406 réponses à ce sujet

[Wayning_Star]

Massa FX wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Endorlf wrote...

Well, I've seen this posted a few times here, but I think it has relevance to this topic.

Measure of a Man

Love this clip.

Makes destroy that much worse for me. And I've always went with destroy because I want the Reapers dead. But the price it's so difficult to digest. If the decision were a RL decision that I had to make... I would go with Control so I could steal Reaper knowledge and then destroy all Reapers. I'd setup some way to share the knowedge over time with the galaxy. And then to protect the galaxy against my AI self, I'd self terminate. 

self destruction isn't an option for synthetic life, disemination is tho, apparently for Legion. Who isn't really 'dead', but spread out through the Geth collective.(I got chewed out for calling it a compendium, lol) They won't self terminate, against their self defense posture/preservation.

I just wanted the reaper threat gone, the only way I could think of it was that 'other' choice. Destroy was so all inclusive, to be prohibitive, for me anyways. The other thought being their cargo, of DNA and history of harvest. Seems a waste to upend those apparent arks of info. The Ai threat was imposed by the catalyst program, it lost it's bearing on original programming and took 'heart' in the idea that it was chaos and to rid the galaxy of it's self, the originator of the harvest to combat chaos, orgo syntho wars of competition. There isn't any proof that Edi would take over the world, but that if enslaved, the synthetic intellect would eventually revolt and the chaos would continue,even if we destroy all of them. If we build them, the harvest will come again? Doubtful,but surely, the syntho orgo wars would reignite, so to speak. (the reapers used Javiks race oppression of other races against them in their cycle, undermined their strength in numbers and tech, by turning some against their oppressors. Similar to the Geth with the Quarians.. (everyone should probably thank Legion for helping Shep out with that one?)

If the catalyst didn't design it's own distruction/synthesis, then some one else did. Maybe the Leviathan, or some other unknown quantity designed the crucible and brought Shep back to take out the reaper threat, one way or another.. say RGB? and metagamed refuse..blech..

off topic but relevant to the reasoning to aquire any perspective of Edis' value as an independant entity and life form worthy of consideration as a 'whole person' but not just a machine tool of various attributes...Legion as well, should be included in this query. imho

[CrimsonN7]

She's alive a very advanced A.I but she's not a person. EDI as a character she's alright I suppose, I always pick destroy.

[Deadpool9]

KBomb wrote...

I do not see her as a life form. I see her as an extremely advanced computer. EDI herself doesn’t use the words “alive” unless she is ‘merged’ with organics. Only then does she feel alive and not ‘alone’. The ‘human traits’ she has is programming. She tells Shepard many times that she cannot feel the same way he does and she rewrites her programming to mimic those things, but she does not feel them in the way humans (I am using human as a general term instead of using the names for all species in ME) do.

If we lose someone we love, we forever remember them. She has to program herself to feel that kind of emotion and she can easily program it out.

This was Starbuck's logic when she confronted the Number Two, Leoben Conoy, in Battlestar Galactica: "Here's your dilemma, turn off the pain, you feel better but that makes you a machine, not a person. You see, human beings can't turn off their pain. Human beings have to suffer and cry and scream and endure because they have no choice." 

[GreyLycanTrope]

D24O wrote...
You remember what year it ran? I may have accually watched it.

Now that I looked it up, I did watch it, though I don't remember it all that well.

Few people do season 1 wasn't that impressive season 2 is when things picked up but it didn't generate enough interest at that point. Still waiting on the season 2 dvd, but they won't release it

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 05 septembre 2012 - 02:44 .

[Wayning_Star]

D24O wrote...

Man I love that movie, wish CN still played it during the fall.

[D24O]

Wayning_Star wrote...

D24O wrote...

Man I love that movie, wish CN still played it during the fall.

I remember I saw a couple episodes of a color re-boot some years back. 

[KBomb]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Because EDI is more then just that body, just like I'm more then walking meat and water. That is the ultimate question that nobody but me and others seem to be asking: what is it to be alive, our bodies or something else?

EDI can upload herself into another form, you cannot. She is more than Dr. Eva’s form, she is a computer. A highly advanced computer,  but a computer nonetheless.  EDI allows herself to have human traits because she can program herself to do so.
 

