214 réponses à ce sujet

[ThinkIntegral]

cgvhjb wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Ideal world doesnt mean everyone has to be a saint.

Yes. Doesn't mean there can't be healthy competition either.

Which equals stagnation, not to mention organic life being able to instantly network means that you're essentially creating a gestalt consciousness which isn't really a good thing. Personally I hate the synthesis ending not only for the fact that it had a ton of plot holes whose only explanation "its space magic" but because it creates a world here core precepts that have shaped and defined organic life are now rendered pointless and much of the indivuality inherent in life is removed. So what synthesis created conformity and understanding and all it cost organic life was their individuality and uniqueness.

Not really sure that trade off is worth it.

How is there stagnation if there's still healthy competition? And who says individuality is removed? I think you're reading much into that last bit.

[genocidal villain]

kblaze13 wrote...

is the words of Mordin...


"no soul, replaced by tech."

at least he didn't live to see that horrible thing come to pass to his people.

Nothing is replaced by tech they were synthesized. Replace a natural heart with a artificial one is replacing it with tech. Combing the heart with artificial components to function in unity is synthesis.

Your quote justs makes Mordin hates all synthetic life. What about Shepard or Legion?

[Old Books]

It's funny people complain about the death of the Geth/EDI in destroy but are seemingly okay with the arbitrary decision of Shepherd/Catalyst to merge all life into one form without anyone wanting it. It is the biggest 'renegade' decision you can make IMO. And no amount of railroading from BioWare is going to make me deviate from destroy which is what my Shepherd set out to do from ME1.

Modifié par Old Books, 27 juin 2012 - 05:50 .

[kblaze13]

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

You must not have been paying attention. "Synthetics will have an understanding of organics and organics of synthetics." Which pretty much ends the cycle forever. There never has to be another harvesting because there's not going to be a need for super computers to do stuff for us.

No need for super computers to do stuff for us?


You realize AI can be created solely for convenience, right?  Initially, the Geth were substantially inferior to the Quarians, created merely to perform certain functions.  They were created for convenience, efficiency, and profitability, not because the Quarians wanted to create something that would surpass them.

doesn't tali even point out when you first encounter legion that a single geth should be no smarter then a varren or something like that?

just goes to show that the Geth evolved beyond what their creators designed and became better. any REAL AI would be able to do so as well, if left unshackled, hell even EDI shows this by rewriting her own programming.

[NewWaveFascist]

Personally I like synthesis because the Reapers are your friends and the can help you move. They're like your buddy with a pickup truck... only they're the truck and are much bigger!

[Zero132132]

EDI actually directly states that progress doesn't end. We inherit the knowledge of millions of dead species, and surpass them. How is that stagnation?

Still don't get the denial-of-free-will bit either. You do force everyone (including Javik, who'll be pissed) to become synthetic/organic hybrids, but reality forces constraints on us constantly. We act within these constraints. Self-determination doesn't mean that you never have any circumstances brought about by external sources. Just seems like a weird goddamned claim.

[ThinkIntegral]

Old Books wrote...

It's funny people complain about the death of the Geth/EDI in destroy but are seemingly okay with the arbitrary decision of Shepherd/Catalyst to merge all life into one form without anyone wanting it. It is the biggest 'renegade' decision you can make IMO. And no amount of railroading from BioWare is going to make me deviate from destroy which is what my Shepherd set out to do from ME1.

Well, I hope you hold to those principles of destroy should ever find yourself in a situation where someone sacrifices your life or your property for you for some greater good.  Long shot I know, but still.

[Cyricsservant101]

Nageth wrote...

Mister_Tez wrote...

Nageth wrote...

I'm not following where synthesis = loss of free will. The only option I saw that resulted in any loss of free will was control. Saying synthesis is a loss of free will is like saying the internet making information flow easily also results in a loss of free will.

I'll give you synthesis being the fan service puppies and cupcakes ending, though.

I don't recall the rest of the galaxy choosing to be "synthesised" or whatever you want to call it.

How many things happen to you that you don't choose? Quite a bit, yet people still think they have free will.

As far as the brain chemistry changes, I still don't see how that automatically = loss of free will. Could be the equivalent of suddenly doing base 2 math instead of base 10. I'd hardly call that a loss of free will.

To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an awful lot like brainwashing to me... You're essentially giving everyone a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty undesirable qualities that they have that make them unique.  Sure, you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

Modifié par Cyricsservant101, 27 juin 2012 - 05:58 .

[Nageth]

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Mister_Tez wrote...

