556 réponses à ce sujet

[Memnon]

Cypher_CS wrote...

Stornskar, isn't the algebraic concept of i a philosophical issue?

You know, I KNEW you were going to talk about complex numbers at some point (EEs use j instead of i, because i is the symbol for current ) It isn't entirely philosophical (though that may be a different debate), as it has practical application, e.g. used for calculating the AC voltage in a circuit

Modifié par Stornskar, 14 juillet 2012 - 08:45 .

[Tritium315]

pirate1802 wrote...

I never experienced World war II yet I think my knowledge of it is reliable. When it is as central to their doctrine of galactic domination its likely to be taught to the children in detail. Also, Javik makes it clear that he can distinguish between the reapers and the synthetics fighting the metacon wars. And I never said his judgements were clear. All our judgements are shaped by our surroundings. It did however reflect his and his cycle's prejudice against synthetics. Agreed about the geth-quarian conflict, then agin, I'm not arguing that it is the synthetics who always attack organics. One point to note, however, is, just because Legion is a friendly Geth, doesn't mean all geth would be as friendly. The Legion-copy which replaces Legion if he dies in ME2, is significantly colder and displays certain amount of disdain for organics. So I'm not sure if all Geth forgave the Quarians immediately.

As for who fired the first shot, what I meant was to the catlyst, it doesnt matter who fired the first shot, either way there is a conflict, the solution to which is more complex that "dont be a dick." Rebeling AIs were never meant to be sentient. What if tomorrow my computer gains sentience and demands to be treated fairly? Maybe I'd make an exception for one computer, but what if all computers in my office gain sentience? What if Avina gains sentience and no longer wants to offer assistance? Synthetics aren't designed to be sentient, it is through mistake or accident or evolution that gives them sentience (as far as we see in the games). So the organics too, cannot be faulted if they wish the machines to work as orginally intended to.

You grew up in a peaceful time where you went to school everday and didn't have to worry about much. If they grew up during a Soviet invasion where the Red Army was marching through America (or wherever you live) butchering everyone I'd guess schooling wouldn't be a very important part of your day to day life. Moreover, I highly doubt your history of WW2 would paint the Soviets as the good guys who teamed up with the rest of the Allies against the Axis. 

Also what synthetics were designed for is irrelevent. Are you saying we can't fault white slave owners in Pre-Civil War America for wanting their slaves to just work the fields and killing them whenever they tried to run away or fight back? After all they never intended them to be anything but tools.

[Cypher_CS]

Still the concept of the square root of a negative number... come on, it's a dead giveaway


In all seriousness though, many philosophical questions are debated with the use of math and physics.
All the people who "invented" math and physics, originally, where philosophers.

[Cypher_CS]

Kushan101 wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Kushan101 wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Do I really need to explain that there is absolutely ZERO chance of some single gunmen shooting killing all 7+ Billion people on Earth?

The Prudential argument here says simply... shoot the bastard.

Doesn't that same argument work for this supposed "organics vs. synthetics" problem? I.e. - the optimal solution would have had Sovereign staying as a scout and warning the Reaper fleet whenever an AI was being developed. The Reapers turn up, destroy where the AI is being developed and broadcast a warning to stop pursuing this technology, or they will be back - maybe with a few notes explaining WHY its such a bad idea.

Same solution.

If it cannot come up with such a simple, without resorting to genocide, solution to such a non-problem, then why should we trust ANY of the bollocks that it comes out with?

Really?
And at no point while writing that proposed solution had it occured to you that any sentient race, having now met something like this Sovereign and having it destroy a creation would find a more secure location and work tirelessly to build a new synthetic that would kick Sovereign's ass? And all of the Reapers?

Im simply using the exact same analogy you used to deal with the "lone gunman" - by this argument you're stating that the "lone gunman" would disappear underground and come out with a planet-busting sized nuke.

No, you are not.

I've proposed a sure fire solution to the problem of the gunman.
You've proposed... what? An interim solution to a single facet or a symptom of the problem.

If you can come up with a solution, I'd be glad to talk about that solution and accept it.
That would, actually, make a very interesting discussion - solving that one improbable but devastating problem.

