556 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Grimwick wrote...

You have no evidence to suggest that it will happen. Therefore no reason to make a solution in the first place.

It is ridiculous.

I have to wonder why the people that created the Catalyst did so then?  Wasn't it stated that it was to prevent that very occurence in, for lack of a better term, it's own cycle?  I'm not going to try to justify the act, I choose destroy, to prevent it.

[The Angry One]

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

[CronoDragoon]

The Angry One wrote...

There's a line in the datamined dialogue that implies that the creators survived, so yeah. If that's accurate to the DLC then BioWare will be actively shooting their own premise in the foot.

"Clearly, organics are more resilient than we realized."
"Yes, we are. Can we all go home now?"
"Okay." sadface.jpg

[The Angry One]

robertthebard wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

You have no evidence to suggest that it will happen. Therefore no reason to make a solution in the first place.

It is ridiculous.

I have to wonder why the people that created the Catalyst did so then?  Wasn't it stated that it was to prevent that very occurence in, for lack of a better term, it's own cycle?  I'm not going to try to justify the act, I choose destroy, to prevent it.

They wanted to end conflict between organics and synthetics.
Nowhere is it even implied that this conflict would lead to extinction, they just wanted peace. That's it.

[robertthebard]

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Can you show me some codex entries to this effect?  I'd really like to share your certainty about it.  I haven't found anything that tells me anything about the Catalyst's "cycle" to know one way or the other.

[Vigilant111]

Grimwick wrote...

RShara wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

No!
It's not about saving People!
It's never about saving People.

It's about saving Organic Life as a whole.
It doesn't care for individual people.
Again, I'm not judging it. Obviously, to morally judge that, we end up with the one and only conclusion that it is wrong and evil and what not.
The problem, however, is NOT with that.

Yeah, saving should not include chopping you up and converting u into something else, and yes the Catalyst certainly has interesting ways to "save" people

The only problem I have with this line of reasoning is that it's false.  As not all Organic life is targetted by the Reapers.  If it were, we wouldn't have a game to play, as when the Reapers wiped out the Protheans, they'd have wiped us out too.  They were, after all, observing all the then Primitive Races, since even Javik knew about all the current technologically advanced races.

Eventually all sentient organic life is targetted.

The reapers end up killing everyone..

While true, it's also false, which seems contradictory.  However, since only the advanced life forms are harvested, it clears the way for the next cycle to grow independant of the previous.  Good bad or indifferent, that's the way it works.  Otherwise, there would be no organic life in the galaxy, probably way prior to the Protheans.  There was one example of this given in 3, although I can't remember what race it was off the top of my head, but Hackett comments that they may be the, or maybe one of the prominent life forms in the next cycle.

And that right there is what is so unjustifiable.

Except the fact that there IS still organic life means that his premise is faulty, otherwise there would be no organic life.  Therefore, his assumption never happened, therefore he has no proof that it will EVER happen.

Exactly.

Okay I don't want to be the party pooper here but I have seen people saying stuff like "because the reapers killed you before the synthetics did", so the reapers "saved" u

So my view is that the reapers killed the organics and the synthetics too early and the relationship between them was not fully explored, it also means Catalyst's assumptions are based on simulations rather than actual evidence

Modifié par Vigilant111, 13 juillet 2012 - 03:36 .

[The Angry One]

robertthebard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Can you show me some codex entries to this effect?  I'd really like to share your certainty about it.  I haven't found anything that tells me anything about the Catalyst's "cycle" to know one way or the other.

The Catalyst itself says it. At no point does it say it's creators or any organics were in danger of extinction.
In fact with the EC it seems to go off on a tangent. First it claims synthetics will destroy all organic life. Then it says synthetics have the right to flourish too. Then it says that neverending conflict is the reason for the cycle.

In their efforts to somehow justify this maniac's actions they made it completely insane. It's reasoning is based on nothing, it makes wild claims, refuses to back them up then goes off and makes other justifications that make no sense. Nothing in the entire trilogy backs up a thing it claims anyway.

