1256 réponses à ce sujet

[clennon8]

ZIPO396 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

Brutal calculus of war. I would rather sacrifice a few million geth than biologically alter quadrillions of organisms.

You would rather potentialy sacrifice. The Geth aren't guaranted to die in destroy as Shepard can live and the thing said he would die to. So it's just a high probability that could infact swing out to be the only sacrifice of Destroy is the relays. But that's just speculation no more than what you get with the pro-synthesis argument either.

Heh.  I appreciate the optimism, but I"m trying to take the Destroy ending at face value, because I don't want my arguments tainted by pie-in-the-sky optimism.  I'm taking the view that Destroy has every negative consequence that the Catalyst says it does, aside from virtually assuring that synthetics will one day destroy all organic life.  That last part cannot possibly be anything more than pure speculation on the Catalyst's part.  The rest of it, though?  Killing the geth and probably killing Shepard?  Fine, I accept those things.  And I still choose Destroy.

[o Ventus]

ZIPO396 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

ZIPO396 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Until my iMac starts speaking to me in ABAB or archaic English, I'm going to take it at face value.

Really, why would a nearly omnipotent VI or AI program speak in metaphors?

And I couldn't blame you for doing so. In fact that's half the reaosn people take Synthesis to be a good or bad choice to begin with as you don't get anything to with it. People seem to swing more towards good thou based on it being the one Bioware have tried (despite failing) set up as such.

I won't lie. Whoever's idea it was for Synthesis didn't take 7th grade biology classes.

Or any social science classes.

Sadly you can't use current scince thou as a standing point for argue against it. Not to long ago Science and common sense was telling people the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the Earth.

The idea that the Earth was flat wasn't supported by anything other than word of authority. that actually WAS just speculations.

And current science is jsut as relevant as past science. Or future science. Science doesn't age. Hydrogen is always hydrogen (provided nothing has happened to make it... Not hydrogen) and organics are always born organic. Synthetics, by the very virtue of being synthetic, do not have DNA. If they did, they'd be organic and no longer synthetic.

[Taboo]

Stop applying Science to Walters mastery of art o Ventus.

Clearly, we peons are no match for her his unlogic.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

What's REALLY amazing is how everyone left when I brought out the quotes.

I'm on a dozen different sites at any time, including Facebook, Cracked, TVTropes and even a PbP game or two on occasion. I don't spam refresh on BSN, slavering at the chance to continue slamming my digital head into brick walls, you know.

Taboo-XX wrote... 
Do I smell...The Anti-Synthesis Compendium coming on?

You can write it if you like, but it seems redundant. 75% of the boards already hate Synthesis, and the arguments you'd use to convince the ones that don't have been rehashed thousands of times, so why bother?

[Taboo]

I'm only joking.

Those quotes are more than likely going to go unanswered, and that's fine. But understand that I will be there EVERY time a Synthesis thread shows up.

Every Step you take. Every move you make. I'll be watching you.

But not like the guy in the song, that was just creepy.

[ZIPO396]

o Ventus wrote...

ZIPO396 wrote...

And I couldn't blame you for doing so. In fact that's half the reaosn people take Synthesis to be a good or bad choice to begin with as you don't get anything to with it. People seem to swing more towards good thou based on it being the one Bioware have tried (despite failing) set up as such.

Sadly you can't use current scince thou as a standing point for argue against it. Not to long ago Science and common sense was telling people the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the Earth.

The idea that the Earth was flat wasn't supported by anything other than word of authority. that actually WAS just speculations.

And current science is jsut as relevant as past science. Or future science. Science doesn't age. Hydrogen is always hydrogen (provided nothing has happened to make it... Not hydrogen) and organics are always born organic. Synthetics, by the very virtue of being synthetic, do not have DNA. If they did, they'd be organic and no longer synthetic.

I don't know once you start giving Synthetics DNA is Hydrogen still gonna be Hydrogen. Well the Scintific understanding at the time said the world can't be round because if you stick something on the other side of said round thing it would fall off.

Modifié par ZIPO396, 13 juin 2012 - 05:33 .

[Heeden]

akenn312 wrote...

Also it's been told in the story with Shepards conversation with the Reaper on Rannoch that each Reaper has a civilization trapped wthin each Reaper.  So actually not destryong them is allowing those souls to remain trapped and  enslaved. More reason to destroy all Reapers I would think. You can free all those trapped souls.

Those souls are freed with the breaking of the cycle as the Reapers are no longer shackled to the Catalyst's programming. Technically that makes each one a post-scarcity society, removing the constraints of resources by existing in virtual space (the other way of reaching post-scarcity status is having fully automated means of production available to all and a near-limitless source of energy). Destroy would eliminate the newly-freed slaves, Control immediately reshackles them.

Nope, you can't avoid the choice issue by tyring to get off track talking about results. The choice is the main issue. You cannot totally change everyone without their consent. Humans had the choice to advance it was a natural evolution. The Reapers violate that by causing them to advance in the way they wished with no say in it.

Clearly I can change everyone without their consent - I just walk in to the green beam. Whether you find that preferable to genocide or enslavement is up to you.

