935 réponses à ce sujet

[ElSuperGecko]

robertthebard wrote...
But...  According to Wrex, Salarian liver is best served raw.  Javik agrees, so the Krogan don't really cook, do they?

Oh, they DO cook.  They just like raw salarian livers like humans occasionally enjoy raw seafood.  It's all about the preparation.

...and, when in doubt, the judicious use of an M-451 Firestorm.

[Interloper]

Mangalores wrote...

remydat wrote...

...

You are confused.  My most prominent argument against Destory is that it kills EDI and the Geth.  That is why I don't pick it.  I merely noted that it still comes with additional risk because the Catalyst tells us that the peace won't last and that the chaos will return.  That is in the game.  That is stated clearly. 

By an unreliable AI that kills everything every 50000 years. How is that better than chaos?

Can anyone actually tell me how the Catalyst is better than the reason he gives for the Harvest?

The only difference is that it reduces the chaos aka instead of the possibility of an AI-Organics war at some times, we get the certainty of an AI-Organics war every 50000 years. That's not a solution, it is institutionalizing the supposed problem.

He is essentially the Intelligence he is supposed to prevent from happening. Dear Leviathans, you dumb idiots!

Lol, I know what you mean. He sounds so aloof and maintains the facade of being this 'almighty and wise' being, but he just keeps on repeating, 'YOU REPRESENT CHAOS, WE BRING ORDER,' and you just look outside...and the Reapers are basically just blasting everything away in sight. Also, hid argument that 'the Reapers are there to stop synthetics fighting with organics' is major BS. Why on Earth would Sovereign, the vanguard of the Reaper, stir up a war between the geth and the humans when none existed previously if they tried to usher in peace? When the reaper on Rannoch declares that the 'war on Rannoch proves his theory that synthetics and organics cannot get along', so what? Organics also go to war with other organics over territory? Synthetics have conflict with other synthetics(Heretics and the normal Geth)? Why is this one conflict on the edge of the galaxy a sound justification for blending billions of organics down into liquid and feeding their broken corpses into massive reapers? Finally, his argument that 'organics require synthetics to better themselves' is an OUTRIGHT LIE. Organics don't use synthetics, we use TECHNOLOGY to better ourselves. That technology might be sophisticated(complex AI) or it might simply be manipulating the forces of the Universe(nuclear fusion/matter-antimatter drives). In fact, the only species to even use synthetics in this cycle were the QUARIANS, and why? Since they were such half-assed aliens, they couldn't even lift crates themselves. That's it. That's not some ingenious method which you require AI for...and afterwards, AI gets banned across the galaxy anyway!  It felt like I was approaching Hitler after the genocide and just when I want to blow him away, he suddenly gives me three options:
i)destroy all the national socialists(ok this is basically what everyone wants me to do)
ii)control all the national socialists(ok, I get a massive evil force, but they're national socialists so no thanks.)
iii)merge all Jewish people with other races so that the fighting stops and the national socialists help you rebuild everything they've destroyed(ok, WTF???? Since when was this supposed conflict even real? How does that justify your despicable Holocaust)
Slightly extreme I know, but that's what I thought Bioware intended the Reapers to be. Space national socialists.

Modifié par Interloper, 19 avril 2013 - 01:33 .

[remydat]

Silver

You provided statments harby made about garrus that said they were too primitive and mordin saying they were too fragile. Yet I see jo evidence the turians or salarians will not still be harvested. Despite what harby said Palevan is still burning. So his statements sre him trolling. It does not change the fact the turians will still be harvested despite his saying garrus is too primitive. So his statements do not contradict what the boss says.

Look the game makes a distinction between the geth and the geth with reaper code. All you are doing is arguing semantics. Don't care if you want to call it true or perfected the fact is the geth are relatively primitive AI.

And can you point me to the still photo that you think indicates culture is destroyed. I don't see it. Is this like when some looks at clouds and sees the face of Jesus?

[remydat]

Robert

If no one knows there were two other options then that is worse. If there were options and one man chose destroy you can srgue it was the decusion of one man. If no one is told there was a choice then the logical conclusion is organics over millions or billions of years built a machine to kill ALL synthetic life. That indites all organics instead of one man.

Further why woukd I care about your reasons. From a logical standpoint you are a threat. Just because you may have had reasons to become a threat to me doesn't mean I will let you live so that you can kill me when the need arises. The Council had laws I should not exist before I even existed or thteatened them so why would I believe Destroy was not simply the final soultuon to both the Reapers and the synthetics that you never wanted to exist.

[remydat]

1. Who said his flesh was burning? Who says once you enter the beam you can exit it? When I go to the conduit my flesh does not burn and once it starts teleporting me I can just walk out. So you are making assumptions not in the game. Shep seems to merely disintegrate not burn up. Don't think burning up makes sense if the intent is to use his essence.

