the defintion. If they want to treat them as a real race with full and equal rights to all others then go ahead. The geth would think that stupid however. We are not the same as organics and Legion states that over and over.

I'd say no subjective experience purely because their "thought process" is very much like a program flow chart. They attempt to get data to answer the question posed to them. They then rate like google would validity of search terms and then decide what is best. As far as I know they cannot go against consus and lacking consensus they seem unable to act.

[InvincibleHero]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Exactly!  Humans do not 'feel' anything physical as you seen to be imagining it - your nervous system is merely programmed to send a signal to your brain in response to particular external stimuli - no different whatsoever to Legion.

The defintion of sense specifically stated through plant or animal organ. Geth possess neither so it is no where near the same. Is a camera the same as human eyes? No way.

Then tell me why the signal is constant until the injury heals? You feel pain until the physical body is mended. You were already informed by the first impulse. The injury sends constant impulses until it is fit again. It is not an external stimulus either. There is no stimulus but the injury itself after the initial act. A geth synthetic platform feels no pain period. Does Legion seem discomfitted by a hole through half its chest cavity? Certainly not. 

Legion is the same as any geth just has a different mobile platform which is not an actual part of the geth.

[InvincibleHero]

aang001 wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

The geth are clearly sentient. If you're going to start trotting out dictionary definitions to pass judgement on them, you need to first sort out whether you're talking about sentience, or sapience.

The geth can perceive, act with agency in the world, and recognize the agency of others. I fail to see how they can be declared non-sentient. Where the question of synthetic intelligence gets more convoluted is whether they truly possess wisdom or will, or only mimic it via complex, clever programming.

This.

Besides, you've played ME2 right? How could you come up with anything different?(To OP) Legion is not sentient?! Maker's breath man you're ignorant... Besides, dont you think thats why this whole war with the geth and Quarians started? They found out they were sentient and had self awareness and that's why they could no longer use them as workers, cause it was basically slavery.  Self awareness is asking about your self, wanting to know more about things around you, asking questions... PLAY Mass Effect and close this thread! It''s like you skipped the story and posted or NEVER played the series!

The only ignorance is your own. I offered primary evidence and you offer insults and your bald opinion. Quoting a fictional entity from DA:O is no help to your cause.

Prove they have sentience and self awareness. The only awareness they offer is they are one entitiy copied millions or billions of times. Without  a robot body they are aware of nothing. You should replay the Heretic station or look on page 7 or 8 for my response citing that.

[InvincibleHero]

BlueDemonX wrote...

Doesn´t matter what you think, it only matters what my Shepard(s) think!

I'm cool with that. You can play it how you want.

[InvincibleHero]

EternalPink wrote...

For someone wanting to use dictionary definitions i think you should look up debate and discussion and then not try and start one with a loaded question.

(Or is this just a troll?)

I stated my position and like everyone else you have not argued I was incorrect with my conclusion. I answered the question. So saying it is loaded means you agree with me or not? If you have a legitimate post please offer your wisdom instead of casting aspersions incorrectly.

[GuardianAngel470]

I already know that InvincibleHero won't accept any of the counter arguments so I'll just post my opinion and leave.
You define perception as organic perception, yes? So let me ask you this: How does your nervous system work? chemistry, electricity, and fat for the most part. Your brain's synapses fire through both electrical and biochemical processes. Your hands send signals back to your brain to alert you of pain. The nerves in your stomach send signals to your brain to tell it it is full. All through a combination of electrical energy and chemistry.

And how do your eyes work? Light comes in through the cornea and pupil and is reversed by the lens onto the back of the eyeball.

So how does a camera work? Much the same process. In fact, early cameras displayed images completely upsidedown before the shot was taken. Photographers had to learn how to view the world upside down accurately before they could take good photographs. Now that process is diverted, but light travels in much the same way for a modern day camera.

Before I go on to postulate on how the geth work, I want to make a statement about lepers. Lepers suffered from two major ailments. First, a complete nullification to all pain. They could not feel pain, therefore they could not know when they had been hurt.

Second was an inability to heal properly when hurt.

The first thing is something I want you to keep in mind IH as I discuss the geth. It stands to reason that, nearly autonomous as they were when the Quarians created them, the geth were given some rudimentary sensory system. "But that's impossible!" you say. Aha, but it isn't. In fact right now, man has developed a synthetic skin more sensitive than our own. Almost as thin as a sheet of paper and filled with printed circuits, this little sensor array is really something. I'm having trouble finding the link for it though so you'll have to find it yourself. Sorry.

