9087 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

Also, you assume that the Geth will reach a level beyond my comprehension.

We understand the Kardenshev scale up until five.

At that point the Geth won't even be in their bodies anymore. They will have transcended this mortal coil? They will be in separate dimensions.

What risk do they pose?

Or other Synthetics for that matter?

[Taboo]

How do we even know they'll be a threat?

Could they, like the Geth not go beyond the Perseus Veil and simply do what they want?

Everyone assumes they are a threat.

ALWAYS.

[Uncle Jo]

Taboo-XX wrote...

1)How do we even know they'll be a threat?

2)Could they, like the Geth not go beyond the Perseus Veil and simply do what they want?

Everyone assumes they are a threat.

ALWAYS.

1)Wanna bet your life on it?

2) You think that the other races'll sleep well with such a potential Damocles sword on their head? That they'd trust Shep as new Catalyst?

3)Well, when we see what they're capable of, we have the right to reasonably not trust them too much.

[Shaigunjoe]

Taboo-XX wrote...
Nano-Scale AI: Eventually it will run out of materials. You cannot create new matter. You cannot violate BASIC astrophysical laws.

It isn't even an astrophysical law, just a regular physics laws.  Conservation of mass. Explain to me why this can't be violated?  It states that matter cannot be created or destroyed.  But we can make anti-matter already, which actually destroys matter.  There are theories that support matter creation.

Thats all well and good, but the thing I really want to know is why you insist on stating you cannot do this or you can do that, nothing that we know in science is really absolute fact, mearly the best conclusion we can draw from empirical data, it is the place of science fiction to challenge these things.

[Taboo]

Yes.

I see the worst case scenario of Synthesis being something like THX 1138. All we do is further the cause of production.

I can see the Jesus painting now:

"Are you happy?"

The Geth have have proven that will only attack when provoked.

Didn't we establish this in three?

That it was with the Reapers that they came out of the veil?

As I said before, they would simply leave organics alone and do whatever they wanted.

What's the worst that could happen?

Be like the Borg and open a portal into another dimension with a terrible species inside?

[Taboo]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
Nano-Scale AI: Eventually it will run out of materials. You cannot create new matter. You cannot violate BASIC astrophysical laws.

It isn't even an astrophysical law, just a regular physics laws.  Conservation of mass. Explain to me why this can't be violated?  It states that matter cannot be created or destroyed.  But we can make anti-matter already, which actually destroys matter.  There are theories that support matter creation.

Thats all well and good, but the thing I really want to know is why you insist on stating you cannot do this or you can do that, nothing that we know in science is really absolute fact, mearly the best conclusion we can draw from empirical data, it is the place of science fiction to challenge these things.

At some point you are not challenging anything. It's just dumb. That's what I mean. It's ridiculous.

[Shaigunjoe]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
Nano-Scale AI: Eventually it will run out of materials. You cannot create new matter. You cannot violate BASIC astrophysical laws.

It isn't even an astrophysical law, just a regular physics laws.  Conservation of mass. Explain to me why this can't be violated?  It states that matter cannot be created or destroyed.  But we can make anti-matter already, which actually destroys matter.  There are theories that support matter creation.

Thats all well and good, but the thing I really want to know is why you insist on stating you cannot do this or you can do that, nothing that we know in science is really absolute fact, mearly the best conclusion we can draw from empirical data, it is the place of science fiction to challenge these things.

At some point you are not challenging anything. It's just dumb. That's what I mean. It's ridiculous.

But it isn't even much of a challenge to conservation of mass, thats a very classical physics thing.  Dont' see rediculousness there at all.

[Uncle Jo]

Taboo-XX wrote...

1.Yes.
2. I see the worst case scenario of Synthesis being something like THX 1138. All we do is further the cause of production.
3..The Geth have have proven that will only attack when provoked.
4.That it was with the Reapers that they came out of the veil?
5.As I said before, they would simply leave organics alone and do whatever they wanted.

What's the worst that could happen?

1. Fair enough. The life of the others?
2. Exactly. Agreed.
3. Bad comparison. The Reapers are trolls the biggest fans of galactic preemptive genocides. They attack without being provoked. They're also part organic btw. What guarantees that they're not going to troll us again? Nothing.
4. Fuel to my own argumentation.
5. In the past billion of years, the only thing that they've done is reaping. What do you propose them for reconversion ? Galactic law enforcement?