Nageth wrote...

I'm not following where synthesis = loss of free will. The only option I saw that resulted in any loss of free will was control. Saying synthesis is a loss of free will is like saying the internet making information flow easily also results in a loss of free will.

I'll give you synthesis being the fan service puppies and cupcakes ending, though.

I don't recall the rest of the galaxy choosing to be "synthesised" or whatever you want to call it.

How many things happen to you that you don't choose? Quite a bit, yet people still think they have free will.

As far as the brain chemistry changes, I still don't see how that automatically = loss of free will. Could be the equivalent of suddenly doing base 2 math instead of base 10. I'd hardly call that a loss of free will.

To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an awful lot like brainwashing to me... Or like giving someone a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty undesirable qualities.  Sure, you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

Then you're brainwashed multiple times a day. Have fun with that one.

[ThinkIntegral]

Cyricsservant101 wrote...
To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading
someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that
they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an
awful lot like brainwashing to me... You're essentially giving everyeone
a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty
undesirable qualities that they have that make them unique.  Sure,
you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a
sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

Modifié par ThinkIntegral, 27 juin 2012 - 05:55 .

[Cyricsservant101]

Nageth wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Mister_Tez wrote...

Nageth wrote...

I'm not following where synthesis = loss of free will. The only option I saw that resulted in any loss of free will was control. Saying synthesis is a loss of free will is like saying the internet making information flow easily also results in a loss of free will.

I'll give you synthesis being the fan service puppies and cupcakes ending, though.

I don't recall the rest of the galaxy choosing to be "synthesised" or whatever you want to call it.

How many things happen to you that you don't choose? Quite a bit, yet people still think they have free will.

As far as the brain chemistry changes, I still don't see how that automatically = loss of free will. Could be the equivalent of suddenly doing base 2 math instead of base 10. I'd hardly call that a loss of free will.

To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an awful lot like brainwashing to me... Or like giving someone a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty undesirable qualities.  Sure, you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

Then you're brainwashed multiple times a day. Have fun with that one.

Riiiiight. 

[Alexius]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

^You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

Yeah, but the law is a result of the social contract. That is to say, the majority of people actually agreed that they would abide by it.

[Cyricsservant101]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...
To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading
someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that
they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an
awful lot like brainwashing to me... You're essentially giving everyeone
a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty
undesirable qualities that they have that make them unique.  Sure,
you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a
sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

To an extent, but enforcement of the law doesn't involve invasive, non-consensual brain surgery.

Modifié par Cyricsservant101, 27 juin 2012 - 05:57 .

[Krosfiyah]

Synthesis may be the final evolutionary stage for Synthetics, but who is it to say that it is for organics? With evolution, there is no ending; however Synthesis erases that notion. Society basically becomes stagnant as many have already mentioned, which IMO is the same as being dead.

[Nageth]

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Mister_Tez wrote...

Nageth wrote...

I'm not following where synthesis = loss of free will. The only option I saw that resulted in any loss of free will was control. Saying synthesis is a loss of free will is like saying the internet making information flow easily also results in a loss of free will.

I'll give you synthesis being the fan service puppies and cupcakes ending, though.

I don't recall the rest of the galaxy choosing to be "synthesised" or whatever you want to call it.

How many things happen to you that you don't choose? Quite a bit, yet people still think they have free will.

As far as the brain chemistry changes, I still don't see how that automatically = loss of free will. Could be the equivalent of suddenly doing base 2 math instead of base 10. I'd hardly call that a loss of free will.

To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an awful lot like brainwashing to me... Or like giving someone a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty undesirable qualities.  Sure, you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

Then you're brainwashed multiple times a day. Have fun with that one.

Riiiiight. 

You have any idea how much viruses and your gi ecology effect you as a person? And that is just one example. Your definition of free will doesn't match observable phenomenon.

Modifié par Nageth, 27 juin 2012 - 05:58 .

[cavs25]

How does synthesis end conflict though?
Yea maybe no more conflict between synthetics and organics because they are all the same....but who says there won't be people who would want to rule others o submit them to their will.
Conflict and war will continue, and syntheorganics can still build machines right? We don't know

[ThinkIntegral]

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

^You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

Yeah, but the law is a result of the social contract. That is to say, the majority of people actually agreed that they would abide by it.

Yeah I know. I also know it gives us more freedoms based on what we agree upon but it's technically also an impairment.  

[Greed1914]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Why are people so happy with refusal? It's a terrible ending.

I mean, it's pretty clever, but it essentially is an ending in which you've utterly failed due to stubbornness.

