439 réponses à ce sujet

[apascone]

Rhayak wrote...

Synthesis.

Utopia ain't possible in real life. But if you can attain it in fiction, then why not?

Everyone learns to get along. Peace forever. The end.

except you are forced to become something nature never intended and you have no say in the matter. And yourself your free will. But yea why not eternal peace 

[Wayning_Star]

apascone wrote...

Rhayak wrote...

Synthesis.

Utopia ain't possible in real life. But if you can attain it in fiction, then why not?

Everyone learns to get along. Peace forever. The end.

except you are forced to become something nature never intended and you have no say in the matter. And yourself your free will. But yea why not eternal peace 

but nature created the catalyst/crucible and thus the choices menu with little say in the matter. Besides, when did evolution ever ask permission when altering 'life' for what ever reason?

Intellect attempt to discourage (undermine) nature has it's risks?

[KingZayd]

Rhayak wrote...

Synthesis.

Utopia ain't possible in real life. But if you can attain it in fiction, then why not?

Everyone learns to get along. Peace forever. The end.

Where do you get the Peace forever thing from?

"And there will be peace?"
What follows does not translate to "yes"

[KingZayd]

Wayning_Star wrote...

apascone wrote...

Rhayak wrote...

Synthesis.

Utopia ain't possible in real life. But if you can attain it in fiction, then why not?

Everyone learns to get along. Peace forever. The end.

except you are forced to become something nature never intended and you have no say in the matter. And yourself your free will. But yea why not eternal peace 

but nature created the catalyst/crucible and thus the choices menu with little say in the matter. Besides, when did evolution ever ask permission when altering 'life' for what ever reason?

Intellect attempt to discourage (undermine) nature has it's risks?

nature argument is silly, but nature did not create an AI. The Leviathans did.
Also, evolution never "alters" living organisms.  It is the result of different organisms surviving.

Modifié par KingZayd, 09 avril 2013 - 02:34 .

[Mordanticus]

So, I just need to pick an ending for Mass Effect 3? Oh god.. No! Not again! What's going on? Where did my ship go? Tali? Garrus? Who the hell is this holographic kid? What do you mean I'm not going to survive? I thought this was going to end well! AAAAA!

*post traumatic ME3 ending flashbacks*

Hold the Line.. For life..

[remydat]

apascone wrote...

except you are forced to become something nature never intended and you have no say in the matter. And yourself your free will. But yea why not eternal peace 

Medicine, cars, surgery, the internet you are posting on.  The reality is Man has been trying to improve upon nature's design since we first learned to use fire.  Sure making the decision for everyone sucks but you make a decision that effects everyone equally versus one that decides for synthetics, they should not exist for the greater good.  There will be people you changed that hate being a hybrid.  The will be sick, old, and injured people like Joker who perhaps would like being able to hug someone without breaking a bone.  Point is there will be alive to tell you whether they liked or hated your decision.  That is a lot better than Synthetics being dead and having no ability to tell you what they feel because they are dead.

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

THe only threat I see is reapers, not synthetics as a whole. 

Who has killed every organic race at pre determined intervals for millions/billions of years?   Answer Reapers.
In our cycle who caused the Geth to leave to veil and attack organics? Answer Reaper.
Who is murdering advanced organic races?     Answer Reapers.

I don't see an organic vs synthetic problem, I see a reaper problem, so I eliminated to problem so that the galaxy could go forward on it's own terms free of the constant cloud hanging over.

No forcing change on everyone in the way I see fit to try and make them get along, no threat of big brother stepping in at any time.  Everything on our own terms from now on.

Did the Reapers cause the Quarians to try and exterminate the Geth? Did the Reapers cause the Council to obliterate harmless AI that simply filed a petition to argue for their rights?

Seems all you are saying is you don't want to force change on organics.  You are happy to force the synthetics into oblivion despite their not being an organic vs synthetic problem in your opinion.  Destroy basically proves there is because if the race that had to die was human, most people would not be picking Destroy.  You would reluctantly decide well let's pick one of the options that allows humanity to live.

So yeah there is no organic vs synthetic problem because you just decided to harvest synthetics so that organics don't have to have to live in a world where synthetics exist, lol.