I've suggested the Three Laws of Robotics - but that already proven itself false with the development of the Zeroth law by Daneel.

[Tritium315]

JamieCOTC wrote...

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." - Arthur C. Clarke

Just think of the Catalyst as a distinguished but elderly scientist here. He knows a lot, but he doesn't know everything. He doesn't prepare for the impossible, which is why Shepard is able to reach him in the first place.

That quote is rather applicable to a certain other individual in this thread.

Modifié par Tritium315, 14 juillet 2012 - 09:31 .

[Tigerman123]

Complex numbers are used everywhere; Mass effect 3 uses a set of hypercomplex numbers called quaternions

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Tritium315 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

But that's going where the Catalyst doesn't interfere, that was not a problem it was supposed to solve. It goes against one kind of conflct where others don't negate them.
Geth stopped the conflict but it doesn't mean that all other synthetic life would ever have stopped and don't negate the Catalyst's assertion.

One or two cases don't make evidence for all possibilities.

Yes, one or two cases does not, but that's one or two more cases than the Catalyst has. The Catalyst gives us an absolute and provides no evidence whatsoever to back it up. Not only that but the Catalyst came to his conclusion based on a test case of one, and we don't even know who started that war. For all we know the Catalyst creator was the original cycle's version of Admiral Xen who dreamed of re-enslaving that cycle's version of the Geth. It's also not outside the realm of possibility that that is the most advanced synthetic race the Reapers ever went up against because every cycle was reaped before any synthetics could emerge to disprove the Catalyst's assertion (we know our cycle was meant to be reaped 2000 years ago).

It has no evidence because it hasn't happened, if it had evidence it would have no organic to present it to lol. This absolute is a possibility to the conflict that's been trying to prevent it from ever happening. That's what it was successfully so far doing with its solution (reapers).

The catalyst, reapers, says that the obliteration of organics is inevitable without the cycle. Is it? It's questionable, we can question this absolute. That's the point of Shepard being there with it and not necessarilly ending the conflict with the geth (as it can end without peace). He built the Crucible and got to that stage of the Citadel, he changed things. Its solution, its ways, won't work anymore. The catalyst says synthesis will end this conflict forever, but won't other conflicts rise? Highly probable, but its programming is reserved to take care of that one.

But the possibility of synthetics destroying all organics, I don't think we can rule it out because of EDI and the geth. The Catalyst's solution was a solution to a possible outcome that conflict, and we have seen the conflict happening. If the conflict happened in this cycle and before, who says another can't end horribly wrong?

Project Overlord final boss game over scene would be one.

[Kushan101]

Cypher_CS wrote...

Eliminating what is soon becoming a veritable pyramid of text

No, you are not.

I've proposed a sure fire solution to the problem of the gunman.
You've proposed... what? An interim solution to a single facet or a symptom of the problem.

If you can come up with a solution, I'd be glad to talk about that solution and accept it.
That would, actually, make a very interesting discussion - solving that one improbable but devastating problem.

I've suggested the Three Laws of Robotics - but that already proven itself false with the development of the Zeroth law by Daneel.

I'm not sure the Three laws of Robotics applies here. If we are talking about an AI. A true AI (the likes that I cannot honestly believe would have been thought of in 1942 when they were first written in a short sci-fi novel). Then there are no laws that can govern it, it will be limited by, and only by, its hardware - in the same way that you and I are limited to our physical bodies. It will also be completely independant in its thinking, as you and I are. No two AI's will be the same as they will have unique personalities of themselves.
An artificial intelligence is exactly that, an artificial representation of an organic mind. Totally able to learn and adapt its own behaviour - this strange talk of the catalyst talking about how "the created will always rebel against their creators" is a massive assumption: its as big an assumption as "a human being can kill - all human beings are murderers".

Situations in which I could accept this statement as being 100% true, is if the creators keep the created as slaves (i.e. Quarians and Geth) or if the AI in question had a MASSIVE case of paranoia and decided that all organics were "out to get it". But how the catalyst could make such a blanket statement about something that hasn't been built yet totally astounds me.

