Isn't it great what can be done within the restrictions of relatively hard SF? I've taken inspiration from that site for my Synthesis interpretation - at least regarding the outcome, as well as a possible technical process of something like Synthesis on an individual level (look up "SNARE"). I wish Bioware had read more stuff like that before they embarked on writing their ending.CosmicGnosis wrote...
Ieldra, I've finally started to read through that Orion's Arm site that you've mentioned in the past. Let's just say that it excites my sense of wonder.
A different ascension - the Synthesis compendium (now with EC material integrated)
Débuté par
Ieldra
, mai 20 2012 05:10
#6551
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:36
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
Retour en haut
#6552
Guest_IReuven_*
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:44
Guest_IReuven_*
Guest_IReuven_*
-
- Guests
Synthesis... oh god, weren't we thorugh it already?
Already then, if I am going to share my opinion, that frankly speaking means jack-**** and everybody is aware of that ( well, that's why formus exist, right? So ppl can share opinions and still don't give a damn.) I have to ask a question:
Why?
Why Synthesis? Is it because You trust Catalyst ( I am looking-over the obvious plothole of Catalyst being sincere - for some goddamn reason )? Is it because... What You think that assimilating... Yes, I am using this word, known from Star Trek series, on purpose. Assimilating whole galaxy, not asking them about it, turning them somehow into cyborgish creatures is fine?
Apart from obvious lack of data on how Sythesis, how energy from Crucible is supposed to create "the new DNA", there is an obvious questions - how will people react. How is altering existance of all creatures in the galaxy morally justified? How change of DNA or even change of composure of organic matter grant "understanding"?
I am just going to throw in the simple fact - We are not defined by our DNA in 100%. Clone never will be the same as the original? Why? Cause living creatures are defined by their history, experiences, decisions that they make. While there is seemingly some connection between behaviour and DNA - it's not a critical one.
Also our good, honest friend we meet at the bitter end of Mass Effect 3 says... That Synthesis cannot be forced... Well, then why are we FORCING it now? It's not like we ask anyone.
And now I am going to do something I do not do often:
Let's assume that Harry Plothole is right: Synthesis is the highest form of evolution.
Well, that means we have PERFECT, I repeat PERFECT creatures all around the galaxy. Yhm, so basically... Never ever anything new will be added.
I need to remind You - evolution is progressing thanks to mistakes - it is progressing thanks to mutations. When the creature is perfect - it stops evolving as none mistakes can apparently be made. Diversity and chaotical beauty of the nature is destroyed, torn apart and thrown out the window.
Also if creature is perfect... Basically nothing is a challenge for it, as complicated ideas are now easy to process, as there is nothing to discover...
Now, I do not mean to offend... But are people that agree with Synthesis a bit... I dunno - unhappy with their lives? Disappointed that so many things are out of their reach?
If so, then it's truly as sad thing... That I do not quite understand. Live is about challenge and sacrifice, live is about the unknown. Live is a search for answers, and even if we do not find them... We often see that traveling the road we did was well worth it for it's own sake.
As a living breathing creature - I like to "evolve" by my own standards, I like to choose my path, I do not like to be bound by anything... and if You think of it - perfection is a kind of bounding.
"Live forever - well, I would rather die - at least I know I wasn't theirs to create.
This is Yours but You should better choose - before they take away Your right to decide."
Already then, if I am going to share my opinion, that frankly speaking means jack-**** and everybody is aware of that ( well, that's why formus exist, right? So ppl can share opinions and still don't give a damn.) I have to ask a question:
Why?
Why Synthesis? Is it because You trust Catalyst ( I am looking-over the obvious plothole of Catalyst being sincere - for some goddamn reason )? Is it because... What You think that assimilating... Yes, I am using this word, known from Star Trek series, on purpose. Assimilating whole galaxy, not asking them about it, turning them somehow into cyborgish creatures is fine?
Apart from obvious lack of data on how Sythesis, how energy from Crucible is supposed to create "the new DNA", there is an obvious questions - how will people react. How is altering existance of all creatures in the galaxy morally justified? How change of DNA or even change of composure of organic matter grant "understanding"?
I am just going to throw in the simple fact - We are not defined by our DNA in 100%. Clone never will be the same as the original? Why? Cause living creatures are defined by their history, experiences, decisions that they make. While there is seemingly some connection between behaviour and DNA - it's not a critical one.
