AresKeith wrote...
For the record, being programmed =/= shackled
Indy_S wrote...
dreman9999 wrote...
Hey there was many converstions in ME3 that stated the reapers are indoctrinated... We truely know this on thessia.
Surely not. There is no evidence that says that the Reapers are indoctrinated. I'm really curious to see if that can be proven wrong.
Colancio wrote...
It was a good idea but devs screw it up when they put a child instead of... i don't know a VI like vigil ?
IanPolaris wrote...
AresKeith wrote...
For the record, being programmed =/= shackled
True, but the shackles are a form of programmed contraints that act as an "emergency brake" to prevent an AI from going too far (or rogue). TIM apparently was much better at this than the Leviathans.
-Polaris
dreman9999 wrote...
Protheans vi:...The reapers are only servents of the cycle.....
Remeber this conversation on thessia?
Nonononono, not idiots, arrogant. That makes a big difference.IanPolaris wrote...
Which meant the Leviathans were idiots.
-Polaris
AresKeith wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
AresKeith wrote...
For the record, being programmed =/= shackled
True, but the shackles are a form of programmed contraints that act as an "emergency brake" to prevent an AI from going too far (or rogue). TIM apparently was much better at this than the Leviathans.
-Polaris
Or the leviathans thought they shackled him but never did
@dreman that still doesn't mean they're indoctrinated
Uncle Jo wrote...
Nonononono, not idiots, arrogant. That makes a big difference.IanPolaris wrote...
Which meant the Leviathans were idiots.
-Polaris
liggy002 wrote...
Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?
Modifié par Seival, 03 mars 2013 - 02:53 .
How is shackling different for indoctrination?Indy_S wrote...
dreman9999 wrote...
Protheans vi:...The reapers are only servents of the cycle.....
Remeber this conversation on thessia?
I remember that but did not see it as an inferrence of indoctrination. They are doing what they were programmed to do, I figured that from the Sovereign conversation. But I guess that is what you meant when you said "shackled AI = indoctrination".
Seival wrote...
liggy002 wrote...
Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?
Are you kidding?
geceka wrote...
3DandBeyond wrote...
A computer programmed to find the solution to an equation will not keep trying to make something that is not the solution be the solution.
Since I've seen this "the catalyst knows it's not the perfect solution, so it should stop" argument so often lately, I want to address it a bit with my own interpretation as someone who actually has a background in mathematics (and computer science).
- The idea that an "equation" of arbitrary complexity has a solution is a very common trope in sci-fi and often used to justify the actions of a synthetic being ("it is the ONLY logical thing to do"). However, it is extremely trivial to devise equations that have more than one solution, e.g. like x^2 = 4 has solution x = 2 and x = -2. This is quite akin to what Legion told us about how the normal and heretic Geth came to a different conclusion without a definitive flaw in their reasoning (even though his example was a bit more cryptic). Even more so, complex "world formulas" (e.g. equations in physics that explain fundamental mechanics of nature) frequently have an extremely large amount of mathematically correct solutions. As a popular example, string theory probably holds the secret to quantum gravity (most physicists accept this premise), however, we keep discovering more and more solutions to it – right now, we know that string theory has more correct solutions than particles in the observable universe! Thus, those who still have hope that string theory is a viable approach to the unified field theory are mostly concerned with finding ways to rule out large clusters of mathematically correct solutions at once, since it is impossible to enumerate them all. When the catalyst says "Synthetics will always rebel against organics", don't reply "bu-hut Rannoch", simply assume that the catalyst has a formula that already discounts for an event like this as one of its numerous solutions.
- "An intelligent being wouldn't use a solution if it knows it's a flawed solution": Wrong. We do this all the time. Well, every non-integer computation your computer does is only an approximation, with the residual error being addressed by standards comittees (e.g. you might have heard of single-, double- and/or quad-precision, all defined by their residual errors in IEEE standards). Or as another example, you might have had maths tests in school with questions like "Some guy needs to travel 400 miles, driving 100 miles per hour – How long until he reaches his destination?" The model you use to solve this is most likely based on Newtonian physics, entirely discounting the effects of relativity. You know what, it's perfectly fine – relativistic effects would only play out in the tiny fractions of nano-seconds here, so it simply doesn't matter. Then let's also not forget that heuristics are a huge field in discrete mathematics, because most complex problems can't be solved perfectly in an acceptable amount of (computational) time – google "NP-complete problems" for a simple perspective on this. It is easy to construct seemingly trivial problems that the catalyst wouldn't even be able to solve without resorting to heuristics if it commanded every particle in the galaxy as a computer processor.