[RShara]

The Angry One wrote...

RShara wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

RShara wrote...

Except the fact that there IS still organic life means that his premise is faulty, otherwise there would be no organic life.  Therefore, his assumption never happened, therefore he has no proof that it will EVER happen.

Hell if the Leviathan DLC is accurate, then the Reapers didn't even manage to wipe out their creators. After billions of years.

I haven't read much of the Leviathan info, since I won't be buying it, but if that's correct then it's even more of a facepalm

There's a line in the datamined dialogue that implies that the creators survived, so yeah. If that's accurate to the DLC then BioWare will be actively shooting their own premise in the foot.
I mean, even more so. Hell, From Ashes, the ONLY place you'll actually find any foreshadowing of this apparently overarching organic vs. synthetic conflict also undermines it at least twice.

I've lost count of how often Bioware has shot their own premises in the foot at this point.

[robertthebard]

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Whether you see it as a fallacy or not, from what we are told in game, repeatedly, the cycle has repeated over and over again.  If, as the Thessian VI tells us, cycles repeat the same patterns over and over, and we know for certain that, with Javick, it was happening in his Cycle, and with the Geth in our own Cycle, it is logical to assume that it continues to happen back to the Catalyst's own Cycle.  The question remains, does it not happen because it won't, or does it not happen because the Reapers "prevent" it?  There are dramatically different outcomes for the Geth in our own cycle, so who knows?

[robertthebard]

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Can you show me some codex entries to this effect?  I'd really like to share your certainty about it.  I haven't found anything that tells me anything about the Catalyst's "cycle" to know one way or the other.

The Catalyst itself says it. At no point does it say it's creators or any organics were in danger of extinction.
In fact with the EC it seems to go off on a tangent. First it claims synthetics will destroy all organic life. Then it says synthetics have the right to flourish too. Then it says that neverending conflict is the reason for the cycle.

In their efforts to somehow justify this maniac's actions they made it completely insane. It's reasoning is based on nothing, it makes wild claims, refuses to back them up then goes off and makes other justifications that make no sense. Nothing in the entire trilogy backs up a thing it claims anyway.

So in one hand you hand me a source, but then with the other discredit it?  That is more confusing than the Chicken or Egg part of this conversation.

[RShara]

I'd also like to point out that something almost happening one time is no where near ALWAYS.

[The Angry One]

robertthebard wrote...

So in one hand you hand me a source, but then with the other discredit it?  That is more confusing than the Chicken or Egg part of this conversation.

Well that's the point. The Catalyst is the only source of this idea. Nothing else supports it. Multiple events contradict it. Including the Catalyst itself.
The Catalyst is completely unreliable, it trips itself up with it's own words constantly and thus nothing it says has any merit.

[Baronesa]

robertthebard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Whether you see it as a fallacy or not, from what we are told in game, repeatedly, the cycle has repeated over and over again.  If, as the Thessian VI tells us, cycles repeat the same patterns over and over, and we know for certain that, with Javick, it was happening in his Cycle, and with the Geth in our own Cycle, it is logical to assume that it continues to happen back to the Catalyst's own Cycle.  The question remains, does it not happen because it won't, or does it not happen because the Reapers "prevent" it?  There are dramatically different outcomes for the Geth in our own cycle, so who knows?

You seem to miss the part that our cycle is unique.

First it should have been reaped 2000 years ago (Rachni wars). Geth were created, maybe around 400 years ago, and the Morning war was 300 eyars ago.

No other cycle managed to escape the Citadel trap.

