982 réponses à ce sujet

[lx_theo]

Fandango9641 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Okay, be that patronizing ***hole who happens to say stupid things. I'm sure you;re proud of it.

Its not to emphasize with the Reapers. Its to emphasize more with synthetics in general. I'm sure they were extremely weary in accepted the Reaper's help when they first came with the offer. Empathy enough not to wipe out a species (the point of it) is not enough to suddenly make someone trust one another or have happy go lucky relationships at the point. I'm sure the whole situaton when they came to offer help would be very entetaining to watch.

And of course they are not hard questions. They are actually so painfully obvious that they make no difference. Why you are asking them is beyond me.

If you wanted to ask questions that become relevant, ask these.

How will our motivations and philosophies evolve after the so called sneeze?
Is gaining greater empathy for a form of life a good thing?

They actually have relevance because they ask the question that would effect this topic on hand.

You're arguing in bad faith Theo. Trying to make the more *ahem* positive aspects of synthesis representative, whilst dismissing the legitimate concerns of others with little more than a wave of your hand is not on buddy. Does synthesis require you empathise with the Reapers or not? If not, why not and what does that mean for the ‘utopia’ of your synthetic future?

A wave of my hand? Explain to me how having empathy changes anything with the Reapers, then. When the reapers offer their help, can organics and synthetics destroy them? Certainly not. They don't have nearly destructive force to do anything like that at this point. Enough empathy to not wipe out a species plays no role here. That makes it irrelevant.

Hence, no wave of hand. Just obvious.

And I don't believe synthesis will lead to a utopia... Who have you been arguing with?

[mauro2222]

Helios969 wrote...

I completely reject the notion that a technological singularity results in genocidal AI's preceiving organic life as a threat that must be eradicated.

From what I read is not even that, is more nosense, they wipe out organics because they don't need them... I mean, what? so if they don't need an element they destroy it too?

[General User]

tettenjager wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

tettenjager wrote...
why is it that when people dont like somethink they think they have the monopoly over the truth?

This is why I have stopped participating in threads like this. It's of no use whatsoever to say anything to these fanatics. It completely escapes them how anyone could dare have a different perspective on Synthesis.

Besides, it's telling that the OP uses as an example a galaxy whose existence is in doubt.

Pot > Kettle > Black.

read my post, I respect other peoples visions, but I dont respect them breaking down other peoples visions

It's called "criticism" and there's nothing wrong with it.  As a matter of fact, those who are secure in their positions and/or are more interested in exploring an issue than reaching a given conclusion, actually welcome it.

[OnlyHazeRemains]

Vigilant111 wrote...
What is this got into do with anything? It is unknown whether synthesis can actually stop singularity

I don't understand the bolded text, are you saying that synthetics destroy organics because they are irrational?

Oh? becoming immortal is the main reason u chose synthesis? I thought synthetics want to become mortal in order to have a full experience of life

Well i looked up technological singularity on wikipedia and what i got from it was just this.

Wikipedia
"The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." (Eliezer Yudkowsky)

Something more "useful"

Read further here

[mauro2222]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

If it is technologically possible to "transcode and copy" the whole human brain onto some electronic device, then you become immortal.

Or you could play a little with your genes... is not that hard to be immortal. There are animals on this planet that are immortal already.

And EDI doen't have a cap in her cells, she doesn't even have cells. She's immortal, who wrote that?

Modifié par mauro2222, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:49 .

[The Angry One]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...
What is this got into do with anything? It is unknown whether synthesis can actually stop singularity

I don't understand the bolded text, are you saying that synthetics destroy organics because they are irrational?

Oh? becoming immortal is the main reason u chose synthesis? I thought synthetics want to become mortal in order to have a full experience of life

Well i looked up technological singularity on wikipedia and what i got from it was just this.

Wikipedia
"The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." (Eliezer Yudkowsky)

Something more "useful"

Read further here

Again, paranoid theories. Assumptions that an all powerful AI will use us for materials instead of, you know, anything else.
Do not confuse the theories of know-it-all fools with the concept itself.

Moreover, again, this has nothing to do with Mass Effect. The Geth do NOT want to kill organics.
Do you know what their stance is?

"You [organics] are different, but we accept you."