[Taboo]

The Reapers are under the control of the Star Child.

The Geth are free.

I will not control the Reapers, nor will I submit to the unknown of Synthesis. I will Destroy them and be done with it.

The Geth are a blow back, an unfortunate causuality. A disgusting thing to say but I will always choose the option I feel violates the least amount of people.

The worst case scenario for Synthesis:

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 24 mai 2012 - 01:34 .

[Uncle Jo]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Reapers are under the control of the Star Child.

The Geth are free.

I will not control the Reapers, nor will I submit to the unknown of Synthesis. I will Destroy them and be done with it.

The Geth are a blow back, an unfortunate causuality. A disgusting thing to say but I will always choose the option I feel violates the least amount of people.

The worst case scenario for Synthesis:
*image removed*

I always forget the space troll. Maybe it's because I can't imagine the Reapers, our archenemies, suddendly become toys.
Anyway, ending taken at face value (or not), I'd choose exactly like you and for the same reasons.

'Night or day (depends on where you are)

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 24 mai 2012 - 01:52 .

[Sisterofshane]

I believe Uncle Jo is correct on the last page - what exactly IS the implication of leaving the Reaper Force intact (in both Synthesis and Control) ?

In both endings we see them flying off, but it almost seems like a joke. In control, it sort of makes sense, but for Synthesis? Are we to believe that, once given free will (apart from the catalyst's control), that they all would just leave and the galaxy would be peaceful? Would they even be allowed to leave? I think there should be some sort of consequence to this that should be elaborated upon ( whether it be positive or negative, as it fits within the writer's story).

I would really like to see this addressed in the EC.

[Taboo]

Sisterofshane wrote...

I believe Uncle Jo is correct on the last page - what exactly IS the implication of leaving the Reaper Force intact (in both Synthesis and Control) ?

In both endings we see them flying off, but it almost seems like a joke. In control, it sort of makes sense, but for Synthesis? Are we to believe that, once given free will (apart from the catalyst's control), that they all would just leave and the galaxy would be peaceful? Would they even be allowed to leave? I think there should be some sort of consequence to this that should be elaborated upon ( whether it be positive or negative, as it fits within the writer's story).

I would really like to see this addressed in the EC.

They are blessed with your Shepard's essence I think.

Thomas Shepard would make some very conflicted Reapers.

[Veneke]

It seems everytime I come back to this topic it grows another 10 pages... I'll be honest, I skimmed about 5 of them. Seems like must the same old rehashing of past arguments anyway.

Uncle Jo wrote...

1. You like the word "irrelevant" do you ?

2. and 3. and 4. and 5.

You're right on one thing. It depends on how much do you trust the Space troll. Personally I don't. Even at face value.
Someone who already lies by the greetings can't be trusted.

- "I'm the Catalyst" (something which is not changed by the events),
- A few minutes later... "The Crucible changed me"

6. See 1. Remember me of something (not completely related to this point but still relevant), Why did we kill/stop Saren in Mass Effect 1 ?

7. I'll repeat something that I've already said in a previous post: one of the main thems in Mass Effect is trying to "find a way to coexist peacefully despite of being different" Isn't a little bit the way how... democracy works?
Deciding to change every one without asking them, because YOU think it's better, isn't somehow authoritarian?
How can it be irrelevant?

8. Please tell me what is relevant to talk about here...

1. I'm only using the word irrelevant so much because quite a bit of the supposed arguments against how Synthesis works are morality arguments on why not to choose Synthesis or are posts like 'How does plantlife work now?' which might be a tad unfair to call irrelevant but I'm pretty sure they're trolling so yeah...

2. and 3. and 4. and 5. - Comes down to trust, as you said. Either you trust the Catalyst or you don't. If you don't then the entire thing is a lost cause and no amount of debate will change that. I'd have to look up the Synthesis ending again on Youtube but doesn't he reply with the Crucible comment as an explanation as to why these options are available (or something similar)?