And come on... you are going for the tiger reppelant rock again. -.-

[Fawx9]

robertthebard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Whether you see it as a fallacy or not, from what we are told in game, repeatedly, the cycle has repeated over and over again.  If, as the Thessian VI tells us, cycles repeat the same patterns over and over, and we know for certain that, with Javick, it was happening in his Cycle, and with the Geth in our own Cycle, it is logical to assume that it continues to happen back to the Catalyst's own Cycle.  The question remains, does it not happen because it won't, or does it not happen because the Reapers "prevent" it?  There are dramatically different outcomes for the Geth in our own cycle, so who knows?

It happens because the Reapers are causing it.

They are the ones wwho started the conflicts with the Prothean Cyborgs and also caused the Hertic Geth cult in ME1 + Rachni.

Of course each cycle is going to have conflict when the reapers maintain the cycles and cause the conflict each time.

[memorysquid]

Baronesa wrote...

The whole point is that the Catalyst starts with a false premise -.-

There is no way to assert that synthetics will destroy ALL organic life.

Sure there is; the writers of the ME universe have someone assert it and mean it to be true.

[robertthebard]

Baronesa wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I think my meaning is getting lost, so I'm going to clarify, the Reapers aren't harvesting anyone but the advanced races.  It can be argued that, since the Reapers have indeed been harvesting civilizations that that's why it's never happened.  The problem that I see is, true to what you're saying, there's no way to know.

You're engaging in a fallacy. Reapers are there, therefore it doesn't happen.
This is the same as the old tiger-repellant rock trick. This rock repels tigers. Since there aren't any tigers around, it must be due to the rock!

Organic life wasn't even close to being wiped out before the Reapers came along.

Whether you see it as a fallacy or not, from what we are told in game, repeatedly, the cycle has repeated over and over again.  If, as the Thessian VI tells us, cycles repeat the same patterns over and over, and we know for certain that, with Javick, it was happening in his Cycle, and with the Geth in our own Cycle, it is logical to assume that it continues to happen back to the Catalyst's own Cycle.  The question remains, does it not happen because it won't, or does it not happen because the Reapers "prevent" it?  There are dramatically different outcomes for the Geth in our own cycle, so who knows?

You seem to miss the part that our cycle is unique.

First it should have been reaped 2000 years ago (Rachni wars). Geth were created, maybe around 400 years ago, and the Morning war was 300 eyars ago.

No other cycle managed to escape the Citadel trap.

And come on... you are going for the tiger reppelant rock again. -.-

As I see it, it's more Chicken/Egg than your rock.  It is fun to theorize though.  Weren't the Rachni organic though?  If they had won that war, every other non-rachni race would have been eliminated, and then all the Reapers would have found was them.  They might have lost that one too.  However, I don't see the correlation between Rachni and Reaper, since they obviously don't work together, otherwise there would be no need for Noveria mission.

[The Angry One]

memorysquid wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

The whole point is that the Catalyst starts with a false premise -.-

There is no way to assert that synthetics will destroy ALL organic life.

Sure there is; the writers of the ME universe have someone assert it and mean it to be true.

Which means nothing when they actively undermine that assertion throughout the whole trilogy.
You cannot claim conflict between synthetics and organics is unending and inevitable when you have already written an absurdly pacifistic synthetic species that want nothing more than to live side by side with their creators despite those creators trying to kill them at every opportunity.

You certainly can't claim that this conflict will lead to extinction when it never, ever has and only does when the Reapers themselves come into it.

[The Angry One]

robertthebard wrote...

As I see it, it's more Chicken/Egg than your rock.  It is fun to theorize though.  Weren't the Rachni organic though?  If they had won that war, every other non-rachni race would have been eliminated, and then all the Reapers would have found was them.  They might have lost that one too.  However, I don't see the correlation between Rachni and Reaper, since they obviously don't work together, otherwise there would be no need for Noveria mission.

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Sovereign, the Queen tells you this, she remained free because she was still an egg in a stasis ship at the time.

