195 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

They don't.  Look what happened to the quarians, and now we have EDI walking around...  The alliance was researching AI development long before that...

Except, with the exception of the geth, no one else in our cycle has created a true AI. Even EDI had to be deliberately set free from her programming constraints. She wasn't made that way at first.

It needn't be a deliberate effort.  Need I bring up the near disaster of the Overlord project?  Technological appocolypse?

Which was a deliberate effort...

Again, everyone here is acting as if people who are scientifically brilliant, are retarded.

Gavin Archer certainly was, and there are many more like him.  For the record, EDI was a fully cognizant AI, even with restrictions.  The lab technicians noted that she could be persuasive and there was a risk a crewman might set her free, they were right but the Illusive Man took that risk and now there is a free AI walking around.  Overlord was not a deliberate effort to make a synthetic menace, it was intended as a control mechanism.  Something helpful...  They knew about the geth but they did it anyway and nearly ended galactic civilization.

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The only question I have is how adding organics to synthetics works. They gain no benefit to being compromised by the frailties of flesh. Maybe they just got emotions and an organic thought process ie true sentience.

Except the Catalyst explicitly says you're creating a "new DNA".

IE, you're creating a new biological organism.

Even though synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize...

It does not.  "A new framework, a new... DNA."  It sounds like an expression of the depth of the change to me but one might interpret it as the synthetics getting a new framework and the organics getting a new DNA

Would that make more sense?

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 mars 2012 - 04:07 .

[EHondaMashButton]

Anaki86 wrote...

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
But species have time to prosper and flourish instead of constantly having Reapers come in to baby sit them.  They also run the risk of these species matching the Reapers technologically and creating synthetics the Reapers could not dominate.  Keeping them within acceptable technological levels would require constant rulership.  A long harvesting and cycle allows the galaxy to stay in the hands of organics.  Die free or live in slavery, I'd say the Reapers might have the more humane solution.

I think I speak for everyone when I say, if given the option, I'd rather live with a galactic babysitter with the one rule of not creating A.I.,  than be indoctrinated and/or die a horrible death, and/or be liquified for reaper parts.

I think many of us would agree to that. The Destroy option allows for just a senario.

According to you two, thats killing the babysitter and taking your chances the kids won't do something stupid to destroy EVERYTHING.  None of these choices are logical.

A rational being would show video evidence of A.I. rebellng during the past 100 cycles. Or let them get scratched up a bit by the mess they've created and let them learn the lesson themselves.  

Or is the solution to nuclear proliferation to obliterate anyone who even looks like they might be on the verge of discovering nuclear power?

[o Ventus]

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The only question I have is how adding organics to synthetics works. They gain no benefit to being compromised by the frailties of flesh. Maybe they just got emotions and an organic thought process ie true sentience.

Except the Catalyst explicitly says you're creating a "new DNA".

IE, you're creating a new biological organism.

Even though synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize...

It does not.  "A new framework, a new... DNA."  It sounds like an expression of the depth of the change to me but one might interpret it as the synthetics getting a new framework and the organics getting a new DNA

Would that make more sense?

I have some spare straws if you need something to grasp at.

[InvincibleHero]

o Ventus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The only question I have is how adding organics to synthetics works. They gain no benefit to being compromised by the frailties of flesh. Maybe they just got emotions and an organic thought process ie true sentience.

Except the Catalyst explicitly says you're creating a "new DNA".

IE, you're creating a new biological organism.

Even though synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize...

I guess sorta like Warlock in the NEw Mutants comics by Marvel comics then. I never understood it other than it was fiction.

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The only question I have is how adding organics to synthetics works. They gain no benefit to being compromised by the frailties of flesh. Maybe they just got emotions and an organic thought process ie true sentience.

Except the Catalyst explicitly says you're creating a "new DNA".

IE, you're creating a new biological organism.

Even though synthetics don't have DNA to synthesize...

It does not.  "A new framework, a new... DNA."  It sounds like an expression of the depth of the change to me but one might interpret it as the synthetics getting a new framework and the organics getting a new DNA

Would that make more sense?

I have some spare straws if you need something to grasp at.

