265 réponses à ce sujet

[arial]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

arial wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

The reaper on Rannoch pointed to the geth/quarian conflict as proof that synthetics and organics will always be at war. Two minutes later they were at peace with each other. The reapers are clearly wrong and by definition, so is the catalyst since it's the one directing the reapers.

you realize how many times thr British Empire was at war with the French? sure they would make peace, and a few dozen years later they are at war again

That's not the point I was trying to make. But if you want to go there, I could just say that the British and French are at peace today. See? It doesn't matter in this discussion.

and you do not get the point I am making...

the Geth and Quarian peace will be short lasting, they will  always have those tentions.

Only reason Peace between Britian and France is lasting now is because so many generations have passed the average person can not remember what half the conflicts started from anyway (with the exception of Historians and some Politicians).

but this would never happen because the Geth do not reproduce. geth are basically an OS activated in various hardware. as such they will always remember the Morning War, and what happened in the battle for Ranoch.

as such, after a certain amount of time thjose memories of conflict and built up anger will arouse again, and the Geth will begin another morning war.

[Reorte]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Reorte wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And now the Reapers are gone there is nothing to stop scientific progress advancing in the field of AI.  Do you think laws will stop ideas?  How long could you keep a galaxy full of scientists from working out how to split the atom?  A decade?  A century?

Synthetics will arise again.  You are not seeing the big picture.

So what if they do reappear? There's a non-zero risk of anything at all going bad, by your logic no-one should ever do anything whatsoever. You offer no evidence that they will ever pose a credible threat, simply that it's a non-zero probability, no matter how small. The same is true for just about everything else in the universe though so why bother putting into place a very destructive scheme to stop this possibility and not the one that the pyjaks will eventually evolve into a destructive force that'll decide to exterminate absolutely everything that isn't them so that they can live their perfect existence as the only form of life (having developed the technology to synthesise all food they need).

and thus the basis for the threat evolution poses for all concerned. Necessity breeds invention..that breeds, apparently, pesky catalystic reaperships.

You know, the Auditors in the Discworld were right after all...

[Wayning_Star]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

. Well once the geth are gone only EDI is left, and I doubt she can exterminate entire races 

and then a feqw years down the line a new synthetic race will be developed, possibly as chesp labour.

. Speculation, no proof

we're all considering 'possibilities, so the idea of those do not need exact proof so much as the theory beholden to the truth of it. Denial of it isn't proof either, in other words.

He's the one making the claim. The burden of proof is on him to provide.

actually the burden of proof lies with everyone considering the sample problem.

[CaptainZaysh]

Reorte wrote...

If you believe what you say you shouldn't be discussing this here but be out in the world trying to do something to prevent it, because if you're right then we're already on the way there. And have been since things like fire and the wheel were invented.

To clarify, I don't believe what the Catalyst believes; I destroyed the f**king thing.

I am explaining its position here because – unlike a great many on the BSN – I understood it.

[arial]

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

. Well once the geth are gone only EDI is left, and I doubt she can exterminate entire races 

and then a feqw years down the line a new synthetic race will be developed, possibly as chesp labour.

. Speculation, no proof

history, History is proof.

Laws will not impede new ideas and technologies (look at software piracy for example), as such races will develope new synthetic AIs.

as someone who has Taken a History course in University I can tell you that yes, History does repeat itself (to an extent)

[Reorte]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

If you believe what you say you shouldn't be discussing this here but be out in the world trying to do something to prevent it, because if you're right then we're already on the way there. And have been since things like fire and the wheel were invented.

To clarify, I don't believe what the Catalyst believes; I destroyed the f**king thing.

I am explaining its position here because – unlike a great many on the BSN – I understood it.

A great many on BSN understand it as well which is why they are saying it's flawed. The problem is that I suspect that the writers didn't intend that to be the case.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

That's all supposition. There is no evidence to support the idea that synthetics and organics cannot coexist. All evidence to the contrary, infact.

The Night Mammoth wrote...

There's no evidence in that thread, just one hypothesis after another, that tries to obscure the fact that there isn't any by trying to prove the Catalyst right using its own words in the most round-about way possible, which is a fallacy in and of itself, even going as far as to use things not even present in the Mass Effect universe, and completely ignoring the important points like why the conclusion results in the solution, or why the solution is the Reapers.

You both misunderstand.  The Catalyst's aim is to prevent a certain eventuality occurring.  The thread I linked to explains what the eventuality is and why it could reasonably be expected to occur (especially in a universe containing self aware synthetic AIs building a ruthlessly defended superbrain).

Evidence for the theory would be based on computer models.  In a way it's similar to the global warming hypothesis; scientists make predictions that allowing Outcome A to occur will be disastrous.  We take action before Outcome A because to act after the disaster will be too late.

Okay, then please provide evidence. You said there was evidence in that thread and there simply isn't any. The Catalyst fails to make a compelling case for it's arguement in the game. It fails to point to even one example of synthetics wiping out all organic life. It ignores the fact that the quarians and geth made peace and the writers refused to let Shepard bring up this crucial fact when it was very important. They did that because they knew it would disqualify the Catalyst's entire arguement.