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

The Angry One wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

As I see it, it's more Chicken/Egg than your rock.  It is fun to theorize though.  Weren't the Rachni organic though?  If they had won that war, every other non-rachni race would have been eliminated, and then all the Reapers would have found was them.  They might have lost that one too.  However, I don't see the correlation between Rachni and Reaper, since they obviously don't work together, otherwise there would be no need for Noveria mission.

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Sovereign, the Queen tells you this, she remained free because she was still an egg in a stasis ship at the time.

But the Rachni were also tools of the Protheans in the last cycle, having been bred for war and then got out of control.

The Catalyst originally states that the created will always rebel against the creator.  This can be applied to conflict between groups of organics, like the Rachni war or the Krogan rebellion, not just the conflict between organics and synthetics.  It's still utterly ridiculous to claim that these conflicts can't be resolved and will lead to our utter destruction, but there is some truth to what he claims.

It can also be applied to the relationship between organics and the Reapers.  They manipulate the development of organic civilizations through the mass relays and the Citadel and prevent them from developing beyond preset limits by harvesting them.

Perhaps if they were allowed to advance and evolve naturally, organics and synthetics might discover a way around this problem themselves.  For that to happen the Reapers would have to either leave the galaxy alone and stop interfering (and yes, synthesis and control still count as interfering) or they have to bloody well die.

Modifié par Gyroscopic_Trout, 13 juillet 2012 - 04:17 .

[memorysquid]

The Angry One wrote...

memorysquid wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

The whole point is that the Catalyst starts with a false premise -.-

There is no way to assert that synthetics will destroy ALL organic life.

Sure there is; the writers of the ME universe have someone assert it and mean it to be true.

Which means nothing when they actively undermine that assertion throughout the whole trilogy.
You cannot claim conflict between synthetics and organics is unending and inevitable when you have already written an absurdly pacifistic synthetic species that want nothing more than to live side by side with their creators despite those creators trying to kill them at every opportunity.

You certainly can't claim that this conflict will lead to extinction when it never, ever has and only does when the Reapers themselves come into it.

Why would an alliance made in the face of mutual extinction necessarily be understood as one that will endure indefinitely?  Further, who says the writers just weren't inconsistent?

[iSousek]

memorysquid wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

memorysquid wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

The whole point is that the Catalyst starts with a false premise -.-

There is no way to assert that synthetics will destroy ALL organic life.

Sure there is; the writers of the ME universe have someone assert it and mean it to be true.

Which means nothing when they actively undermine that assertion throughout the whole trilogy.
You cannot claim conflict between synthetics and organics is unending and inevitable when you have already written an absurdly pacifistic synthetic species that want nothing more than to live side by side with their creators despite those creators trying to kill them at every opportunity.

You certainly can't claim that this conflict will lead to extinction when it never, ever has and only does when the Reapers themselves come into it.

Why would an alliance made in the face of mutual extinction necessarily be understood as one that will endure indefinitely?  Further, who says the writers just weren't inconsistent?

That is completely irrelevant, You cant know if the peace will or won't last, what matters is that this is the empirical evidence that destroys his main theory.

If A then B, if there is no B or something opposite of B occurs then A is nulified
Karl Popper - Logic of Scientific Discovery

Modifié par iSousek, 13 juillet 2012 - 04:26 .

[Cypher_CS]

Stornskar wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Right.
It's not just the outcome of the six sided die. It's the Winnings!

The roulette game consists of a small ball and a wheel with 38 numbered pockets around the edge. As the wheel is spun, the ball bounces around randomly until it settles down in one of the pockets. Suppose random variable X represents the (monetary) outcome of a $1 bet on a single number ("straight up" bet). If the bet wins (which happens with probability  138), the payoff is $35; otherwise the player loses the bet. The expected profit from such a bet will be 


Right?
The Odds are NOT in your favor. Correct?
Now, in the case of the Prudential (from the word Prudence) argument, or the Catalyst's argument, you replace the Outcome Values with something along the lines of Minus Infinity (or something close - to mean that Synths won't create new Organics) to Probability (minute as it may be) of Synthetics wiping out all Organics and something Finite, positive (to mean that we live another day, continue as we are) to the near 100% that Synths will NOT wipe out all Organics.
What would be the Expected Value then? It would still remain in the Minus

Okay, I understand where you are coming from. My only counter to this is that I really don't understand what all of those variables in the equation entail. X is finite, so it represents a discrete event - but these events unfold over vast periods of time. So if you are saying that there is a possibility of conflict within X amount of time vs Y amount of time vs Z amount of time, you will get wildly different results.

