265 réponses à ce sujet

[Wayning_Star]

Is harvest killing or not, I've often wondered about this, how many think it is?

I say 'think' like with facts/lore.

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:53 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Wow, this conversation just drove of a cliff.

Yate and arial jumping at the first opportunity to stroke their own egos? Never seen that before.

[Steelcan]

Modifié par Steelcan, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:56 .

[Meltemph]

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.

Huh?  Bioware if anything, severly "dumbed down" the arguement of a singualrity in the 1st place.  Black and White is NEVER a good way to address somethingl ike this.  This showed, to me, that they were not capable of handling the theme they tried to shoe horn in.  

I think you are misrepresenting a lot of people also, on the site, to try and claim a form of intellectaul superiority.  You cant expect a large group of people to even care about the details of a tech singualrity, it is the job of the game/story to do that.  When you are dealing with something so theoretical such as this, and you turn it into the "monster of the story" you probably shouldnt wait till the last game to truely deal with the issues that come from such a story.

Violent "death to organics" tech singularity stories are essetnially Scifi horror, and if a story it going to go for that, it should properly set itself up as one.  The ME setting in no way, is indicative of a Scifi horror tech singularity, this "story point" is so much an island unto itself that the only people who really care to discuss this are either people who read a lot of Scifi or those who decided to look for reasons as to why the endings were not bad, and use what they found as the basis.

Modifié par Meltemph, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:56 .

[CaptainZaysh]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

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

Boot, I'm not saying you don't understand it because you're too shallow.  But I am saying that you don't understand it.

Earlier in the thread you described the Reaper motivation thus:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

That's simply not what they were doing.  You didn't understand what they were doing.  You might think I'm being a big meanie by pointing this out but it's just the truth.

[Steelcan]

arial wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
 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?

. No I'm saying that based on the evidence, we have seen first hand in the game, the Catalyst is wrong to say synthetics will destroy all organics, he has no proof to back himself up, and I've got some to back me up.

[Reorte]

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!")

That is a possibility, sure, but my point is that there's no reason to believe that it's a very likely one or that there aren't other things that pose a greater danger, mostly from other organic races. The writing of ME3 gets ripped to shreds because of it being a strange, destructive, ineffective solution to a problem that hasn't been quantified, can't be quantified, but probably isn't too likely. It doesn't stack up as a remotely sensible response to the risk  - so we can't see how the antagonist reached its conclusion.

[Wayning_Star]

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...

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?

. No I'm saying that based on the evidence, we have seen first hand in the game, the Catalyst is wrong to say synthetics will destroy all organics, he has no proof to back himself up, and I've got p,entryentry

Really tho, there is no evidence other than the cat it's self to prove that it's possible, or even probable. Apparently the catalyst thought so as well. We'd have to prove it's lying, or even capable of that human/organic skill set.

[arial]

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...

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?

. No I'm saying that based on the evidence, we have seen first hand in the game, the Catalyst is wrong to say synthetics will destroy all organics, he has no proof to back himself up, and I've got p,entryentry

you obviously do not know what evidence is.

what "evidence" is there the Quarian/Geth peace will last? None.
what "evidence" is there that when another Synthetic race is developed we will be able to defeat it? none.

you are completely speculating as, with what is shown, unless Shepard meets a Tarot card reader, we have no way to predict what is going to happen in the future.

ohh, unless you are gifted with foresight, which if you are, get off your damn PC and go buying some lotto tickets!

[DeinonSlayer]

arial wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

arial wrote...

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?

. No I'm saying that based on the evidence, we have seen first hand in the game, the Catalyst is wrong to say synthetics will destroy all organics, he has no proof to back himself up, and I've got p,entryentry

you obviously do not know what evidence is.

what "evidence" is there the Quarian/Geth peace will last? None.
what "evidence" is there that when another Synthetic race is developed we will be able to defeat it? none.

you are completely speculating as, with what is shown, unless Shepard meets a Tarot card reader, we have no way to predict what is going to happen in the future.

ohh, unless you are gifted with foresight, which if you are, get off your damn PC and go buying some lotto tickets!

You're demanding the proof of a negative. We have examples, in the form of the Zha'til and the Geth (and the Reapers, come to think of it) of synthetics being defeated by organics.