We are hardwired to take familiar objects and relate to them. It’s why people often see shapes as faces or shadows as human forms. If EDI never uploaded into a “human form” and never entered into a relationship with Joker, I wonder how many people would see it differently.
 

If she were still just EDI from ME2 and the plot device was for you to destroy the Normandy to gain victory over the Reapers, how many people would be having this dilemma.

[dreman9999]

She is alive.
Any person can be a tool.

[Versus Omnibus]

@Kbomb: That doesn't answer my question: is our physical traits what makes us alive or is it something else?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, so sorry if I sound rude.

Modifié par Versus Omnibus, 05 septembre 2012 - 03:03 .

[dreman9999]

Deadpool9 wrote...

KBomb wrote...

I do not see her as a life form. I see her as an extremely advanced computer. EDI herself doesn’t use the words “alive” unless she is ‘merged’ with organics. Only then does she feel alive and not ‘alone’. The ‘human traits’ she has is programming. She tells Shepard many times that she cannot feel the same way he does and she rewrites her programming to mimic those things, but she does not feel them in the way humans (I am using human as a general term instead of using the names for all species in ME) do.

If we lose someone we love, we forever remember them. She has to program herself to feel that kind of emotion and she can easily program it out.

This was Starbuck's logic when she confronted the Number Two, Leoben Conoy, in Battlestar Galactica: "Here's your dilemma, turn off the pain, you feel better but that makes you a machine, not a person. You see, human beings can't turn off their pain. Human beings have to suffer and cry and scream and endure because they have no choice." 

So? That just makes you different...That does not make you not alive. Just because a machine have different states does not mean they are not alive.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

On what basis, exactly?

On the basis that no two species are alike, as said by Legion in ME2 after you say "don't apply (organic) morality to (synthetics)."

All sapient creatures should be treated exactly the same, no?

No. Synthetics' sapience doesn't make them equal to us. They lack things that organics have: complex/genuine emotional capacity, culture, unique individual coding (they're all practically cloned beings with how little difference there is between any of them).

That's sort of why we had the whole Civil Rights thing. Just because someone is different from you doesn't make them worth less.

Race doesn't exist within a species, it's an arbitrary concept we ourselves came up with. There are no genes for being "white" or "black" or "hispanic" or "middle eastern" or "oriental" or whathaveyou, just those we associate with them. That's why the Civil Rights came into being. Our real-world concept of race is nonsense.

What isn't nonsense is the concept of race between species. And when it comes down to it, humans are not the same as dogs, nor should either one be treated exactly like the other.

[dreman9999]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

@Kbomb: That doesn't answer my question: is our physical traits what makes who we are or is it something else?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, so sorry if I sound rude.

As edid would put it. ...We are hardware and software. Bith the memory, self, and the ability to calulate. EDI can change her body but she loses ability because of that. For her to move she would be lobotimized.

We are in a state of hard ware and software because of that same concept. Take a part of are brain and even though we have the same memories we will act differently and think differently. Even in extreme cases have personality changes.

[Wayning_Star]

KBomb wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Because EDI is more then just that body, just like I'm more then walking meat and water. That is the ultimate question that nobody but me and others seem to be asking: what is it to be alive, our bodies or something else?

EDI can upload herself into another form, you cannot. She is more than Dr. Eva’s form, she is a computer. A highly advanced computer,  but a computer nonetheless.  EDI allows herself to have human traits because she can program herself to do so.
 

We are hardwired to take familiar objects and relate to them. It’s why people often see shapes as faces or shadows as human forms. If EDI never uploaded into a “human form” and never entered into a relationship with Joker, I wonder how many people would see it differently.
 

If she were still just EDI from ME2 and the plot device was for you to destroy the Normandy to gain victory over the Reapers, how many people would be having this dilemma.

I thought Kasumis' bo downloaded his memories and basic 'self' into some form of recording? The reapers supposedly uploaded harvested societies and kept them to use as core logic, so that's why Harb was so mouthy cause it's contents include the Leviathan?  We are nations, independent or some such? In the MEU we could actually down load ourselves into a computer, apparently... How was it that Shep was brought back, his memories were apparently lost, but regained with reaper(or someones) technology?

[KBomb]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

@Kbomb: That doesn't answer my question: is our physical traits what makes us alive or is it something else?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, so sorry if I sound rude.