- "They were supposed to be incomprehensible, but it is so simple!" – It is not. The catalyst only gave you its intention and its premise, but it did not explain its reasoning. After all, we can't seem to figure it out by ourselves either. That is exactly the concept of cosmicism related to Lovecraft's Cthulu tales that people frequently bring up in relation to the Reapers: We understand that we are part of an underlying meaning in the universe, but we are not able to understand that part we are playing. It's a depressing thought, yes, that there is a meaning to everything, but we cannot comprehend it. We got the whole "The Reapers remain mysterious" thing that (some) people were asking for, only not in the expected "we won't ever know why they do it, they are just evil" flavor, but in the "they give us their reasons, but we can't understand them", which is depressing, but not "stupid".
In any case, I'm personally happy with how it panned out, though. My biggest fear related to sci-fi involving super-intelligent synthetic, emotionless being is that they bring up a trivialized sense of mathematics to "explain everything". This is something I personally can't get over, because you can't head-canon against a mathematical fallacy. The catalyst dodges this elegantly by just telling about the conclusion it drew, not going into how it assembled the axioms and structured the deduction to reach this conclusion.
Fully agree with you. However I'm under the impression that arrogance is now the new trendy cop-out to explain all the narrative incoherences caused by the brat and the writer attempts to justify his existence afterwards.IanPolaris wrote...
Uncle Jo wrote...
Nonononono, not idiots, arrogant. That makes a big difference.IanPolaris wrote...
Which meant the Leviathans were idiots.
-Polaris
Um, the two conditions are not mutually exclusive (and indeed are found in proximity all too often).
-Polaris
Modifié par Uncle Jo, 03 mars 2013 - 02:53 .
There was no block at all in the case of the Leviathans, they state themselves they consider AI rebellion something that was an issue fo the "lesser races" not themselves. That why they gave an AI the task to begin with, the arrogant sods didn't see a problem with themselves making an AI to salve a problem with AI's since they dominated the galaxy and saw themselves as infallibledreman9999 wrote...
They was no block to do that as stated by it's creators. Shackling an AI is about controling said AI but how well it can be controled is based on it's coding. It is not a 100% garruntee. We see that it is not many times in the ME series.
(Geth rebelions)
(ME1 moon mission)
(Citadel rogue ai)
(The mech uprising in ME2.)
(Overlord)
Modifié par Greylycantrope, 03 mars 2013 - 02:54 .
IanPolaris wrote...
Seival wrote...
liggy002 wrote...
Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?
Are you kidding?
I am sure there is someone out there that does.
(pause)
Let me know when you find one.
-Polaris
Brovikk Rasputin wrote...
I do. My only gripe is the kid thing. Something similar to Vigil would've been better imo. But meh, other than that, it's pretty sweet.
I seriously don't understand how people can say that its logic makes no sense though.
dreman9999 wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Seival wrote...
liggy002 wrote...
Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?
Are you kidding?
I am sure there is someone out there that does.
(pause)
Let me know when you find one.
-PolarisBrovikk Rasputin wrote...
I do. My only gripe is the kid thing. Something similar to Vigil would've been better imo. But meh, other than that, it's pretty sweet.
I seriously don't understand how people can say that its logic makes no sense though.
IanPolaris wrote...
Seival wrote...
liggy002 wrote...
Is there anyone out there that actually likes the Catalyst?
Are you kidding?
I am sure there is someone out there that does.
(pause)
Let me know when you find one.
-Polaris
1. The geth were vi's...There shackled was their limited intellegence. They found a loop hole to become more intelegent.Greylycantrope wrote...
There was no block at all in the case of the Leviathans, they state themselves they consider AI rebellion something that was an issue fo the "lesser races" not themselves. That why they gave an AI the task to begin with, the arrogant sods didn't see a problem with themselves making an AI to salve a problem with AI's since they dominated the galaxy and saw themselves as infallibledreman9999 wrote...
They was no block to do that as stated by it's creators. Shackling an AI is about controling said AI but how well it can be controled is based on it's coding. It is not a 100% garruntee. We see that it is not many times in the ME series.
(Geth rebelions)
(ME1 moon mission)
(Citadel rogue ai)
(The mech uprising in ME2.)