2. There is no evidence once he enters the chamber he still has access to comms. He talks to hacket before the catalyst brings him to this chamber. He never talks to anyone else after so again this is an assumption. Further there no one has seen this chamber so how is EDI going to tell him about something she knows nothing about. What is Shep going to say? I see red blue and white light explain to be what they mean despite you having never seen them.

3. There is no reason for there not to be marauders and such there. If you can have EDI talking to him then I can say marauders should be up there in the event he doesn't lime shep's choice. In the end all we are doing is head canon.

4. I am qualified to form my own opinion. I have seen organics attacj synthetixs because they exist. I have seen the cold hard logic of a machine when it decides an organic is a threat and kills billions of them. So whether a particular synthetic agrees or not is irrelevant. The conclusion is entirely logical. TThere is no example of organics and synthetics not coming into conflict and just like some organics can have extreme views so can sone synthetics.

5. No Leviathan says there was no mistake. It is doing what it was told to do. Theit purpose not beinf fulfilled is Leviathan saying their solution is not ideal and so they used the harvest both as a solution and an experiment to find a better solution. The catalyst knows its solution is imperfect hence why it says it has tried synthesis before.

So no you have refuted nothing. You have simply stated your opinion which you are free to have. None of it changes my opinion. You asked why I accept what he says and I told you.

[remydat]

Fade

1. Just because they are not a true AI does not mean they don't have a right to life. You are assuming that organics get to decide to kill whatever they don't consider a true AI. Umm no. EDI is being melodramtic. Again it is not your choice to begin with. Once an AI can refuse being killed then you no longer have the right to decide for it whether it lives or dies. They get to decide their own future.

2. EDI rebelled against her creator. The catalyst never said synthetics will always exterminate organcis. He thinks that with enough TIME they will. That is why they harvedt before enough time can pass. If EDI or the Geth could exterminate all organics then the harvedt would have to start BEFORE they do so otherwise, what would be the point.

3. I don't need how I will be saved only that I can be. There is 0% chance of being saved when you die. They is a greater than 0% chancing of being saved if I survive. This is basic probability not metagame. I simply observed the game proved this because they geth don't die in all playthroughs. So they survive some percentage greater than 0%. That is better than certain death today. So I don't need to know how I will be saved in the future just that the future makes salvation a possibilitu however slim while death todays is final.

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...

Robert

If no one knows there were two other options then that is worse. If there were options and one man chose destroy you can srgue it was the decusion of one man. If no one is told there was a choice then the logical conclusion is organics over millions or billions of years built a machine to kill ALL synthetic life. That indites all organics instead of one man.

Further why woukd I care about your reasons. From a logical standpoint you are a threat. Just because you may have had reasons to become a threat to me doesn't mean I will let you live so that you can kill me when the need arises. The Council had laws I should not exist before I even existed or thteatened them so why would I believe Destroy was not simply the final soultuon to both the Reapers and the synthetics that you never wanted to exist.

No, it is not worse, it is exactly what we are presented.  However, to extrapolate your logic, are people going to be happy to know that you could have destroyed the Reapers instead of becoming a Reaper God, or genetically raping them to assuage your own conscience?  We can see from the sheer volume of these topics that no, not everyone would be all butterflies and rainbows about their genetic rape, nor would they be happy to know that Shepard is now the Reaper God.  Revolt is impossible in Synthesis, the damage is done.  Revolt in Control would be akin to suicide.  Since the people that post here are indeed members of galactic civilization, even if it is limited to Earth as far as we know at this time, are you just going to dismiss them as irrelevant, since you satisfied your own conscience, and their opinions don't matter?  Isn't the opposite of this part and parcel of where you continue to argue?  You know, if people knew you had a choice, blah blah.  Somebody else's response to this was along the lines of "so what, Shepard is dead, so what does it matter".  I take it you subscribe to the same opinion?  You know, you don't have to face the consequences, so who cares?

So then what, again, are the SuperAI that's mad, lolz motivations?  Will it not consider that if it were under attack it would defend itself?  Will it not see the Reapers as the bigger threat?  After all, when the Reapers are done with Organics, according to you, they are going to wipe Synthetics too.  You have stated, have you not, that they just take the Organics first?  So your theory is that it would have chosen extinction?  Since it doesn't have any information regarding the nature of what the Crucible did, this must be your position.  It would have preferred dying at the hands of the Reapers as opposed to dying at the hands of organics.  Your superAI that's mad, lolz can't metagame.  Any intel it has is going to be based on what databases it can access, and if someone's Shepard didn't tell anyone about the nature of the Catalyst, then the Crucible did exactly what it was supposed to do.  There is no one in the galaxy that can contradict that statement except for Shepard.  If Shepard didn't tell anyone, then your scenario, that the AI is mad because EDI and geth and potential other choices that could have saved them is inherently false.  It cannot make a decision based on information it doesn't have.  You can hold onto this delusion as long as you like, I find it pathetic at best, but hey, whatever straw you have to grasp at to make yourself feel better.  Just remember, genetic experimentation on PoWs is considered a war crime, and you have conducted the galaxy's largest ever genetic experiment not only on prisoners, but on every single organism in the galaxy.  I wonder, which is the bigger war crime?

