1357 réponses à ce sujet

[hammerfan]

CavScout wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

hammerfan wrote...
I didn't say that NO electrical impulses come from the brain. I said that NOT ALL electrical impulses come from the brain.

But the ones basedon body functions are. It ether goes out of the brain or to it.

http://en.wikipedia....icial_pacemaker

It clear that we are not taking about implaints...

We are talking about alternative ways of controling the body without the mind, which some (you?) claim is impossible.

Precisely.

And implants still aren't necessarily required. It's already established that they can send a wireless electrical signal to the brain, they can just send it directly to the ulnar instead:devil:

[CavScout]

LaZy i IS wrote...
Like I said, circumstantial evidence and circular logic.

Fact 1. People are indoctrinated by being near reapers and reaper tech. 

Fact 2. People that at are under the process of indoctrination here whispers.

Fact 3.Shepard is near allot of reaper tech through out ME1 and ME2.  

You can't look at this first or you end up with circular logic...

Theory should follow evidence, not the other way around.

Yep, horribly flawed logic. Heck, using the same "evidence" as IT folks I could say:

FACT 1: People drown when in water.
FACT 2: People are wet when drowning.
FACT 3: Surfers are near a lot of water.

Conclusion: Surfers must have/be drowning.

That's what IT logic looks like.

[hammerfan]

LaZy i IS wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

@OP
The IT is derived using circular logic and evidence that is at best, circumstantial.

IT at this point like said in my last post a theory created by the fans to help them deal with the ending and keep them able to play ME3 or the ME series over. If IT was true it wouldve been made plainly obivious or hinted at bigger than it was. 

Yeah. Well put.
Also, most of the "evidence" for IT has a much simpler non-IT explanation.

Yay, Occam!

[CavScout]

LaZy i IS wrote...

You could directly affect the spinal cord rather than the brain.

Certainly.

[CavScout]

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Considering TIM dies, how much better was it?

Considering that the Reapers die too (according to the face value interpretation) and TIM gets closer to stopping Shepard? it's certainly better.

The Reapers never controled Shep like TIM.

[hammerfan]

CavScout wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...
Like I said, circumstantial evidence and circular logic.

Fact 1. People are indoctrinated by being near reapers and reaper tech. 

Fact 2. People that at are under the process of indoctrination here whispers.

Fact 3.Shepard is near allot of reaper tech through out ME1 and ME2.  

You can't look at this first or you end up with circular logic...

Theory should follow evidence, not the other way around.

Yep, horribly flawed logic. Heck, using the same "evidence" as IT folks I could say:

FACT 1: People drown when in water.
FACT 2: People are wet when drowning.
FACT 3: Surfers are near a lot of water.

Conclusion: Surfers must have/be drowning.

That's what IT logic looks like.

Which is why I consider it IH, I can't see elevating it to a T. 

[LaZy i IS]

hammerfan wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

@OP
The IT is derived using circular logic and evidence that is at best, circumstantial.

IT at this point like said in my last post a theory created by the fans to help them deal with the ending and keep them able to play ME3 or the ME series over. If IT was true it wouldve been made plainly obivious or hinted at bigger than it was. 

Yeah. Well put.
Also, most of the "evidence" for IT has a much simpler non-IT explanation.

Yay, Occam!

Exactly.

hammerfan wrote...

Which is why I consider it IH, I can't see elevating it to a T. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Yeah, by definition, it is not a "Theory".

Modifié par LaZy i IS, 06 mai 2012 - 08:17 .

[CavScout]

hammerfan wrote...

CavScout wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...
Like I said, circumstantial evidence and circular logic.

Fact 1. People are indoctrinated by being near reapers and reaper tech. 

Fact 2. People that at are under the process of indoctrination here whispers.

Fact 3.Shepard is near allot of reaper tech through out ME1 and ME2.  

You can't look at this first or you end up with circular logic...

Theory should follow evidence, not the other way around.

Yep, horribly flawed logic. Heck, using the same "evidence" as IT folks I could say:

FACT 1: People drown when in water.
FACT 2: People are wet when drowning.
FACT 3: Surfers are near a lot of water.

Conclusion: Surfers must have/be drowning.

That's what IT logic looks like.

Which is why I consider it IH, I can't see elevating it to a T. 

[ev76]

Cavscouts Nobody needs to show anything, it's a discussion not a debate, if it was a debate you would of lost or have been disqualified based on your witty one liners.