I don't want to harp on about this, but AI's are independant. They will not all agree on this issue - I'd more than likely assume they would fight each other before fighting the organics around them.

On a more metapyhsical note: whos to say this is really a problem? If the catalyst insists that this will happen, then who is he/she/it to stop it? if that is the way the "natural cycle" always ends up - then surely it is an event that is meant to happen. In the same way a nature documentary presenter will not help a starving polar bear, why should the catalyst commit genocide against organics to prevent them from building synthetics?

Modifié par Kushan101, 14 juillet 2012 - 11:04 .

[Tritium315]

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

But that's going where the Catalyst doesn't interfere, that was not a problem it was supposed to solve. It goes against one kind of conflct where others don't negate them.
Geth stopped the conflict but it doesn't mean that all other synthetic life would ever have stopped and don't negate the Catalyst's assertion.

One or two cases don't make evidence for all possibilities.

Yes, one or two cases does not, but that's one or two more cases than the Catalyst has. The Catalyst gives us an absolute and provides no evidence whatsoever to back it up. Not only that but the Catalyst came to his conclusion based on a test case of one, and we don't even know who started that war. For all we know the Catalyst creator was the original cycle's version of Admiral Xen who dreamed of re-enslaving that cycle's version of the Geth. It's also not outside the realm of possibility that that is the most advanced synthetic race the Reapers ever went up against because every cycle was reaped before any synthetics could emerge to disprove the Catalyst's assertion (we know our cycle was meant to be reaped 2000 years ago).

It has no evidence because it hasn't happened, if it had evidence it would have no organic to present it to lol. This absolute is a possibility to the conflict that's been trying to prevent it from ever happening. That's what it was successfully so far doing with its solution (reapers).

The catalyst, reapers, says that the obliteration of organics is inevitable without the cycle. Is it? It's questionable, we can question this absolute. That's the point of Shepard being there with it and not necessarilly ending the conflict with the geth (as it can end without peace). He built the Crucible and got to that stage of the Citadel, he changed things. Its solution, its ways, won't work anymore. The catalyst says synthesis will end this conflict forever, but won't other conflicts rise? Highly probable, but its programming is reserved to take care of that one.

But the possibility of synthetics destroying all organics, I don't think we can rule it out because of EDI and the geth. The Catalyst's solution was a solution to a possible outcome that conflict, and we have seen the conflict happening. If the conflict happened in this cycle and before, who says another can't end horribly wrong?

Project Overlord final boss game over scene would be one.

I still don't get how Shepard being there suddenly causes the Catalyst's solution to no longer work. If he's so sure that his way is the only way why is he so willing to give up. On top of that none of the new alternatives really fix the problem (if there is one to begin with, but from the Catalyst's perspective there is). Destroy will obviously lead to new synthetics being made eventually. Control will result in Geth being alive, and new synthetics being made, unless Shep starts reaping. As for synthesis, well no one is stopping the new hybrids from creating pure synthetics. Not to mention the Geth have stated they are pure software; how do you even make a program organic? C++ Synthesis Edition?

Pretty much nothing about the ending makes sense, logically or otherwise. "Changed the variables" is apparently code for "I give up," which begs the question of why he didn't sooner.

[Mazebook]

Kushan101 wrote...

Cypher_CS wrote...

Eliminating what is soon becoming a veritable pyramid of text

No, you are not.

I've proposed a sure fire solution to the problem of the gunman.
You've proposed... what? An interim solution to a single facet or a symptom of the problem.

If you can come up with a solution, I'd be glad to talk about that solution and accept it.
That would, actually, make a very interesting discussion - solving that one improbable but devastating problem.

I've suggested the Three Laws of Robotics - but that already proven itself false with the development of the Zeroth law by Daneel.

I'm not sure the Three laws of Robotics applies here. If we are talking about an AI. A true AI (the likes that I cannot honestly believe would have been thought of in 1942 when they were first written in a short sci-fi novel). Then there are no laws that can govern it, it will be limited by, and only by, its hardware - in the same way that you and I are limited to our physical bodies. It will also be completely independant in its thinking, as you and I are. No two AI's will be the same as they will have unique personalities of themselves.
An artificial intelligence is exactly that, an artificial representation of an organic mind. Totally able to learn and adapt its own behaviour - this strange talk of the catalyst talking about how "the created will always rebel against their creators" is a massive assumption: its as big an assumption as "a human being can kill - all human beings are murderers".