Anyway, if today we are capable of such advanced sensor systems and other technologies exist to give robots sensory input, like this, then it stands to reason that the quarians came up with it to give their worker bees more versatility and autonomy.

More than that, pain is an important sense for organic beings. It keeps us out of serious harm or, in the case of an already occured injury, keeps us from hurting ourselves more. Therefore as a method for protecting their creations or even post revolution to alert a unit to seek repairs. From the suicide mission we know that Legion can feel some form of pain alerting him to impending permanent harm.

We already know that Legion has a camera for an eye and I already illustrated that the camera was designed around the same concept as the human eye so right there we have two similarities to organic sensory input, part of your perception.

Of course, robots have no need for taste but through conversations with legion we know that the geth can hear, likely using some form of microphone which again, is based loosely on the human ear (vibrations in the air known as sound force a drum to oscillate and a sensor of some sort, in the case of a microphone an electrical magnet and the ear the fluid in the cochlea) so the geth have three of the five senses, really all they need as inorganic creatures.

And it isn't impossible that they have olfactory units as well. I'm sure somewhere along the line having such units would serve a purpose as a force dedicated to serving organics. In fact, it is well within reason to assume that a geth's sense of smell would be more powerful than an organics due to the fact that it could be tailored to detect or "smell" virutally all forms of vaporous elements and compounds. For instance, humans can't smell carbon monoxide despite the fact that every element has a smell. The geth could easily detect this sort of thing.

So now they have four of the five human senses, most definitely all they would need. Of course this is all postulation and assumption but as I've shown it all has a basis in modern day science and in-game dialog.

One last thing; even if your position is completely untouchable and infallable you still sound like an arrogant jerk when you insinuate that your position is the only intelligent one. Society tends to frown on such people; it tends to elevate less qualified people with better social skills over those more qualified but socially inept.
 

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 17 août 2011 - 11:21 .

[GuardianAngel470]

As to how the geth use these senses and perceptions to understand and shape the world around them we have two examples off the top of my head.

First, the geth-quarian war, or Morning War. The quarians, an organic species, deemed that a sentient race, the geth, posed a clear and present danger to the safety of all quarians. Thus, they decided to shut them all off. And what did the geth do?

They retaliated. They fought for what shadows of lives they had. They fought to protect themselves. They chose to retaliate instead of allow themselves to be shut off. Based on what they saw the quarians were doing, based on what they heard the quarians saying, and based on what they likely felt the quarians doing they fought back.

That is sensory input manifesting in perception. It is perception feeding action and reaction.

Second, we have Legion aboard the Heretic station. Specifically when you have the option to talk to him right before the final confrontation at the control panel. I'll quote him and then move on from there: "How could we become so different?"

Right there we have a verbal example of perception based on sensory input. Legion perceives his geth as different from the heretics based on the things he's seen them do.

The rest of the conversation is also an example of sensory input fueling perception. For instance, when he finds the fact that the heretics had plots of his geth's current patrol routes he deduces that the heretics likely had runtimes in his geth's network.

And so on and so forth.

[Warlocomotf]

Omnicrat wrote...

Also, my point is that, as far a we know, the rat only knows its physically exists and what its physical form is. And yes, a rat has a better network in its brain then in my computer, but I'm not calling my computer sentient. My point is that the Geth (they never say it because they don't need to) most likely have a more complex network then a single rats brain, so it should be at least sentient.

That is (most likely) a wrong presumption. We don't know what exactly causes sentience/self awareness. This is one of the great questions of neuroscience; what exactly is it that changes the brain from just a processor that processes data, into something that has consciousness? What exactly is consciousness?

You can theorize about this; perhaps it comes with a great quantity of processing power, perhaps it's a function of complex programming; most likely it's a combination of the 2- but possible more than that still. Tali Zorah does not know either what exactly sparked their collective to become thinking/self aware.

Also, someone else mentioned that it could not be just programming that asks if it has a soul; this is wrong. You do not need to be programmed to ask this question- one of the things of greatest importance / value when programming something "intelligent" is the ability and will to learn new things. By intelligient what I mean is not when you're trying to program AI- it's also important for things like the moon buggy and what not; you can not program for every possible situation, so instead you must program your software so that it learns.