[KingZayd]

LaZy i IS wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

so either the crucible was able to reprogram an AI that nobody knew was there, or it makes the Catalyst stupid by hogging resources... kinda like firefox?

Apparently someone knew it was there because the plans for the Crucible at some point in time included the Catalyst.  Second, I have no idea how you get the hogging resources idea from some change in logical gates.  In any case the details of how it does it have kind of a low relevancy.  Based on what we know the Crucible does something to the Catalyst because it explicitly says so, it gives you three choices, and you're talking to it.

i got that from the case that nobody did program it, and there was some sort of accidental change to the personality.

The Starchild said that no organic had ever been there before. How would anyone discover it's presence and create a a device capable of reprogramming the catalyst.

The change is merely this addition of a crucible that allows 3 options. This is why he says "the crucible changed me" not when he's explaining that the old solution won't work anymore, but before he tells you what the new possibilities are.

The device was designed to work with the Citadel. Not an AI nobody knew about. Otherwise surely the Starchild would be able to activate the Crucible itself?

Uh huh.  Well logical gates aren't like hogging resources.

That's an unknown and more or less unimportant because all that matters is that at some point the Catalyst was included in the design of the Crucible and the two combined stop the Reapers.

So you're limiting change to that?  I don't even know why you're singling that out.

You have no conclusive knowledge of whether previous civilizations knew there was an AI there.  Just because they don't know it, doesn't exclude the possibility that some previous civilization did. Everyone in the current cycle had no idea how the Crucible works. Plus, just because you build a device to interact with another device doesn't per se mean that the other has the ability to manipulate it. The design and intent of the creators dictate that.

But why even bring that up? Again, I have no idea what you're trying show.

I was addressing the only way I could think of that there could be some accidental change in personality. That's where i got resource hogging from.

He mentions the change only when he's saying there are now possiblities. He gives no indication that the change affects his personality or compels him. This is something that you've been saying.

He tells us that no organics have been there before. So tell me please, how did someone design the crucible to interact with this AI that nobody knew was there? or perhaps suggest a way they could have figured out there was an AI there?

The catalyst needed to complete the crucible is the Citadel. Unless you can tell me why the AI is needed for this device to work?

Chorban found out abot the keeper's origins and  that they are programmed to do something every 50000 years just by scanning 21 of them. Who's to say someone couldn't have found out about the AI without going there?


The Catalyst is the AI. Dialogue: "I am the Catalyst, the Citadel is a part of me". 
Since the Crucible uses the relay system, the Citadel being the main relay, it seems pretty likely that the AI is needed for the Crucible to fire across the relay system.

Ok then so:
Why does the Catalyst (of whom the Citadel is part of) need a reaper that it controls to stay behind and tell  it when the Harvest is ready [the organic races are on the Citadel (part of the Catalyst)], so that it can send a signal to the Keepers so that they can open the Citadel relay (part of the Catalyst)? How do the Protheans sneak onto the Citadel (part of the Catalyst) and change it without alerting the Catalyst? When the Citadel receives Sovereign's signal, and the keepers aren't activated, why doesn't it let Sovereign know what's going on? Why does Sovereign have to spend thousands of years figuring out by himself, and eventually using Saren to discover the truth. Why does the Citadel (part of the catalyst) have a master control console that organics can use? Why hasn't the Catalyst made the other reapers it controls who can enter the Milky Way using FTL drives, do so in all that time? 

The whole catalyst thing was probably bad writing anyways, but let's try to answer:
The Catalyst seems to be pretty isolated from the info you get in the game, how do you know it has access to all citadel systems? It's an AI, so whoever made it could've just as easily had programming "shackles" or protocols that stop it from interfering with the rest of the citadel.
The Catalyst doesn't signal the keepers, Sovereign does.
The Protheans did it via the conduit, and if the Catalyst could detect the inside of the citadel, Sovereign would be completely unnecessary.
Sovereign does know that the keepers won't respond, so uses Saren to grant access.
The citadel needs controls that the organics inside can use, such as for closing/opening the arms, how else to defend against attack(wars/etc.)?
How do you know how long the reapers would take to travel into the galaxy from dark space? There's no mention of the distance anywhere.

Best I can do with what little info there is, combined with some logic.
As I said, the whole "starchild" ending just seems badly done to me.

"
The Catalyst doesn't signal the keepers, Sovereign does. "

Actually, the Keepers have evolved to not respond directly to the Reapers calls. Sovereign signals the Citadel, which in turn signals the Keepers.