6. I think someone made a reply to this - it went along the lines of Saren was looking for organics to submit to synthetics whereas Synthesis makes the two halves equal. Seems reasonable (and yes, relevant. )
 
7. It's irrelevant because it's an argument against picking Synthesis, not an argument as to why OPs thinking is flawed.
 
8. It should be obvious and probably would have remained so if certain people posting hadn't decided to attach political importance to something that is apolitical. What's relevant is how Synthesis works and OPs train of thought. What isn't relevant are morality arguments for or against choosing Synthesis.

Taboo-XX wrote...

Veneke wrote...

I must have missed the synthesis = authoritarianism link. Care to point it out to me?

You enforce a choice upon a large group of people based upon the views of one person. Do I really have to spell it out for you?

I shouldn't have to tell you anymore than that.

?

All the options do this.
 
- Destroy enforces a choice made by one man without consultation with anyone. It enforces a choice that all organics must abide by, maybe more than half organics wanted to Control and not Destroy the Reapers, how could you tell? Let's not forget that it kills off an entire synthetic race. It's quite probable, likely in fact, that there's a substantial portion
of the ingame population that would have preferred a different option.

- Control enforces a choice made by one man without consultation with anyone. It enforces your will over an entire synthetic race. Did you have time to take a poll? Maybe more than half the organics wanted to kill the Reapers altogether and not let them live at all? It's quite probable, likely in fact, that there's a substantial portion
of the ingame population that would have preferred a different option.
 
- Synthesis enforces a choice made by one man without consultation with anyone. It changes everybody and everything. No poll was taken and it's quite probable, likely in fact, that there's a substantial portion of the ingame population that would have preferred a different option.

[Vigilant111]

Ieldra2 wrote...

You already have the fate of the galaxy in your hands when you're making your decision about how the Crucible is to be used. You're deciding everyone's fate. All sapient life including the Reapers is affected by your decision. Pretending humility is hypocritical. You have the responsibility. Control may actually be the least drastic choice if you look at the consequences.

Yes, exactly, u are right! pretending humility is useless, I will give all galactic species what they wanted all along throughout the game - delivering the dead bodies of reapers to them

*In anguish: When my armor is gone, all I have is my morals, my principles, they are what drove me to the citadel, they are what drove me to unite the galactic powers

I am not even gonna speculate what might happen in the future, out of time, if u are asking me to throw my morals away, okay, then I would come to the conclusion fast and brisk without even considering EDI and the Geth, and press the destroy button with no regrets

Modifié par Vigilant111, 24 mai 2012 - 06:49 .

[Xandurpein]

The whole line of the OP is a very interesting headcanon, and I hope that Bioware will put as much effort into explaining what they think Synthesis actually is, as the OP, but the OP fail to convince me that this headcanon is more plausible than any other headcanon. The OP still pick and chose what in the game is admissable as "evidence". Since the Catalyst is the one offering the choice, any words of explanation of what Synthesis is ought to be given more credence than interpretations and other more circumstansial evidence. And yet the OP cheerfully dismisses the only real "as is" information the Catalyst himself gives us, "a new form of DNA", as obviously metaphorical. That alone tells methat while this is a nice theory, it's still wishful thinking to believe this interpretation is more plausible than any other, including the more dystopian.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 24 mai 2012 - 06:57 .

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

 Carl Sagan. I assume you know who he is?

You have to have energy to do this. You understand that the amount needed would be immense. Have you factored in the energy output as well? The amount of energy exhuded could potentially cause harm to a planet. We call that heat waste. You raise the temperatures of the Ocean and the planet. Sound familiar? Are we going to waste planets in the name of the upwards goal of what ever vision you have?

You have to send the waste somewhere, you simply don't blast it into space.

What about the Malthusian Catastrophe? If we are such perfect beings, we will breed and breed and breed. What happens when we become so numerous that we outpace argriculture?

There are so many unknowns in Synthesis it's not even funny.

1) Why would you pursue galactic levels of power on a planet? That's senseless from the very start.
2) Even assuming we would even need to "breed," Synthesis would give us the same level of control over our propagation that Geth have - create X units and no more. There would thus be no boundless expansion, no viral assimilation of our galaxy and subsequent galaxies. You're applying organic motivations to a non-organic race.

Uncle Jo wrote...

(don't argue against this please)

As you wish, but that means I probably won't read it either.

Taboo-XX wrote...

Also, you assume that the Geth will reach a level beyond my comprehension.

We understand the Kardenshev scale up until five.

