317 réponses à ce sujet

[themaxzero]

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

[Zyrious]

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Again, control or merge is a decision that is forced upon the galaxy out of fear. You are essentially giving up, resigning to your fate, giving up on what you were fighting for.  "You fight or you die" "You lose if you arent willing to die". Destroy may be a risk, but it's a risk that maintains who and what we are.

Modifié par Zyrious, 03 mars 2012 - 08:13 .

[Aesieru]

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

---

Remember Project Overlord, that was nearly an AI that saw no use for organics and literally just wanted to kill everything. It nearly infected all technology across the galaxy. If your technology isn't working, you're not going to have much chance taking them on.

Modifié par Aesieru, 03 mars 2012 - 08:15 .

[Zyrious]

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

[Bentebent]

Zyrious wrote...
Again, control or merge is a decision that is forced upon the galaxy out of fear. You are essentially giving up, resigning to your fate, giving up on what you were fighting for.  "You fight or you die" "You lose if you arent willing to die". Destroy may be a risk, but it's a risk that maintains who and what we are.

Maybe giving up what your Shepard was fighting for? You know you can easily play a technocrat Shepard, helping AIs when possible, saving the Collector base. Not everyone is afraid of progress.

[Eclipse_9990]

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike control, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 03 mars 2012 - 08:20 .

[Aesieru]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike the eternal cycle, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

ACtually, Synergy's dialog is along the lines of "with foresight and knowledge, maybe it won't happen"

[Zyrious]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike the eternal cycle, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

Yes there is, go over to the Xio threads in the group. in Synergy, you are changing the VERY NATURE OF EXISTENCE FOR ALL LIFE to create an understanding of synthetics among organics in an attempt to neutralize the thread of singularity forever. You are changing the very nature of being, you are infusing every human with a partly synthetic existence against their will, which may have other reprocussions. To think there are people who so readily support this genuinly scares me.

[themaxzero]

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Again, control or merge is a decision that is forced upon the galaxy out of fear. You are essentially giving up, resigning to your fate, giving up on what you were fighting for.  "You fight or you die" "You lose if you arent willing to die". Destroy may be a risk, but it's a risk that maintains who and what we are.

Well I do think it is inevitable. Humans always seek to evolve and grow. The problem is in modern times, more and more it's the human body which is the limitation. So if human race wishes to 'be more' then this limitation must be dealt with.

If someone loses a leg in a serious injury they are considered disabled. They could get a prosthetic leg to replace it. Unfortunately that leg isn't as good as the biological original so they are still considered disabled.

What happens if that prosthetic leg is actually better then the original? At first it's only in limited fields and still overall worse (see the banned South African runner) but in time, as technology progress, the balance will shift.

If the replacement leg is overall better then the original is the person still disabled? It could quite possibly end up that the 'able bodied' person could be the one considered disabled. If everyone else is kicking through walls, running the 100m in 5 seconds and jumping 10m in the air how are you feeling with your normal human legs?

Modifié par themaxzero, 03 mars 2012 - 08:23 .

[Balek-Vriege]

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

Of course the risk is the same, but the long term ramifications are not.  The Guardian or those who programmed it fear that AI and/or runaway intelligence would prevent the universe functioning as it normally would ever again.  My added concern (or the undefined conerns of the Guardian) is technological singularities would cause the end of the galaxy/universe as we know it.  Something able to ever rewrite how smart it is would most likely start using uncontrollable amounts of resources and make technological leaps so fast and instantaneous that it would be almost like a "grey/pink goo" consuming the galaxy.  Something improving/upgrading that fast would be extremely dangerous.


The original plan is zoo-like with intelligent organics that make it to a certain point getting their time in the sun (50K years) until they're wiped out before AIs get too much a foothold. Then they get made into an avatar/meseum piece of their former selves if they can be reaperfied.  That plan is proven debunked since Shepard is actually speaking with the Guardian and the Reapers are on the verge of defeat because of his/her actions.

Now the destroy ending allows us to choose our own destiny at first glance.  At a second glance and taking the Guardian's points to heart, it's more of a choice of how/when we meat our final destiny/fate (technological singularity).

