463 réponses à ce sujet

[NM_Che56]

sth128 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Then you clearly don't understand how a machine thinks. They don't have a choice if the program tell it to do something. If you command  computer your to turn off , does it ever tell you"No, I don't want to"?

No, it is you who does not understand how AI works. Equating the Reapers and the Catalyst to your Windows Vista?

Really? All your intelligence and that's the best you can come up with?

TIM told EDI to shut down, guess what she did?

That's right, she uploaded porn. That's the testament of a true AI right there: the ability to enjoy porn.

She did not say she enjoyed it.  She understands that such images are widely viewed as offensive and distasteful, so, as a joke, she spammed Cerberus with terrabytes of it.

[Raging Nug]

cavs25 wrote...

Fire isn't a sentient being, and the reapers are....most moronic analogy I've ever seen.

The Reapers are like the bombs - they're doing what they're meant to do. The fact that they're sentient doesn't mean they'll suddenly stop doing their job. If a toaster could think, would it stop being a toaster? Is it responsible for the burning of the bread? Or is it the fault of the person who sets the dial or turns the toaster on?

This isn't moronic, it's philosophy.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Carlthestrange wrote...

When fire burns, do we not blame the one who lit the fire?

At least one of interpretations that they (original creators of Catalyst) are long dead and out of your reach.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:20 .

[sth128]

Master Che wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Then why are the producers (Mike Gamble) and others (Tully Ackland) supplementing things via posts and twitter? Obviously the creators have something in mind.

Because they realized their product is illogical and can be interpreted in conflicting ways? So they rushed to come up with excuses to try and cover the glaring errors? And to give us some "free" content hoping that fans would just ignore said errors and be happy about the situation?

Prior to EC, I would agree with you.  However, people are still wanting explanations for what should now be obvious.  This is the source of much great personal butt hurt.

You attributed the quote(s) to the wrong person. I wrote the part in bold. If you're gonna quote people, do it properly.

Many things presented in the EC are clearly not obvious, otherwise the forum would not be filled with such commotion. Just because you think those things are "correct" or "obvious" doesn't make them true. Unless you are confident enough to declare that you are always right, there exists the possibility that you are wrong, and things aren't "logical" or "obvious".

For example, nothing in the EC explains the clear discrepancy between what Sovereign (and to some extent, Harbinger) said and what Catalyst said. Before, the Reapers were "each a nation, independent, free of all weakness" and "has no beginning, has no end". Now, the Reapers are just "mindless tools", "fire to cleanse the garden because I hate grass".

Where is the logic? Where is the obvious truth?

[Carlthestrange]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

When fire burns, do we not blame the one who lit the fire?

At least one of interpretations that they (original creators of Catalyst) are long dead and out of your reach.

Very true. Which makes the whole matter incrediby complicated.

[NM_Che56]

Raging Nug wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Fire isn't a sentient being, and the reapers are....most moronic analogy I've ever seen.

The Reapers are like the bombs - they're doing what they're meant to do. The fact that they're sentient doesn't mean they'll suddenly stop doing their job. If a toaster could think, would it stop being a toaster? Is it responsible for the burning of the bread? Or is it the fault of the person who sets the dial or turns the toaster on?

This isn't moronic, it's philosophy.

If a bear sh*+s in the woods and no one ...

ooo...Wait a minute...  that's not how it goes...dammit!

[JShepppp]

I think some people are taking this too literally. The Catalyst basically says that if a man is shooting a gun, you don't blame the gun for the shooting as the gun is merely a tool. But if all you see is a floating gun in the air, you'd assume the gun, which you've never seen before, is shooting of its own accord. We didn't know anyone was shooting the gun, so to speak. If someone has full control of the gun and the gun no longer is in control of its own agency, the person who is is the one who's at fault. Basically, people misinterpreted the true nature of the Reapers because the Catalyst was not known about.

All I can say is the following quote from Stargate:

If you know the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked long ago.

[Naugi]

Rasofe wrote...

It's answer is basically - this isn't a war, they're just cleansing the universe of life.

See, I have to wonder to what degree the Catalyst / Reapers have ever had reason to regard what they are doing as war. Dont get me wrong, it is. But would the AI think it is? Would the Reapers?

I hate to start on more analogies, but lets take that good old pest control officer, exterminating rats. Would he consider himself at war with them? What if one day Shepard rat,  hero of rat kind arrived on his doorstep and shouted at him 'You dont call this war?'

Perhaps, being human, he might re-assess his career and reply, 'damn, youre right ...'

But I dont think the Catalyst would do this, to some degree its automated and performing a function, to what degree would it re-assess its actions in light of Shepards question about war? Would it defend itself and its function, not being able to look at its own actions as anything other than its function, ro would it have an epiphany and admit its own flawed logic?

Interesting question, basically, how stubborn is the AI?

[Rasofe]

No it's moronic.