Just because you are considered a hero does not give you a free licence to play god.

In this situation I rather think it does. It took the combined efforts of almost the entire galaxy to put Shepard in that situation, and he was placed at the spear-point because through words and deeds Shepard has earned their trust and respect (or fear and contempt, however you play).

Weird so you can see the bad implications of violating the Geth though a choice, but not changing everyone on the genetic level. hmmm interesting.

There's no mention of changing anyone on a genetic level - when the Catalyst mentions the "new DNA" he's either talking allegorically or the entire sentence is nonsense.

I dislike up-lift because I feel it takes something away from the culture being accelerated. It could be well-earned pride or foolish arrogance, but I believe if the species of our cycle can evolve to a higher level (whatever that may entail) we can do it independantly, in our own way, and the end result - whilst less certain and further away - will be richer because of it. But even as I paint my Shepard's future in the happiest colours I know his dreams will be forever haunted by the untold billions of individuals lost because of his choice.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I'm only joking.

Those quotes are more than likely going to go unanswered, and that's fine. But understand that I will be there EVERY time a Synthesis thread shows up.

Every Step you take. Every move you make. I'll be watching you.

But not like the guy in the song, that was just creepy.

I respect both your tenacity, and your dedication to ethical concerns. Which is why I don't treat every gap in your posting stream as a capitulation. 

My only argument/belief is that the upside from instant-transhumanization-just-add-Shepard has the potential to be great enough to outweigh some short-term squick.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Isn't that safe to assume that the people in the galaxy want to either destroy or control the reapers? come on, be reasonable

"What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right."

Who said that? Based on the diatribes we've seen posted in this thread, most would probably guess that it came from some dirty facist or dictator. But they would be wrong, it was Thomas Jefferson, the architect behind the world's greatest (or once-greatest) democratic system.

So what I'm trying to say is, that's a silly reason to choose the other two options. A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best, even if he/she is the elected leader in a democratic system. And in my eyes, Synthesis is a considerably better option than Control or Destroy (or, no decision).

It would be like a GM of a sports team making decisions based on what fans want rather than what the coaches want. He'll drive the club into the ground.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 13 juin 2012 - 05:21 .

[o Ventus]

ZIPO396 wrote...
I don't know once you start giving Synthetics DNA is Hydrogen still gonna be Hydrogen. Well the Scintific understanding at the time said the world can't be round because if you stick something on the other side of said round thing it would fall off.

Synthetics w/ DNA aren't synthetic, they're organic. Like I said. That said, you cannot create amino acids out of binary, or ASCII, or C++, or anything of the sort.

And the belief that the Earth as flat wasn't a scientific one, by the definition of the word.

[ZIPO396]

clennon8 wrote...

ZIPO396 wrote...

You would rather potentialy sacrifice. The Geth aren't guaranted to die in destroy as Shepard can live and the thing said he would die to. So it's just a high probability that could infact swing out to be the only sacrifice of Destroy is the relays. But that's just speculation no more than what you get with the pro-synthesis argument either.

Heh.  I appreciate the optimism, but I"m trying to take the Destroy ending at face value, because I don't want my arguments tainted by pie-in-the-sky optimism.  I'm taking the view that Destroy has every negative consequence that the Catalyst says it does, aside from virtually assuring that synthetics will one day destroy all organic life.  That last part cannot possibly be anything more than pure speculation on the Catalyst's part.  The rest of it, though?  Killing the geth and probably killing Shepard?  Fine, I accept those things.  And I still choose Destroy.

"Without hope we may as well be machines programmed to do what we're told."

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I'm only joking.

Those quotes are more than likely going to go unanswered, and that's fine. But understand that I will be there EVERY time a Synthesis thread shows up.

Every Step you take. Every move you make. I'll be watching you.

But not like the guy in the song, that was just creepy.

I respect both your tenacity, and your dedication to ethical concerns. Which is why I don't treat every gap in your posting stream as a capitulation. 

My only argument/belief is that the upside from instant-transhumanization-just-add-Shepard has the potential to be great enough to outweigh some short-term squick.

Hey man. it's cool. I wouldn't be here if I didn't like talking with you guys.

It's far better than the...IT threads.

[o Ventus]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best.

So a dictator then?

[PsyrenY]

The Catalyst's "A new... DNA" is clearly a metaphor. Hence the pause.

[ZIPO396]

o Ventus wrote...

ZIPO396 wrote...
I don't know once you start giving Synthetics DNA is Hydrogen still gonna be Hydrogen. Well the Scintific understanding at the time said the world can't be round because if you stick something on the other side of said round thing it would fall off.

Synthetics w/ DNA aren't synthetic, they're organic. Like I said. That said, you cannot create amino acids out of binary, or ASCII, or C++, or anything of the sort.

And the belief that the Earth as flat wasn't a scientific one, by the definition of the word.

I know that. It's why I've been laughing. I like how they gave us the wizard it all makes sense now.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Catalyst's "A new... DNA" is clearly a metaphor. Hence the pause.

It has to be.

