9089 réponses à ce sujet

[PsyrenY]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Organics and synthetics, who is easier to be indoctrinated?

The answer is ironically synthetics. Strong-willed organics can resist brainwashing, and it is impossible to indoctrinate an entire population for the simple reason that mass-indoctrination requires being inside, or in close-proximity to, Reaper superstructures. (Hence the call by the Reapers for human leadership to board them.) And even long after indoctrination, its hold can be broken - we see it in Saren, in TIM, and even the most ardent IT adherens believe this possibility.

For synthetics, force of will is a non-issue. Legion said it best: "The minds of both forms of life can be shaped. Organics require time and effort. With synthetics, replacing a data file is the only requirement."

[Vigilant111]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Bioware has stated that no ending was supposed to be the best, at least Mr. Gamble did.

I choose to believe that all the endings resolve the issue in one way or the other. But only one ensures the possibility of it NEVER happening.

Synthesis is a solution to a hypothetical problem. As we have discussed, we cannot predict what they'll do. They could simply start and then stop.

If the Universe is mine to mold as my story and I would choose to believe the Geth would come to an understanding with us, as they did on Rannoch.

The speculations we have in here are just that.

I don't think Bioware will ever explain just "how" Synthesis works to us. It will simply happen.

Why can't they just make destroy option better like being able to keep the Geth and EDI, that way no one would accuse u of being genocidal again, I mean I bring them all the way to earth just to get killed? f**k that

To me, destroy fits Shepard, it emphasizes sacrifice, its the most stoic of the three

Modifié par Vigilant111, 25 mai 2012 - 04:55 .

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You don't get to use Arthur C. Clarke.

Sure we do. Deal with it.

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Organics and synthetics, who is easier to be indoctrinated?

The answer is ironically synthetics. Strong-willed organics can resist brainwashing, and it is impossible to indoctrinate an entire population for the simple reason that mass-indoctrination requires being inside, or in close-proximity to, Reaper superstructures. (Hence the call by the Reapers for human leadership to board them.) And even long after indoctrination, its hold can be broken - we see it in Saren, in TIM, and even the most ardent IT adherens believe this possibility.

For synthetics, force of will is a non-issue. Legion said it best: "The minds of both forms of life can be shaped. Organics require time and effort. With synthetics, replacing a data file is the only requirement."

No, Orgnaics are. Synthetic have to have the code up load into them. They need to accept it first. No point in the series was it shown that indoctriantion was forced on synthetics. And on top of that it's reversible with synthetics.

Modifié par dreman9999, 25 mai 2012 - 04:56 .

[Taboo]

dreman9999 wrote...

There is no point of arguing in this direction.  Gamble didn't even say that at all.

C-c-c-combo breaker.

Take that as you will.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You don't get to use Arthur C. Clarke.

Sure we do. Deal with it.

We call that being a bot where I come from.

You remind me of the people who watch people ****** on canvases and call it art.

They will use anything they can to justify something.

[dreman9999]

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

There is no point of arguing in this direction.  Gamble didn't even say that at all.

C-c-c-combo breaker.

Take that as you will.

Key word..."I don't think."
That means it's a speculation.

[Taboo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

There is no point of arguing in this direction.  Gamble didn't even say that at all.

C-c-c-combo breaker.

Take that as you will.

Key word..."I don't think."
That means it's a speculation.

Key text here:

"Different endings resonate more with diff ppl"

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 25 mai 2012 - 04:59 .

[dreman9999]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You don't get to use Arthur C. Clarke.

Sure we do. Deal with it.

We call that being a bot where I come from.

You remind me of the people who watch people ****** on canvases and call it art.

They will use anything they can to justify something.

The fact that there are other ways to consider what going on based on thing in the plot, counters this.

[dreman9999]

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

There is no point of arguing in this direction.  Gamble didn't even say that at all.

C-c-c-combo breaker.

Take that as you will.

Key word..."I don't think."
That means it's a speculation.

Key text here:

"Different endings resonate more with diff ppl"

That's a general statement. That doen't mean they intended the ending to not have a preference. This is what he thinks.