With that said, I have some major beefs with the Geth. Not because I dislike them, but because they're poorly written by the story writers of ME. There are a lot of flaws in the story- things that a real thinking machine simply would not say or do. ie; it is utter rubbish that machine operated by transistors would get 2 different anwsers to the same equation- and that both are correct. Sorry, that's not how math works, it's not how software works.

The explanation of how Geth concensus works is also rubbish- if each Geth platform has the same data available, they won't come to different conclusions; again, that's not how transistors work. A much more possible way of building concensus would have been that all Geth donate a certain amount of processing power- and that together they solve 1 giant equation that factors in as many different factors as possible (Something akin to SETI@Home).

[marshalleck]

 Excellent posts, GuardianAngel470!

[Clayless]

Anyone else noticed that Invicible ignores all counter arguments and straw picks at certain people?

Literally his ENTIRE argument is "It's not organic so it doesn't count".

That's it. Seriously that's it. He completely ignores the fact that, organic or not, your body is still hardware, because that counters his argument and leaves him with nothing.

So are the Geth sentient? Yes. Are the Geth sentient if you only count organic hardware as counting? No, but also you're and idiot.

[Omnicrat]

InvincibleHero wrote...

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

"Sorry Legion, my dictionary says you're not sentient."

"But.. we are."

"Nope, sorry.

If I recall Legion said sapient once or twice and not sentient.

If one can be sapient without being sentient, then sentience means nothing important.

[GuardianAngel470]

Warlocomotf wrote...

With that said, I have some major beefs with the Geth. Not because I dislike them, but because they're poorly written by the story writers of ME. There are a lot of flaws in the story- things that a real thinking machine simply would not say or do. ie; it is utter rubbish that machine operated by transistors would get 2 different anwsers to the same equation- and that both are correct. Sorry, that's not how math works, it's not how software works.

The explanation of how Geth concensus works is also rubbish- if each Geth platform has the same data available, they won't come to different conclusions; again, that's not how transistors work. A much more possible way of building concensus would have been that all Geth donate a certain amount of processing power- and that together they solve 1 giant equation that factors in as many different factors as possible (Something akin to SETI@Home).

I cut up your post because I think the rest of your argument is solid enough. As a basis in opinion it is as valid as everyone else's.

However I want to comment on this bit if I may. First, you missed or misinterpreted, I believe, part of what Legion said in that conversation. From what I remember Legion specifically said that, in the analogy, both answers were correct. They weren't wholly different answers but two perspectives on the same problem. It was an analogy and not a description if I remember correctly.

Second, you yourself provided the answer to your conundrum: learning algorithms. Think of each Geth runtime as a separate learning algorithm. Then imagine that no two runtimes had experienced the exact same situations over their entire lifetimes.

It stands to reason that each learning algorithm would behave differently than every other algorithm. It's because they learn that they reach different conclusions and, like opinions, many are often correct concurrently based on specific experiences.

The reason they must reach consensus is because sometimes these learning algorithms must share information, past experiences, before the correct path can be chosen.

[Warlocomotf]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

With that said, I have some major beefs with the Geth. Not because I dislike them, but because they're poorly written by the story writers of ME. There are a lot of flaws in the story- things that a real thinking machine simply would not say or do. ie; it is utter rubbish that machine operated by transistors would get 2 different anwsers to the same equation- and that both are correct. Sorry, that's not how math works, it's not how software works.

The explanation of how Geth concensus works is also rubbish- if each Geth platform has the same data available, they won't come to different conclusions; again, that's not how transistors work. A much more possible way of building concensus would have been that all Geth donate a certain amount of processing power- and that together they solve 1 giant equation that factors in as many different factors as possible (Something akin to SETI@Home).

I cut up your post because I think the rest of your argument is solid enough. As a basis in opinion it is as valid as everyone else's.

However I want to comment on this bit if I may. First, you missed or misinterpreted, I believe, part of what Legion said in that conversation. From what I remember Legion specifically said that, in the analogy, both answers were correct. They weren't wholly different answers but two perspectives on the same problem. It was an analogy and not a description if I remember correctly.

Second, you yourself provided the answer to your conundrum: learning algorithms. Think of each Geth runtime as a separate learning algorithm. Then imagine that no two runtimes had experienced the exact same situations over their entire lifetimes.

It stands to reason that each learning algorithm would behave differently than every other algorithm. It's because they learn that they reach different conclusions and, like opinions, many are often correct concurrently based on specific experiences.