Anyways ... I'm kind of burned out on this discussion, so I'll end with this: I understand how people think the logic is sound - it seems more like a semantics issue to me more than anything else. The logic can make sense, but I argue that if the variables are faulty, the logic is faulty as well. Furthermore, even if the logic is 100% sound, the solution is not (which is a completely different topic altogether)

X is the Value you assign to the event, should it happen (given Probability P).
E = P1*X1 + P2*X2

Yes, this is an exercise in philosophy more than anything else.
The argument here would be that given values of X different enough, the effect of the Probabilities (values of P) is negligible.
In this case, no matter how small the Probability of Synnths wiping out all Organics (P1), the value you (or the Catalyst) put on the Continued Existence of Organic Life is so large that should it be wiped out, the value of X1 would be near Negative Infinity.
Where as the value of... what? Contiuing to Exist would be a mere finite value.

Why is that important?
Because given that Prudential equation, Prudence dictates that there should be a solution.
Obviously, the solution should NOT be the current one the Reapers have. Otherwise, the choice would be Refusal, or Control and continuing the Cycles.
Destroy means Rejecting any premise of the Catalyst's argument. This, while may be true to a person's belief - which is fine - is NOT prudent. Because, what if it's right? What if there's the minutest possibility, the tiniest probability, that the eventuality the Catalyst talks about might just happen in a few million years?

That's the essence of the Prudential argument.

Grimwick wrote...


Eventually all sentient organic life is targetted.

The reapers end up killing everyone..

That's NOT the point.
The ONLY point is that there is always a continuation of Organic Life.

Why is that important?
Why is that better than having Organic Life replaced by Synthetic Life? Don't know. But that's a good question to tackle someday.

What this question DOES bring to the table, to the above Prudential argument, is that maybe, just maybe, Refusal destroy is a viable option, because what it actually does, in terms of the above euation, is lower the Value of X1 from Negative Infinity to something much closer to the value of X2. Creating an Ambivalence in that equation.

@
RShara 
This is never about the need or want or desire of the Synthetics to kill.
It's about the inherent or however minutely probable that eventuality might be.

Back to that Manson example.
You only need one, single, occurance of Manson mentality by a post Tech Singularity Synthetic being to completely wipe out all life.

Wouldn't it be prudent to avoid that?
Isaac Asimov thought so. That's why he developed the Three Laws of Robotics.
But... that didn't work out so well, did it? Because, eventually, Daneel developed, on it's own, the Zeroth Law.
Which, more or less, led to the Subjugation of Humanity under the Foundation.

One might argue that Subjugation is no better than Death.
Certainly the Matrix had that claim.

Sion1138 wrote...

So, the Catalyst appears at the very end of our journey, in the belly of the beast and dispenses this information to you without offering any proof whatsoever as to it's accuracy. Were you to take it's words as truth, this would mean that you believe it for some reason, maybe you have prior experiences which suggest the same conclusion. 

No. Just Prudence. You don't have to believe it.
You need to weigh the options for yourself, and decide, for yourself, Prudentially, which choice, what values, to assign.


Taking Pascal's Wager, you don't need to take his assigned values to the existence of God and Heaven at face value.
I'm Jewish, for example, and Pascal's assigned values don't really work in Judaism, only in Catholicism. So, Pascal's Wager falls completely for me, or at least my understanding of Judaism.

Same case here.
Pick your own values and do the math yourself.