I could accept this statement as being 100% true, is if the creators keep the created as slaves (i.e. Quarians and Geth) or if the AI in question had a MASSIVE case of paranoia and decided that all organics were "out to get it". But how the catalyst could make such a blanket statement about something that hasn't been built yet totally astounds me.

I don't want to harp on about this, but AI's are independant. They will not all agree on this issue - I'd more than likely assume they would fight each other before fighting the organics around them.

just here to say...

that the only reason that he was constructed was to solve a problem...The Catalyst shows no interest in doing something else...so we can assume that he was only programmed to solve the problem and execute his solution.

ergo he is not independend...he depends on his programming...he is bound to it ...ergo he has no free will...

but continue...

...i will see myself out again...

[Tritium315]

maaaze wrote...

just here to say...

that the only reason that he was constructed was to solve a problem...The Catalyst shows no interest in doing something else...so we can assume that he was only programmed to solve the problem and execute his solution.

ergo he is not independend...he depends on his programming...he is bound to it ...ergo he has no free will...

but continue...

...i will see myself out again...

Oh...it's...you...again...

[Kushan101]

maaaze wrote...

just here to say...

that the only reason that he was constructed was to solve a problem...The Catalyst shows no interest in doing something else...so we can assume that he was only programmed to solve the problem and execute his solution.

ergo he is not independend...he depends on his programming...he is bound to it ...ergo he has no free will...

but continue...

...i will see myself out again...

I agree with you. The catalyst is not an AI. It is a VI with delusions of grandure. In which case he is a VI making statements about something it cannot ever comprehend: independent thought.
His "arguments" are, as Taboo-XX put it, moot.

[Mazebook]

Tritium315 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

But that's going where the Catalyst doesn't interfere, that was not a problem it was supposed to solve. It goes against one kind of conflct where others don't negate them.
Geth stopped the conflict but it doesn't mean that all other synthetic life would ever have stopped and don't negate the Catalyst's assertion.

One or two cases don't make evidence for all possibilities.

Yes, one or two cases does not, but that's one or two more cases than the Catalyst has. The Catalyst gives us an absolute and provides no evidence whatsoever to back it up. Not only that but the Catalyst came to his conclusion based on a test case of one, and we don't even know who started that war. For all we know the Catalyst creator was the original cycle's version of Admiral Xen who dreamed of re-enslaving that cycle's version of the Geth. It's also not outside the realm of possibility that that is the most advanced synthetic race the Reapers ever went up against because every cycle was reaped before any synthetics could emerge to disprove the Catalyst's assertion (we know our cycle was meant to be reaped 2000 years ago).

It has no evidence because it hasn't happened, if it had evidence it would have no organic to present it to lol. This absolute is a possibility to the conflict that's been trying to prevent it from ever happening. That's what it was successfully so far doing with its solution (reapers).

The catalyst, reapers, says that the obliteration of organics is inevitable without the cycle. Is it? It's questionable, we can question this absolute. That's the point of Shepard being there with it and not necessarilly ending the conflict with the geth (as it can end without peace). He built the Crucible and got to that stage of the Citadel, he changed things. Its solution, its ways, won't work anymore. The catalyst says synthesis will end this conflict forever, but won't other conflicts rise? Highly probable, but its programming is reserved to take care of that one.

But the possibility of synthetics destroying all organics, I don't think we can rule it out because of EDI and the geth. The Catalyst's solution was a solution to a possible outcome that conflict, and we have seen the conflict happening. If the conflict happened in this cycle and before, who says another can't end horribly wrong?

Project Overlord final boss game over scene would be one.

I still don't get how Shepard being there suddenly causes the Catalyst's solution to no longer work. If he's so sure that his way is the only way why is he so willing to give up. 

One more thing...

his solution won´t work because Organics have surpassed him...they were able to dock the crucible...organics have found a way to evolve passed the cycle through the crucible...which means they are evolving past the Catalyst.