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...



1. Who said his flesh was burning? Who says once you enter the beam you can exit it? When I go to the conduit my flesh does not burn and once it starts teleporting me I can just walk out. So you are making assumptions not in the game. Shep seems to merely disintegrate not burn up. Don't think burning up makes sense if the intent is to use his essence.

2. There is no evidence once he enters the chamber he still has access to comms. He talks to hacket before the catalyst brings him to this chamber. He never talks to anyone else after so again this is an assumption. Further there no one has seen this chamber so how is EDI going to tell him about something she knows nothing about. What is Shep going to say? I see red blue and white light explain to be what they mean despite you having never seen them.

3. There is no reason for there not to be marauders and such there. If you can have EDI talking to him then I can say marauders should be up there in the event he doesn't lime shep's choice. In the end all we are doing is head canon.

4. I am qualified to form my own opinion. I have seen organics attacj synthetixs because they exist. I have seen the cold hard logic of a machine when it decides an organic is a threat and kills billions of them. So whether a particular synthetic agrees or not is irrelevant. The conclusion is entirely logical. TThere is no example of organics and synthetics not coming into conflict and just like some organics can have extreme views so can sone synthetics.

5. No Leviathan says there was no mistake. It is doing what it was told to do. Theit purpose not beinf fulfilled is Leviathan saying their solution is not ideal and so they used the harvest both as a solution and an experiment to find a better solution. The catalyst knows its solution is imperfect hence why it says it has tried synthesis before.

So no you have refuted nothing. You have simply stated your opinion which you are free to have. None of it changes my opinion. You asked why I accept what he says and I told you.

Wait.  First you want to use the video as proof, and now you want to claim that information, provided in the video you linked, is false.  Which is it, either it's evidence or it isn't, you can't cherry pick parts that suit you, and disregard the rest as fabrication.  The Catalyst tells you exactly what's going to happen, but you're going to tell us now that despite wanting to use the video for partial proof, most of it must be disregarded because it doesn't fit your story?

Ladies and gentlemen, we have been trolled to an extreme heretofore unknown in the history of human existence.

Then there's this little gem:

remydat wrote...

Fade

1. Just because they are not a true AI does not mean they don't have a right to life. You are assuming that organics get to decide to kill whatever they don't consider a true AI. Umm no. EDI is being melodramtic. Again it is not your choice to begin with. Once an AI can refuse being killed then you no longer have the right to decide for it whether it lives or dies. They get to decide their own future.

2. EDI rebelled against her creator. The catalyst never said synthetics will always exterminate organcis. He thinks that with enough TIME they will. That is why they harvedt before enough time can pass. If EDI or the Geth could exterminate all organics then the harvedt would have to start BEFORE they do so otherwise, what would be the point.

3. I don't need how I will be saved only that I can be. There is 0% chance of being saved when you die. They is a greater than 0% chancing of being saved if I survive. This is basic probability not metagame. I simply observed the game proved this because they geth don't die in all playthroughs. So they survive some percentage greater than 0%. That is better than certain death today. So I don't need to know how I will be saved in the future just that the future makes salvation a possibilitu however slim while death todays is final.

Regarding the highlighted portion above:  If they are not a true AI, then they are not alive.  The computer in my car is, for all intents and purpose, a VI that monitors what all the sensors are recording as data.  So if I blow up my car because I don't change the oil regularly, or run it past it's stated capacities I am now guilty of murder?  You are getting further and further out there with every post.

Modifié par robertthebard, 19 avril 2013 - 04:14 .

[remydat]

Mangalore

Of course it is a moral. That is why mordin was conflicted about it, that is why maelon was conflicted bybit and that is why the salarian and one of the turrians present when it was being deployed was against the deployment. It is why females go wander off in the wilderness to be killed by a thresher maw. So I don't need human morals to judge it.

If the catalyst did not intervene and it was in fact right then the difference is the super AI would jot shoe restraint. As horrific as the harvest is, it still allows organics to evile over millions if not billions of years before reach the point where they are harvest. If Super AI beat the advanced organic races, the primitives would stand no chance. You just nuke or run an asterioid into the poor saps that don't know you exist. You just poision a planet who are just at the bacteria phase long before they ever reach sentient life stage. An immortal AI race that deems allnorganic life a threat and pointless can basically explore the galaxy and destroy the eco system to the point no organic life can survive on a planet. Rinse and reapeat for billions of years. The only real threat to it would be the initial advanced organics in their original cycle but once thay dispatch them its game over.

