685 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I am approaching this from a consequentialist viewpoint. If I can reasonably expect the results to be beneficial to the great majority, and I don't have the means to apply the decision on an individual level, I might be justified in making that decision for all.

Similar to how I (And a lot of others) can expect the results to not be so straightforward and beneficial. Realistically, things that immediately seem great and largely beneficial don't work out as such without proper testing and simulation.

Really, stop dismissing all the negative counterpoints to Synthesis without thought. The point of the boards is to hold discussions, and you're doing it wrong.

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@AngryFrozenWater
I should really make a list of ridiculous claims about Synthesis. It's "serving the Reapers", "makes everyone the same", "destroys free will".... Where the hell does the nonsense end? To what length will you go to hammer your propaganda into everyone's brain?

Yes, Shepard doesn't ask people if they want to be synthesized. He also doesn't ask if they want to live under the guardianship of a synthetic overlord with the mind of an ascended human (aka Control-Shepard), or if they want to live with the risk that their descendants and their complete species will be killed by post-singularity synthetics. And as I said, results matter. I am approaching this from a consequentialist viewpoint. If I can reasonably expect the results to be beneficial to the great majority, and I don't have the means to apply the decision on an individual level, I might be justified in making that decision for all. Public decision making often goes that way, even today. Also, in my interpretation the change is reversible on an individual basis. A few billion dropouts won't matter for the bigger objective.

Well i don't disagree that your version of a synthesis which is beneficial may outway the negative aspect of universal forced application. However i don't see your version of synthesis as being the logical conlusion of the choice as it stands in the game. Maybe EC will radically alter the ending so that i can see a more positive spin on synthesis as being the logical result.

[Taboo]

The thought of having that amount of power terrifies me. I wouldn't choose it even if only upset a thousand people.

That's one thousand too many.

The Geth are dead in my playthrough. We can deal with the singularity when it becomes an issue and judging from the Star Gazer scene, it won't be occurring for at least ten thousand years.

[TheClonesLegacy]

Yeah Sure Let's Play god then...
Because Humankind is SOOOOO ready for that compared to Control...
Logic Fail.

Modifié par TheClonesLegacy, 02 juin 2012 - 10:27 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Lord Goose wrote...

People are divided into "us and them".

"Bull****. We destroy them, or they destroy us."

Well, as a law student, I wouldn't say it is wise to apply such therms to anything what is not human. Law is made by humans and for humans. It obviously hard to expand to any sentiend and inhuman being, such as Reapers. All other beings are vaguely human, but the Reapers are just different.

Law student? Even if you were a god I am not willing to listen to you your outrageous statement that genocide is OK because the reapers are different. It doesn't matter whether they are superior sentient beings, different in a way we cannot comprehend, or even one of the many gods: Genocide is a crime not to punish those who commit it, but to protect those who are the victims. Once identified action should be taken to prevent further losses.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 02 juin 2012 - 10:26 .

[Lord Goose]

He also doesn't
ask if they want to live under the
guardianship of a synthetic overlord with
the mind of an ascended human (aka
Control-Shepard)

Speaking about wild claims. In Control Shepard may have given Reapers a single and simple order: go away and never return. Where is nothing to support the evidence what he would be going galactic fuhrer after it.

genocide is
OK because the reapers are different.

Genocide is normally illegal, because it involves killing humans. And killing humans normally is illegal because all humans have right to live. What's why many countries have banned capital punishment. Its touchy issue whethere capital punishment is lawful or not. The idea is basically what if you are done so many illegal actions what you should be restrained to prevent future harm, and killed if other means do not seems to be adequate.

Genocide which changes all lifeforms DNA is most certainly beyound legal field. Probably it is still would be unlawful because it involves changing your life without consent.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Oops. Deleted.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 02 juin 2012 - 10:41 .

[Taboo]

Not sure if serious....

Or fascism.

OH GOD WHY.

[o Ventus]

Lord Goose wrote...

He also doesn't
ask if they want to live under the
guardianship of a synthetic overlord with
the mind of an ascended human (aka
Control-Shepard)

Speaking about wild claims. In Control Shepard may have given Reapers a single and simple order: go away and never return. Where is nothing to support the evidence what he would be going galactic fuhrer after it.