Control is continuing the zoo choice, but allowing time to see what happens and allowing a more "human touch" (I think) to when reaperficiation happens.

Synergy/Merge is trying to find a permanent solution by giving organics the abilities of advanced AIs, but a built in "uh oh approaching singularity" warning into their new cybernetic selves.  A warning that acts as a means to keep us from achieving runaway intelligence.  Any uniqueness that came before is gone (new ways of thinking, new cultures etc.).  However, there's actually a good chance the races of the Galaxy will not hit the singularity since all their needs are taken care of by innate ability instead of relying on true AIs.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 03 mars 2012 - 08:24 .

[Eterna]

Canned Bullets wrote...

Wow. Biwoare just sucks at writing now. We should have seen this coming because of Dragon Age 2.

blah blah blah, whine whine whine.

[Eclipse_9990]

Aesieru wrote...

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike the eternal cycle, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

ACtually, Synergy's dialog is along the lines of "with foresight and knowledge, maybe it won't happen"

Thats still a far better chance than what the other two offers. Destroy is just like control in a way; they're both just delaying the inevitable. With destroy it just takes a little longer. As all the species are advancing again over millenia do you really think they're going to remember all of this stuff? No. They are going to end up creating A.I's this is a fact, and the Tech Singularity, or the Reapers is going to end up happening. 

With synergy you actually have a good chance of it being stopped outright. Everyone retains their individuality, and their feelings, and don't end up screwed on whatever planet they end up on. Destroy, and control is just making your actions in ME1, and ME2 a completely wasted effort.  I know everyone retains their individuality because the synergy is based on shepard who is a cyborg.

And last time I checked you could still make your own choices, and you had your own feelings in ME2. 

While Synergy actually has the best chance of stopping it outright, without sacrificing technology, or relying on some outside source, and they would have evolved in the process. 

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 03 mars 2012 - 08:27 .

[Aesieru]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike the eternal cycle, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

ACtually, Synergy's dialog is along the lines of "with foresight and knowledge, maybe it won't happen"

Thats still a far better chance than what the other two offers. Destroy is just like control in a way; they're both just delaying the inevitable. With destroy it just takes a little longer. As all the species are advancing again over millenia do you really think they're going to remember all of this stuff? No. They are going to end up creating A.I's this is a fact, and the Tech Singularity, or the Reapers is going to end up happening. 

With synergy you actually have a good chance of it being stopped outright. Everyone retains their individuality, and their feelings, and don't end up screwed on whatever planet they end up on. Destroy, and control is just making your actions in ME1, and ME2 a completely wasted effort.

While Synergy actually has the best chance of stopping it outright, without sacrificing technology, or relying on some outside source, and they would have evolved in the process. 

You forced a method of thought on others and gave people unprepared for it a synthetic artificial genome of some sort (I can only make guesses as to how) and that seems closer to a Tech Singularity than anything.

[Zyrious]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

The risk of an AI overwhelming us is no different than the risk of some alien species, or a biological virus, or a billion other things. Subjecting the galaxy to Merge or Control out of fear is not the right path, imo. There is no gaurentee it will ever happen, and if the galaxy can unite to stop the reapers, of all things, then they may very well find a not-so-overkill way to resolve any problems with AI if it actually did come to pass. At the end of the day, "I won't let fear compromise who i am" - Commander Shepard

The Guardian's solution is based on the idea that we will eventually create an AI that destroy's. The scary thing is, it has a point.

Look at the Geth, what the Guardian fears has already come to pass.

I would go merge because us creating a overpowering AI isn't just likely it's inevitable.

The geth actually surprise Gaurdian because they *dont* follow the pattern he thought AI are suppose to follow. Depending on how you handle the geth-quarian situation, atleast. I don't believe overpowering AI is inevitable, and i don't believe we wouldnt find a way to deal with it, just like how the galaxy have been able to handle, and even pacify the geth (you can make peace between the geth and Quarians).

Very temporary peace that is there merely to defeat a greater threat, who knows what happens a few years after when tensions rise again.