It's like saying that the liquour store deserves to be robbed because it has money that would attract thieves. Thieves only do what thieves do, and liquour stores shouldn't have money, they should have liquour.

PERFECT SENSE.

The Reapers and the Catalyst were created with the purpose to prevent war between synthetics and organics. The catalysts solution is to have the Reapers war with the organics, but only every 50 000 years.

The claim that it is NOT war doesn't stand. If we're talking EXTINCTION, that's different, that's arguable, but it certainly is WAR and a fire analogy is illogical.

[sth128]

Master Che wrote...

She did not say she enjoyed it.  She understands that such images are widely viewed as offensive and distasteful, so, as a joke, she spammed Cerberus with terrabytes of it.

For someone who understands the concept of joking, you seem to be incapable of actually perceiving one.

The "testament of AI depends on enjoyment of porn" is a joke.

Do I really need to include "that was a joke" so that you "get it"?

[JShepppp]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

When fire burns, do we not blame the one who lit the fire?

At least one of interpretations that they (original creators of Catalyst) are long dead and out of your reach.

I'd argue differently. If the Reapers are the fire, the Catalyst is the one who made the fire. The Catalyst's Creators are the ones who told it "make it warm, however you want".

The analogy only goes so far, but if the most "efficient" way was to do something harsh to burn heat, that's what the Catalyst would do.

[Rasofe]

Naugi wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

It's answer is basically - this isn't a war, they're just cleansing the universe of life.

See, I have to wonder to what degree the Catalyst / Reapers have ever had reason to regard what they are doing as war. Dont get me wrong, it is. But would the AI think it is? Would the Reapers?

I hate to start on more analogies, but lets take that good old pest control officer, exterminating rats. Would he consider himself at war with them? What if one day Shepard rat,  hero of rat kind arrived on his doorstep and shouted at him 'You dont call this war?'

Perhaps, being human, he might re-assess his career and reply, 'damn, youre right ...'

But I dont think the Catalyst would do this, to some degree its automated and performing a function, to what degree would it re-assess its actions in light of Shepards question about war? Would it defend itself and its function, not being able to look at its own actions as anything other than its function, ro would it have an epiphany and admit its own flawed logic?

Interesting question, basically, how stubborn is the AI?

Stubborn enough to ignore facts, thats for sure. And to spew semantic demagogy to cover its nonsense.

[Malkeor]

I really hated the expression on Shep's face when the catalyst said that.
No...he's not just gonna be like "oh yeah guess yurrr rightt" Ugh...dammit.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Carlthestrange wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

When fire burns, do we not blame the one who lit the fire?

At least one of interpretations that they (original creators of Catalyst) are long dead and out of your reach.

Very true. Which makes the whole matter incrediby complicated.

It's not complicated really, but for me it just disappointing.

Some ancient race made a powerful construct which went haywire and now laying waste to the galaxy.
You were trying to stop it, but you were unable to stop it without sacrificing something in the end.
I expected more of ME.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:26 .

[Carlthestrange]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

It's not complicated really, but for me it just disappointing.

Some ancient race made a powerful construct which went haywire and now laying waste to the galaxy.
You were trying to stop it, but you were unable to stop it without sacrificing something in the end.
I expected more of ME.

Hmm, the unfortunate human factor of cleaning up someone elses mess.

[Rasofe]

Sovereign did say it was an incomprehensible purpose.

He was completely right.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

JShepppp wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Carlthestrange wrote...

When fire burns, do we not blame the one who lit the fire?

At least one of interpretations that they (original creators of Catalyst) are long dead and out of your reach.

I'd argue differently. If the Reapers are the fire, the Catalyst is the one who made the fire. The Catalyst's Creators are the ones who told it "make it warm, however you want".

The analogy only goes so far, but if the most "efficient" way was to do something harsh to burn heat, that's what the Catalyst would do.

This will depend on if Catalyst has free will. A lot of people insist it doesn't.
It was never clearly established in game, so just another topic for endless speculation.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:28 .

[sth128]

JShepppp wrote...

All I can say is the following quote from Stargate:

If you know the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked long ago.

+1

The candle is lit, but nobody is home.

Naugi wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

It's answer is basically - this isn't a war, they're just cleansing the universe of life.

See, I have to wonder to what degree the Catalyst / Reapers have ever
had reason to regard what they are doing as war. Dont get me wrong, it
is. But would the AI think it is? Would the Reapers?

(WARNING SECOND COMING OF GODWIN)

Mr. Master Race also thought he was just cleansing Europe of undesirables. So it is now NW2 (Not War II).

I cannot believe we're reached the second cycle of thread destruction so soon. Someone else do the photoshopping. I'm too tired.

Modifié par sth128, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:30 .

[Rasofe]

I agree, it's a bit silly that you have to end on such an epic game fighting an enemy that doesn't really deserve hate, but must be destroyed.