[PsyrenY]

dreman9999 wrote...
No, Orgnaics are. Synthetic have to have the code up load into them.

You act like uploading a file somewhere is hard.

dreman9999 wrote... 
They need to accept it first.

No they don't. Viruses force acceptance. Legion tells you this himself. "We will be forced to accept an invalid conclusion." "The heretics can be rewritten to accept our truth." No organic race can accomplish this level of subversion on another.

dreman9999 wrote... 
No point in the series was it shown that indoctriantion was forced on synthetics. And on top of that it's reversible with synthetics.

Sure it's reversible - by writing another virus, which only the Geth would know how to do. If they had all been turned into Heretics, what then?

[Taboo]

I only have his word to go on. No one else communicates.

Art is subjective.

No interpretation is wrong but one should expect to be challenged.

The difference is how far you're willing to go to defend your position.

Using Arthur C. Clarke is being a bot.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

We call that being a bot where I come from.

You remind me of the people who watch people ****** on canvases and call it art.

They will use anything they can to justify something.

I don't care what podunk town you're from. You don't get to tell me which philosophies I choose to follow, end of story.

Sooner or later you'll get it through your head that your disapproval of me is about as far down my give-a-****-list as it is possible to be.

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
No, Orgnaics are. Synthetic have to have the code up load into them.

You act like uploading a file somewhere is hard.

dreman9999 wrote... 
They need to accept it first.

No they don't. Viruses force acceptance. Legion tells you this himself. "We will be forced to accept an invalid conclusion." "The heretics can be rewritten to accept our truth." No organic race can accomplish this level of subversion on another.

dreman9999 wrote... 
No point in the series was it shown that indoctriantion was forced on synthetics. And on top of that it's reversible with synthetics.

Sure it's reversible - by writing another virus, which only the Geth would know how to do. If they had all been turned into Heretics, what then?

1.It's not....Getting the file through an AI's defence is.
2. But the virus hasto be upload first. Do you not get that? If the virus is never upload. They can't become indoctrinated. That can said with organics. If they are by reaper tech. They get indoctionated regardless of any protection.
3.They have to be turn to heritics first or havea platrom that is not indoctrinated to reverse the virus....Like Legion.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

We call that being a bot where I come from.

You remind me of the people who watch people ****** on canvases and call it art.

They will use anything they can to justify something.

I don't care what podunk town you're from. You don't get to tell me which philosophies I choose to follow, end of story.

Sooner or later you'll get it through your head that your disapproval of me is about as far down my give-a-****-list as it is possible to be.

You assume I cared in the first place. Do you think I do this because I believe I can change your mind? I've encountered many people like you before.

I know I can't change your mind.

I simply believe in direct criticism because that's what you do where I come from.

Do you?

[dreman9999]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I only have his word to go on. No one else communicates.

Art is subjective.

No interpretation is wrong but one should expect to be challenged.

The difference is how far you're willing to go to defend your position.

Using Arthur C. Clarke is being a bot.

No oneis arguing that art is subjective. Art doesn't live in a vacuum. But thethingyou miss is that the thing that can explaine that art is in the peice. You don't have to like it but thereis no exsuce not to try and understand it if it gives you the awnsers.

[PsyrenY]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.It's not....Getting the file through an AI's defence is.
2. But the virus hasto be upload first. Do you not get that? If the virus is never upload. They can't become indoctrinated. That can said with organics. If they are by reaper tech. They get indoctionated regardless of any protection.
3.They have to be turn to heritics first or havea platrom that is not indoctrinated to reverse the virus....Like Legion.

1. The Geth have the most sophisticated defenses in the galaxy, yet the Heretics were about to brainwash every last one of them. It's not that hard.
2. Getting people close to reapers is harder than uploading a file to a galactic network. Can you imagine if indoctrination was as easy as rewrite? The Reapers wouldn't even have to invade, they could just head to the nearest comm buoy.
3. They turned to heretics because of a math glitch, remember?

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I simply believe in direct criticism because that's what you do where I come from.

Is that how you refer to juvenile namecalling?

"We call people like you bots."

Get off your high horse.

[Taboo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I only have his word to go on. No one else communicates.

Art is subjective.