The reason they must reach consensus is because sometimes these learning algorithms must share information, past experiences, before the correct path can be chosen.

The dialog: "An equation with a result of 1.33382 returns 1.33381."
Now, in the real world this sometimes happens; if I recall correctly the initial batch of Intel 80486 processors had a similar problem where a very rare specific equation would return incorrectly. Legion goes on to explain that this simple math error has an influence on all higher level processes- which is actually very true.

However, Sheaprd responds: "So the reason they worship the reapers is a math error?"
Legion responds: "We are purely software, mathematics. The heretics conclusion is valid for them, Our conclusion is valid for us. Neither result is an error".

I object to this, Legion effectively says that the Heretics and Geth get a different answer out of an equal equation- and that both are correct. Again, that is not how math works.

---

As for building concensus- that would be an incredibly poor way of building concensus. It's not that it could be true- I however find it likely that the Geth would have since upgraded their software to a more elegant approach over the time period of several thousand years (particularly centralized life memory storage).

To build concensus based on each platform's personal experience would mean that those with no experience or knowledge on a topic would still have an equal say on the decision. For building concensus it would be far superior to share experience.

Legion also states that the Geth do not do this; he describes democracies as "Codifying the most broadly acceptable average of views"- which is essentially what you describe.
Shepard then asks; "What makes the Geth different?"
Legion responds: "Data is shared between Geth..."

If (experience) data was stored on a single Geth and deemed relevant to the current topic on which concensus was to be built, im confident that data would also be shared.

All in all- it does not make sense.

[Sisterofshane]

Warlocomotf wrote...

The dialog: "An equation with a result of 1.33382 returns 1.33381."
Now, in the real world this sometimes happens; if I recall correctly the initial batch of Intel 80486 processors had a similar problem where a very rare specific equation would return incorrectly. Legion goes on to explain that this simple math error has an influence on all higher level processes- which is actually very true.

However, Sheaprd responds: "So the reason they worship the reapers is a math error?"
Legion responds: "We are purely software, mathematics. The heretics conclusion is valid for them, Our conclusion is valid for us. Neither result is an error".

I object to this, Legion effectively says that the Heretics and Geth get a different answer out of an equal equation- and that both are correct. Again, that is not how math works.

Here, read this:
bytes.com/topic/c/answers/805612-two-implementations-simple-math-equation-yield-different-results


I think it adequetly explains how different machines, using different computational methods, could inadvertently but correctly come to a slightly different conclusion.  It has to do with rounding and memory storage -- ex, a calculator with less memory space will need to round up much higher in decimal places then one with more memory.  It would not be an incorrect answer, just a less exact answer.  If the heretics' platforms contained a lesser number of geth, (or vice versa), then it could explain why there would be less memory between the shared run times (assuming that memory and storage are one of the lower basic functions that is enhanced within the neural network).

As for building concensus- that would be an incredibly poor way of building concensus. It's not that it could be true- I however find it likely that the Geth would have since upgraded their software to a more elegant approach over the time period of several thousand years (particularly centralized life memory storage).

To build concensus based on each platform's personal experience would mean that those with no experience or knowledge on a topic would still have an equal say on the decision. For building concensus it would be far superior to share experience.

Legion also states that the Geth do not do this; he describes democracies as "Codifying the most broadly acceptable average of views"- which is essentially what you describe.
Shepard then asks; "What makes the Geth different?"
Legion responds: "Data is shared between Geth..."

If (experience) data was stored on a single Geth and deemed relevant to the current topic on which concensus was to be built, im confident that data would also be shared.

All in all- it does not make sense.

Data is shared between Geth, but so far they have been unable to link all geth in entirety to the same neural network.  What you are saying about the centralized life memory is part of what the Geth are trying to achieve.  Remember that Legion also says that at some point, he and the other Geth will need to link up with a larger majority of Geth to share experiences.  There is no guarantee that any one Geth within Legion has led the exact same cycle of experiences, thus they need to bulid consensus.

Also, I think that the order in which an individual Geth experiences all of the shared memory could effect decisions about said memory.  For example, a Geth who is first exposed to a large body of water from another memory will react differently to the ocean then a Geth which had never seen such a thing before.

And on top of all this, if heretic geth prove nothing else but that each individual CAN come to different opinions, despite completely open and shared experiences, then there is no reason not to believe that the geth within legions platform could not do so.

[Saaziel]

Warlocomotf wrote...