"
if the Catalyst could detect the inside of the citadel, Sovereign would be completely unnecessary. "
That was also part of the point. Why make the system so convoluted. Why make it so the Catalyst can't detect the inside of the CItadel?"

"Sovereign does know that the keepers won't respond, so uses Saren to grant access. "
Why didn't he just get some help from Mr Starchild?

"
The citadel needs controls that the organics inside can use, such as for closing/opening the arms, how else to defend against attack(wars/etc.)? "

Why is this necessary for the reapers? Their plan is to cull species soon after they reach the Citadel anyway. The Rachni wars (which it's suggested were instigated by Sovereign) took place at around 600 years after the Asari reached the Citadel. I assume this happened after he discovered he couldn't get the relay open.

"
How do you know how long the reapers would take to travel into the galaxy from dark space? There's no mention of the distance anywhere. "
From what we've seen in the games, that's exactly what they did. They arrived after 3 years after ME1.

Thanks for responding, and being civil while doing so.

However, from what I've seen, the only complete answers that work are: bad writing and indoctrination. I used to think it was just bad writing, while hoping i was wrong. However, the more I looked, the more I became convinced that it was indoctrination.

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

I'm trying to point out there aren't as many reasonable explanations as you think. Sure with enough handwaving you can get something that works, but you end up making the entire story convoluted and the reapers laughable.

Coming from an IT proponent, this is laughable.

Since it's you who's laughing, i'll just assume it's because you don't understand again.

Says the one who doesn't understand the ending and so invented one to cling to instead.

Says the one either doesn't understand the ending (if it's indoctrination), or doesn't understand why it's ridiculous (if we're meant to take it at face value)

[KingZayd]

LaZy i IS wrote...

hammerfan wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

@OP
The IT is derived using circular logic and evidence that is at best, circumstantial.

IT at this point like said in my last post a theory created by the fans to help them deal with the ending and keep them able to play ME3 or the ME series over. If IT was true it wouldve been made plainly obivious or hinted at bigger than it was. 

Yeah. Well put.
Also, most of the "evidence" for IT has a much simpler non-IT explanation.

Yay, Occam!

Exactly.

hammerfan wrote...

Which is why I consider it IH, I can't see elevating it to a T. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Yeah, by definition, it is not a "Theory".

Theory: 
An idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action 

Indoctrination theory fits that definition.

As for Occam's razor, clearly we get different results from using it. 

Modifié par KingZayd, 06 mai 2012 - 08:32 .

[LaZy i IS]

@KingZayd, I appreciate why you believe IT, I did at first. Try looking at the "evidence" from a point of view not involved with the IT though, and you'll see that there is a simpler non-IT explanation for pretty much all of it.

hammmerfan wrote...
Yay Occam!

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Considering TIM dies, how much better was it?

Considering that the Reapers die too (according to the face value interpretation) and TIM gets closer to stopping Shepard? it's certainly better.

The Reapers never controled Shep like TIM.

Exactly. So clearly TIM's tech works better? Unless you're saying they didn't try? in which case, how stupid are they?

[LaZy i IS]

KingZayd wrote...
Theory: 
An idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action 

Indoctrination theory fits that definition.

As for Occam's razor, clearly we get different results from using it. 

You forgot that, also by def., theories require sound evidence. What you described is a hyothesis.

I wrote...
by definition, it is not a "Theory".

 

[KingZayd]

LaZy i IS wrote...

@KingZayd, I appreciate why you believe IT, I did at first. Try looking at the "evidence" from a point of view not involved with the IT though, and you'll see that there is a simpler non-IT explanation for pretty much all of it.

hammmerfan wrote...
Yay Occam!

I did, I was in fact on the opposite side at first. I didn't believe IT. The focus on trees, and infinite ammo made me feel as if people were just fooling themselves. I accidentally convinced myself of IT. The only other explanation I can find that works is "bad writing". But along with all the emphasis on indoctrination in the story, and the fact that it seems the writing suddenly becomes "bad" right after Harbinger knocks you out? That makes me think that there's indoctrination going on. I admit I might be wrong, and something really did happen to the writers, but I'm convinced that indoctrination is what was going on there.

At the very least, they were planning indoctrination up til near the end, and then they changed their minds but left a lot of the evidence behind.

[KingZayd]

LaZy i IS wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
Theory: 
An idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action 

Indoctrination theory fits that definition.

As for Occam's razor, clearly we get different results from using it. 