No interpretation is wrong but one should expect to be challenged.

The difference is how far you're willing to go to defend your position.

Using Arthur C. Clarke is being a bot.

No oneis arguing that art is subjective. Art doesn't live in a vacuum. But thethingyou miss is that the thing that can explaine that art is in the peice. You don't have to like it but thereis no exsuce not to try and understand it if it gives you the awnsers.

If you can explain it, it isn't art. Your opinion and your opinion alone is what matters.

Here is the question they ask you about art. Can you answer it?

“There are seven identical red squares, so how can they be in different styles?”


To see something as art requires something the eye cannot descry—an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art: an artworld -Arthur Danto

[Uncle Jo]

It's wonderful to see that so much people distrust the Geth and yet blindly believe that what the brat (who is in their opinion an AI) and his toys said is true.

Modifié par Uncle Jo, 25 mai 2012 - 05:17 .

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I simply believe in direct criticism because that's what you do where I come from.

Is that how you refer to juvenile namecalling?

"We call people like you bots."

Get off your high horse.

"Bots" exist on both sides.

My opinion alone gives credence to how I view the art.

And the same goes to you.

This is my point.

[PsyrenY]

Uncle Jo wrote...

It's wonderful to see that so much people distrust the Geth and yet blindly believe that what the brat (who is in their opinion an AI) and his toys said is true.

Not worried about the current Geth. Worried about the Geth post-singularity.

If they're going to get there, I'm not going to stop them - I just want organics to have a chance of reaching it too.

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1.It's not....Getting the file through an AI's defence is.
2. But the virus hasto be upload first. Do you not get that? If the virus is never upload. They can't become indoctrinated. That can said with organics. If they are by reaper tech. They get indoctionated regardless of any protection.
3.They have to be turn to heritics first or havea platrom that is not indoctrinated to reverse the virus....Like Legion.

1. The Geth have the most sophisticated defenses in the galaxy, yet the Heretics were about to brainwash every last one of them. It's not that hard.
2. Getting people close to reapers is harder than uploading a file to a galactic network. Can you imagine if indoctrination was as easy as rewrite? The Reapers wouldn't even have to invade, they could just head to the nearest comm buoy.
3. They turned to heretics because of a math glitch, remember?

1. And yet we were able to reverse it any way. And it would be easy to do so if they didn't think the heritics were a hostal theat. They would only do so with Legions report.
2.No, it not. Remeber, it's reapers and reaper tech. Most time when people find reaper tech they don't even know what it is. This is how Saren got indoctrinated and well the turians in the comic , ME:EVOLUTION.
3.Anf the reapers indoctrinate people via electic pulse in the limbic system. No difference at all ecept for the fact it's easier to ue electric pulses on the brain.

Modifié par dreman9999, 25 mai 2012 - 05:22 .

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

My opinion alone gives credence to how I view the art.

And the same goes to you.

This is my point.

No, the same does not go to me. I have more on my side than my own opinion:

- The tone of Synthesis (hopeful and positive, rather than bleak and negative.)
- The epilogue ("Commander Shepard has become a legend and ended the Reaper threat.")
- Bioware statements (e.g.: "No one starves to death")
- The inherent hope of having extremely resourceful synthetics (Geth and EDI) still alive.

All you have is pointless pessimism.

[dreman9999]

Taboo-XX wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I only have his word to go on. No one else communicates.

Art is subjective.

No interpretation is wrong but one should expect to be challenged.

The difference is how far you're willing to go to defend your position.

Using Arthur C. Clarke is being a bot.

No oneis arguing that art is subjective. Art doesn't live in a vacuum. But thethingyou miss is that the thing that can explaine that art is in the peice. You don't have to like it but thereis no exsuce not to try and understand it if it gives you the awnsers.

If you can explain it, it isn't art. Your opinion and your opinion alone is what matters.

Here is the question they ask you about art. Can you answer it?

“There are seven identical red squares, so how can they be in different styles?”


To see something as art requires something the eye cannot descry—an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art: an artworld -Arthur Danto

The renaissance called...It says that's bs. Art can be both easily. Art is not only something you can't understand. Art requires a connection to it for the person to even like.