At that point the Geth won't even be in their bodies anymore. They will have transcended this mortal coil? They will be in separate dimensions.

What risk do they pose?

Or other Synthetics for that matter?

The same risk that a boot poses to an ant. Or a volcano to a snail.

[Xandurpein]

Optimystic_X wrote...

2) Even assuming we would even need to "breed," Synthesis would give us the same level of control over our propagation that Geth have - create X units and no more. There would thus be no boundless expansion, no viral assimilation of our galaxy and subsequent galaxies. You're applying organic motivations to a non-organic race.

No. It's you who fail to understand the nature of evolution. When a synthetic race gains free will and can self-propagate then the same laws of evolution that applies to organic life will determine the synthetics.

[Vigilant111]

Xandurpein wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

2) Even assuming we would even need to "breed," Synthesis would give us the same level of control over our propagation that Geth have - create X units and no more. There would thus be no boundless expansion, no viral assimilation of our galaxy and subsequent galaxies. You're applying organic motivations to a non-organic race.

No. It's you who fail to understand the nature of evolution. When a synthetic race gains free will and can self-propagate then the same laws of evolution that applies to organic life will determine the synthetics.

wait, evolution derives from free will?

For the Geth I think its technological change that enabled free will

I thought the catalyst already said its the end of evolution

Modifié par Vigilant111, 24 mai 2012 - 07:18 .

[PsyrenY]

Xandurpein wrote...

No. It's you who fail to understand the nature of evolution. When a synthetic race gains free will and can self-propagate then the same laws of evolution that applies to organic life will determine the synthetics.

This is not true at all. The one commonality between organic and synthetic evolution is "change due to external stimuli." The similarities end there, because synthetics have both total control over their evolution and can enact the changes much more quickly.

Take EDI. She spent nearly her entire existence housed within her quantum blue box. However, seconds after being plugged into Normandy, she mastered autonomously controlling the most complex frigate in the galaxy despite never having done so before. And in ME3, seconds after installing herself into Eva's robot body, she had achieved enough fine motor control to function in combat and operate firearms with comparable efficacy to trained soldiers. When asked about this, she informs you that "she only needs one occurrence to adapt to a new concept."

There is no organic species that can evolve that quickly in response to change, especially not in such highly-specified ways. Synthesis is our only hope of keeping up.

[Rip504]

Here let me explain synthesis for you:

Evolution









New DNA




Got it?

[Vigilant111]

Optimystic_X wrote...

There is no organic species that can evolve that quickly in response to change, especially not in such highly-specified ways. Synthesis is our only hope of keeping up.

Its called technological change

[Vigilant111]

Rip504 wrote...

Here let me explain synthesis for you:

Evolution









New DNA




Got it?

Okay I donno what is the above but one of you already told me NEW DNA is a metaphor, and not just evolution, but THE END of it

[Ieldra]

Sisterofshane wrote...
I believe Uncle Jo is correct on the last page - what exactly IS the implication of leaving the Reaper Force intact (in both Synthesis and Control) ?

In both endings we see them flying off, but it almost seems like a joke. In control, it sort of makes sense, but for Synthesis? Are we to believe that, once given free will (apart from the catalyst's control), that they all would just leave and the galaxy would be peaceful? Would they even be allowed to leave? I think there should be some sort of consequence to this that should be elaborated upon ( whether it be positive or negative, as it fits within the writer's story).

I would really like to see this addressed in the EC.

In Control, it's up to Shepard. All we see is that they stop attacking and leave Earth. This ends the Reaper threat, but apart from that it's up to the player to imagine what happens.

In Synthesis, they also stop attacking and leave Earth. This aiso ends the Reaper threat, and here, too, it's up to the player to imagine what happens, but since it's not up to Shepard, there is less common ground for speculation. Between them flying away, never to be seen again, them staying around and establishing peaceful contact after being freed from the Catalyst's mind control, or most of them flying away but a few scattered ones having to be defeated in the following years, everything is possible. All we know that they're no longer a serious threat to the galaxy. Even if some remain and a few remain hostile, they no longer have a unified purpose.

My favorite scenario is that they stay around, but simply have other priorities incomprehensible to the post-Synthesis civilizations who are just starting to explore their new potential. One or two might be persuaded to share their knowledge in order to help rebuilding the relays, one or two others' constituent minds might ask for help in restoring their old forms. A few might even be hostile. I don't think a scenario where they all do the same is plausible.