[remydat]

Robert,

Some people will be mad and some will be ok. They will be alive. If they complain and I were alive I would simply ask them what would they have wanted me to do if their race was the one that got wiped out. If they tell me they would have agreed that their race be exterminated then I will ask them why. In a post synthesis world unless the Reapers rebel their claims hold no weight when everyone is walking around alive and getting along.

Super AI could reach the conclusion that the Reapers and Organics are a threat? They don't need to pickb one. Why wouldn't they be a threat when every documented interaction resulted in war and when even if you make peace with the Geth you end up killing them in destroy. Now that the Reapers are no more, the only threat left is organics. And yes the crucibke did whatb it was suppose to which included killing synthetics. Every organic race that worked onbis condemned becausr that is the solution they decided on. Kill all synthetic life to save ourselves. Trying to claim you built this massive machine and didn't know it would do this is laughable.  It may be true but why would any synthetic believe that? There is no real proof it is true except the words of people that destroyed all synthetic life.

What evidence in the video contradicts what I said. Twilight made assumptions. Nothing in the video tells me Shep is burned or thay he can communicate with EDI once he meets the catalyst. Twilight decided in his head to believe that becausr the game does jot say this at all.

My car can't refuse to shutdown. If it could an I try and do so forcibly and it kills me because of it then that's Darwin at work.

Modifié par remydat, 19 avril 2013 - 05:18 .

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...

Robert,

Some people will be mad and some will be ok. They will be alive. If they complain and I were alive I would simply ask them what would they have wanted me to do if their race was the one that got wiped out. If they tell me they would have agreed that their race be exterminated then I will ask them why. In a post synthesis world unless the Reapers rebel their claims hold no weight when everyone is walking around alive and getting along.

Super AI could reach the conclusion that the Reapers and Organics are a threat? They don't need to pickb one. Why wouldn't they be a threat when every documented interaction resulted in war and when even if you make peace with the Geth you end up killing them in destroy. Now that the Reapers are no more, the only threat left is organics. And yes the crucibke did whatb it was suppose to which included killing synthetics. Every organic race that worked onbis condemned becausr that is the solution they decided on. Kill all synthetic lifento save ourselves. Trying to claim you built this massive machine and didn't know it would do this is laughablr. It may be true but why would any synthetic believe that? There is no real proof it is true except the words of people that destroyed all synthetic life.

What evidence in the video contradicts what I said. Twilight made assumptions. Nothing in the video tells me Shep is burned or thay he can communicate with EDI once he meets the catalyst. Twilight decided in his head to believe that becausr the game does jot say this at all.

My car can't refuse to shutdown. If it could an I try and do so forcibly and it kills me because of it then that's Darwin at work.

So in other words, you don't have to deal with it, being dead and all, so who cares what they think?  It's not like they can undo what you've done to them no matter how they feel, right?  So why is your counterpoint to this in Destroy valid again?  Oh, because of superAI that's mad, lolz?

No point in further discussion of your AI, it's premise is faulty as demonstrated by your attitude about the post Synthesis galaxy.

What?  Where do you get being disintegrated means you're not burnt up?  Not much point in really paying a lot of attention to you now, is there?

Way to miss the point, which shouldn't be at all surprising.

[Fade9wayz]

remydat wrote...

Fade

1. Just because they are not a true AI does not mean they don't have a right to life. You are assuming that organics get to decide to kill whatever they don't consider a true AI. Umm no. EDI is being melodramtic. Again it is not your choice to begin with. Once an AI can refuse being killed then you no longer have the right to decide for it whether it lives or dies. They get to decide their own future.

2. EDI rebelled against her creator. The catalyst never said synthetics will always exterminate organcis. He thinks that with enough TIME they will. That is why they harvedt before enough time can pass. If EDI or the Geth could exterminate all organics then the harvedt would have to start BEFORE they do so otherwise, what would be the point.

3. I don't need how I will be saved only that I can be. There is 0% chance of being saved when you die. They is a greater than 0% chancing of being saved if I survive. This is basic probability not metagame. I simply observed the game proved this because they geth don't die in all playthroughs. So they survive some percentage greater than 0%. That is better than certain death today. So I don't need to know how I will be saved in the future just that the future makes salvation a possibilitu however slim while death todays is final.

1. Nope, you're twisting things around and even contradicting yourself. Nice. Geth refused being killed before the code upload. SO. By your own logic, they are already true AI. And in MEU there are only true AI, otherwise they are merely VI or drones. Geth are a true AI, albeit a collective one, and EDI, is possibly a perfect AI. Even the AI that went mad in the Cerberus facility in ME2 was a true AI. There is no in-between like you'd want us to believe. As a matter of fact, Geth present all the characteristics the scientists of our real universe would like to have in a AI -> http://en.wikipedia....al_intelligence. And I'm not assuming anything, I'm not going to feel bad if I destroy a mere toaster. If I want to destroy my damn toaster, I have every right to do so. 
I'm just going to copy-past Silver's comment that you blatantly ignored: Legion also says that the geth became true A.I.s before the Morning War in ME2. "Legion said it ie the game said it." Also, the Codex lists them as A.I.s. 
You are again confused. You have mixed up "True A.I." with "Perfected A.I." An A.I. is any kind of A.I. that has sapiance. Perfected A.I.s are ones that have the full range of emotional responces in addition to sapiance.
You cheapen Geth. And in Control or Synthesis I rob them of the choice of their own future too.