I cannot imagine Bioware mucking up the presentation of Synthesis again by clarifying in the EC that it does mix DNA.

[o Ventus]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Catalyst's "A new... DNA" is clearly a metaphor. Hence the pause.

And what are you basing this off of?

That's like saying Shepard just ran a marathon, hence the heavy breathing.

[PsyrenY]

o Ventus wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Catalyst's "A new... DNA" is clearly a metaphor. Hence the pause.

And what are you basing this off of?

Because actually giving robots DNA is nonsense?

"When you have eliminated the impossible - whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" -Sherlock Holmes.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 13 juin 2012 - 05:25 .

[ZIPO396]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

"What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right."

Who said that? Based on the diatribes we've seen posted in this thread, most would probably guess that it came from some dirty facist or dictator. But they would be wrong, it was Thomas Jefferson, the architect behind the world's greatest (or once-greatest) democratic system.

So what I'm trying to say is, that's a silly reason to choose the other two options. A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best, even if he/she is the elected leader in a democratic system. And in my eyes, Synthesis is a considerably better option than Control or Destroy (or, no decision).

It would be like a GM of a sports team making decisions based on what fans want rather than what the coaches want. He'll drive the club into the ground.

I don't know at least we get to elect the guys who have to make the crappy decisions. I don't remember a galactic vote. Also that quote implies what's right is more often what is also popular.

Modifié par ZIPO396, 13 juin 2012 - 06:12 .

[o Ventus]

Optimystic_X wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Catalyst's "A new... DNA" is clearly a metaphor. Hence the pause.

And what are you basing this off of?

Because actually giving robots DNA is nonsense?

"When you have eliminated the impossible - whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" -Sherlock Holmes.

That doesn't make your case any stronger.

Melting people into goop and saying they're still alive is also nonsense.

Space rocks that give people cancer and other telekinetic powers is also nonsense, but it's at least sort of believable since they bothered to offer exposition on how it works and it sounds vaguely (if laughably) scientific.

With Synthesis you have... A talking hologram who thinks it's Shakespeare. Yes, I think Bioware actually CAN go full retard on this.

Modifié par o Ventus, 13 juin 2012 - 05:30 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

o Ventus wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best.

So a dictator then?

...

Somebody missed the part where I quoted the founder of a democratic society supporting this idea.

I swear, westerners have no clue about their own democratic systems any more. People see it as a means to decide on what's popular, not what's actually good/effective. No wonder our societies are going down in favor of China.

[Vigilant111]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Isn't that safe to assume that the people in the galaxy want to either destroy or control the reapers? come on, be reasonable

"What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right."

Who said that? Based on the diatribes we've seen posted in this thread, most would probably guess that it came from some dirty facist or dictator. But they would be wrong, it was Thomas Jefferson, the architect behind the world's greatest (or once-greatest) democratic system.

So what I'm trying to say is, that's a silly reason to choose the other two options. A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best, even if he/she is the elected leader in a democratic system. And in my eyes, Synthesis is a considerably better option than Control or Destroy (or, no decision).

It would be like a GM of a sports team making decisions based on what fans want rather than what the coaches want. He'll drive the club into the ground.

If that is the case then BW should never release the EC in response to popular demand

It is how democracy works...even if it is the wrong choice, and BTW who said that destroy is WRONG???

[PsyrenY]

o Ventus wrote...

That doesn't make your case any stronger.

You choose not to believe it because you're grasping for any straw that could potentially cause them to scrap Synthesis. Tough, because Bioware isn't changing the endings.

o Ventus wrote... 
Melting people into goop and saying they're still alive is also nonsense.

Who ever said that Reaped races are still alive?

o Ventus wrote... 
Space rocks that give people cancer and other telekinetic powers is also nonsense, but it's at least sort of believable since they bothered to offer exposition on how it works and it sounds vaguely (if laughably) scientific.

No, it's space magic. You were just willing to tolerate it then because reasons.

o Ventus wrote... 
With Synthesis you have... A talking hologram who thinks it's Shakespeare. Yes, I think Bioware actually CAN go full retard on this.

Uh... all the endings have a talking hologram. Not sure if you noticed.

[Taboo]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

A leader shouldn't be making decisions based on what people in general want, it should be based on what he thinks is best.

So a dictator then?

...

Somebody missed the part where I quoted the founder of a democratic society supporting this idea.

I swear, westerners have no clue about their own democratic systems any more. People see it as a means to decide on what's popular, not what's actually good/effective. No wonder our societies are going down in favor of China.

I do, and everytime I mention it, all the Synthesis people leave.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

ZIPO396 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote... It would be like a GM of a sports team making decisions based on what fans want rather than what the coaches want. He'll drive the club into the ground.

I don't know at least we get to elect the guys who have to make the crappy decisions. I don't remember a galactic vote. Also that quote implies what's right is more often what is also popular.

Democracy is a privledge, not a right. And in this circumstance, we do not have the luxury of a galactic vote.

So, this is more like the example of the pro sports GM. And I can tell you this, in the world of sports at least, what's popular is rarely right.