Hardly, you need to loosen your grip on that one word if you ask me.  It says more than that you know.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 mars 2012 - 04:12 .

[o Ventus]

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

They don't.  Look what happened to the quarians, and now we have EDI walking around...  The alliance was researching AI development long before that...

Except, with the exception of the geth, no one else in our cycle has created a true AI. Even EDI had to be deliberately set free from her programming constraints. She wasn't made that way at first.

It needn't be a deliberate effort.  Need I bring up the near disaster of the Overlord project?  Technological appocolypse?

Which was a deliberate effort...

Again, everyone here is acting as if people who are scientifically brilliant, are retarded.

Gavin Archer certainly was, and there are many more like him.  For the record, EDI was a fully cognizant AI, even with restrictions.  The lab technicians noted that she could be persuasive and there was a risk a crewman might set her free, they were right but the Illusive Man took that risk and now there is a free AI walking around.  Overlord was not a deliberate effort to make a synthetic menace, it was intended as a control mechanism.  Something helpful...  They knew about the geth but they did it anyway and nearly ended galactic civilization.

You know what happens when you plug a mentally unstable person into a machine that could potentially drive them even more insane?

Shocker, I know.

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

[Anaki86]

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Anaki86 wrote...

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
But species have time to prosper and flourish instead of constantly having Reapers come in to baby sit them.  They also run the risk of these species matching the Reapers technologically and creating synthetics the Reapers could not dominate.  Keeping them within acceptable technological levels would require constant rulership.  A long harvesting and cycle allows the galaxy to stay in the hands of organics.  Die free or live in slavery, I'd say the Reapers might have the more humane solution.

I think I speak for everyone when I say, if given the option, I'd rather live with a galactic babysitter with the one rule of not creating A.I.,  than be indoctrinated and/or die a horrible death, and/or be liquified for reaper parts.

I think many of us would agree to that. The Destroy option allows for just a senario.

According to you two, thats killing the babysitter and taking your chances the kids won't do something stupid to destroy EVERYTHING.  None of these choices are logical.

A rational being would show video evidence of A.I. rebellng during the past 100 cycles. Or let them get scratched up a bit by the mess they've created and let them learn the lesson themselves.  

Or is the solution to nuclear proliferation to obliterate anyone who even looks like they might be on the verge of discovering nuclear power?

It's not a matter of killing the babysitter and letting the children take their chances. It's the children finally growing up to a point that they can handle things without supervision. Shepard unifying the galaxy including EDI and the Geth shows that. And yes, I know that the Destroy option will kill them as well.

[Ethical]

Atakuma wrote...

Space magic is the entire basis of modern civilization in the ME universe. I'm not sure why this is now a problem all of a sudden.

this may be a late response and has already been addressed.....but..... the other "space magic" that holds up Mass Effect and its world is at least explained through codex. They are set as rules for the world of mass effect (why we can travel faster than light, why we understand alien language etc). Mass Effect at least tries to explain it with codex entries and we as the player give in some leeway and suspend our belief a little.

The ending however, was advertised by Casey Hudson as involving NO space magic, and the space magic they did in fact used is not explained whatsoever, our suspension of disbelief is diminished.

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Modifié par Ethical, 26 mars 2012 - 04:19 .

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

They don't.  Look what happened to the quarians, and now we have EDI walking around...  The alliance was researching AI development long before that...

Except, with the exception of the geth, no one else in our cycle has created a true AI. Even EDI had to be deliberately set free from her programming constraints. She wasn't made that way at first.

It needn't be a deliberate effort.  Need I bring up the near disaster of the Overlord project?  Technological appocolypse?

Which was a deliberate effort...

Again, everyone here is acting as if people who are scientifically brilliant, are retarded.

Gavin Archer certainly was, and there are many more like him.  For the record, EDI was a fully cognizant AI, even with restrictions.  The lab technicians noted that she could be persuasive and there was a risk a crewman might set her free, they were right but the Illusive Man took that risk and now there is a free AI walking around.  Overlord was not a deliberate effort to make a synthetic menace, it was intended as a control mechanism.  Something helpful...  They knew about the geth but they did it anyway and nearly ended galactic civilization.