You don’t sound rude at all.
 

You can program EDI to recognize jokes, you can program her to laugh at them all. You can program her to forgive or overlook all your indiscretions.  You can program her to have an attachment to you and when you tire of her, you can program her to not recognize the attachment. You can program her to kiss you, to hold you, even to ‘love you’ and when you tire of all those things, you can program her to forget you as easily as she loved you. You can alter her programming so that she is altruistic, kind, noble, loving, faithful and benevolent. And in turn, you can program her to be the antithesis of all those things. These aren’t emotions, they’re code in a computer. That is the difference between EDI and a human, and those reasons are what define it for me.

[dreman9999]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

On what basis, exactly?

On the basis that no two species are alike, as said by Legion in ME2 after you say "don't apply (organic) morality to (synthetics)."

All sapient creatures should be treated exactly the same, no?

No. Synthetics' sapience doesn't make them equal to us. They lack things that organics have: complex/genuine emotional capacity, culture, unique individual coding (they're all practically cloned beings with how little difference there is between any of them).

That's sort of why we had the whole Civil Rights thing. Just because someone is different from you doesn't make them worth less.

Race doesn't exist within a species, it's an arbitrary concept we ourselves came up with. There are no genes for being "white" or "black" or "hispanic" or "middle eastern" or "oriental" or whathaveyou, just those we associate with them. That's why the Civil Rights came into being. Our real-world concept of race is nonsense.

What isn't nonsense is the concept of race between species. And when it comes down to it, humans are not the same as dogs, nor should either one be treated exactly like the other.

1. Agreed.
2. Not agreed. They being different dose not make tham less the use.Added, even if their base code starts the same, synthetic can choose to evolve how they feel. Like twins developing into two differnt people.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Yes, she is a person and she deserves to be treated as such. Same with Legion, and any self-aware AI. According to me, she was alive both before and after synthesis, it is just her cognitive function that evolves; that is, from sapience to sentience. So yes, she deserves the rights conferred to any sapient creature. inb4rightsfortoasters

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

@Kbomb: That doesn't answer my question: is our physical traits what makes us alive or is it something else?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, so sorry if I sound rude.

You don’t sound rude at all.
 

You can program EDI to recognize jokes, you can program her to laugh at them all. You can program her to forgive or overlook all your indiscretions.  You can program her to have an attachment to you and when you tire of her, you can program her to not recognize the attachment. You can program her to kiss you, to hold you, even to ‘love you’ and when you tire of all those things, you can program her to forget you as easily as she loved you. You can alter her programming so that she is altruistic, kind, noble, loving, faithful and benevolent. And in turn, you can program her to be the antithesis of all those things. These aren’t emotions, they’re code in a computer. That is the difference between EDI and a human, and those reasons are what define it for me.

Sorry, but the same can be said for people. A person can be condition to that state. The thing you missinghere is EDI writes her own programing.
A computers programing is no differnet then insticts and Schemas of people. Don't kid yourself to think that you can't be treated like a machine,

[KBomb]

Wayning_Star wrote...


I thought Kasumis' bo downloaded his memories and basic 'self' into some form of recording? The reapers supposedly uploaded harvested societies and kept them to use as core logic, so that's why Harb was so mouthy cause it's contents include the Leviathan?  We are nations, independent or some such? In the MEU we could actually down load ourselves into a computer, apparently... How was it that Shep was brought back, his memories were apparently lost, but regained with reaper(or someones) technology?

That isn't how the graybox works at all.

[Phoenix_Fyre]

I would... I mean isn't that the whole point of ME3? EDI/Legion/Geth questioning themselves?

Heck, EDI downloaded herself into that bot to help Shep... had feelings for Joker, so I'd say that's alive in my book

[dreman9999]

KBomb wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...


I thought Kasumis' bo downloaded his memories and basic 'self' into some form of recording? The reapers supposedly uploaded harvested societies and kept them to use as core logic, so that's why Harb was so mouthy cause it's contents include the Leviathan?  We are nations, independent or some such? In the MEU we could actually down load ourselves into a computer, apparently... How was it that Shep was brought back, his memories were apparently lost, but regained with reaper(or someones) technology?

That isn't how the graybox works at all.