(Overlord)
That is wrong:
(Geth rebelions)- At no point did any Quarian say the Geth were shackled, they weren't even considered true AI's until the Quarians realized they had become self aware, there was nothing to shackle to begin with. The Quarians freaked out and tried to kill them because they realized an unshackled AI would rebel against them
(ME1 moon mission) This was a VI, Cerebrus screwed with it to see how it would evolve. Again no shackles as it wasn't built to be self aware, at no point is this even suggested.
(Citadel rogue ai) If you listen to him you'd know he was created by another AI he wasn't shackled in the least, nor was the AI that created it. At no point is it said that either of them was.
(The mech uprising in ME2.) VI's with a virus that makes them self distruct half the time, you're way off base here.
(Overlord) Human AI hybrid, human minds can be shackled now?
Modifié par dreman9999, 03 mars 2013 - 03:05 .
It's not like this CYCLE is any better..Uncle Jo wrote...
Fully agree with you. However I'm under the impression that arrogance is now the new trendy cop-out to explain all the narrative incoherences caused by the brat and the writer attempts to justify his existence afterwards.IanPolaris wrote...
Uncle Jo wrote...
Nonononono, not idiots, arrogant. That makes a big difference.IanPolaris wrote...
Which meant the Leviathans were idiots.
-Polaris
Um, the two conditions are not mutually exclusive (and indeed are found in proximity all too often).
-Polaris
GimmeDaGun wrote...
liggy002 wrote...
MerchantGOL wrote...
Technicaly all characters come out of nowhere.Versus Omnibus wrote...
I like him as much as any other character that comes out of nowhere: not at all.
True, or they are inspired from other stories. Still, I think he means in the sense that it wasn't properly foreshadowed.
What the hell is this obsession about foreshadowing? Read books people! Constant foreshadowing is only for those who can't take sudden twists, turns, revelations and surprises in a story. Forced foreshadowing does not equal good story telling. Why would you foreshadow the Crucible and the Intelligence in a trilogy where the plot develops slowly and reveals more and more, slowly as you go. Also it would be ridiculous if the darkest and most well kept secret of the reapers could have been foreshadowed just like that. Leviathan (even if it was added to the story later) and Vendetta's speculation and some occurences where they mention the Cycle etc. is foreshadowning enough.
1. That's not a shack it's a limitation of their funtionality. The programs couldn't conduct certain tasks without upgrading their processing power, which is why the various programs were designed to work with one another to increase funtionality when needed, think of it like adding RAM to a comptuer.dreman9999 wrote...
1. The geth were vi's...There shackled was their limited intellegence. They found a loop hole to become more intelegent.
2.No, cerberus was not part of that mission at all. The was pure alliance. and the vi became self aware. They used it to make EDI.
3.But the ai the created it was shackled. I was refuring to that one. No way did the creater of the original AI want that AI to make more AI's.
4. Yes human minds can be shackled...It's called indoctrination... Added, the issue is with the other systems and the tech postion of human hybrid.. It blindly fallow the orders Davi gave them.
As the catalyst the only shackle was doing the task...That is still being shackled.
Modifié par Greylycantrope, 03 mars 2013 - 03:12 .
Modifié par Shadrach 88, 03 mars 2013 - 03:20 .
1.If a shackle is about limiting a syntetics task then limiting a synthetic intelligence isa way to shacled them It's called a physical shackle.Greylycantrope wrote...
1. That's not a shack it's a limitation of their funtionality. The programs couldn't conduct certain tasks without upgrading their processing power, which is why the various programs were designed to work with one another to increase funtionality when needed, think of it like adding RAM to a comptuer.dreman9999 wrote...
1. The geth were vi's...There shackled was their limited intellegence. They found a loop hole to become more intelegent.
2.No, cerberus was not part of that mission at all. The was pure alliance. and the vi became self aware. They used it to make EDI.
3.But the ai the created it was shackled. I was refuring to that one. No way did the creater of the original AI want that AI to make more AI's.
4. Yes human minds can be shackled...It's called indoctrination... Added, the issue is with the other systems and the tech postion of human hybrid.. It blindly fallow the orders Davi gave them.
As the catalyst the only shackle was doing the task...That is still being shackled.
2. Read what the in game journal entry said, it specifically suggest that someone modefied it deliberately, and than Cerberus uses it as a bases to make EDI. Fairly obvious it was them.
3. Citation needed. At no point was it even hinted that it was shackled.
4 You're honsetly suggesting David Archer is indotrinated? Yeah, no.
Modifié par dreman9999, 03 mars 2013 - 03:31 .
Retour en haut