Exactly, "Who knows". Would you subject the galaxy to Synergy or the eternal cycle based on "What ifs"?

But unlike the eternal cycle, or destroy. Synergy doesn't have any real risks or downsides. With synergy you pretty much know the cycle isn't going to continue, and everyone gets really cool enhancements while still retaining their feelings, and individuality.

There is no real risk or downside for Synergy unlike the other two. 

ACtually, Synergy's dialog is along the lines of "with foresight and knowledge, maybe it won't happen"

Thats still a far better chance than what the other two offers. Destroy is just like control in a way; they're both just delaying the inevitable. With destroy it just takes a little longer. As all the species are advancing again over millenia do you really think they're going to remember all of this stuff? No. They are going to end up creating A.I's this is a fact, and the Tech Singularity, or the Reapers is going to end up happening. 

With synergy you actually have a good chance of it being stopped outright. Everyone retains their individuality, and their feelings, and don't end up screwed on whatever planet they end up on. Destroy, and control is just making your actions in ME1, and ME2 a completely wasted effort.  I know everyone retains their individuality because the synergy is based on shepard who is a cyborg.

And last time I checked you could still make your own choices, and you had your own feelings in ME2. 

While Synergy actually has the best chance of stopping it outright, without sacrificing technology, or relying on some outside source, and they would have evolved in the process. 

It's BASED on shepard, it isnt a direct copy of the process. It just uses it as a baseline, mixed with stuff from the Gaurdian. It is LITERALLY and INTENTLY changing the thinking processes and essence of being of ALL LIFE in an attempt to prevent the singularity and create an "understanding" of synthetics among current organics. It IS changing people, directly and against their will. What is unique, special, and individual is lost, and intently.

[Eclipse_9990]

Aesieru wrote...

You forced a method of thought on others and gave people unprepared for it a synthetic artificial genome of some sort (I can only make guesses as to how) and that seems closer to a Tech Singularity than anything.

No because the Tech Singularity is AI completely taking over, and/or destroying organics. With synergy you would be fusing organic, and synthetic into one. It would be a fusion of the two. Perfectly balanced. 

Its exactly as Saren said. 

"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic, and machine intertwined, a union of flesh, and steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither. I am a vision of the future, Shepard. The evolution of ALL organic life. This is our destiny."

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 03 mars 2012 - 08:33 .

[Aesieru]

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

You forced a method of thought on others and gave people unprepared for it a synthetic artificial genome of some sort (I can only make guesses as to how) and that seems closer to a Tech Singularity than anything.

No because the Tech Singularity is AI completely taking over, and/or destroying organics. With synergy you would be fusing organic, and synthetic into one. They would have the benefits of both, and the weaknesses of neither.

Its exactly as Saren said. 

"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic, and machine intertwined, a union of flesh, and steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither. I am a vision of the future, Shepard. The evolution of ALL organic life. This is our destiny."

Well except that AI is still superior because organics have weaknesses, they still have to poop, for instance.

During their pooping session the AI might advance faster than they can keep up with all their poop breaks.

[Eclipse_9990]

Aesieru wrote...

Eclipse_9990 wrote...

Aesieru wrote...

You forced a method of thought on others and gave people unprepared for it a synthetic artificial genome of some sort (I can only make guesses as to how) and that seems closer to a Tech Singularity than anything.

No because the Tech Singularity is AI completely taking over, and/or destroying organics. With synergy you would be fusing organic, and synthetic into one. They would have the benefits of both, and the weaknesses of neither.

Its exactly as Saren said. 

"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic, and machine intertwined, a union of flesh, and steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither. I am a vision of the future, Shepard. The evolution of ALL organic life. This is our destiny."

Well except that AI is still superior because organics have weaknesses, they still have to poop, for instance.

During their pooping session the AI might advance faster than they can keep up with all their poop breaks.

This is a little silly, but I'll play along. Who says Cyborgs will have to poop? Maybe instead of expelling waste in that form they will simply expell it via an oderless gas, or simply sweat. 