Except for the fact that the Catalyst, which is still a nigh incomprehensible super-AI that operates on a cosmic level, still exists when Shepard is assimilated-- I mean, fuses consciousness. Any other work of fiction would realistically dictate the organic fused with the super-AI as either going insane and homicidal or going mad with power. Hell, this happened to David Archer in Overlord and look what happened to him.

Genocide which changes all lifeforms DNA is most certainly beyound legal field. Probably it is still would be unlawful because it involves changing your life without consent.

Genocide is genocide, there isn't a lot of wiggle room.

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...
Genocide is genocide, there isn't a lot of wiggle room.

This.

You don't get away with it regardless of who or what you are.

[Lord Goose]

nigh incomprehensible
super-AI that operates on a cosmic level,
still exists when Shepard is assimilated

Catalyst was pretty much comprehensible. And its not like he was going to do, well, anything beyound our understanding. His decisions are actually on teen level. And project Overlord turned out so... disastrous only because David was special. They needed fake god for geth which would listen to TIM, not some crazy maniac.

Genocide is genocide, there isn't a lot of
wiggle room.

You can't apply law to magic. In reality it is impossible to perform genocide without mass murder. So it is bad. In fiction it is possible to replace genes without killing anybody.

[Taboo]

What the hell?

I would consider turning my body into paste and making me lost my mind beforehand to be pretty ****ing consistent with Genocide.

Just because my DNA is preserved doesn't mean I'm alive and am a conscious being.

[Ieldra]

wright1978 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@AngryFrozenWater
I should really make a list of ridiculous claims about Synthesis. It's "serving the Reapers", "makes everyone the same", "destroys free will".... Where the hell does the nonsense end? To what length will you go to hammer your propaganda into everyone's brain?

Yes, Shepard doesn't ask people if they want to be synthesized. He also doesn't ask if they want to live under the guardianship of a synthetic overlord with the mind of an ascended human (aka Control-Shepard), or if they want to live with the risk that their descendants and their complete species will be killed by post-singularity synthetics. And as I said, results matter. I am approaching this from a consequentialist viewpoint. If I can reasonably expect the results to be beneficial to the great majority, and I don't have the means to apply the decision on an individual level, I might be justified in making that decision for all. Public decision making often goes that way, even today. Also, in my interpretation the change is reversible on an individual basis. A few billion dropouts won't matter for the bigger objective.

Well i don't disagree that your version of a synthesis which is beneficial may outway the negative aspect of universal forced application. However i don't see your version of synthesis as being the logical conlusion of the choice as it stands in the game. Maybe EC will radically alter the ending so that i can see a more positive spin on synthesis as being the logical result.

I never claimed that my version was the only plausible one. But since the phrasing is so vague, it's at least as plausible as any other scenario, and certainly more plausible than the versions posted by the anti-Synthesis radicals because they intentionally create scenarios that make no sense or are unnecessarily unpleasant in order to discredit the whole idea.

And yes, I hope for some clarification. As I see it, all endings are intended to be "heroic" endings. With some sacrifice, yes, but in the end the story is intended to end in as good a way as the writing lets us make up in our minds. And that counts for *all* endings. Obviously, I can't claim that the relays survive in Synthesis or that the geth survive in Destroy, but I can pretty much say that in my ME universe, the effects of Synthesis are like what I describe in my other thread. The Control people can pretty much say that Shepard will continue to exist and do his best to guide the galaxy, whatever that means *for them*, and the Destroy people can pretty much claim that the galactic dark age only lasts a thousand years instead of not even being over after ten thousand as suggested by dev's notes. Trying to gain sovereignity of interpretation with an unnecessarily unpleasant interpretation is against the spirit of the story, to say nothing of malicious to other players. Making propaganda against choices you don't like by using your worst-possible scenario as a baseline is nothing better than trying to ruin others' games.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 02 juin 2012 - 11:03 .

[o Ventus]

Lord Goose wrote...

nigh incomprehensible
super-AI that operates on a cosmic level,
still exists when Shepard is assimilated

Catalyst was pretty much comprehensible. And its not like he was going to do, well, anything beyound our understanding. His decisions are actually on teen level. And project Overlord turned out so... disastrous only because David was special. They needed fake god for geth which would listen to TIM, not some crazy maniac.

Genocide is genocide, there isn't a lot of
wiggle room.