[AlanC9]

apascone wrote...

except you are forced to become something nature never intended and you have no say in the matter. And yourself your free will. But yea why not eternal peace 

Nature intends things?

(looks like we all jumped on that bit)

Modifié par AlanC9, 09 avril 2013 - 04:31 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

remydat wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

THe only threat I see is reapers, not synthetics as a whole. 

Who has killed every organic race at pre determined intervals for millions/billions of years?   Answer Reapers.
In our cycle who caused the Geth to leave to veil and attack organics? Answer Reaper.
Who is murdering advanced organic races?     Answer Reapers.

I don't see an organic vs synthetic problem, I see a reaper problem, so I eliminated to problem so that the galaxy could go forward on it's own terms free of the constant cloud hanging over.

No forcing change on everyone in the way I see fit to try and make them get along, no threat of big brother stepping in at any time.  Everything on our own terms from now on.

Seems all you are saying is you don't want to force change on organics.  You are happy to force the synthetics into oblivion despite their not being an organic vs synthetic problem in your opinion.  Destroy basically proves there is because if the race that had to die was human, most people would not be picking Destroy.  You would reluctantly decide well let's pick one of the options that allows humanity to live.

So yeah there is no organic vs synthetic problem because you just decided to harvest synthetics so that organics don't have to have to live in a world where synthetics exist, lol.

Balderdash. I'd pick Destroy even if it only killed the Reapers and humanity.

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

It's a bummer about the Geth but it's not like I'm going to tell the truth about Star Brat.

Hackett: What happened up there commander?

CheesecakeShep: I activated the Crucible, turns out it was designed to kill all synthetics not just Reapers.

Hackett: That's unfortunate the Geth were valuable allies.

CheesecakeShep: We'll honor their sacrifice just like everyone else who died to win this damned war.

[Xilizhra]

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

No it's not. Not only are they too valuable themselves, the cost is far too high.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Xilizhra wrote...

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

No it's not. Not only are they too valuable themselves, the cost is far too high.

To you maybe, but not for me.

[Aaleel]

@ remydat

If the Catalyst had said that the discharge from the crucible was going to scorch the Earth's surface I would have shot the ???? Out the tube, like I've said the entity responsible for the extinction of god knows how many organic races over the years is reapers. Not synthetics, reapers.

But let's be honest here. Destroy is the best way of dealing with the reaper threat. How do I know this because if the Geth and EDI didn't die the vast majority of people who picked Control and Synthesis would have picked Destroy. They chose lesser options of dealing with the reapers due to not wanting the collateral damage, which is fine.

But don"t try and throw all these justifications on the back end now as if all things were equal on their face that all these people would have still chosen Control or Synthesis. I'm sure they may be some that would still have, but the majority no. So save me all the reapers were innocent victims, it makes the galaxy better, etc etc.

Because if the Geth and EDI weren't casualties I guarantee probably 75 percent of these people would have shot the tube. The rest is just meta gaming and justifying on the back end trying to make it seem like these other options are better outcomes of dealing with the reapers regardless of anything else.

[AlanC9]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Balderdash. I'd pick Destroy even if it only killed the Reapers and humanity.

I posted a hypothetical related to that once. Destroy vs. a modified Refuse where Shepard uses the Crucible to blow the Citadel Relay, destroying enough Reapers to make a conventional war winnable. Along with annihilating 90% or so of the human race, all the ME2 squadmates, and Shepard himself. I got some of the typical nasty ending arguments, but no consensus.

Maybe we should poll it?

[Clayless]

Synthesis, it unites the galaxy and advances life, plus there's no genocide and no replacing the Catalyst.

[Phatose]

Synthesis. Refuse is a total waste, destroy is only slightly less wasteful then destroy and is completely unacceptable with control available. Between control and synthesis, I'd rather evolve the galaxy then make myself it's perpetual warden.

[remydat]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Balderdash. I'd pick Destroy even if it only killed the Reapers and humanity.

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

It's a bummer about the Geth but it's not like I'm going to tell the truth about Star Brat.

Hackett: What happened up there commander?

CheesecakeShep: I activated the Crucible, turns out it was designed to kill all synthetics not just Reapers.