You forgot that, also by def., theories require sound evidence. What you described is a hyothesis.

I wrote...
by definition, it is not a "Theory".

 

I took that definition from a dictionary. It's a theory.

[savionen]

CavScout wrote...

Yep, horribly flawed logic. Heck, using the same "evidence" as IT folks I could say:

FACT 1: People drown when in water.
FACT 2: People are wet when drowning.
FACT 3: Surfers are near a lot of water.

Conclusion: Surfers must have/be drowning.

That's what IT logic looks like.

That's what the Catalyst's logic looks like.

Synthetics are created by imperfect beings, therefore they always rebel against their creators.
Therefore all synthetics will want to kill every single organic in the galaxy from krogan to bacteria.

That's like saying all children will kill their parents.

Kill all parents because their children might rebel and kill all parents.

Seems legit.

Modifié par savionen, 06 mai 2012 - 08:45 .

[balance5050]

Before Harbinger's beam. 




 After Harbinger's beam:

[Agugaboo]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...


And what else is it? He's been studying indoctrination. Whatever he has is based on that research. Are you suggesting he's been able to come up with a technology beyond the reapers? TIM's a remarkable man indeed, but I think you overestimate him.

No I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that he researched Indoctrination to figure out how to gain control over people.

He reverse engineered it and made it his own. Just like he tells you in the final scene. A lot of tech in the future is reverse engineered from reaper tech. This provides grounds to possibility of reverse engineering Indoctrnation.

But the reapers like to control people too? Something like that would be really useful against Shepard. Why does TIM's device work better than the Reapers' own tech?

Considering TIM dies, how much better was it?

Well, capable of overriding reaper signals at close range indefinitely, so better than reapers' signal at close range. If shepard was able to break control of it temporarily even though it is more powerful than reaper signal, at close range, then that should say something.

[LaZy i IS]

KingZayd wrote...

LaZy i IS wrote...

KingZayd wrote...
Theory: 
An idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action 

Indoctrination theory fits that definition.

As for Occam's razor, clearly we get different results from using it. 

You forgot that, also by def., theories require sound evidence. What you described is a hyothesis.

I wrote...
by definition, it is not a "Theory".

 

I took that definition from a dictionary. It's a theory.

Theory:
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted.
Hypothesis:
A proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of
phenomena.

Indoc. "Theory" = Indoc. Hypothesis

Please, provide me a real-life theory that doesn't have sound evidence in support of it.

[ThinkIntegral]

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...
Well as I said before...

As far as personality goes, we don't even know if it had a personality or what its personality was previously.  Kind of irrelevant.  As far as the Crucible compelling the Catalyst to do something, technically yeah it did, because otherwise you wouldn't be standing at the bottom of the Presidium talking to it about to make three choices nor would an energy bubble disperse or shoot out from the device.  Shepard would've failed and died right there in front of the console.

That detail is something you and I will never know and because of that is kind of irrelevant.  The important thing you should be focusing on is that at some point someone did; whether figuring out an AI is there and/or designing the Crucible to interface with it because Vendetta said the Citadel was incorporated into the Crucible designs.  In other words, there was a reason why.  Yes the reaso could be that they weren't aware of an AI and thought that the Citadel was an added component to disperse energy.  But the end result, the fact that you're talking to the Catalyst, that it gives you three freaking choices to choose from, and honors your choices or is forced to exercise your choice suggests there was more to the design of the Crucible.

Like Cavscout said, your problem and frustration is because you're trying to ask questions on things that you won't probably ever know even with the EC, and some of which are tangential. 

You're there because it brought you up there. It doesn't tell you why it brought you up there, and it only mentions that it's been changed when it's saying there are new possibilties. He was changed like Iron Man. new hardware, new possibilities.

It's not irrelevant. For what you're saying to make sense there has to be a way for the designers to know of the AI so they can factor it into the design. If what you're saying is true, but there isn't a way for the designers to know of the AI in the first place, then the story is nonsensical.  As for the latter part of the paragraph: "A mad man sees what he sees".  I haven't yet seen an explanation that makes sense and can address these issues, that isn't indoctrination. I'm asking you to try and address them some other way.

My problem is that I'm thinking about the story? I don't need to have all the answers, but there should at least be some plausible explanation for the story to make sense.