Also our good, honest friend we meet at the bitter end of Mass Effect 3 says... That Synthesis cannot be forced... Well, then why are we FORCING it now? It's not like we ask anyone.
And now I am going to do something I do not do often:
Let's assume that Harry Plothole is right: Synthesis is the highest form of evolution.
Well, that means we have PERFECT, I repeat PERFECT creatures all around the galaxy. Yhm, so basically... Never ever anything new will be added.
I need to remind You - evolution is progressing thanks to mistakes - it is progressing thanks to mutations. When the creature is perfect - it stops evolving as none mistakes can apparently be made. Diversity and chaotical beauty of the nature is destroyed, torn apart and thrown out the window.
Also if creature is perfect... Basically nothing is a challenge for it, as complicated ideas are now easy to process, as there is nothing to discover...
Now, I do not mean to offend... But are people that agree with Synthesis a bit... I dunno - unhappy with their lives? Disappointed that so many things are out of their reach?
If so, then it's truly as sad thing... That I do not quite understand. Live is about challenge and sacrifice, live is about the unknown. Live is a search for answers, and even if we do not find them... We often see that traveling the road we did was well worth it for it's own sake.
As a living breathing creature - I like to "evolve" by my own standards, I like to choose my path, I do not like to be bound by anything... and if You think of it - perfection is a kind of bounding.
"Live forever - well, I would rather die - at least I know I wasn't theirs to create.
This is Yours but You should better choose - before they take away Your right to decide."
#6553
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:46
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
As for the question of Synthesized micro-organisms: I wonder if it was ever the intention to include literally all life in the Synthesis. It appears to me that when "all life" was referenced what was really meant was "intelligent synthetic and organic life", since for anything else the whole process doesn't make sense. Also, someone mentioned the problems with abiogenesis, where new organic life can come into existence from nonliving materials on worlds as yet undiscovered.
We have two alternatives: either we accept the "biosynthetic leaves" and run into the aforementioned problem and more, or we disregard the biosynthetic leaves as yet another artifact of the presentation. I have so far not commented on this problem since I don't have a good answer. Perhaps there is none. It's a sad state of things that Bioware couldn't write a Synthesis ending that doesn't result in contradictions or unsolvable problems.
We have two alternatives: either we accept the "biosynthetic leaves" and run into the aforementioned problem and more, or we disregard the biosynthetic leaves as yet another artifact of the presentation. I have so far not commented on this problem since I don't have a good answer. Perhaps there is none. It's a sad state of things that Bioware couldn't write a Synthesis ending that doesn't result in contradictions or unsolvable problems.
#6554
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:48
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
You'd also have to classify a virus as "alive" and it really doesn't quote on quote fit that definition.
Mind you the Cylons in BSG were in fact Synthetic (NO WAY) and dropped like flies when Meningitis got aboard the ship. That's the image I have foremost on my mind here.
Mind you the Cylons in BSG were in fact Synthetic (NO WAY) and dropped like flies when Meningitis got aboard the ship. That's the image I have foremost on my mind here.
#6555
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:51
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
@IReuven:
The "new DNA" is metaphorical, as clearly indicated by the pause the Catalyst makes before it says that. Also, it has been superseded by the EC, where organics and synthetics are affected differently. Synthetics with a DNA analogue are an oxymoron, I have explained why in the OP, and the EC has acknowledged that. We only know that something fundamental in the physical nature of intelligent organic life will be changed, in order to facilitate self-change and the integration of technology. That could be genetic, but need not necessarily be.
And lastly, there is no "final evolution". Life will change until it doesn't exist anymore, either by natural or artificial evolution. There is no endpoint. I take that "final evolution" to mean that from now on, civilization is so advanced that it can control the evolution of species, so that it doesn't depend on random chance any more (i.e. no more "natural" evolution unless we leave it alone) but more on deliberate change.
The "new DNA" is metaphorical, as clearly indicated by the pause the Catalyst makes before it says that. Also, it has been superseded by the EC, where organics and synthetics are affected differently. Synthetics with a DNA analogue are an oxymoron, I have explained why in the OP, and the EC has acknowledged that. We only know that something fundamental in the physical nature of intelligent organic life will be changed, in order to facilitate self-change and the integration of technology. That could be genetic, but need not necessarily be.
And lastly, there is no "final evolution". Life will change until it doesn't exist anymore, either by natural or artificial evolution. There is no endpoint. I take that "final evolution" to mean that from now on, civilization is so advanced that it can control the evolution of species, so that it doesn't depend on random chance any more (i.e. no more "natural" evolution unless we leave it alone) but more on deliberate change.