Modifié par The Angry One, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:48 .

[lx_theo]

The Angry One wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Well, if you don't want to be told how you evade every explanation, don't do it. You post nothing relatively close to understanding it and ignore people who correect you.

More evasions, more insults.

I've already address many of your points in this thread. Do you mean that latest one where you basically came out and said you don't understand one bit of it? Yeah, maybe someone else has the patience to explain something someone evades to them.

You have failed to explain why the Catalyst's dialogue is worth anything at all.
You have failed to explain how synthesis doesn't affect minds.
You have failed to justify why synthesis would give synthetics "understanding" but not organics, when the Catalyst and the Rannoch Destroyer flat out say organics represent chaos.

I will say again. Stop pretending that you have made irrefutable arguments and those who disagree with you don't understand. I loathe this type of behaviour.

And don't worry, I've already explained it to you in threads of past. You did the same thing then. Evade, evade, evade, evade...

Stop wasting everyone's time, please.

Still evading your widely known history I see?

You have failed to prove it doesn't make sense other than by admitted you yourself don't understand it even when there are whole threads deidicated to explaining it.
You have failed to put any evidence forward that suggests it actually does effect minds like you say.
You have failed to understand that giving understanding to organics is perfectly possible, just not one of the major goals of synthesis as put forth by the Catalyst.

I will say again, stop citing something you have admitted repeated to not understanding as fact, because I loathe when people sound arrogant and stupid at the same time.

Stop wasting everyone's time yourself if you yourself don't understand the subject. 

Tada. 

[tettenjager]

The Angry One wrote...

tettenjager wrote...

read my post, I respect other peoples visions, but I dont respect them breaking down other peoples visions

I respect opinions, but I will not stand by and let people promote something based on galactic scale violation. Sorry.
If they want their opinions unchallenged, why do they come here?

Ha, what you say is; I respect opinions, but i will not stand by and let people have other opinions. Maybe some people, like me dont think synthesis is violation.

[lx_theo]

Fandango9641 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Okay, be that patronizing ***hole who happens to say stupid things. I'm sure you;re proud of it.

Its not to emphasize with the Reapers. Its to emphasize more with synthetics in general. I'm sure they were extremely weary in accepted the Reaper's help when they first came with the offer. Empathy enough not to wipe out a species (the point of it) is not enough to suddenly make someone trust one another or have happy go lucky relationships at the point. I'm sure the whole situaton when they came to offer help would be very entetaining to watch.

And of course they are not hard questions. They are actually so painfully obvious that they make no difference. Why you are asking them is beyond me.

If you wanted to ask questions that become relevant, ask these.

How will our motivations and philosophies evolve after the so called sneeze?
Is gaining greater empathy for a form of life a good thing?

They actually have relevance because they ask the question that would effect this topic on hand.

You're arguing in bad faith Theo. Trying to make the more *ahem* positive aspects of synthesis representative, whilst dismissing the legitimate concerns of others with little more than a wave of your hand is not on buddy. Does synthesis require you empathise with the Reapers or not? If not, why not and what does that mean for the ‘utopia’ of your synthetic future?

A wave of my hand? Explain to me how having empathy changes anything with the Reapers, then. When the reapers offer their help, can organics and synthetics destroy them? Certainly not. They don't have nearly destructive force to do anything like that at this point. Enough empathy to not wipe out a species plays no role here. That makes it irrelevant.

Hence, no wave of hand. Just obvious.

And I don't believe synthesis will lead to a utopia... Who have you been arguing with?

Answer the questions being asked of you or wind your neck in you dozy little pleb.

I thought you could read? 

[Vigilant111]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...
What is this got into do with anything? It is unknown whether synthesis can actually stop singularity

I don't understand the bolded text, are you saying that synthetics destroy organics because they are irrational?

Oh? becoming immortal is the main reason u chose synthesis? I thought synthetics want to become mortal in order to have a full experience of life

Well i looked up technological singularity on wikipedia and what i got from it was just this.

Wikipedia
"The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else." (Eliezer Yudkowsky)

Something more "useful"

Read further here

What? What is the difference between pre-synthesis understanding and post-synthesis understanding?