I don't get that, either.  At first I thought I was sort of excited to see it since many people were asking for the option to refuse.  However, since that option also results in failure, it came off like they didn't actually want it in there. 

[Alexius]

Krosfiyah wrote...

Synthesis may be the final evolutionary stage for Synthetics, but who is it to say that it is for organics? With evolution, there is no ending; however Synthesis erases that notion. Society basically becomes stagnant as many have already mentioned, which IMO is the same as being dead.

Yup, to me "final evolution" just sounds like an oxymoron. But it's still an interesting idea.

[iNyxs]

I can't seem to find myself to like this ending. Uh-uh not one bit.

[kblaze13]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

^You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

saw that one coming the moment I read nagath's post.

and while yes it is in a sense impairment of free will, Laws, at least they are supposed to be in the USA, decided by the governing body which is given the power of officals elected into office by the majority of populace. In other words an agreed law.

Synth isn't doing this it's Shep forcing it onto EVERY SINGLE BEING IN THE GALAXY. How is that anything but Renegade?

It's not even shep's idea it's the starbrats idea. for all we know it could be an idea he was programmed with when he was created. For all we know he could have been created by some crazy version of a alien hitler, which isn't too far fetched when you think about how he made the reapers to wipe out organic life.

It still boils down to forcing a single person's decision on EVERYONE, which makes it different then most systems of Laws.

[ThinkIntegral]

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...
To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading
someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that
they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an
awful lot like brainwashing to me... You're essentially giving everyeone
a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty
undesirable qualities that they have that make them unique.  Sure,
you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a
sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

To an extent, but enforcement of the law doesn't involve invasive, non-consensual brain surgery.

Depending on where you're at it can be invasive. Also, it appears to me you're somehow assuming there will be a loss of individuality when nothing indicated as such.

[Cyricsservant101]

Nageth wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

Nageth wrote...

Mister_Tez wrote...

Nageth wrote...

I'm not following where synthesis = loss of free will. The only option I saw that resulted in any loss of free will was control. Saying synthesis is a loss of free will is like saying the internet making information flow easily also results in a loss of free will.

I'll give you synthesis being the fan service puppies and cupcakes ending, though.

I don't recall the rest of the galaxy choosing to be "synthesised" or whatever you want to call it.

How many things happen to you that you don't choose? Quite a bit, yet people still think they have free will.

As far as the brain chemistry changes, I still don't see how that automatically = loss of free will. Could be the equivalent of suddenly doing base 2 math instead of base 10. I'd hardly call that a loss of free will.

To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an awful lot like brainwashing to me... Or like giving someone a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty undesirable qualities.  Sure, you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

Then you're brainwashed multiple times a day. Have fun with that one.

Riiiiight. 

You have any idea how much viruses and your gi ecology effect you as a person? And that is just one example. Your definition of free will doesn't match observable phenomenon.

My definition of free will doesn't match observable phenomenon... I have no idea where you're going with this.

And while we're at it what, pray tell, is my definition of free will?

[Alexius]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

^You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

Yeah, but the law is a result of the social contract. That is to say, the majority of people actually agreed that they would abide by it.

Yeah I know. I also know it gives us more freedoms based on what we agree upon but it's technically also an impairment.  

Still, it would be an impairment we agreed upon, unlike Synthesis.

[Cyricsservant101]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Cyricsservant101 wrote...
To quote SimonPhoenix from Demolition man: "You can't take away people's right to be ****s!"

Invading
someone's autonomy of self and fundamentally changing them so that
they're less aggressive, self-serving, confrontational, etc.  seems an
awful lot like brainwashing to me... You're essentially giving everyeone
a magical, space lobotomy so that you can excise all those nasty
undesirable qualities that they have that make them unique.  Sure,
you're not messing with their free will AFTER the change... but  in a
sense, synthesis is an impairment of free will. 

You know what else is also an impairment of free will? The law.

To an extent, but enforcement of the law doesn't involve invasive, non-consensual brain surgery.

Depending on where you're at it can be invasive. Also, it appears to me you're somehow assuming there will be a loss of individuality when nothing indicated as such.

Does it involve an invasion and modification of the operation of the mind?  I suppose forced lobotomies might be comparable.  I think those are wrong too, by the way. 

And there is circumstantial evidence indicating that there have been changes... E.g. the instaneous understanding between human and husk, the implication that "war" and "conflict" are going to become outdated concepts.  That's hardly conclusive evidence, but it does tip the scale in one direction.