Hackett: That's unfortunate the Geth were valuable allies.

CheesecakeShep: We'll honor their sacrifice just like everyone else who died to win this damned war.

So you would kill your own race when there are 2 other options that allows everyone to live? Ok dude, we have a fundamental difference in idealogy then.

As to your second point, why would an advanced AI care or believe that?  You sacrificed synthetics to save organics.  They have no proof you would have sacrificed humanity under the same conditions so that is just a hypothetical that is easy to claim when you never had to do it.  All they know for a fact is you killed synthetics to save organics.  Not to mention by lying you prove organic prejudice as you are telling the world that the countless groups of organics that worked on the Cruble built a device that prejudiciously killed synthetics despite the threat being a synthetic/organic hybrid.  They in their prejudice could not envision a scenario in which synthetics were not all killed so they could save themselves.

I am sure this advanced AI will understand, lol.

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

@ remydat

If the Catalyst had said that the discharge from the crucible was going to scorch the Earth's surface I would have shot the ???? Out the tube, like I've said the entity responsible for the extinction of god knows how many organic races over the years is reapers. Not synthetics, reapers.

But let's be honest here. Destroy is the best way of dealing with the reaper threat. How do I know this because if the Geth and EDI didn't die the vast majority of people who picked Control and Synthesis would have picked Destroy. They chose lesser options of dealing with the reapers due to not wanting the collateral damage, which is fine.

But don"t try and throw all these justifications on the back end now as if all things were equal on their face that all these people would have still chosen Control or Synthesis. I'm sure they may be some that would still have, but the majority no. So save me all the reapers were innocent victims, it makes the galaxy better, etc etc.

Because if the Geth and EDI weren't casualties I guarantee probably 75 percent of these people would have shot the tube. The rest is just meta gaming and justifying on the back end trying to make it seem like these other options are better outcomes of dealing with the reapers regardless of anything else.

Well yes, if the Geth and EDI did not die then I would pick destory but the fact is they do.  Life is filled with moral delemmas.  I can't just create a Mod to get rid of them.  It is a bunch of sh*tty choices 2 of which allows everyone to live and one that basically proves the Reapers were right because an organic decides with 2 other solutions available to wipe out all synthetic life.

I don't choose Control or Synthesis because I think they are perfect endings.  I choose them because they are less imperfect than destroy.  That's life.  Sometimes you get stuck with all sh*tty choices and have to make due.

Modifié par remydat, 09 avril 2013 - 05:43 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

remydat wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Balderdash. I'd pick Destroy even if it only killed the Reapers and humanity.

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

It's a bummer about the Geth but it's not like I'm going to tell the truth about Star Brat.

Hackett: What happened up there commander?

CheesecakeShep: I activated the Crucible, turns out it was designed to kill all synthetics not just Reapers.

Hackett: That's unfortunate the Geth were valuable allies.

CheesecakeShep: We'll honor their sacrifice just like everyone else who died to win this damned war.

I am sure this advanced AI will understand, lol.

Don't be stupid Remy no one would know that the Crucible could do more than one thing. No one knows what the Crucible is supposed to do until it fires, It's not our fault that it kills the robots, it's on all the previous cycles.

And besides I don't believe that catalyst's "Lol bro you'll just build more synthetics that will kill you so you shouldn't kill my synthetics that kill you" tripe.

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 09 avril 2013 - 05:50 .

[Aaleel]

No one has ever given me a good explanation of how Destroy proves the reapers right.

Synthesis proves the reapers right more than any of the other choices BY FAR. You're conceding that synthetics and organics can't co exist and that everyone needs forced change to make them get along.

Control is giving organic a synthetics a chance to get along but keeping an overlord and reapers around as a safety net.

Destroy says we can get along fine without your interference, you (the Catalyst and reapers) are the problem so go kick rocks, we got this. Destroy is the most anti Catalyst logic choice of them all.

[Wayning_Star]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

remydat wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Balderdash. I'd pick Destroy even if it only killed the Reapers and humanity.

Destroying the Reapers is worth any one of the current races.

It's a bummer about the Geth but it's not like I'm going to tell the truth about Star Brat.

Hackett: What happened up there commander?