I thought both organics and synthetics are now capable of being irrational, nothing has really changed, in fact the situation has gotten worse since now organics share the same rate of technological advancement in terms of developing weapons

[Baronesa]

Ok...

for those mentioning the Technological singularity...

Prove that it is indeed a bad thing as the Catalyst assume.

My contention is... IT IS AN UNKNOWN.

You don't know if it will have positive, neutral or positive effects. The Catalyst solution, motives, everything is based only on the POSSIBILITY that it MAY be bad.

This undermines the foundation of everything else the Catalyst tells you

[mauro2222]

The Angry One wrote...

"You [organics] are different, but we accept you."

Key words.

Accept.

A big difference with understanding, wich is not the same. You can understand someone but not accept it. That's why Synthesis is BS.

Modifié par mauro2222, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:51 .

[Vigilant111]

mauro2222 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

"You [organics] are different, but we accept you."

Key words.

Accept.

A big difference with understanding, wich is not the same. You can understand someone but not accept it. That's why Synthesis is BS.

U can also understand and not trust, or perhaps that trust is no longer required when u understand everything

Modifié par Vigilant111, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:55 .

[The Angry One]

lx_theo wrote...

Still evading your widely known history I see?

Nope.

You have failed to prove it doesn't make sense other than by admitted you yourself don't understand it even when there are whole threads deidicated to explaining it.

I have given numerous examples, and what? Are you resorting to lying about what I've said now?

You have failed to put any evidence forward that suggests it actually does effect minds like you say.

Again, I have given the example of co-existence with the Reapers which you have yet to explain any other way.

You have failed to understand that giving understanding to organics is perfectly possible, just not one of the major goals of synthesis as put forth by the Catalyst.

Therefore, you admit that mind alteration with synthesis is possible and likely.

I will say again, stop citing something you have admitted repeated to not understanding as fact, because I loathe when people sound arrogant and stupid at the same time.

Stop wasting everyone's time yourself if you yourself don't understand the subject. 

Tada. 

Wow, just wow. More insults, posturing and now lies about what I've been saying. I suggest nobody waste any more time with you. You have also been reported for your constant personal attacks despite warnings. Good day.

Modifié par The Angry One, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:52 .

[The Angry One]

mauro2222 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

"You [organics] are different, but we accept you."

Key words.

Accept.

A big difference with understanding, wich is not the same. You can understand someone but not accept it. That's why Synthesis is BS.

Yep that's the point. The Geth didn't understand organics, but they were trying, and they accepted organics all the same.

[lx_theo]

The Angry One wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Still evading your widely known history I see?

Nope.

You have failed to prove it doesn't make sense other than by admitted you yourself don't understand it even when there are whole threads deidicated to explaining it.

I have given numerous examples, and what? Are you resorting to lying about what I've said now?

You have failed to put any evidence forward that suggests it actually does effect minds like you say.

Again, I have given the example of co-existence with the Reapers which you have yet to explain any other way.

You have failed to understand that giving understanding to organics is perfectly possible, just not one of the major goals of synthesis as put forth by the Catalyst.

Therefore, you admit that mind alteration with synthesis is possible and likely.

I will say again, stop citing something you have admitted repeated to not understanding as fact, because I loathe when people sound arrogant and stupid at the same time.

Stop wasting everyone's time yourself if you yourself don't understand the subject. 

Tada. 

Wow, just wow. More insults, posturing and now lies about what I've been saying. I suggest nobody waste any more time with you. You have also been reported for your constant personal attacks despite warnings. Good day.

lol, thats a big yes

No, you haven't

Yes, I have. Many times. Like 4, 5 times. In fact.

Possible? Sure. Likely? Not even a little. EDI would have picked up on it if it was anything major enough to do what you say.

Lies? Have you even read your own posts? What a shame.

Modifié par lx_theo, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:56 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Or does the utopia of synthesis prevents aggression? The reapers' extremely violent behavior didn't prevent it in the past. If the hypothetical synthetics threat is true wouldn't that cause one intergalactic war after another in the future? Soon the reapers fill the universe. All because it is "inevitable"?

LOL what an awful thread.

1.) Preventing individual aggression was never the goal. It's technological advancement for organics, understanding for synthetics.
2.) Reapers were not seeking to prevent organics' aggression with the cycles. Good lord, do you pay no attention?
3.) The synthetics threat is neutralized completely. Future conflict or not, they will not be able to surpass the overall synthesis galaxy.
4/5.) LMAO! Where did you get that idea, your ass?