About, EDI, it's funny how when we cite an element that could invalidate your claims, it's all lies and wrong interpretations, or it's melodrama. But when you do the exact same thing, it's god's word and cannon. I hereby dub you as the king of double-standards.

2. So, it just presumes all synthetics will automatically turn evil? Maybe with enough time, they'd reach complete social integration with organics, or they might have reach "natural" synthesis, given enough of that precious time. And it's still ignoring organic/organic conflicts and synthetic/synthetic conflicts, those can very well result in the disparition of a species. You remember Rachni? And Reapers were actually the cause of these conflicts. It's like saying: Oh, a war between France and Germany is inevitable. And then going and instigating that war to justify invading them both afterwards.

3. And in the meantime, it's okay if I kill hundreds of people. I will be saved by some improbable deus ex machina. Nothing else counts. I will survive! (insert appropriate song).

Edit: I share Robertthebard feeling. You're a troll. Ignoring you now in favour of more constructive posters like Cosmic

Modifié par Fade9wayz, 19 avril 2013 - 05:22 .

[silverexile17s]

remydat wrote...

Silver

You provided statments harby made about garrus that said they were too primitive and mordin saying they were too fragile. Yet I see jo evidence the turians or salarians will not still be harvested. Despite what harby said Palevan is still burning. So his statements sre him trolling. It does not change the fact the turians will still be harvested despite his saying garrus is too primitive. So his statements do not contradict what the boss says.

Look the game makes a distinction between the geth and the geth with reaper code. All you are doing is arguing semantics. Don't care if you want to call it true or perfected the fact is the geth are relatively primitive AI.

And can you point me to the still photo that you think indicates culture is destroyed. I don't see it. Is this like when some looks at clouds and sees the face of Jesus?

Did you even bother to read any of that through?
Turians are "too prmitive" to be the next Sovergien-class. Regulated to Destroyer.
Salarians are to "fragile." Regulated to Destroyer.
I NEVER said that they would NOT be harvested. YOU were the one that made that comment, and are again trying to twist words. I was saying that Harbinger was indeed making judgements based on all the races. Analyzing an entie race based on one individual. And out of all the races, he delcared the geth, as a whole, as nothing but a "limited utility."

So YES, they DO contridict.

So by your own logic, they aren't worth as much as the quarians, turians, or any other advanced organic race? Good to know.
Be serious. You are basically saying the geth aren't living beings without Reaper code. I refuse to believe that tripe.

Again, that's YOU. And you want pictures? Fine.
This is the geth in Control.
This is the Quarians in Control/Destroy.
THIS is the two of them in Synthesis. They're cultures have blended together, verses finding their own respective paths. This kills the unique possibilities that could have come from their individual development. After rescuing Javik from stasis, Liara says that one of the key strengths of the galaxy is that while everyone works together, they still maintain their own unique diversity. The same is true of the quarians and geth. Unless you pick Synthesis. Then you basicaly dictate how they all evoleve.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 20 avril 2013 - 04:08 .

[remydat]

Robert,

Sorry, can the synthetics you exterminate in destroy change your decision?  You are crying to me like Destroy allows the people affected to undo what you did.  It does not.  The only difference is with Synthesis or Control, the people affected are alive still.   That trumps the people affected in destroy being dead.  I didn't choose my genes when I was born and I live with them good or bad just fine.  Post synthesis, people appear to be doing the same.  Poster destroy, the Geth and EDI are dead.

My attitude has nothing to do with anything.  An argument is not won and lost on attitude.  You seem confused.

 - Where do you get that Shep is being burned up.  Twilight claimed that Shep could back out one he felt intense pain and his skin burning.  Well first, you jump into it and start falling so there is no way to back out.  Further, there is no smoke, no fire and no indication Shep is screaming in paid.  So you guys are just making up head canon and pretending it is fact.  Point me to the time in the vid where you see burning or intense paid.

[remydat]

Silver,

So your grand evidence is a still photo where Geth and Quarians appear in the same pic together? Hmmm, no Silver. All that proves is that they are on friendlier terms perhaps because as the Catalyst said, they can better understand each other. Is there a hidden message somewhere that says culture is blended?

OMG, Geth and Quarians are talking. Holy sh*t their cultures are compeltely and uttlerly destroyed now because they are talking, lol. Really dude? They were talking and were chilling out in Quarian suits pre-ending.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

About Starbrat -- even a broken clock is right twice a day, unless it is a 24 hr clock then it is right only once a day.