[DoctorUburian]

As long as the species are just augmented, and not physically merged, i will chose Synthesis. If they are physically merged, i will go with Destroy.

Modifié par DoctorUburian, 03 mars 2012 - 08:40 .

[ninjaNumber1]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Jackumzz wrote...

There's going to be a high cost regardless of which choice. You're facing the greatest known threat the galaxy has faced thus far. Elimating the geth and EDI is a small price to pay for the relative saftey of the rest of the galaxy.

Didn't say it wasn't a small price.

All I said was there were no "Good" endings from a moral standpoint. The only moral choice would be to free the reapers from control and allow them to choose what to do with their freedom.

I think the destroy ending is indeed moral. The Reapers, Geth and EDI are simply manfactured AI constrcuts. So it is possible to destroy them all, and recreate them again if required.

In this case, one can destroy all synthetics lets say, and then simply re-create the ones like the Geth or EDI, if required.

The usual dilemma of loosing any lives do not exist when we speak of destruction of Geth/EDI etc. The destruction of the Geth is not the same as extinction of the human race. If Shepard dies, you cannot recreate another shepard (hence why they had Lazarus Project). But if Legion dies/vaporized, its only a matter of re-inventing the technology to bring him back.

Modifié par ninjaNumber1, 03 mars 2012 - 08:47 .

[DoctorUburian]

The Geth and EDI are alive.

[Kanmuru]

DoctorUburian wrote...

The Geth and EDI are alive.

 They are not even alive! Not really. They are just a machines, and machines can be broken! 

Modifié par Kanmuru, 03 mars 2012 - 08:56 .

[ninjaNumber1]

Kanmuru wrote...

DoctorUburian wrote...

The Geth and EDI are alive.

 They are not even alive! Not really. They are just a machines, and machines can be broken! 

Exactly! Not to sound cruel, but machine life forms can be recreated. If Shepard is vaporized, you cannot re-create Shepard. Even the ME universe acknowledges that as the need for the Lazarus project. But any Geth can simply be re-created.

Hence, no moral dilemma that a life has been ended when killing a machine. If required, that 'life' can be re-created at a later date.

Modifié par ninjaNumber1, 03 mars 2012 - 09:03 .

[themaxzero]

ninjaNumber1 wrote...

Kanmuru wrote...

DoctorUburian wrote...

The Geth and EDI are alive.

 They are not even alive! Not really. They are just a machines, and machines can be broken! 

Exactly! Not to sound cruel, but machine life forms can be recreated. If Shepard is vaporized, you cannot re-create Shepard. Even the ME universe acknowledges that as the need for the Lazarus project. But any Geth can simply be re-created.

Hence, no moral dilemma that a life has been ended when killing a machine. If required, that 'life' can be re-created at a later date.

What if the machine becomes self aware and begins to develop a unique personality?

[Aesieru]

themaxzero wrote...

ninjaNumber1 wrote...

Kanmuru wrote...

DoctorUburian wrote...

The Geth and EDI are alive.

 They are not even alive! Not really. They are just a machines, and machines can be broken! 

Exactly! Not to sound cruel, but machine life forms can be recreated. If Shepard is vaporized, you cannot re-create Shepard. Even the ME universe acknowledges that as the need for the Lazarus project. But any Geth can simply be re-created.

Hence, no moral dilemma that a life has been ended when killing a machine. If required, that 'life' can be re-created at a later date.

What if the machine becomes self aware and begins to develop a unique personality?

A ship can make rapid transport  from one location to another, with the right programming it can even talk to you and defend itself, but it is still just a machine, I should feel no sympathy for it as I would experimenting on my childhood toys.

[Eclipse_9990]

Kanmuru wrote...

DoctorUburian wrote...

The Geth and EDI are alive.

 They are not even alive! Not really. They are just a machines, and machines can be broken! 

Then tell me. What, and who determines if something is alive or not?
The same logic can be applied to organics. They're not even alive! Not really. They're just hunks of meat, and meat is only good for eating. /unfunny devil emote.

Legion, and EDI are just as alive as Miranda, and Garrus. They just aren't as squishy.

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 03 mars 2012 - 09:19 .