It IS kind of Star Trekky though, but only to a very small, superficial degree.

[Raging Nug]

Rasofe wrote...

No it's moronic.

It's like saying that the liquour store deserves to be robbed because it has money that would attract thieves. Thieves only do what thieves do, and liquour stores shouldn't have money, they should have liquour.

Thinking of it in terms of right and wrong complicated the issue. You see it as 'deserves', I simply accept it as an eventuality. Thieves are thieves because they steal, and they steal for various reasons - doesn't mean they're at war with liquor stores. XD

PERFECT SENSE.

A-thank you ;D

The Reapers and the Catalyst were created with the purpose to prevent war between synthetics and organics. The catalysts solution is to have the Reapers war with the organics, but only every 50 000 years.

Right, except you're wrong. The Catalyst was created to ensure the preservation of life, and it does so by storing civilizations and cultures inside the Reaper in a different form. The prevention of war would be preferable, but it's more of a secondary objective. What matters is the life itself.

The claim that it is NOT war doesn't stand. If we're talking EXTINCTION, that's different, that's arguable, but it certainly is WAR and a fire analogy is illogical.

Just depends on your perspective. If I have an anthill out front and I need to take it out before it destroys my garden, am I at war with those ants? Maybe, but again, that's philosophy.

[Hussain747715]

spiriticon wrote...

Is this candle at war?

The fire (reapers) is at war with the candle (galaxy).

[Rasofe]

sth128 wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

All I can say is the following quote from Stargate:

If you know the candlelight is fire, then the meal was cooked long ago.

+1

The candle is lit, but nobody is home.

Naugi wrote...

Rasofe wrote...

It's answer is basically - this isn't a war, they're just cleansing the universe of life.

(WARNING SECOND COMING OF GODWIN)

Mr. Master Race also thought he was just cleansing Europe of undesirables. So it is now NW2 (Not War II).

I cannot believe we're reached the second cycle of thread destruction so soon. Someone else do the photoshopping. I'm too tired.

Geesh, dude, relax.  I'm sort-of-citing the Catalyst here, the Godwin threshold has not been reached yet.

[sth128]

Rasofe wrote...

I agree, it's a bit silly that you have to end on such an epic game fighting an enemy that doesn't really deserve hate, but must be destroyed.

It IS kind of Star Trekky though, but only to a very small, superficial degree.

What's really Star Trek-ky is the fact that they had this metaphor / conversation in one of the TNG episodes.

I'm think the one where Data made his girlfriend / daughter, and asked Dr. Beaverly ask "what is life"? She said "it consumes, reproduces, dies, etc." and Data said "fire consumes fuel, reproduces itself to create more fire, then dies when no more fuel remain. Is fire alive"?

Then Doc slapped Data across the face and fused him with some organic bits and created the Borg.

Or something like that.

[NM_Che56]

sth128 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Then why are the producers (Mike Gamble) and others (Tully Ackland) supplementing things via posts and twitter? Obviously the creators have something in mind.

Because they realized their product is illogical and can be interpreted in conflicting ways? So they rushed to come up with excuses to try and cover the glaring errors? And to give us some "free" content hoping that fans would just ignore said errors and be happy about the situation?

Prior to EC, I would agree with you.  However, people are still wanting explanations for what should now be obvious.  This is the source of much great personal butt hurt.

You attributed the quote(s) to the wrong person. I wrote the part in bold. If you're gonna quote people, do it properly.

Many things presented in the EC are clearly not obvious, otherwise the forum would not be filled with such commotion. Just because you think those things are "correct" or "obvious" doesn't make them true. Unless you are confident enough to declare that you are always right, there exists the possibility that you are wrong, and things aren't "logical" or "obvious".

For example, nothing in the EC explains the clear discrepancy between what Sovereign (and to some extent, Harbinger) said and what Catalyst said. Before, the Reapers were "each a nation, independent, free of all weakness" and "has no beginning, has no end". Now, the Reapers are just "mindless tools", "fire to cleanse the garden because I hate grass".

Where is the logic? Where is the obvious truth?

Noted.  I'll alert CNN of the retraction. 

As for me being "confident enough to declare that you are always right...".  Aside from my inability to quote properly, I am pretty confident, yeah. 

The fact that there's butt hurt doesn't mean it's not clear.  It means some people are dullards.

As for the whole "sovereign" and "being independent".

TIM thought he was calling all of the shots, right?
Saren?
How about Matriarch Benezia? 

Granted, they all had moments of clarity afforded to them because Shepard challenged them, but aside from the curtain of indoctrination being blown open enough for them to see reality, they thought they were acting independently to.

What am I saying?

The reapers used indoctrination to control others...however, the Catalyst made the Reapers.  It is logical to assume that they were just as deluded regarding their "independence" as those who are indoctrinated.

Since we're quoting Sovereign, it also said the "we have no beginning"...hello Catalyst? I think I found the beginning.