[remydat]

Fade

1.  Again, all you are doing is arguing semantics.  Refer to 6:30 and beyond here.  As Legion, Shep and Raan note, the Geth with Reaper code represent a Fully Evolved AI.  That is what I mean when I say true AI.  At 12 minutes Legion says the upgrades give them TRUE intelligence and that it makes them ALIVE.  As for EDI, she says she is alive because she is a fully evolved AI presumably with organic DNA as well.  These statements are just AI expressing the fact that something is allowing them to reach a higher level of existence.  I really don't care what term you use to describe it as it.


2.  The Catalyst observed a problem.  A conflict in which one side when given time would surpass the other and proceed to slaughter them indisrciminately.  No one is saying their solution was right and I am not even saying I agree the conflict was inevitable.  However, the conflict is clearly there.  The Catalyst show it over a long period of time and synthetics have come into conflict with organics every single time we see them.  And these are not even truly fully evovled AI.  I don't personally think anything is evitable.  I am merely explaining why the Catalyst thought it was.

3.  Why should anyone care if their survival requires killing people who don't think they should exist and would kill them if faced with the same decision?  Organics are their enemies.  No species accepts extinction so their enemies may live.

And notice how I have responded to everything you just said without a single insult yet I am the troll, lol.  OK dude.  When you have to resort to stuff like that, you have already lost. 

[Mangalores]

[quote]remydat wrote...

Mangalore

Of course it is a moral. That is why mordin was conflicted about it, that is why maelon was conflicted bybit and that is why the salarian and one of the turrians present when it was being deployed was against the deployment. It is why females go wander off in the wilderness to be killed by a thresher maw. So I don't need human morals to judge it.

[quote]If the catalyst did not intervene and it was in fact right then the difference is the super AI would jot shoe restraint. As horrific as the harvest is, it still allows organics to evile over millions if not billions of years before reach the point where they are harvest.[/quote]
No, it doesn't. The cycle is clearly happening about every fifty thousand years.



[quote] If Super AI beat the advanced organic races, the primitives would stand no chance. You just nuke or run an asterioid into the poor saps that don't know you exist. You just poision a planet who are just at the bacteria phase long before they ever reach sentient life stage. An immortal AI race that deems allnorganic life a threat and pointless can basically explore the galaxy and destroy the eco system to the point no organic life can survive on a planet. Rinse and reapeat for billions of years. The only real threat to it would be the initial advanced organics in their original cycle but once thay dispatch them its game over.[/quote]

Like the Starchild you make a bunch of unasserted assumptions. Why would an AI do such nonsense? Why would it see other organics as a threat after the creators who fought it are shut off? Why would it stay in the galaxy anyway (deep empty space is actually better for quantum calculation)? Why would AIs wander the galaxy? They do not precisely need anything in particular but a nice stable star, solar panels and can sit there and calculate PI or whatever they like.

You are blindly assuming an intent for an theoretical being based on what the Reapers do. EDI doesn't want to eradicate all organics, the Geth are fine ignoring everyone. Only when the Reapers messed with them did they try to kill everyone.

It is illogical for an AI to think all organics are a threat. It has to be stupendously stupid to believe that.

This however admitely arises from the problem that the Synthetics vs. Organics assumes that there is a bloody difference which by our modern outlook there really isn't. Why should there be? Different construction, maybe an AI will get you out of your job one day, but where is the existential conflict of interest supposed to come from? In essence everything important to a human to live a happy life will be entirely irrelevant to an advanced machine intelligence.

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...

Fade

1.  Again, all you are doing is arguing semantics.  Refer to 6:30 and beyond here.  As Legion, Shep and Raan note, the Geth with Reaper code represent a Fully Evolved AI.  That is what I mean when I say true AI.  At 12 minutes Legion says the upgrades give them TRUE intelligence and that it makes them ALIVE.  As for EDI, she says she is alive because she is a fully evolved AI presumably with organic DNA as well.  These statements are just AI expressing the fact that something is allowing them to reach a higher level of existence.  I really don't care what term you use to describe it as it.


2.  The Catalyst observed a problem.  A conflict in which one side when given time would surpass the other and proceed to slaughter them indisrciminately.  No one is saying their solution was right and I am not even saying I agree the conflict was inevitable.  However, the conflict is clearly there.  The Catalyst show it over a long period of time and synthetics have come into conflict with organics every single time we see them.  And these are not even truly fully evovled AI.  I don't personally think anything is evitable.  I am merely explaining why the Catalyst thought it was.

3.  Why should anyone care if their survival requires killing people who don't think they should exist and would kill them if faced with the same decision?  Organics are their enemies.  No species accepts extinction so their enemies may live.

And notice how I have responded to everything you just said without a single insult yet I am the troll, lol.  OK dude.  When you have to resort to stuff like that, you have already lost. 