The dialog: "An equation with a result of 1.33382 returns 1.33381."

Now,
in the real world this sometimes happens; if I recall correctly the
initial batch of Intel 80486 processors had a similar problem where a
very rare specific equation would return incorrectly. Legion goes on to
explain that this simple math error has an influence on all higher level
processes- which is actually very true.

I'm not sure i follow your objection.

Are you arguing that a construct of pure mathematics is impossible because it is not applicable to the real physical world (In which case i would agree * ) Or are you saying that such a construct could exist, but only as one entity and not as the Geth are presented.

Warlocomotf wrote...

I object to this, Legion effectively says that the Heretics and Geth get a different answer out of an equal equation- and that both are correct. Again, that is not how math works.

1=0.999...

* I hesitate to add my position here , simply because it might run off topic. I'll go into details if you wish to debate this particular point.

Modifié par Saaziel, 18 août 2011 - 03:17 .

[Warlocomotf]

[quote]Sisterofshane wrote...

As for the
T
I thinka
[quote]Warlocomotf wrote...

The dialog: "An equation with a result of 1.33382 returns 1.33381."
Now, in the real world this sometimes happens; if I recall correctly the initial batch of Intel 80486 processors had a similar problem where a very rare specific equation would return incorrectly. Legion goes on to explain that this simple math error has an influence on all higher level processes- which is actually very true.

However, Sheaprd responds: "So the reason they worship the reapers is a math error?"
Legion responds: "We are purely software, mathematics. The heretics conclusion is valid for them, Our conclusion is valid for us. Neither result is an error".

I object to this, Legion effectively says that the Heretics and Geth get a different answer out of an equal equation- and that both are correct. Again, that is not how math works.[/quote]

Here, read this:
bytes.com/topic/c/answers/805612-two-implementations-simple-math-equation-yield-different-results


I think it adequetly explains how different machines, using different computational methods, could inadvertently but correctly come to a slightly different conclusion.  It has to do with rounding and memory storage -- ex, a calculator with less memory space will need to round up much higher in decimal places then one with more memory.  It would not be an incorrect answer, just a less exact answer.  If the heretics' platforms contained a lesser number of geth, (or vice versa), then it could explain why there would be less memory between the shared run times (assuming that memory and storage are one of the lower basic functions that is enhanced within the neural network).
[/quote]



I love this thread , it's not people going in circles repeating the same argument. People are actually responding to points you make and providing a counter argument.

You make a really good point. However I'm not convinced; it's possible, but I can't help but feel that the Geth would at the finding of this difference (which is causing fundamental differences of important decisions) be determined to find out which answer the correct or most accurate one is. It would determine that the highest precision answer to the equation is correct- I think.

AI can't really exist without a strong will to learn, it is almost unimaginable that they would not investigate this difference to determine "Who's right".

[quote]As for building concensus- that would be an incredibly poor way of building concensus. It's not that it could be true- I however find it likely that the Geth would have since upgraded their software to a more elegant approach over the time period of several thousand years (particularly centralized life memory storage).

To build concensus based on each platform's personal experience would mean that those with no experience or knowledge on a topic would still have an equal say on the decision. For building concensus it would be far superior to share experience.

Legion also states that the Geth do not do this; he describes democracies as "Codifying the most broadly acceptable average of views"- which is essentially what you describe.
Shepard then asks; "What makes the Geth different?"
Legion responds: "Data is shared between Geth..."

If (experience) data was stored on a single Geth and deemed relevant to the current topic on which concensus was to be built, im confident that data would also be shared.

All in all- it does not make sense.[/quote]

Data is shared between Geth, but so far they have been unable to link all geth in entirety to the same neural network.  What you are saying about the centralized life memory is part of what the Geth are trying to achieve.  Remember that Legion also says that at some point, he and the other Geth will need to link up with a larger majority of Geth to share experiences.  There is no guarantee that any one Geth within Legion has led the exact same cycle of experiences, thus they need to bulid consensus.

Also, I think that the order in which an individual Geth experiences all of the shared memory could effect decisions about said memory.  For example, a Geth who is first exposed to a large body of water from another memory will react differently to the ocean then a Geth which had never seen such a thing before.

And on top of all this, if heretic geth prove nothing else but that each individual CAN come to different opinions, despite completely open and shared experiences, then there is no reason not to believe that the geth within legions platform could not do so.
[/quote]


You're right, not all Geth are always connected. But those not connected also won't be able to put in their 2 cents for the concensus. To share experience, they require connection- however that same connection is required to share opinion / participate in building of concensus.