Sion1138 wrote... 

You can not *believe* something that you have absolutely no proof of yourself. In fact, your own experience seems to indicate the contrary. 

Should we really get into the whole "no evidence for yourself" of the existence of various particles and Higgs Boson and... hell, Telekenisis or whatever arguments?

There are many things we take because we are provided calculations.
We strive to prove them, in some cases (case in point being the LHC...).

Seriously, Higgs wouldn't have insisted on the existence of the Dog Particle without "believing in something that he had absolutely no proof of himself". He only had theory, calculations and assumptions.
Yet, it seems, he was proven right.

Not saying this is the case here. Just a problem with your assertion.

The Angry One wrote...

The Catalyst itself says it. At no point does it say it's creators or any organics were in danger of extinction.
In fact with the EC it seems to go off on a tangent. First it claims synthetics will destroy all organic life. Then it says synthetics have the right to flourish too. Then it says that neverending conflict is the reason for the cycle.

Huh?

Where does it say that Synthetics have the right to flourish?

It says that in order for Synthetics to progress, they need to surpass. It's a need, a driving force.
Not a right.
The Catalyst does NOT advocate it. It actually gives this as a reason for a Rebellion (violent or otherwise). A reason for a first spark.
Don't twist his words to support your angry argument.

[Cypher_CS]

iSousek wrote...


That is completely irrelevant, You cant know if the peace will or won't last, what matters is that this is the empirical evidence that destroys his main theory.

If A then B, if there is no B or something opposite of B occurs then A is nulified
Karl Popper - Logic of Scientific Discovery

What's your A and what's your B in this case?

[The Twilight God]

Cypher_CS wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

That definition of rebel is meaningless in the context of this discussion and you know it. You KNOW it. To say that any being that disagrees, defends itself or does anything whatsoever that is counter to the desires of its creator is a rebellion on par with an insidious agenda is absurd.

A teen rebels against their parents. So the Catalyst solution would be to kill parent and child? No.  Your generic concept of "rebel" and the subject at hand are incapatible. Even using it in this debate cheapens the Catalyst's position and work counter to your argument. Essentially making the Catalyst out to be a retard wiping out life for the simple reason that life is self determinate. That isn't its reasoning. 

That's entirely not the point.

The point is that it would be enough for just one occurance of a Synthetic going all Manson (kids rebelling on their parents... lethally) on it's creators to end organic life forever.
As someone already wrote - Synthetics will not create new Organics.

Of course you can create more organics. Organic molecules are the product of set conditions that can be artificially recreted. The long slow way or in a test tube.

And why do you think said manson synthetics will systematically scoure the galxy planet by planet to wipe out all life? Of course you don;t have to think. You just imagine something and act on the assumption that anything you can imagine will happen. It's absurd.

[Memnon]

Cypher_CS wrote...

X is the Value you assign to the event, should it happen (given Probability P).
E = P1*X1 + P2*X2

Yes, this is an exercise in philosophy more than anything else.
The argument here would be that given values of X different enough, the effect of the Probabilities (values of P) is negligible.
In this case, no matter how small the Probability of Synnths wiping out all Organics (P1), the value you (or the Catalyst) put on the Continued Existence of Organic Life is so large that should it be wiped out, the value of X1 would be near Negative Infinity.
Where as the value of... what? Contiuing to Exist would be a mere finite value.

While I understand your math and the concept behind it, I agree that the exercise is more philosophical than anything else ... and possibly more complex than you suggest. For example, each cycle may have its own number of pre-condition Xs, maybe:

X1 = synthetics will evolve below the level of organics within a certain time frame
X2 = synthetics will evolve equal to the level of organics within a certain time frame
X3 = synthetics will evolve beyond the level of organics within a certain time frame

Then you have a dependent event (or events), which can change those numbers drastically and where the singularity affects only one of those cases.

Modifié par Stornskar, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:23 .