You know what happens when you plug a mentally unstable person into a machine that could potentially drive them even more insane?

Shocker, I know.

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

Exactly, scientifically brilliant people are capable of doing some spectacularly dumb things as you so recently said they weren't.  The Overlord DLC actually fits as your example of a synthetic turning against it's maker, but I'll humor you.

Javik relates that a species from his time created synthetics to run the implants they used to survive.  The synthetics hijacked their implants and turned them into a slave species.  You can get this conversation if you talk with him during the Priority: Rannoch missions.  There you go.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 mars 2012 - 04:19 .

[EHondaMashButton]

Anaki86 wrote...
It's not a matter of killing the babysitter and letting the children take their chances. It's the children finally growing up to a point that they can handle things without supervision. Shepard unifying the galaxy including EDI and the Geth shows that. And yes, I know that the Destroy option will kill them as well.

Now we're getting somewhere.  If we're all grown up and have proven that we can handle A.I. responsibly, why are the Reapers still harvesting us?  Why do we have to destroy all synthetic life if we just proved A.I. doesn't always rebel?

[Heimdall]

Ethical wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Space magic is the entire basis of modern civilization in the ME universe. I'm not sure why this is now a problem all of a sudden.

this may be a late response and has already been addressed.....but..... the other "space magic" that holds up Mass Effect and its world is at least explained through codex. They are set as rules for the world of mass effect (why we can travel faster than light, why we understand alien language etc). Mass Effect at least tries to explain it with codex entries and we as the player give in some leeway and suspend our belief a little.

The ending however, was advertised by Casey Hudson as involving NO space magic, and the space magic they did in fact used is not explained whatsoever, our suspension of disbelief is diminished.

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Javik gives an example from his time.

[MegaSovereign]

Funny how people are so up and arms about the small plot holes in the ending (most of which can be solved with a little bit of off-screen interpretation).

Yet...I don't see people filing FTC complaints about the intro to ME2. Shepard's corpse was burned up to nothing and yet he comes back as Space Jesus. Not even space magic can explain that massive plot hole.

[o Ventus]

Ethical wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Except it obviously has never happened, since organics still exist.

If a theoretical AI so hellbent on destroying organics actually DID come to fruition, how in the hell do the turians, salarians, humans, asari, krogan, etc exist?

[o Ventus]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Funny how people are so up and arms about the small plot holes in the ending (most of which can be solved with a little bit of off-screen interpretation).

Yet...I don't see people filing FTC complaints about the intro to ME2. Shepard's corpse was burned up to nothing and yet he comes back as Space Jesus. Not even space magic can explain that massive plot hole.

Jacob says Shepard was "nothing but meat and tubes" when they brought him to Lazarus. 

But yeah, it was pretty space-magical.

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

Ethical wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Except it obviously has never happened, since organics still exist.

If a theoretical AI so hellbent on destroying organics actually DID come to fruition, how in the hell do the turians, salarians, humans, asari, krogan, etc exist?

Um, that's a pretty obvious anwser.  The A.I. was stopped.

[Malevolence65]

Synthetic hats

[Ethical]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Funny how people are so up and arms about the small plot holes in the ending (most of which can be solved with a little bit of off-screen interpretation).

Yet...I don't see people filing FTC complaints about the intro to ME2. Shepard's corpse was burned up to nothing and yet he comes back as Space Jesus. Not even space magic can explain that massive plot hole.

He wasn't burned up to a crisp, he was sent into space which would freeze him and rupture him at a molecular level as his cells burst from being frozen. The nanotechnology shown in the intro cinematic serves as an explanation from Bioware and we the viewers suspend our disbelief a little.  

Again, we complain because Casey Hudson said there will be no space magic that ends the reapers in the end, well there was.

[EHondaMashButton]

Lord Aesir wrote...
Javik gives an example from his time.

Glad you brought that up, because its pretty damning evidence against ever merging synthetics and organics.  

 

In summary:  as synthetics repair/improve/upgrade the organic gets left behind, until only the synthetic is left.  I might trust EDI, I might trust Legion.  But to accept synthetics from the guy who created the reapers?  Hell no.