So he no longer has the power to stop organics from evolving...which makes his plan and himself mute...so like every good computer...he sees that he can´t fullfill his programming anymore and thus is allowed to take him self out of the equation.

[Mazebook]

Kushan101 wrote...

maaaze wrote...

just here to say...

that the only reason that he was constructed was to solve a problem...The Catalyst shows no interest in doing something else...so we can assume that he was only programmed to solve the problem and execute his solution.

ergo he is not independend...he depends on his programming...he is bound to it ...ergo he has no free will...

but continue...

...i will see myself out again...

I agree with you. The catalyst is not an AI. It is a VI with delusions of grandure. In which case he is a VI making statements about something it cannot ever comprehend: independent thought.
His "arguments" are, as Taboo-XX put it, moot.

I am not sure but i believe V.I. can not act on their own...He is a A.I. but a shackeld one. He can´t evolve past his programming...but he can think about his problem and execute the solution.

[Mazebook]

Tritium315 wrote...

maaaze wrote...

just here to say...

that the only reason that he was constructed was to solve a problem...The Catalyst shows no interest in doing something else...so we can assume that he was only programmed to solve the problem and execute his solution.

ergo he is not independend...he depends on his programming...he is bound to it ...ergo he has no free will...

but continue...

...i will see myself out again...

Oh...it's...you...again...

Hi ..there...

[Tritium315]

maaaze wrote...


One more thing...

his solution won´t work because Organics have surpassed him...they were able to dock the crucible...organics have found a way to evolve passed the cycle through the crucible...which means they are evolving past the Catalyst.

So he no longer has the power to stop organics from evolving...which makes his plan and himself mute...so like every good computer...he sees that he can´t fullfill his programming anymore and thus is allowed to take him self out of the equation.

How does the crucible symbolize that exactly? Far as I can tell if Harbinger had slightly better aim (or a ****ing brain and shot the Normandy) then the cycle would have continued.

You are making some impressive blanket statements for someone who knows no more than we do... and... talks... like... this.

[Kushan101]

maaaze wrote...

I am not sure but i believe V.I. can not act on their own...He is a A.I. but a shackeld one. He can´t evolve past his programming...but he can think about his problem and execute the solution.

I believe a VI is something that is created with a singular purpose - from what we have seen - I.e. tour guide or personal secretary. That this one was created with the singular purpose of "stopping conflict between synthetics and organics", while being quite a big task, is still a singular one. It fits everything we've seen in the ME universe as being a VI, not an AI. Again, just because it has large resources at its disposal does not make it any more intelligent or free thinking.

[Mazebook]

Tritium315 wrote...

maaaze wrote...


One more thing...

his solution won´t work because Organics have surpassed him...they were able to dock the crucible...organics have found a way to evolve passed the cycle through the crucible...which means they are evolving past the Catalyst.

So he no longer has the power to stop organics from evolving...which makes his plan and himself mute...so like every good computer...he sees that he can´t fullfill his programming anymore and thus is allowed to take him self out of the equation.

How does the crucible symbolize that exactly? Far as I can tell if Harbinger had slightly better aim (or a ****ing brain and shot the Normandy) then the cycle would have continued.

You are making some impressive blanket statements for someone who knows no more than we do... and... talks... like... this.

If you read the purly the dialoge of the Catalyst...you can pretty much read between the lines and figure out what is implied.

They were able to dock the crucible...the curcible is the work of many Cycles...it has the power to change the variables...it can make things happen the Catalyst did not intend or could not make them happen... ergo organics have surpassed him.

[Mazebook]

Kushan101 wrote...

maaaze wrote...

I am not sure but i believe V.I. can not act on their own...He is a A.I. but a shackeld one. He can´t evolve past his programming...but he can think about his problem and execute the solution.

I believe a VI is something that is created with a singular purpose - from what we have seen - I.e. tour guide or personal secretary. That this one was created with the singular purpose of "stopping conflict between synthetics and organics", while being quite a big task, is still a singular one. It fits everything we've seen in the ME universe as being a VI, not an AI. Again, just because it has large resources at its disposal does not make it any more intelligent or free thinking.

the main point about V.I. ´s is that they are not self aware...source : Mass Effect Wiki


The Catalyst is pretty much self aware...but can only do one specific thing...so he is something between an A.i. and a V.I. ... I think shackeld A.I. fits the description best.