You can't apply law to magic. In reality it is impossible to perform genocide without mass murder. So it is bad. In fiction it is possible to replace genes without killing anybody.

1. I'm speaking in in-universe terms, not from the POV of an audience member. Never thought that wasn't obvious enough.

2. Not on the level that Synthesis does it. That is, A) on a galactic scale and instantaneously without anyone's apparent knowledge.

[Taboo]

I'm pretty sure World War II happened in the ME Universe.

Unless Walters wrote it out or something.

[draken-heart]

i do not like synthesis, mainly because it makes no sense in the immediate solution: how in the world does hopping into a beam make everyone into bio-synthetic hybrids, even though the only synthetic thing Shepard has in her is the implants holding her together? logical answer only.

here is the page on Cyborg, even though it is only Wikipedia, it works for this: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyborg 

in it, i do not see how a Cyborg makes sense as synthesis, as it is said that synthesis mixes organic and synthetic "DNA" together, even though synthetics do not have DNA, and Shepard, unless she was a reaper, not a minion, but an actual reaper, from the start, is an organic through anf through. So, i do not see how jumping into a beam of light makes all people  reaper-like as Shepard was, is, and always will be, a pure organic, even if she has synthetic implants in her.

/tirade

Modifié par draken-heart, 02 juin 2012 - 11:17 .

[chuckles471]

Sorry you used the 2 words that nearly every bad guy in every media uses. When they are about to take a dump in your pudding.

"enlightenment and salvation"

You are the guy who thinks he is doing everyone a favor but are really the end boss of a game. So get ready to become 50 foot tall and grow some phallicly looking tentacles.

[frylock23]

It's at times like this that I love my dictionary.

genocide - the systematic, planned annihilation of a racial, political or cultural group

race - a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics

genetic code - the information coded with the nucleotide sequences of DNA and RNA that specifies the amino acid sequence of in the synthesis of proteins, and upon which heredity is based

Basically, synthesis gives everyone new DNA. New DNA changes our heredity upon which our racial makeups are based. Our racial makeups determine who we are as a species and as groups within a species.

A genocide is the annihilation of a distinct genetic group within a species or a distinct species.

By creating and giving everyone a new DNA, you've wiped out what they were by wiping out their old DNA. They aren't what they were and you've done it systematically and with planning. Congratulations! You've committed galaxy wide genocide of every extant form of life with DNA via synthesis. No, no one died, but neither are they exacty what they were either and that's all it takes. None of those species exist anymore.

So, maybe we ought to stop tossing the genocide word around, k?

[Taboo]

frylock23 wrote...

It's at times like this that I love my dictionary.

genocide - the systematic, planned annihilation of a racial, political or cultural group

race - a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics

genetic code - the information coded with the nucleotide sequences of DNA and RNA that specifies the amino acid sequence of in the synthesis of proteins, and upon which heredity is based

Basically, synthesis gives everyone new DNA. New DNA changes our heredity upon which our racial makeups are based. Our racial makeups determine who we are as a species and as groups within a species.

A genocide is the annihilation of a distinct genetic group within a species or a distinct species.

By creating and giving everyone a new DNA, you've wiped out what they were by wiping out their old DNA. They aren't what they were and you've done it systematically and with planning. Congratulations! You've committed galaxy wide genocide of every extant form of life with DNA via synthesis. No, no one died, but neither are they exacty what they were either and that's all it takes. None of those species exist anymore.

So, maybe we ought to stop tossing the genocide word around, k?

It's so disgusting I can't even.....

[o Ventus]

frylock23 wrote...

It's at times like this that I love my dictionary.

genocide - the systematic, planned annihilation of a racial, political or cultural group

race - a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics

genetic code - the information coded with the nucleotide sequences of DNA and RNA that specifies the amino acid sequence of in the synthesis of proteins, and upon which heredity is based

Basically, synthesis gives everyone new DNA. New DNA changes our heredity upon which our racial makeups are based. Our racial makeups determine who we are as a species and as groups within a species.

A genocide is the annihilation of a distinct genetic group within a species or a distinct species.

By creating and giving everyone a new DNA, you've wiped out what they were by wiping out their old DNA. They aren't what they were and you've done it systematically and with planning. Congratulations! You've committed galaxy wide genocide of every extant form of life with DNA via synthesis. No, no one died, but neither are they exacty what they were either and that's all it takes. None of those species exist anymore.