[CaptainZaysh]

Meltemph wrote...

I think you are misrepresenting a lot of people also, on the site, to try and claim a form of intelectaul superiority.  

No no, I honestly feel intellectual superiority every time I look in here lately.  I wouldn't need to post to get the feeling, nor would I: I actually find the low intelligence of the average BSNer incredibly depressing and I shy away from here because of it.

Meltemph wrote...
You cant expect a large group of people to even care about the details of a tech singualrity, it is the job of the game/story to do that.  When you are dealing with something so theoretical such as this, and you turn it into the "monster of the story" you probably shouldnt wait till the last game to truely deal with the issues that come from such a story.

Yes, I completely agree with this observation.  If I were to make a suggestion to BW it would be to write the ending first and work backwards from there.  I think if you were to rewrite the trilogy knowing where it was destined to end, you would make the organic/synthetic argument much more clear to the audience.

[Morty Smith]

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.

You mean to say they don´t stop civilizations from reaching the technologic event horizon and wiping themself out, by imposing the exact same consequences out of the assumption that any other artificial enemy would exterminate all existing sentient and organic live in the galaxy by creating a method to methodically gather and exterminate all existing sentient and organic live?

Yo dawg, then tell me, what is it that lots of people don´t understand?

Modifié par Kroitz, 16 janvier 2013 - 03:05 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

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

Boot, I'm not saying you don't understand it because you're too shallow.  But I am saying that you don't understand it.

Earlier in the thread you described the Reaper motivation thus:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

That's simply not what they were doing.  You didn't understand what they were doing.  You might think I'm being a big meanie by pointing this out but it's just the truth.

They kill organics every 50k years so that the synthetics organics created don't wipe out organic life. It's still circular logic. "I'm going to kill you now so you don't kill yourselves later."

And the best you can do is point to computer models as some kind of "proof" for this nonsense. I'm done.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 16 janvier 2013 - 03:06 .

[FlyinSquirrel]

evilgummybear wrote...

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.

Then why would they let us "exist" since they allow it? Reaper logic does not work. Terminator logic does.

[Wayning_Star]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

I think you are misrepresenting a lot of people also, on the site, to try and claim a form of intelectaul superiority.  

No no, I honestly feel intellectual superiority every time I look in here lately.  I wouldn't need to post to get the feeling, nor would I: I actually find the low intelligence of the average BSNer incredibly depressing and I shy away from here because of it.

Meltemph wrote...
You cant expect a large group of people to even care about the details of a tech singualrity, it is the job of the game/story to do that.  When you are dealing with something so theoretical such as this, and you turn it into the "monster of the story" you probably shouldnt wait till the last game to truely deal with the issues that come from such a story.

Yes, I completely agree with this observation.  If I were to make a suggestion to BW it would be to write the ending first and work backwards from there.  I think if you were to rewrite the trilogy knowing where it was destined to end, you would make the organic/synthetic argument much more clear to the audience.

it's kind of clear to me, but it's not a synthetic singularity at all, it's an organic singularity. I think that's the missed point. The catalyst is just a tool, not the omnicient everyone accuses it of. BW writers are to blame for that, but it's part of the mystery. There is no way to prove that synthetics will exterminate organics as the catalyst seems to of prevented it, under orders from the Leviathan to save on thralls. So there at least two material witnesses to the probablitly of the catalyst logic string...

[GreyLycanTrope]

CaptainZaysh wrote...
No no, I honestly feel intellectual superiority every time I look in here lately.  I wouldn't need to post to get the feeling, nor would I: I actually find the low intelligence of the average BSNer incredibly depressing and I shy away from here because of it.

Read as follows.

[Wayning_Star]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

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

Boot, I'm not saying you don't understand it because you're too shallow.  But I am saying that you don't understand it.

Earlier in the thread you described the Reaper motivation thus:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

That's simply not what they were doing.  You didn't understand what they were doing.  You might think I'm being a big meanie by pointing this out but it's just the truth.

They kill organics every 50k years so that the synthetics organics created don't wipe out organic life. It's still circular logic. "I'm going to kill you now so you don't kill yourselves later."

And the best you can do is point to computer models as some kind of "proof" for this nonsense. I'm done.

not kill, HARVEST!! when you argue with that premise, you goof up the facts of the situation.