[tetrisblock4x1]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Funny how people are so up and arms about the small plot holes in the ending (most of which can be solved with a little bit of off-screen interpretation).

Yet...I don't see people filing FTC complaints about the intro to ME2. Shepard's corpse was burned up to nothing and yet he comes back as Space Jesus. Not even space magic can explain that massive plot hole.

Ah, so you're arguement is that it was okay in ME2 so it must be okay in ME3 also? No. It sucked back then too. Maybe peoples taste has just kind of matured since then, maybe people have different standards and a lower tolerance for that typle of bull**** of the ME2 introduction?

[Anaki86]

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Anaki86 wrote...
It's not a matter of killing the babysitter and letting the children take their chances. It's the children finally growing up to a point that they can handle things without supervision. Shepard unifying the galaxy including EDI and the Geth shows that. And yes, I know that the Destroy option will kill them as well.

Now we're getting somewhere.  If we're all grown up and have proven that we can handle A.I. responsibly, why are the Reapers still harvesting us?  Why do we have to destroy all synthetic life if we just proved A.I. doesn't always rebel?

Because we proved that we can co-exist the solution changes. We don't have to destroy all synthetic life, but it we decide to destroy the Reapers the death of all synthetic life is an inevitable bi-product. However, if we choose synthesis or control then synthetics continue living.  

[Heimdall]

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
Javik gives an example from his time.

Glad you brought that up, because its pretty damning evidence against ever merging synthetics and organics.  

 

In summary:  as synthetics repair/improve/upgrade the organic gets left behind, until only the synthetic is left.  I might trust EDI, I might trust Legion.  But to accept synthetics from the guy who created the reapers?  Hell no.

I think there's a distinction between integrating synthetics into organics and organics becoming part synthetic.  Then the organics can upgrade as well.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 mars 2012 - 04:30 .

[o Ventus]

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ethical wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Except it obviously has never happened, since organics still exist.

If a theoretical AI so hellbent on destroying organics actually DID come to fruition, how in the hell do the turians, salarians, humans, asari, krogan, etc exist?

Um, that's a pretty obvious anwser.  The A.I. was stopped.

Stopped by what? The Reapers? They can't harvest synthetics, and the Catalyst has never mentioned killing any god-powerful AI monstrosity?

Have you never once stopped and though that maybe the retarded Catalyst was the all-powerful AI that everyone is so scared of?

[MegaSovereign]

o Ventus wrote...

Ethical wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Except it obviously has never happened, since organics still exist.

If a theoretical AI so hellbent on destroying organics actually DID come to fruition, how in the hell do the turians, salarians, humans, asari, krogan, etc exist?

It could be that the organics of the very first cycle created the Reapers right before their doom. But yea it doesn't really make much sense.

[Heimdall]

o Ventus wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ethical wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Challenge, find me actual evidence of synthetics rebelling against their creators. No, the geth do not count, since they didn't "rebel", they retaliated like any organic would.

 

To be fair, the starchild explained that it has occured in previous cycles and as such his solution was....well it was that circular logic. You don't need actual evidence, the starchild said it happened in the past and unless we have a time machine (don't get any ideas marc/casey) then we just have to take the writers word for it. 

Except it obviously has never happened, since organics still exist.

If a theoretical AI so hellbent on destroying organics actually DID come to fruition, how in the hell do the turians, salarians, humans, asari, krogan, etc exist?

Um, that's a pretty obvious anwser.  The A.I. was stopped.

Stopped by what? The Reapers? They can't harvest synthetics, and the Catalyst has never mentioned killing any god-powerful AI monstrosity?

Have you never once stopped and though that maybe the retarded Catalyst was the all-powerful AI that everyone is so scared of?

No, the Reapers don't harvest synthetics but they clearly kill them off.  Considering the synthetics Javik mentioned aren't still around, I assume they were wiped out.  An A.I. that threatens the Reaper's goals of allowing organic life to continue would certainly make their hit list.  Why would the Catalyst preserve organic species as Reapers if it was omnicidal?

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 26 mars 2012 - 04:35 .