I hope you're indoctrinated and not as blind as a bat to logic and reason.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:40 .

[The Night Mammoth]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

You both misunderstand.  The Catalyst's aim is to prevent a certain eventuality occurring.  The thread I linked to explains what the eventuality is and why it could reasonably be expected to occur (especially in a universe containing self aware synthetic AIs building a ruthlessly defended superbrain).

I'm not misunderstanding anything. I know exactly what the Catalyst says its motivation is, the problems I have are how it came to that conclusion, how it came finding a solution, and why that solution involved the Reapers.

None of these things are explained in Jshepppp's thread, just lots of hypothese which dodge the issue of having no foundation evidence to build anything on, whilst trying to subvert the fact that it's all poorly explained by using...

Evidence for the theory would be based on computer models.  In a way it's similar to the global warming hypothesis; scientists make predictions that allowing Outcome A to occur will be disastrous.  We take action before Outcome A because to act after the disaster will be too late.

... computer models, which aren't evidence for anything in and of themselves. Using the above example; global warming is a proven idea because there's evidence to go on. Predictions are made using the events of the past and present. 

There's nothing to base a 'computer model' on in this instance because there's no evidence that's not fabricated. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:42 .

[Steelcan]

arial wrote...
history, History is proof.

Laws will not impede new ideas and technologies (look at software piracy for example), as such races will develope new synthetic AIs.

as someone who has Taken a History course in University I can tell you that yes, History does repeat itself (to an extent)

. But that is just pure speculation.  It cannot be proved one way or another.  If you say that I say Dragons will come from the planet Drx-354. They will make sure organics always triumph after the year 3872.

[evilgummybear]

If you think about the reapers, they are almost like Terminators. Humans built skynet, skynet sees human population as a problem and decide to wipe them out to extinction. Same theory as the reapers.

[CaptainZaysh]

Reorte wrote...

So what if they do reappear? There's a non-zero risk of anything at all going bad, by your logic no-one should ever do anything whatsoever.

Synthetic civilisation represents a unique threat to organic civilisation because, if left unchecked, it can evolve much faster than we can.

Once it is much more intelligent than us it will be able to defeat us.

Once it has defeated us it could quite easily ensure that organic civilisation never arose again.

Now, do I think that the possibility of this eventual outcome is worth killing trillions of people every 50,000 years for?  Condemning the Milky Way to an endless cycle of apocalypse, killing our development every time we get to flying cars and blue alien space babes?  Of course not.  I'm not the antagonist.  But I can understand why the antagonist reached this conclusion, and since half the BSN can't, I sometimes try and explain it for them.  (Afterwards, I nearly always wonder why I bothered, but occasionally I get a nice IM from somebody saying "ohhh!  NOW i get it!")

[Wayning_Star]

Reorte wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Reorte wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And now the Reapers are gone there is nothing to stop scientific progress advancing in the field of AI.  Do you think laws will stop ideas?  How long could you keep a galaxy full of scientists from working out how to split the atom?  A decade?  A century?

Synthetics will arise again.  You are not seeing the big picture.

So what if they do reappear? There's a non-zero risk of anything at all going bad, by your logic no-one should ever do anything whatsoever. You offer no evidence that they will ever pose a credible threat, simply that it's a non-zero probability, no matter how small. The same is true for just about everything else in the universe though so why bother putting into place a very destructive scheme to stop this possibility and not the one that the pyjaks will eventually evolve into a destructive force that'll decide to exterminate absolutely everything that isn't them so that they can live their perfect existence as the only form of life (having developed the technology to synthesise all food they need).

and thus the basis for the threat evolution poses for all concerned. Necessity breeds invention..that breeds, apparently, pesky catalystic reaperships.

You know, the Auditors in the Discworld were right after all...

I admit, I had to look that one up.. Discworld is totally awsome..lol Not sure about auditors tho..

I was attempting to put it in order of events,as the procession of evidence. The ME story fills in the blanks, hopefully.

[arial]

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...
history, History is proof.

Laws will not impede new ideas and technologies (look at software piracy for example), as such races will develope new synthetic AIs.

as someone who has Taken a History course in University I can tell you that yes, History does repeat itself (to an extent)

. But that is just pure speculation.  It cannot be proved one way or another.  If you say that I say Dragons will come from the planet Drx-354. They will make sure organics always triumph after the year 3872.

what you are saying is pure speculation as well, you are speculating that the Geth and Quarian peace would last. you are Speculating that by defeating Geth we can Defeat any other Synthetic race we develope.


so your posts are really "calling the kettle black" aren't they?

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So what if they do reappear? There's a non-zero risk of anything at all going bad, by your logic no-one should ever do anything whatsoever.

Synthetic civilisation represents a unique threat to organic civilisation because, if left unchecked, it can evolve much faster than we can.

Once it is much more intelligent than us it will be able to defeat us.

Once it has defeated us it could quite easily ensure that organic civilisation never arose again.