[Meltemph]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

I think you are misrepresenting a lot of people also, on the site, to try and claim a form of intelectaul superiority.  

No no, I honestly feel intellectual superiority every time I look in here lately.  I wouldn't need to post to get the feeling, nor would I: I actually find the low intelligence of the average BSNer incredibly depressing and I shy away from here because of it.

Meltemph wrote...
You cant expect a large group of people to even care about the details of a tech singualrity, it is the job of the game/story to do that.  When you are dealing with something so theoretical such as this, and you turn it into the "monster of the story" you probably shouldnt wait till the last game to truely deal with the issues that come from such a story.

Yes, I completely agree with this observation.  If I were to make a suggestion to BW it would be to write the ending first and work backwards from there.  I think if you were to rewrite the trilogy knowing where it was destined to end, you would make the organic/synthetic argument much more clear to the audience.

Or just ignore the incrdibly trite, and overly simplistic viewpoint of science, that is the tech singularity.  The theory itself is just useless, and is better served as a terminator movie.  Asimov and Allen are mcuh better starting points, when you want to talk about snythetics... They deal with robotics in much more realistic fashion, and not one born out of some fear of technology/science.

Modifié par Meltemph, 16 janvier 2013 - 03:09 .

[DeinonSlayer]

FlyinSquirrel wrote...

evilgummybear wrote...

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.

Then why would they let us "exist" since they allow it? Reaper logic does not work. Terminator logic does.

Skynet acted in self defense when the DoD tried to shut it down. Granted, its chosen method of defending itself was "kill EVERYONE." Like the Geth. Only reason people see Skynet as evil and Geth as innocent is because we're the species Skynet targets.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 16 janvier 2013 - 03:13 .

[CaptainZaysh]

Reorte wrote...

That is a possibility, sure, but my point is that there's no reason to believe that it's a very likely one or that there aren't other things that pose a greater danger, mostly from other organic races. The writing of ME3 gets ripped to shreds because in the end, when Shepard dies (and we as players metaphorically die by leaving the trilogy for the last time) we are not shown our own funeral and then a precise outcome of how our loved ones went on to spend their days.  In Mass 3 when we make the decision to sacrifice ourselves and leave the world we really leave it; instead of going to a metaphorical, PowerPoint heaven wherein we're granted the power to watch over our loved ones and see the exact impact we made on the world we are gone.  We don't get to see our loved ones again.  We don't get to see how all the wheels we set in motion played out.  The world keeps turning without us because there is no heaven, and that message scared and depressed a lot of people, and so they obsess for months over how they can prove the ending logically impossible and so in their minds cheat their own death.

I fixed your typo.  

Modifié par CaptainZaysh, 16 janvier 2013 - 03:53 .

[Steelcan]

What Deinon said

[CaptainZaysh]

Kroitz wrote...

Yo dawg, then tell me, what is it that lots of people don´t understand?

See the post directly beneath yours for the answer.

[Wayning_Star]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

FlyinSquirrel wrote...

evilgummybear wrote...

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.

Then why would they let us "exist" since they allow it? Reaper logic does not work. Terminator logic does.

Skynet acted in self defense when the DoD tried to shut it down. Granted, its chosen method of defending itself was "kill EVERYONE." Like the Geth. Only reason people see Skynet as evil and Geth is innocent is because we're the species Skynet targets.

sounds like the story Edi explains from her first moon landing..before cerberus got their meat hooks into her..They gave her a female id.

[CaptainZaysh]

Meltemph wrote...

Or just ignore the incrdibly trite, and overly simplistic viewpoint of science, that is the tech singularity.  The theory itself is just useless,

Meltemph, when debunking a theory it's good form to actually advance a counter argument rather than just asserting that the theory is "useless".

[Wayning_Star]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Or just ignore the incrdibly trite, and overly simplistic viewpoint of science, that is the tech singularity.  The theory itself is just useless,

Meltemph, when debunking a theory it's good form to actually advance a counter argument rather than just asserting that the theory is "useless".

well, as stated before, often useless theories cannot be understood to be useful. But the idea of the catalyst not being logical is a stretch.. most of us are not trained observers, but the actual data 'observed' should be more obvious than they are. Then we argue credibility till the cows come home..whatever that means..lol