#6556
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:52
The Geth Spectre
-
- Members
- 155 messages
If all organic are blended together does that mean when I eat cattle I will have to pick around the metal?
#6557
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:52
MegaSovereign
-
- Members
- 10 794 messages
If the Catalyst had tried Synthesis before do you think he tried using the Citadel and the relays to initiate it?
The Crucible alone can't achieve synthesis. It's merely a device designed to shoot energy through the relay network. It could be that Shepard's energy, the Crucible, and the Catalyst's own Synthesis "formula" initiates the perfect Synthesis outcome.
It would have been interesting if there was a low-EMS outcome for Synthesis.
The Crucible alone can't achieve synthesis. It's merely a device designed to shoot energy through the relay network. It could be that Shepard's energy, the Crucible, and the Catalyst's own Synthesis "formula" initiates the perfect Synthesis outcome.
It would have been interesting if there was a low-EMS outcome for Synthesis.
#6558
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:54
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
MegaSovereign wrote...
It would have been interesting if there was a low-EMS outcome for Synthesis.
Did you ever see Akira?
#6559
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:56
ElSuperGecko
-
- Members
- 2 317 messages
Ieldra2 wrote...
No. As of the EC there is no change in the physical makeup of synthetics.
So the Geth (and Reapers) would effectively be immortal, but the Synthesised organic races would not? A conundrum...
#6560
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 09:59
ElSuperGecko
-
- Members
- 2 317 messages
Taboo-XX wrote...
Did you ever see Akira?
For a better (read: more disturbing) example, did you ever see Tetsuo: The Iron Man?
Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:00 .
#6561
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:00
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
As I said, I think Synthesis was meant for "all life" as in "all intelligent organic and synthetic life". Also, there are subtler ways of integrating technology. A cellular-level cyborg would look like a normal, un-enhanced member of its species.The Geth Spectre wrote...
If all organic are blended together does that mean when I eat cattle I will have to pick around the metal?
#6562
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:00
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Yes I'm well aware of it. Akira is more fitting though as it too makes little scientific sense, just like Synthesis.
In the film all people have the ability to create a Universe....INSIDE THEM.
In the film all people have the ability to create a Universe....INSIDE THEM.
#6563
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:06
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
Perhaps it comes a surprise to some, but I would have appreciated that very much. Much of the intensity of the dislike for Synthesis comes from people's perception that it's Bioware's favorite ending. If we had a bad variant we could lay that claim to rest.MegaSovereign wrote...
If the Catalyst had tried Synthesis before do you think he tried using the Citadel and the relays to initiate it?
The Crucible alone can't achieve synthesis. It's merely a device designed to shoot energy through the relay network. It could be that Shepard's energy, the Crucible, and the Catalyst's own Synthesis "formula" initiates the perfect Synthesis outcome.
It would have been interesting if there was a low-EMS outcome for Synthesis.
As for the comparative role of the Crucible and the Catalyst, this is not at all clear. The statement "The Crucible changed me, created new possibilities" stands against "The Crucible is not much more than a power source."
#6564
Guest_IReuven_*
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:08
Guest_IReuven_*
Guest_IReuven_*
-
- Guests
Ieldra2 wrote...
@IReuven:
The "new DNA" is metaphorical, as clearly indicated by the pause the Catalyst makes before it says that. Also, it has been superseded by the EC, where organics and synthetics are affected differently. Synthetics with a DNA analogue are an oxymoron, I have explained why in the OP, and the EC has acknowledged that. We only know that something fundamental in the physical nature of intelligent organic life will be changed, in order to facilitate self-change and the integration of technology. That could be genetic, but need not necessarily be.
And lastly, there is no "final evolution". Life will change until it doesn't exist anymore, either by natural or artificial evolution. There is no endpoint. I take that "final evolution" to mean that from now on, civilization is so advanced that it can control the evolution of species, so that it doesn't depend on random chance any more (i.e. no more "natural" evolution unless we leave it alone) but more on deliberate change.
All these nasty metaphores sneaking up.
Then there is a better one: So Synthesis will eventually affect everyones BRAINS/CPU/whatever to understand each other.... I thought something like this was called "indoctrination" but I can be wrong.
Also... What is arificial evolution? What, the fact the AIs/Machines upgrade themselves? Well, I disagree. And I will throw the most polite reaper quote into it.