I don't think a real experience will be different than a memory experience. See it as Drell memories- they have perfect memory, and because of that the memory is as real for them as the experience (To the point that they can get stuck in memory).

The Separation of Geth and Heretics is also something that I find in-adequately explained. For some reason, on this topic they did not build concensus? Why? The only reason I can think of is that for a period of time there were 2 large separate networks of Geth that had each for themselves already built concensus on the topic. Frankly however, I find this to be another part of "poor story writing" when it comes to Geth.

[marshalleck]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Prove they have sentience and self awareness. The only awareness they offer is they are one entitiy copied millions or billions of times. Without  a robot body they are aware of nothing. You should replay the Heretic station or look on page 7 or 8 for my response citing that.

Prove that you have sentience and self-awareness. 

[LeviathanZero]

Why are we arguing for/against the human-only pre-AI definition of sentience in the first place?
We might as well go back in time and start arguing phrenology "Geth clearly aren't intelligent because their head has a slope at angle X".
Trying to apply antiquated definitions to something 'current' is always going to cause problems.

[Warlocomotf]

Saaziel wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

The dialog: "An equation with a result of 1.33382 returns 1.33381."

Now,
in the real world this sometimes happens; if I recall correctly the
initial batch of Intel 80486 processors had a similar problem where a
very rare specific equation would return incorrectly. Legion goes on to
explain that this simple math error has an influence on all higher level
processes- which is actually very true.

I'm not sure i follow your objection.

Are you arguing that a construct of pure mathematics is impossible because it is not applicable to the real physical world (In which case i would agree * ) Or are you saying that such a construct could exist, but only as one entity and not as the Geth are presented.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean, I *think* what you mean is that pure math/data can not represent the world. I disagree with this- I think numbers can represent data- and data can be processed through numeric algorithms.

You say here "I'm not sure I follow your objection", but in the piece of text cited above that I have no real objection- I'm saying that a computer coming to an incorrect answer is technically possible.

Saaziel wrote...

Warlocomotf wrote...

I object to this, Legion effectively says that the Heretics and Geth get a different answer out of an equal equation- and that both are correct. Again, that is not how math works.

1=0.999...

* I hesitate to add my position here , simply because it might run off topic. I'll go into details if you wish to debate this particular point.

This is similar to hat the other person said- it comes down to accuracy (though in this case these would be infinite digits). Again however I see no reason why Geth would not build concensus on which the technically superior answer is.

[Logical Escape]

LeviathanZero wrote...

Why are we arguing for/against the human-only pre-AI definition of sentience in the first place?
We might as well go back in time and start arguing phrenology "Geth clearly aren't intelligent because their head has a slope at angle X".
Trying to apply antiquated definitions to something 'current' is always going to cause problems.

Even applying antiquated definitions, we still come to the conclusion that the geth are sentient.

The fact that the geth are creatures of causality should not be an issue.  All organic life are also creatures of causality, just to a lower degree of mathematical consistency.

[Sisterofshane]

Warlocomotf wrote...

You're right, not all Geth are always connected. But those not connected also won't be able to put in their 2 cents for the concensus. To share experience, they require connection- however that same connection is required to share opinion / participate in building of concensus.

I don't think a real experience will be different than a memory experience. See it as Drell memories- they have perfect memory, and because of that the memory is as real for them as the experience (To the point that they can get stuck in memory).

The Separation of Geth and Heretics is also something that I find in-adequately explained. For some reason, on this topic they did not build concensus? Why? The only reason I can think of is that for a period of time there were 2 large separate networks of Geth that had each for themselves already built concensus on the topic. Frankly however, I find this to be another part of "poor story writing" when it comes to Geth.

But still, an individual coming from a different background will not percieve a memory the same as you would -- even if you managed to make it as real as re-living the moment.

And I think it is safe to say that enough geth have been seperated at frequent enough intervals to make it so that they have a variety of different background experiences.  Hence my example of the ocean.  There are Geth who have seen one before, there are some who have not.  When a new experience of an "ocean" is brought back to the network from a mobile platform, those Geth who have had no previous experience of oceans are going to form a different consensus on oceans then the ones who had.  And that would just be one little branch of division between them.  Given enough divides, you can create one individual Geth who is completely different from the another.