[Tritium315]

maaaze wrote...

If you read the purly the dialoge of the Catalyst...you can pretty much read between the lines and figure out what is implied.

They were able to dock the crucible...the curcible is the work of many Cycles...it has the power to change the variables...it can make things happen the Catalyst did not intend or could not make them happen... ergo organics have surpassed him.

You say that like you actually know what change the variables actually means. You're not reading between the lines; you're stringing his sentences together and then coming up with your own wild assumptions while trying to sound smart... ergo you're pulling **** out of your ass.

Now I know what the people who wrote that god awful ending probably sound like.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

@Tritium 315

What maaze said. The reapers, i.e. his solution, were surpassed, won't work anymore.

[Tritium315]

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

@Tritium 315

What maaze said. The reapers, i.e. his solution, were surpassed, won't work anymore.

How, exactly, were they surpassed though; because the organics built a giant battery? It's not like any of the new "solutions" are better, from the Catalyst's perspective. If anything they're worse. Not to mention how does docking a giant ball with a beam of light suddenly invalidate the Catalyst's plan. He didn't have to raise the elevator; he could have just let Shep bleed out.

You can't just say "well you see, it changed the variables so that's why the old plan wont work anymore." That doesn't actually mean anything. What's even more confusing is the destroy tube and control handles were already present on the Citadel. Did the Reapers design it that way and then decide "well when the organics can build a battery to power this ****, despite not knowing it exists, that will be the arbitrary point in time when the variables will have changed and our solution wont work anymore."  Except it's still perfectly viable, they just need to stop being lazy with the time capsules.

[Dharvy]

 I have a couple questions for all those who feel the catalyst is illogical or don't have any evidence to back up its claim.

1)Why do you feel that the "synthetic wiping out organic life" reasoning of the catalyst is referring to a low probability multi-lottery winning event that it never was first-hand on the brink of? Why do you feel the catalyst analysis is not right and he has no evidence of his statements?

2)Couldn't it be altogether possible that the 2 cycle period that you/shepard know of is the all encompassing hope? You know when you win the lottery against the millions of tickets bought? Couldn't the present cycle be the anomaly?

I'm saying this because its possible that a race like the Asari, the protheans for example, in any of the other cycles could have created synthetics long before the Quarians did in our present cycle and the Reapers could have, nearly countless times saved the galaxy from extinction in there 20k cycle experience. Why are you all assuming the Catalyst reasoning never ever happened and have a chance so slim as its best to do nothing and just live life? Considering it takes nearly 50k years to even be a problem in any organic society, organics minuscule life spans nearly make it irrelevant until its literally upon us. The catalyst/reapers/synthetics, near immortals, would view time much different.

[Dharvy]

I feel the OP is right and makes a lot of sense. We only have 2 cycles of experience, going up against the logic of someone with 20k cycles of experience. Our findings can't compare with its finding. For all we know, we are like some primitive tribe laughing at our first sight of a gun and thinking its harmless seconds before an invading force use it to blow our heads off. Now we have definitive proof that these guns can kill, too bad the information is not worthless.

[Mazebook]

Tritium315 wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

@Tritium 315

What maaze said. The reapers, i.e. his solution, were surpassed, won't work anymore.

How, exactly, were they surpassed though; because the organics built a giant battery? It's not like any of the new "solutions" are better, from the Catalyst's perspective. If anything they're worse. Not to mention how does docking a giant ball with a beam of light suddenly invalidate the Catalyst's plan. He didn't have to raise the elevator; he could have just let Shep bleed out.

organics have now the means to destroy the reapers...if not this cycle another will do... now...the Catalyst now knows this for sure...he has enough evidence...that is what he means when he talks about changing the variables.

[btw. don´t bother to insult me furthermore...I will just ignore it... focus your energy on the actual arguement.
that would be my advice]

Modifié par maaaze, 15 juillet 2012 - 01:21 .