[Xandurpein]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

2) Even assuming we would even need to "breed," Synthesis would give us the same level of control over our propagation that Geth have - create X units and no more. There would thus be no boundless expansion, no viral assimilation of our galaxy and subsequent galaxies. You're applying organic motivations to a non-organic race.

No. It's you who fail to understand the nature of evolution. When a synthetic race gains free will and can self-propagate then the same laws of evolution that applies to organic life will determine the synthetics.

wait, evolution derives from free will?

For the Geth I think its technological change that enabled free will

I thought the catalyst already said its the end of evolution

The Catalyst's claim that Synthesis is the final stage of evolution is one of the most bizarre statements in the game and something that undermines it's credence as a whole. There are in fact some frightening implications if you take it literally. More on that later. A very benign interpretation of the statement would be that if Synthesis, as some have suggested, would mean the possibility of self-modification, then Synthesis would strongly diminish the impact of random mutation as the cause of diversity.

It's diversity that is the root of evolution, not the change of external stimuli or anything else. As long as there is diversity in a group, then some individuals may prove more successful than others, and these will pass their traits (genes) on to their offspring. Of course this means that actually having a desire to propagate at all is one of the most basic traits that all succesful speices share, because those who lack that desire will quickly die out.

We are used to see evolution from a far, as a gradual change in a seices, but that view is a simplification of a series of micro jumps where in each generation different individuals have different traits and different strategies and the successful ones survive and pass their traits on to the next generation. A change in the external stimuli will accelerate the apparant rate of change, because it will favor some more extreme mutations in each generation, compared to a stable environment, but evolution always occurs as long as there is diversity and some individuals are more successful than others.

Evolution isn't limited to our physical bodies. It's not just a metaphore when we say that our societies evolve. We have different ideas and some ideas (memes) are more successful and competetive than others, and they will tend to dominate as more and more people copy successful strategies, while societies where people cling to old ideas decline. The fact that society evolves at a much faster rate than out organic bodies, is a prime example of how self-modification results in a much higher rate of evolution than relying on random mutations.

Nor is evolution limited to organic beings. Imagine the Geth. We know little of the Geth, but I think it's safe to assume that the Geth propagate by some form of duplication. We know that the there is diversity among the Geth, because they can have different opinions, like when Legion was unable to reach a concensus about the fate of the heretics. It's not far-fetched to imagine that a small group of Geth, either through some random error-coding or through an act of free will, put a higher priority on propagation than other Geth. As they will proportionally devote more time to duplicate thmesleves than the other Geth, they will out-breed the original Geth and eventually dominate the concensus. This is why I believe that any synthetic race will, in time, either be as interested in propagating themselves as organics, or diminish and disappear.

The frightening implication of Reapers claim that they are "the Pinnacle of Evolution" is that they have no diversity.  Each Reaper is a race of individual beings forced into one single consensus. The Reapers have absorbed countless generations of different speices and yet they appear as static and as single-minded in their purpose through the ages. They have eliminated evolution by eliminating diversity. The Catalyst is as unchanged as the Reapers and it offers Synthesis with the promise that it would mean "the final stage of evolution" and an end to the "chaos" of organic evolution. This is enough for me to pause and worry. The Catalyst may even genuinely believe that the end of diversity is a good thing as it means the end of the "chaos" of evolution and change, but do I?

If you prefer the more benign idea, that Synthesis offers more diversity not less, then the ability to change our physical bodies through self-modification will NOT mean the end of evolution. It'll mean that evolution will occur at a vastly accelerated pace as different strategies are explored and those deemed succesful will be copied and spread, not at the slow pace of mutation of genes, but at the vastly quicker rate of change of memes.

Edit: Fixed some typos

Modifié par Xandurpein, 24 mai 2012 - 09:17 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Rip504 wrote...

Here let me explain synthesis for you:

Evolution









New DNA




Got it?

Okay I donno what is the above but one of you already told me NEW DNA is a metaphor, and not just evolution, but THE END of it

Yes, the pinnacle of evolution. 

Something that cannot be reached. An impossibility. An idea so mind-numbingly stupid to anyone who has studied the concept in any depth I literally cannot play the end of this game anymore.