[Saaziel]

LeviathanZero wrote...

Why are we arguing for/against the human-only pre-AI definition of sentience in the first place?

For one , the game doesn't (As far as i can tell) present a fully detailed definition of AI. It simply state that they exist and are banned. So there is some gap to fill here.

And secondly , its a fun subject to discuss in and of it self. Perhaps its a little much in the "Off topic" territory , but its still relevant to the Mass effect universe.

[Warlocomotf]

Sisterofshane wrote...

But still, an individual coming from a different background will not percieve a memory the same as you would -- even if you managed to make it as real as re-living the moment.

And I think it is safe to say that enough geth have been seperated at frequent enough intervals to make it so that they have a variety of different background experiences.  Hence my example of the ocean.  There are Geth who have seen one before, there are some who have not.  When a new experience of an "ocean" is brought back to the network from a mobile platform, those Geth who have had no previous experience of oceans are going to form a different consensus on oceans then the ones who had.  And that would just be one little branch of division between them.  Given enough divides, you can create one individual Geth who is completely different from the another.

Geth should be capable of recognizing what factors into their opinion (ie: I don't see why they could use the data to add to the equation without recognizing that it is part of their equation). If it is their own memory and they recognize that it factors into the equation- why would that data not also be shared as relevant to the current topic on which concensus is being made?

Isn't it like 300 years or so since the morning war? Surely by now they would have upgraded themselves beyond this rather silly inefficiency / willfull ignorance.

(On a slightly related topic, I applaud the Overlord DLC on this topic- adding something/someone into the Geth network seems the perfect way to attack them).

[edit = typo fixed. Ty Marshalleck]

Modifié par Warlocomotf, 18 août 2011 - 04:06 .

[marshalleck]

300 years since morning war, not 3000

if that wasn't a typo

[Boiny Bunny]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Exactly!  Humans do not 'feel' anything physical as you seen to be imagining it - your nervous system is merely programmed to send a signal to your brain in response to particular external stimuli - no different whatsoever to Legion.

The defintion of sense specifically stated through plant or animal organ. Geth possess neither so it is no where near the same. Is a camera the same as human eyes? No way.

Then tell me why the signal is constant until the injury heals? You feel pain until the physical body is mended. You were already informed by the first impulse. The injury sends constant impulses until it is fit again. It is not an external stimulus either. There is no stimulus but the injury itself after the initial act. A geth synthetic platform feels no pain period. Does Legion seem discomfitted by a hole through half its chest cavity? Certainly not. 

Legion is the same as any geth just has a different mobile platform which is not an actual part of the geth.

That is not a valid argument.  The 'defintion' of sense is a small collection of words in a dictionary, written in the real world to apply to the human specific understanding of what 'sense' means.  Presumably, if, in the real world, sentient machines were ever created, the dictionary definition would have to be modified, as it would be incorrect from that point onward.

When you touch something, your hand does not actually 'feel' it.  Your nervous system sends a signal to your brain, which simulates a 'feeling' that you interpret as your hand 'feeling' something.  This is no different, at all, in any way, to sensors on Legion's hand sending a signal to its programming core, which would be capable of simulating a 'feeling'.

The reason humans feel pain, when injured or when healing from an injury, is to stop them from damaging their bodies.  This is particularly useful when human children are developing.  You touch something hot - you get burned.  You then learn to not touch hot things.  As an adult who has learned that lesson well, you have less of a need for that painful sensation - if at all.  It would be good if you body could tell you that something was too hot for you to touch, without a painful sensation, yes?

A machine on the other hand, has no need to feel 'pain'.  It should already have all forms of warnings about external hazards pre-programmed in.  It has no lessons to learn in this regard.  But it does have sensors which can tell it something is hazardous, without it needing to feel any painful sensations.

If you were designing a robot, would you program it to feel 'pain' in order to stop it from touching hot things, or would you program it to already have the knowledge that touching hot things is bad?

Further, I would argue that if programmed correctly, a mechanical eye (or 'camera') is identical to a human eye.  It probably won't be long before people who have lost their eye(s) or vision will be having prosthetic eyes inserted in their place.  These eyes will in theory, act in exactly the same manner as a normal eye, sending signals to and responding to the brain.

The basis for your entire argument seems to be "The dictionary says only organic things can feel or look or touch, therefore the Geth are not sentient".

Modifié par Boiny Bunny, 18 août 2011 - 04:12 .