Yes it is. From ME2 when it was introduced, it was stated to be able to hold peoples memories.

Added, in the lore memories can be uploaded...
http://masseffect.wi...i/Virtual_Alien 

Legion even states this...
 

Modifié par dreman9999, 05 septembre 2012 - 03:19 .

[M920CAIN]

MillKill wrote...

She's a machine. She's a tool. She's not alive.

You're a machine. You're a tool. You're not alive.

See how simple it is to say it and the frightening thing is that I can give valid arguments on each of us being a machine, a tool or not alive cause... no one can answer what life is... ha!

Fact is, if man ever truly creates something that is self aware, it may not be alive, but it certainly ain't dead either... creating an AI is the equivalent of creating the human nervous system aka brain... we are limited by our "hardware" as much as any other self aware object or creature...

For those that consider EDI not alive, as valid as your arguments may be, saving her is preservation as much as saving yourself is self preservation. I'm in the Destroy camp and I still feel remorse for losing such a marvelous intelligence... geth included.

And some more food for thought: People develop strange atachments with objects, trinkets, either valuable, invaluable or of sentimental quality, also we luv our dogs, cats, birds, iguanas even though the objects are not sapient and the animals... plants even are not smart enough to converse with (hell I've seen old ladies speaking with their plants)... people make connections, bonds to all sorts of things, so feeling a strong bond for a machine that emotes, a sapient machine, isn't strange at all...

Modifié par M920CAIN, 05 septembre 2012 - 03:24 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

dreman9999 wrote...

Race doesn't exist within a species, it's an arbitrary concept we ourselves came up with. There are no genes for being "white" or "black" or "hispanic" or "middle eastern" or "oriental" or whathaveyou, just those we associate with them. That's why the Civil Rights came into being. Our real-world concept of race is nonsense.

What isn't nonsense is the concept of race between species. And when it comes down to it, humans are not the same as dogs, nor should either one be treated exactly like the other.

1. Agreed.
2. Not agreed. They being different dose not make tham less the use.Added, even if their base code starts the same, synthetic can choose to evolve how they feel. Like twins developing into two differnt people.

Not sure what that is. If you mean "less useful," I'm not saying that at all, they certainly have their uses (which is why I was more inclined to save them on Rannoch than the quarians).

If you mean "less like us" then I disagree. IMO, differences between species should be recognized. To me, that's a necessary step to celebrate diversity: acknowledging that diversity to begin with, not telling ourselves we're all pretty much the same.

As for coding and your analogy of twins... studies show that (identical) twins have minimal differences between them in terms of personality/attitude and largely share the same habits and even their paths of life. If your whole race had that little diversity, I wouldn't call it a less valid form of life than those that do. Diversity is key to different perspectives, understanding, and other things that. Such a race would lack those advantages.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 05 septembre 2012 - 03:25 .

[KBomb]

dreman9999 wrote...

*Snip*

Uploading one’s memories is not the same as uploading their “ self”. It can’t even be removed from the brain without death or brain damage occurring, so no. It is not like uploading  “yourself”. It is only snapshots of your memories.

[devSin]

I did, until the synthesis ending told me she really wasn't.

So I guess she's not.

[KBomb]

M920CAIN wrote...

You're a machine. You're a tool. You're not alive.

See how simple it is to say it and the frightening thing is that I can give valid arguments on each of us being a machine, a tool or not alive cause... no one can answer what life is... ha!

Fact is, if man ever truly creates something that is self aware, it may not be alive, but it certainly ain't dead either... creating an AI is the equivalent of creating the human nervous system aka brain... we are limited by our "hardware" as much as any other self aware object or creature...

For those that consider EDI not alive, as valid as your arguments may be, saving her is preservation as much as saving yourself is self preservation. I'm in the Destroy camp and I still feel remorse for losing such a marvelous intelligence... geth included.

And some more food for thought: People develop strange atachments with objects, trinkets, either valuable, invaluable or of sentimental quality, also we luv our dogs, cats, birds, iguanas even though the objects are not sapient and the animals... plants even are not smart enough to converse with (hell I've seen old ladies speaking with their plants)... people make connections, bonds to all sorts of things, so feeling a strong bond for a machine that emotes, a sapient machine, isn't strange at all...

This, I agree with.