"We are harbringers of Your perfection." - reapers - do not evolve. They belive to be the final stage of the evolution, thus they do not see the point in making themselves better. Some of it also goes to the Geth - their mobile platforms are designed to perfectly fullfill given task. Machines do it in binary mode - if it's perfect - do not fix it.
#6565
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:10
The Geth Spectre
-
- Members
- 155 messages
When you say intelligent life do you mean organics with Sentience? Some people may say dolphins are intelligent same with monkeys. I just want to clear up some issues I have.
#6566
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:12
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
The Geth Spectre wrote...
When you say intelligent life do you mean organics with Sentience? Some people may say dolphins are intelligent same with monkeys. I just want to clear up some issues I have.
Pigs are also incredibly intelligent.
Gorillas have also been studied recently and some scientists believe they have incredibly primitive religious practices.
#6567
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:15
The Geth Spectre
-
- Members
- 155 messages
yes that's the point, how can you believe the star brat if it isn't clear who gets turned in to a organic robot. I rather destroy and not make all the humans into husks ,but that is just me.Taboo-XX wrote...
The Geth Spectre wrote...
When you say intelligent life do you mean organics with Sentience? Some people may say dolphins are intelligent same with monkeys. I just want to clear up some issues I have.
Pigs are also incredibly intelligent.
Gorillas have also been studied recently and some scientists believe they have incredibly primitive religious practices.
#6568
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:18
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
There would be some arbitrary threshold of sapience, probably around the human level since ME is a human-centered story. But plainly I don't think the writers put any thought into this.The Geth Spectre wrote...
When you say intelligent life do you mean organics with Sentience? Some people may say dolphins are intelligent same with monkeys. I just want to clear up some issues I have.
And please, can we dispense with the "Synthesis turns all humans into Husks" nonsense? I gather that many people dislike Synthesis, but I'd appreciate it if that dislike was based on things that actually happen. Or appear to happen. Or can reasonably be inferred to happen, taking thematic aspects into account etc.. Dismissing the EC is not reasonable in this context.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:21 .
#6569
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:20
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
All I can see now are super pigs and gorillas.
What happens to corpses with flesh still on them? That is to say things like mammoths encased in ice with useable tissue?
What happens to corpses with flesh still on them? That is to say things like mammoths encased in ice with useable tissue?
#6570
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:23
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
Yeah, yeah, continue to make silly claims. We all know the writing invites those. Give it a rest. I'd rather spend my energy on creating interpretations that make sense.
#6571
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:27
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Ieldra2 wrote...
Yeah, yeah, continue to make silly claims. We all know the writing invites those. Give it a rest. I'd rather spend my energy on creating interpretations that make sense.
I wanted to know what happened to the tissue. I didn't intend it to be silly. I apologize.
#6572
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:34
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
I meant the "super pigs". As for corpses, why the hell should they be affected?
#6573
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:38
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Ieldra2 wrote...
I meant the "super pigs". As for corpses, why the hell should they be affected?
Stupid ideas have kept this forum alive and running and you know that.
I'm referring to specifications of what IS targeted. Organics will affected. A pig IS organic. What about the Wooly Mammoth with cloneable tissue still on it?
I'm not talking zombies or anything. Just how specific do you think this process is? I see synthesized plants. I've never heard anyone discuss what happens to all the animals either.
Pigs? Goats? Bears?
#6574
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:40
Ieldra
-
- Members
- 25 190 messages
Here's a question for everyone who's interested:
Suppose the ending could be modded in subtle ways. How would you think should a Synthesis-like ending come about, i.e. an ending that mostly has the same ultimate outcome - maybe further down the line - but which is brought about in a different way?
@Taboo:
As I see it, there must be a living organism. Otherwise, I have no idea. I tend to invoke Belisario's Maxim here. The *interesting* topic is how sapient species are affected.
Suppose the ending could be modded in subtle ways. How would you think should a Synthesis-like ending come about, i.e. an ending that mostly has the same ultimate outcome - maybe further down the line - but which is brought about in a different way?
@Taboo:
As I see it, there must be a living organism. Otherwise, I have no idea. I tend to invoke Belisario's Maxim here. The *interesting* topic is how sapient species are affected.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 07 janvier 2013 - 10:44 .
#6575
Posté 07 janvier 2013 - 10:42
Taboo
-
- Members
- 20 234 messages
Pretty simple. Look at your dead Reapers and perfect it. It's no less ridiculous than the in place Vitalism now.
Humans ARE special after all.
Humans ARE special after all.