So, maybe we ought to stop tossing the genocide word around, k?

Thank you.

[Lord Goose]

I'm speaking in in-universe terms, not
from the POV of an audience member.
Never thought that wasn't obvious
enough.

I don't remember that he was stated to be super-AI in-universe. I recall claim that he is being of light (from planet Klencory description).

Not on the level that Synthesis does it.
That is, A) on a galactic scale and
instantaneously without anyone's
apparent knowledge.

Well, lack of consent is quite good argument to mark it as unlawful. On the other hand it is probably less unlawful than physical extermination.

[o Ventus]

Lord Goose wrote...

I'm speaking in in-universe terms, not
from the POV of an audience member.
Never thought that wasn't obvious
enough.

I don't remember that he was stated to be super-AI in-universe. I recall claim that he is being of light (from planet Klencory description).

Not on the level that Synthesis does it.
That is, A) on a galactic scale and
instantaneously without anyone's
apparent knowledge.

Well, lack of consent is quite good argument to mark it as unlawful. On the other hand it is probably less unlawful than physical extermination.

1. Klencory refers to "beings" (plural). There's 1 Catalyst. 

2. Less unlawful? That means genetic genocide is MORE LAWFUL than mortal genocide. What? You're taking organics, and rendering them no longer organic. How is that remotely lawful?

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...

2. Less unlawful? That means genetic genocide is MORE LAWFUL than mortal genocide. What? You're taking organics, and rendering them no longer organic. How is that remotely lawful?

And it's even more fascism!

Genetics were a big thing with those guys!

[draken-heart]

draken-heart wrote...

i do not like synthesis, mainly because it makes no sense in the immediate solution: how in the world does hopping into a beam make everyone into bio-synthetic hybrids, even though the only synthetic thing Shepard has in her is the implants holding her together? logical answer only.

here is the page on Cyborg, even though it is only Wikipedia, it works for this: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyborg 

in it, i do not see how a Cyborg makes sense as synthesis, as it is said that synthesis mixes organic and synthetic "DNA" together, even though synthetics do not have DNA, and Shepard, unless she was a reaper, not a minion, but an actual reaper, from the start, is an organic through anf through. So, i do not see how jumping into a beam of light makes all people  reaper-like as Shepard was, is, and always will be, a pure organic, even if she has synthetic implants in her.

/tirade

sorry for the tirade, but i can't even see synthesis as remotely possible. Shepard is not a Reaper (i think), and that means to me that synthesis is unavailible in the sense we see it.

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I never claimed that my version was the only plausible one. But since the phrasing is so vague, it's at least as plausible as any other scenario, and certainly more plausible than the versions posted by the anti-Synthesis radicals because they intentionally create scenarios that make no sense or are unnecessarily unpleasant in order to discredit the whole idea.

And yes, I hope for some clarification. As I see it, all endings are intended to be "heroic" endings. With some sacrifice, yes, but in the end the story is intended to end in as good a way as the writing lets us make up in our minds. And that counts for *all* endings. Obviously, I can't claim that the relays survive in Synthesis or that the geth survive in Destroy, but I can pretty much say that in my ME universe, the effects of Synthesis are like what I describe in my other thread. The Control people can pretty much say that Shepard will continue to exist and do his best to guide the galaxy, whatever that means *for them*, and the Destroy people can pretty much claim that the galactic dark age only lasts a thousand years instead of not even being over after ten thousand as suggested by dev's notes. Trying to gain sovereignity of interpretation with an unnecessarily unpleasant interpretation is against the spirit of the story, to say nothing of malicious to other players. Making propaganda against choices you don't like by using your worst-possible scenario as a baseline is nothing better than trying to ruin others' games.

I certainly wouldn't ever claim sovereignty over anyone else's interpretation. My negative interpretation of synthesis  is based on what i see as the logical inference based on the ending as it currently stands not to bash the wider concept as an abstract. Others are certainly welcome to their own interpretation.

Clarification will hopefully come and prove my conclusions wrong and get rid of the silly galactic dark age nonsense entirely. I can't see me picking control or synthesis unless something is done to starbrat's role is clarified in EC to make him/it be considered in anyway trustworthy though.

Modifié par wright1978, 02 juin 2012 - 11:40 .