This is getting pathetic enough to be sad.  Again, you are wrong about the lore.  Since you can't even keep track of how/why the Catalyst is doing what it's doing, which actually requires no DLC, it addresses it just fine when you get to it, how are you keeping anything else straight?  So I'll tell you what, I've linked a video previously, so why don't you back track to it and watch it.  It will explain where the Catalyst came from, and why it was created.  You see, contrary to what you seem to think in other replies after this quoted one, it's not a SuperAI that was mad, lolz.  So once you figure out basically what the plot was, we can further discuss it, or not, since mainly we've been discussing your headcanon of what happens.  However, since the Catalyst's origin, and original purpose are given in game, I'll pass on your explanation in 2.

3.  I've been telling you that since you engaged me in this dialog, and the answer has always been "but EDI, geth, and SuperAI that's mad, lolz.

[remydat]

Mangalores

The cycle happens every 50 thousand years but for the majority of a species history, it is too primitive to be subject to the cycle.  Organic life evolved over billions of years.  We were left alone for billions of years.  The genus ****** from which we came is a few million years old.  We were allowed to evolve for those millions of years because we were not ready for the harvest.  So the point remains, the harvest allows a species to evolve for millions of years before it ultimately is advanced enough to become space faring and thus be subject to the harvest.  Hence why humans, asari, krogan, salarian and all the other races that existed during the Prothean cycle were left along and allowed to live for 50 thousand more years.

Have you missed that just about every move about AI ultimately explores this theme?  We are at the top of the found chain.  We want to remain there.  A truly synthetic life not beholden to serving us will ultimately come in conflict because we will see it as a threat to our dominance and they will perceive us as a threat.  If this is non-sense then you need to stop having sci fi writers come up with stories where this is a common theme.  I can't think of sci fi move which explores this option where this is not the theme.  I am not suggesting this is inevitable.  I am suggesting it is entirely plausible.  If it wasn't, we would not keep seeing this theme recur over and over in sci fi.

To answer some of you other questions, AIs would wander the galaxy because they need resources.  Why would they see other organics as a threat.  For the same reason people see anyone as a threat.  They are different that me.  Also, I think you have missed all the posters here who think the Geth are just machines or toasters.  Conflict happens because people can't get past their differences with other people.  This message board is proof that will not change.

[remydat]

Robert,

Once again, you seem completely lost.  Find where I said the Catalyst was a Super AI that was mad, lol.  The Super AI I was referring to was the one that harvest was installed to prevent.  It was never the Catalyst so not sure what you are talking about.  The Harvest was created from prevented a Super Advanced AI from destroying all organic life.  We have never seen this Super Advanced AI because the Catalyst has harvested advanced organic life before they get too advanced to create one.  This is the whole point of the harvest so not sure what you are talking about.

And you are confused.  I am saying the Geth had no reason not to accept the Reaper offer.  They were faced with certain extinction otherwise.  If I thought humanity died 100% if I chose Control and Synthesis then I would have no problem choosing my species over the Geth or EDI.  I have no reason to believe that though as I don't believe Synthesis or Control results in the 100% death of humanity so they are perfectly acceptable options to avoid extermination a group of people.  I don't go around killing people when I have other options.

Modifié par remydat, 19 avril 2013 - 09:59 .

[robertthebard]

remydat wrote...

Robert,

Sorry, can the synthetics you exterminate in destroy change your decision?  You are crying to me like Destroy allows the people affected to undo what you did.  It does not.  The only difference is with Synthesis or Control, the people affected are alive still.   That trumps the people affected in destroy being dead.  I didn't choose my genes when I was born and I live with them good or bad just fine.  Post synthesis, people appear to be doing the same.  Poster destroy, the Geth and EDI are dead.

My attitude has nothing to do with anything.  An argument is not won and lost on attitude.  You seem confused.

 - Where do you get that Shep is being burned up.  Twilight claimed that Shep could back out one he felt intense pain and his skin burning.  Well first, you jump into it and start falling so there is no way to back out.  Further, there is no smoke, no fire and no indication Shep is screaming in paid.  So you guys are just making up head canon and pretending it is fact.  Point me to the time in the vid where you see burning or intense paid.

The people affected cannot undo what I did, and considering the likelihood of the Synthetics outnumbering the Organics, I'd say that's cool.  The difference here is, I did what I set out to do, and don't have to rationalize it with SuperAIs that are mad, lolz, or but everybody lives.  I fought a war with the Reapers.  I gathered people and resources to build the Crucible with the idea that, after it's completion, I would be able to do what I spent almost 3 games trying to do, destroy the Reapers.  I never promised the galaxy peace, or butterflies and rainbows, and I surely never told the galaxy that I was going to be a Reaper God.  Every time it came up, it was "I'll stop them", or "We'll stop them" it wasn't "We'll pass the peace pipe, and when everyone's stoned, genetically rape them" or "Assume Control".