Now, do I think that the possibility of this eventual outcome is worth killing trillions of people every 50,000 years for?  Condemning the Milky Way to an endless cycle of apocalypse, killing our development every time we get to flying cars and blue alien space babes?  Of course not.  I'm not the antagonist.  But I can understand why the antagonist reached this conclusion, and since half the BSN can't, I sometimes try and explain it for them.  (Afterwards, I nearly always wonder why I bothered, but occasionally I get a nice IM from somebody saying "ohhh!  NOW i get it!")

The fact that half of BSN disagrees with you should tell you something.

[Wayning_Star]

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...
history, History is proof.

Laws will not impede new ideas and technologies (look at software piracy for example), as such races will develope new synthetic AIs.

as someone who has Taken a History course in University I can tell you that yes, History does repeat itself (to an extent)

. But that is just pure speculation.  It cannot be proved one way or another.  If you say that I say Dragons will come from the planet Drx-354. They will make sure organics always triumph after the year 3872.

they got Dragons on Drx-354?!?.. Reapers, catalyst AND dragons..Now what can Shep do with those..

[Meltemph]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

If you believe what you say you shouldn't be discussing this here but be out in the world trying to do something to prevent it, because if you're right then we're already on the way there. And have been since things like fire and the wheel were invented.

To clarify, I don't believe what the Catalyst believes; I destroyed the f**king thing.

I am explaining its position here because – unlike a great many on the BSN – I understood it.

Oh, I understood its arguement, it just wasnt a good one(specially when you realize who was in cotnrol when the thing was made, and how the Leviathan were, as a species).  

[CaptainZaysh]

Reorte wrote...

A great many on BSN understand it as well which is why they are saying it's flawed. The problem is that I suspect that the writers didn't intend that to be the case.

No, really – lots of people here don't understand it.  Anybody who thinks "yo dawg, synthetics kill you to stop you being killed by synthetics" did not understand what was going on.

And there are loads of people who still believe that.  It's sad really, because I am absolutely certain that BioWare will have to make sure from now on that all their stories are dumbed down so everybody gets them.

[Yate]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

A great many on BSN understand it as well which is why they are saying it's flawed. The problem is that I suspect that the writers didn't intend that to be the case.

No, really – lots of people here don't understand it.  Anybody who thinks "yo dawg, synthetics kill you to stop you being killed by synthetics" did not understand what was going on.

And there are loads of people who still believe that.  It's sad really, because I am absolutely certain that BioWare will have to make sure from now on that all their stories are dumbed down so everybody gets them.

give this man a medal please

[CaptainZaysh]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The fact that half of BSN disagrees with you should tell you something.

I've got to say that I will never care what the BSN thinks about anything.  It is full of people who could not understand the plot of Mass Effect 3.  This is not exactly where humanity's best and brightest hang out.

[Wayning_Star]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So what if they do reappear? There's a non-zero risk of anything at all going bad, by your logic no-one should ever do anything whatsoever.

Synthetic civilisation represents a unique threat to organic civilisation because, if left unchecked, it can evolve much faster than we can.

Once it is much more intelligent than us it will be able to defeat us.

Once it has defeated us it could quite easily ensure that organic civilisation never arose again.

Now, do I think that the possibility of this eventual outcome is worth killing trillions of people every 50,000 years for?  Condemning the Milky Way to an endless cycle of apocalypse, killing our development every time we get to flying cars and blue alien space babes?  Of course not.  I'm not the antagonist.  But I can understand why the antagonist reached this conclusion, and since half the BSN can't, I sometimes try and explain it for them.  (Afterwards, I nearly always wonder why I bothered, but occasionally I get a nice IM from somebody saying "ohhh!  NOW i get it!")

The fact that half of BSN disagrees with you should tell you something.

well, we must consider that around 35% of those disagree just to be entertained..maybe more..lol

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Reorte wrote...

A great many on BSN understand it as well which is why they are saying it's flawed. The problem is that I suspect that the writers didn't intend that to be the case.

No, really – lots of people here don't understand it.  Anybody who thinks "yo dawg, synthetics kill you to stop you being killed by synthetics" did not understand what was going on.

And there are loads of people who still believe that.  It's sad really, because I am absolutely certain that BioWare will have to make sure from now on that all their stories are dumbed down so everybody gets them.

"It's so deep and you're too shallow to understand." <------- not a good arguement, but carry on.

[arial]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The fact that half of BSN disagrees with you should tell you something.

I've got to say that I will never care what the BSN thinks about anything.  It is full of people who could not understand the plot of Mass Effect 3.  This is not exactly where humanity's best and brightest hang out.

so true

[Wayning_Star]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The fact that half of BSN disagrees with you should tell you something.

I've got to say that I will never care what the BSN thinks about anything.  It is full of people who could not understand the plot of Mass Effect 3.  This is not exactly where humanity's best and brightest hang out.

ppphhht.. I'm so enraged right now!!!

heheh

[DeathScepter]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

DeathScepter wrote...

I do think that CaptainZayish is indoctrinated.

I hope so. Otherwise, implications... unpleasant.

The solution is Interesting. 

[HiddenInWar]

So how 'bout that Falcons/Seahawks game amirite.