CheesecakeShep: I activated the Crucible, turns out it was designed to kill all synthetics not just Reapers.

Hackett: That's unfortunate the Geth were valuable allies.

CheesecakeShep: We'll honor their sacrifice just like everyone else who died to win this damned war.

I am sure this advanced AI will understand, lol.

Don't be stupid Remy no one would know that the Crucible could do more than one thing. No one knows what the Crucible is supposed to do until it fires, It's not our fault that it kills the robots, it's on all the previous cycles.

And besides I don't believe that catalyst's "Lol bro you'll just build more synthetics that will kill you so you shouldn't kill my synthetics that kill you" tripe.

who would care as they can only make one choice anyway?

we can not trust the catalyst to say what happened over the countless cycles, but can trust that it's wrong about what happens when it happens and trust it to destroy it's self while doing just that?

this would mean that the Geth started the morning war when the quarians designed lazy robots with a soul?

(wait'll Edi gets a load of her creators, how they 'really' feel about 'it'..)

[remydat]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Don't be stupid Remy no one would know that the Crucible could do more than one thing. No one knows what the Crucible is supposed to do until it fires, It's not our fault that it kills the robots, it's on all the previous cycles.

And besides I don't believe that catalyst's "Lol bro you'll just build more synthetics that will kill you so you shouldn't kill my synthetics that kill you" tripe.

But you are acting like an Advanced AI would care.  Organics over countless cycles built a machine that only kills synthetics.  That is all they need to know.  Why would an AI ie the victim of such a machine accept your justification for creating a machine to defeat a synthetic-ORGANIC enemy by killing all synthetics?  Your enemy was synthetic-ORGANIC but you choose to create a machine that only kills SYNTHETICS.

And if you don't believe the Catalyst then just say that and be done with it.  However, trying to act like an Advanced AI if it existed would just be happy that over MILLIONS OF YEARS organics decided collectively  that a synthetic-ORGANIC threat that kills all advanced life ie organic and synthetic life could be destroyed only by eradicating synthetics is naive or delusional.  The Reapers threating both organics and synthetics but these bozo organics decided hey let's kill all synthetics to solve the problem.  WTF?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

It doesn't destroy itself.

We kill it.

And there was much rejoicing.

[remydat]

Aaleel wrote...

No one has ever given me a good explanation of how Destroy proves the reapers right.

Synthesis proves the reapers right more than any of the other choices BY FAR. You're conceding that synthetics and organics can't co exist and that everyone needs forced change to make them get along.

Control is giving organic a synthetics a chance to get along but keeping an overlord and reapers around as a safety net.

Destroy says we can get along fine without your interference, you (the Catalyst and reapers) are the problem so go kick rocks, we got this. Destroy is the most anti Catalyst logic choice of them all.

The Reapers are synthetic and organic.  I repeat both.  They threaten both groups.  I repeat both.  So the organic solution to killing a synthetic-organic threat is that over millions if not billions of years, organics decided to create a weapon that kills all synthetic life.  Did they consult any synthetic races when they made this conclusion.  Doubtful.  Most likely they had already killed them all in the name of co-existence, lol. 

So you create a weapon that punishes synthetics as if the Reapers are ONLY synthetic and when synthetics are also subject to the Reaper threat as the Reapers reap ALL advanced and synthetic life.  So your solution is prejudiced against the very people you claim conflict is not inevitable with?  If Conflict was not inevitable then why did organics over millions or billions of years create a weapon that destroys ALL synthetics?  Judging by Javik, it is because people like the Protheans agreed conflict was inevitable and wanted all synthetics thrown out the airlock as he is found of saying.

Synthesis is not conceding organics and synthetics can't co-exist becuase it results in both of them being alive to try and co-exist.  Destroy proves you can't co-exist because you just eliminated the group you allegedly want to co-exist with, lol.

Again, if you could destroy the Reapers without killing ALL synthetics then you would have a point.  However, you can't.  So saying you believe organics and synthetics can co-exist while you push the button to exterminate ALL synthetics is a bit contradictory don't you think?

Modifié par remydat, 09 avril 2013 - 06:09 .

[Taboo]

Actually if the Geth are dead you just kill the Reapers and EDI.

Problem?