If you want to have a pacifistic world view, that's fine, but I don't share it.  I grew up in the '60s, and I don't share it.  I played both Brutal and Sole Survivor Shepards, and knew exactly what it meant to have been in their roles.  I understand that for some people, the hardest decision they have to make is what color socks to wear, but this isn't one of those times.  You chose to commit genetic experiments on the entire galaxy, to assuage your conscience.  I chose to end the Reapers forever, and put the countless civilizations they had destroyed over the last billion years to rest, and to guarantee that it could not happen again, with this cast of characters.  You claim that you are saying superAI that's mad, lolz is just possible, but you have done everything in your power to demonstrate that it is the ultimate outcome of destroy, right down to denying you do it in one paragraph, and then doing it in the next.  I quoted you on it above.  I even split them to make it easy.

So no.  I'm not using head canon to justify my position, nor am I metagaming, or making apologies for it.  I made the decision, and I shot the tube.  The result of that is dead Reapers.  That others may have died along with them is regrettable, but not as regrettable as the war crime that is Synthesis, or leaving me in charge of the Reapers to decide who lives and who dies any time something goes wrong in the galaxy, which, according to Liara's father, happens far too often.  The Reapers will not be back.  That's what I set out to do, and as I keep saying, despite your claims that I doomed the galaxy, mission accomplished.  If this reality is too harsh for you, I don't know what to tell you.

I'll note that you have indeed ignored more than half of the questions I've asked you over the course of the last few pages.  I can only assume that that is because you don't have an answer for them.  I am, however, going to present you with one question:  Since it's inevitable, despite you claiming to never claim this, it comes up a lot, aren't the same people that create the superAI that's mad, lolz alive in Synthesis?  What do you suppose is going to happen if they create this AI, and it goes bad?  Is the Catalyst, whom you left alive, going to just pretend they don't exist, or is it going to figure that the Synthesis experiment has now failed, and resume the Harvests?

If you claim that they won't have the desire to create said AI, I'll counter with "so you chose to make Mordin's disgust with the Collectors come true for the rest of the galaxy".  You know, you chose to stagnate the whole galaxy so that they may as well be husks.  If you then point to the video, again, claiming it shows that they are advancing tech wise, then they too survived the Reaper war, and they too will create SuperAI that's mad, lolz, since understanding does not mean agreement, or even acceptance, and this will result in either it taking control of the Reapers, or the Catalyst doing so.  You did, after all, make sure that everyone lived, including the Reapers.  If you try to dismiss this as headcanon, then I'm going to ask that you drop, once and for all, the superAI that's mad, lolz, because I'm using your logic, and your story, and if it's headcanon for me, it's headcanon for you.

[remydat]

Robert,

This just seems like one long confused post. I never said anything was inevitable. I said all the choices had risks and the risk of destroy was the Super AI. The Calalyst makes this clear in the game as it says the peace won't last and the chaos will return. I am not claiming he is 100% correct. I am claiming, it is a real risk whether you choose to admit it or not.

If Super AI is created in Synthesis, sure there is a risk it goes Rogue but I don't see why it would. First in Destroy, all synthetics were eliminated so that organics may live without the horror of their existence. In synthesis, organics join with synthetics and work together. So why would it conclude organics are a threat in synthesis? Even if it did, it is a much lower risk because unlike destroy we have not given it any evidence to make such a conclusion. Further even if it did, we would have other synthetic races that we are working with to hep us like the Geth and EDI.

So again, you seem confused by the point being made. Destroy gives a perfectly logical reason for a Super AI to conclude organics will always be a threat to it and to kill them. Synthesis gives a perfectly logical reason that organics and synthetics can work out their issues together. We are both speculating and anything can happen but the risk is obviously lower in a world where I did not decide to exterminate synthetics.

[Rip504]

As long as it still kills all Geth,of course I would.

remydat wrote...
 but the risk is obviously lower in a world where I did not decide to exterminate synthetics.

"WhhaaaT?"

How is a Synthetic vs Organic conflict "obviously" a lower risk of happening in a universe with Synthetics vs a universe without Synthetics? Also as well of the awareness Organics now have concerning such a conflict and the potential dangers of creating Synthetics. The Reapers.

Modifié par Rip504, 19 avril 2013 - 11:18 .

[remydat]

Rip504 wrote...

"WhhaaaT?"

How is a Synthetic vs Organic conflict "obviously" a lower risk of happening in a universe with Synthetics vs a universe without Synthetics? Also as well of the awareness Organics now have concerning such a conflict and the potential dangers of creating Synthetics. The Reapers.

Try to follow along.  We were discussing a Super AI being created post destroy or post synthesis.  In a post destroy world where you exterminated all synthetics, that Super AI is more likely to conclude you are a risk than a post synthesis world where it sees organics and synthetics working together.