Yes you're there because it brought you there. Absent the Crucible, you think it would've done so otherwise?  And if so, on what grounds?  Or rather the question is, even if the Crucible worked what independent grounds show that it would've brought you there anyways?  Because it wants to "trick" you?  Why? The battle probably would've ended in the Reapers success.  Even if that's the case [because of the time limit] why does the Catalyst then let you [unless forced to let you] make a choice which results in an energy bubble and beam being dispersed?

Anyways, I'm basing my thoughts solely on what's been presented before me, and the fact that the Crucible has been premised throughout the entire ME3 storyline as the only way to stop the Reapers and that it must be combined with the Catalyst suggests if the Crucible were never connected to the Citadel, Shepard would not be standing there at the bottom of the Presidium nor would the Reapers be stopped.

Also you're taking things too literal.  It mentions change at that moment because it was relevant in that moment for Shepard to make a choice.  You know to make sure that the intended receiver [Shepard] is aware that the Crucible has made/allowed it to provide Shepard with 3 options to come up with an alternative to pruning advanced civilizations in the galaxy.  It doesn't equate to an idea that change did not occur up until that moment.

Yes it is fairly irrelevant. It's a detail that was not explored in depth so that the narrative of the story could direct you at what's important.  The Crucible plans included the design of the Catalyst/Citadel.  The fact that the Catalyst is changed after the connection, suggests someone at some point had to have known something.  Otherwise, why even include it in the plans?

You haven't seen an explanation that makes sense because you keep asking questions no one has answers to including yourself and going off on tangential points.  The relevancy is what has been laid before you in that closed box. And apparently it sounds like you do need all the answers because you keep asking about everything.

[EpyonX3]

dreman9999 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...


And what else is it? He's been studying indoctrination. Whatever he has is based on that research. Are you suggesting he's been able to come up with a technology beyond the reapers? TIM's a remarkable man indeed, but I think you overestimate him.

No I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that he researched Indoctrination to figure out how to gain control over people.

He reverse engineered it and made it his own. Just like he tells you in the final scene. A lot of tech in the future is reverse engineered from reaper tech. This provides grounds to possibility of reverse engineering Indoctrnation.

But the reapers like to control people too? Something like that would be really useful against Shepard. Why does TIM's device work better than the Reapers' own tech?

Because of the intended purposes. Reapers don't want to control your body, they want the mind. The mind can over power the body so not having control of the mind makes sleeper agents impossible to work with.

I'd say reaper control is much better than TIM's control.

......Benzia and Paul Grayson would say indoctrination does both... So would Saren. Also, if you know howindoctrination works...You would know that there would be no way for it to effect the body with out the mind.

This actually helps my case. What the codex describes is reaper indoctrination. It controls both the mind and body. The key is that the mind is also under control. TIM doesn't have control of Anderson or Shepard's mind, just they're bodies.

Therefore, TIM is not indoctrinating them, but using the only physical control implementation of reaper indoctrination.

[balance5050]

EpyonX3 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...


And what else is it? He's been studying indoctrination. Whatever he has is based on that research. Are you suggesting he's been able to come up with a technology beyond the reapers? TIM's a remarkable man indeed, but I think you overestimate him.

No I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that he researched Indoctrination to figure out how to gain control over people.

He reverse engineered it and made it his own. Just like he tells you in the final scene. A lot of tech in the future is reverse engineered from reaper tech. This provides grounds to possibility of reverse engineering Indoctrnation.

But the reapers like to control people too? Something like that would be really useful against Shepard. Why does TIM's device work better than the Reapers' own tech?

Because of the intended purposes. Reapers don't want to control your body, they want the mind. The mind can over power the body so not having control of the mind makes sleeper agents impossible to work with.

I'd say reaper control is much better than TIM's control.

......Benzia and Paul Grayson would say indoctrination does both... So would Saren. Also, if you know howindoctrination works...You would know that there would be no way for it to effect the body with out the mind.

This actually helps my case. What the codex describes is reaper indoctrination. It controls both the mind and body. The key is that the mind is also under control. TIM doesn't have control of Anderson or Shepard's mind, just they're bodies.

Therefore, TIM is not indoctrinating them, but using the only physical control implementation of reaper indoctrination.

There is not physical control without mental control when it comes to indotctination, purely physical control is huskification, Shepard isn't a husk. 

[LaZy i IS]

balance5050 wrote...

Before Harbinger's beam. 




 After Harbinger's beam:

Weak evidence. Before the beam there are still trees, just not on the path down the hill. Most likely explanation: Devs didn't think that people were gonna pay attention to those tiny details whilst running toward the citadel beam, and wouldn't like a tree in their way.