OP, you haven't a single clue. Then again, that can be said for just about everyone here who bashes green anyway.

[The Angry One]

lx_theo wrote...

lol, thats a big yes to the first point

Seriously everyone, don't waste your time with this guy, he's clearly trying to turn this topic into a flame war.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Heaven forbid someone has a different interpretation of Synthesis that isn't negative. We can't allow that, can we?

[tettenjager]

Baronesa wrote...

Ok...

for those mentioning the Technological singularity...

Prove that it is indeed a bad thing as the Catalyst assume.

My contention is... IT IS AN UNKNOWN.

You don't know if it will have positive, neutral or positive effects. The Catalyst solution, motives, everything is based only on the POSSIBILITY that it MAY be bad.

This undermines the foundation of everything else the Catalyst tells you

Because this is a STORY and in this STORY TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY is BAAAAD! 

[Baronesa]

tettenjager wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Ok...

for those mentioning the Technological singularity...

Prove that it is indeed a bad thing as the Catalyst assume.

My contention is... IT IS AN UNKNOWN.

You don't know if it will have positive, neutral or positive effects. The Catalyst solution, motives, everything is based only on the POSSIBILITY that it MAY be bad.

This undermines the foundation of everything else the Catalyst tells you

Because this is a STORY and in this STORY TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY is BAAAAD! 

ç

Only because the MAIN ANTAGONIST SAY SO!!!

Why the hell am I supposed to AGREE WITH THE MAIN ANTAGONIST , if all evidence presented to me ON THIS CYCLE contradicts it's stance???

[The Angry One]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

1.) Preventing individual aggression was never the goal. It's technological advancement for organics, understanding for synthetics.

And stopping conflict.

2.) Reapers were not seeking to prevent organics' aggression with the cycles. Good lord, do you pay no attention?

"You represent chaos. We represent order."

3.) The synthetics threat is neutralized completely. Future conflict or not, they will not be able to surpass the overall synthesis galaxy.

How is it neutralised? What will stop the rise or new synthetics? Why will those new synthetics now surpass hybrids? How will hybrid synthetics never be a problem?

4/5.) LMAO! Where did you get that idea, your ass?


OP, you haven't a single clue. Then again, that can be said for just about everyone here who bashes green anyway.

And people ask me why I regard pro-synthesizers the way I do..

[AngryFrozenWater]

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
It did change the reapers, the husks, the synthetics and the organics. Whatever it is, it made sure all of these have those ugly green glowing eyes. You can deny that anyway you want, but that doesn't make what you believe true.

Child: Add your energy to the Crucible's. The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic live into a new framework. A new... DNA.

Shepard: Explain how my energy can be added to the Crucible.

Child: Your organic energy, the essence of who you are and what you are, will be broken down and then dispersed.

Shepard: To do what exactly?

Child: The energy of the Cruscible, released this way, will alter the matrix of all organic life in the galaxy. Organics seek perfection through technology. Synthetics seek perfection through understanding. Organics will be perfected by integrating fully with synthetic technology. Synthetics, in turn, will finally have full understanding of organics. It is te ideal solution. Now that we know it is possible, it is inevitable we will reach synthesis.

Not only does it destroy the racial identies, it also messes with everyone's mind. The "essence of who you are and what you are", those are Shepard's, are added to the mix. "Who you are and what you are" do not suggest pure physical qualities, but how Shepard thinks instead is brought in the soup of the matrix of this new framework. If that wasn't important then James Vega's body would be much better. Physically he looks more fit than Shepard. So, sorry, it looks like mind control to me.

Youre nitpicking at words and visuals without actually thinking about the concept behind it.

The obvious flaws you point out in the ending are caused by the impossible task to explain synthesis in a frame of  maybe 10 senteces and a few video sequences. The "essence of who you are and what you are" is just dodgy mumbo jumbo because an actual explanation would fill up books and would still be completely hypothetical from todays view.

Nitpicking or not, it doesn't make the point made invalid. The addional "clarification" that the EC brought us is responsible for that.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:00 .