68 réponses à ce sujet

[Megaton_Hope]

It's not terrorism if your end goal is the nutrient-rich victim slurry rather than the ensuing terror.

[Xilizhra]

True! Avoiding discourse with Reaper agents, accepting their logic, their ideals and suggestions may help as well...

None are binding without an indoctrination signal. In any case, I gave TIM the Collector base and that worked out all right.

Explain the Reaper's use of Harvesters, please.

I thought it was a point of dogma on your side that the ones uploaded into Reapers were also dead.

[ElSuperGecko]

Xilizhra wrote...
None are binding without an indoctrination signal. In any case, I gave TIM the Collector base and that worked out all right.

Supposition. (see also: self-serving headcanon).  YOu don't know for sure HOW the Reapers indoctrinate, only that the DO indoctrinate.

As for giving TIM the Collector Base working out "all right", well, I guess that depends on what you mean by "all right".  I take it you didn't weep profusely for each corrupted Cerberus soldier you shot dead, then?

Xilizhra wrote...
I thought it was a point of dogma on your side that the ones uploaded into Reapers were also dead.

Ah, so now you're saying they kill off insufficiently technologically advanced organic life as well?  Which is it?

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 30 avril 2013 - 01:10 .

[Xilizhra]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I thought it was a point of dogma on your side that the ones uploaded into Reapers were also dead.

Ah, so now you're saying they kill off insufficiently technologically advanced organic life as well?  Which is it?

Harvesters aren't used on those.

[ElSuperGecko]

Xilizhra wrote...
Harvesters aren't used on those.

They ARE one of those.

So much for the Reapers leaving unadvanced species alone...

[Xilizhra]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Harvesters aren't used on those.

They ARE one of those.

So much for the Reapers leaving unadvanced species alone...

Those don't seem to be sapient, so I doubt technological advancement is relevant for them anyway.

Supposition. (see also: self-serving headcanon).  YOu don't know for
sure HOW the Reapers indoctrinate, only that the DO indoctrinate.

Actually, we know the process quite well from the codex, in addition to the symptoms. We also know that rapid indoctrination turns the victim into a drooling zombie who will die rather fast, and slow indoctrination would be too slow to make any difference to Shepard (if the Catalyst was just introducing it, it'd be akin to the Eden Prime soldiers who first heard Sovereign's signal). Additionally, when indoctrination is strong enough to actually control you, something described by every indoctrination victim who got to that stage is "constantly hearing voices, many of which will give you orders;" Shepard only hears the voices of the dead in dreams, and they aren't trying to control her.

As for giving TIM the Collector Base working out "all right", well, I
guess that depends on what you mean by "all right".  I take it you
didn't weep profusely for each corrupted Cerberus soldier you shot dead,
then?

It isn't like destroying the base changes anything.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 30 avril 2013 - 01:19 .

[ElSuperGecko]

Xilizhra wrote...
Those don't seem to be sapient, so I doubt technological advancement is relevant for them anyway.

And now we're backtracking and adding provisios, are we?

The Reapers argue that they only exterminate sufficiently advanced organic life.  Sapience doesn't come into it.  This is clearly a lie.

Look at the devastation wreaked upon Palavan and Earth.  The irreparable damage to those planets biospheres.  Humanity and the Turians aren't the only species that the Reapers are threatening with extinction in their attack.

But even it we throw biological diversity out of the window and focus on sapient species to save your argument, tell me, what exactly did the Reapers "preserve" of the Protheans, exactly?

[Xilizhra]

The Reapers argue that they only exterminate sufficiently advanced organic life. Sapience doesn't come into it. This is clearly a lie.

They only exterminate sufficiently advanced organic life in the same way that you consider Destroy to not be genocide; it's not an end goal. I'm curious as to which side you'll stay on there.

But even it we throw biological diversity out of the window and focus on sapient species to save your argument, tell me, what exactly did the Reapers "preserve" of the Protheans, exactly?

A great deal. Most of their DNA strand. Derivatives of their technology. Enough sapience to be awakened by Leviathan shenanigans. More than what's been preserved from the vast, vast majority of extinct species across the galaxy.

[dorktainian]

This isnt about preserving life, its about murdering everything and everybody. What the hell gives the reapers the right to murder on a galactic scale? Anyone who can justify the mass murder of trillions of sentient creatures by huge cyborg killing machines as an act of 'so called' preservation needs to take a very long hard look at themselves.

[Xilizhra]

dorktainian wrote...

This isnt about preserving life, its about murdering everything and everybody. What the hell gives the reapers the right to murder on a galactic scale? Anyone who can justify the mass murder of trillions of sentient creatures by huge cyborg killing machines as an act of 'so called' preservation needs to take a very long hard look at themselves.

Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

[Argolas]

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

That's a poor excuse, really. The purpose to "preserve life" is a general as it could be, building giant warships and pumping DNA paste into them in a galactic cycle of genocide is not part of its programming at all. The Catalyst chose to do that, fully aware that it is forcing a fate on innocents which they neither want nor deserve.

My organic programming tells me to make sure I stay alive and to reproduce if I get the chance. That does not mean everything I do in my life is not my fault because I did it in the larger context of my programming.

Modifié par Argolas, 30 avril 2013 - 02:14 .

[Xilizhra]

Argolas wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

That's a poor excuse, really. The purpose to "preserve life" is a general as it could be, building giant warships and pumping DNA paste into them in of a galactic cycle of genocide is not part of its programming at all. The Catalyst chose to do that, fully aware that it is forcing a fate on innocents which they neither want nor deserve.

My organic programming tells me to make sure I stay alive and to reproduce if I get the chance. That does not mean everything I do in my life is not my fault because I did it in the larger context of my programming.

The Catalyst was never given a reason to care about the opinions of individuals; it wasn't built with that form of ethics in mind, and has no context from which to learn it. EDI learned it from the crew, the geth can learn it because they're interested in observing organics, but the Catalyst has no basis to learn any of this, much less apply it.

[dreamgazer]

Where does the balance between pragmatism and naive idealism enter this conversation?

Because that's just as important as fearing fear itself.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ HYR 2.0: What I'm seeing reading both threads is that people are seeing only what they wanted to see. You may think you've presented an unbiased view of things in the other thread you referenced but it is not unbiased. We just happen to know your bias and it's very easy to see it.

Oh I have an agenda. No question about it.

Nonetheless, I don't deny what's clearly on the screen and what isn't.

IE -- I'm not going to say something like: "Destroy-galaxy gets mobbed by evil synthetics years later!"

dorktainian wrote...

*snip*

straight from the horses mouth so to speak. and your point is what?

I maintain PST.

In short, Mac is F'n w/ us.

You're an ITer, don't you pretty much believe that yourself?

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Do you know what IS worse than indoctrination? Pretending it doesn't apply to YOU. Assuming YOU'RE immune. That you AREN'T potentially being led by the nose to a particular decision. And ignoring the advice you've been given and the hard lessons you've learned in the process.

The comment about how "hysteria" manifests in an out of game level is interesting as well. I've seen something similar - how "indoctrination" manifests in an out of game level.

Don't be silly. Indoctrination is literally impossible to manifest out of game: the Reapers don't actually exist to do it (I shouldn't have to explain that, but, here we are). Hysteria is not a thing limited to the game, it exists IRL.

Aforementioned hysteria has led to people conflating simple Reaper-liking (or just tolerance) with the purely in-game concept of indoctrination. I'm out to give this concept a swift kick in the quad.

There's this one dude here who's practically in love with Harbinger. Is he indoctrinated? 'Cause the guy is a Destroy-IT'er.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 30 avril 2013 - 03:14 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

dreamgazer wrote...

Where does the balance between pragmatism and naive idealism enter this conversation?

Because that's just as important as fearing fear itself.

Believe me, I know that as well as anyone.

Lots of folks around here talk a big game on "pragmatism."

Yet, when push comes to shove, they take their cues from the game. And the game generally supports idealism.

Just take the mission to save the rachni-queen. The idealistic response is to take the queen at her/its word that it will help you. The pragmatic response is not to risk it. Who wins? Idealism in a landslide. [Poll]. [Thread].

Given that, ya can't sell me that Destroy is being chosen for "pragmatic" reasons. This is the same deal as the rachni: players did what they were made to expect. The rachni queen was to help you in ME3; the Reapers were to be destroyed.

Not this guy. I guess you could say I "resisted indoctrination" ... in the classical (read: real-life) sense of the word.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 30 avril 2013 - 03:36 .

[dreamgazer]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Where does the balance between pragmatism and naive idealism enter this conversation?

Because that's just as important as fearing fear itself.

Believe me, I know that as well as anyone.

Lots of folks around here talk a big game on "pragmatism."

Yet, when push comes to shove, they take their cues from the game. And the game generally supports idealism.

Just take the mission to save the rachni-queen. The idealistic response is to take the queen at her/its word that it will help you. The pragmatic response is not to risk it. Who wins? Idealism in a landslide. [Poll]. [Thread].

Given that, ya can't sell me that Destroy is being chosen for "pragmatic" reasons. This is the same deal as the rachni: players did what they were made to expect. The rachni queen was to help you in ME3; the Reapers were to be destroyed.

Not this guy. I guess you could say I "resisted indoctrination" ... in the classical (read: real-life) sense of the word.

That's a major false equivalence, though. 

As far as meta indoctrination is concerned, you know how that conversation can go. Really, you can reduce anybody's motivation to falling for a form of indoctrination if you deem it fit, whether it's listening to characters for three games or shifting your paradigm in the last fifteen minutes after chatting with the antagonist.

[ElSuperGecko]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Don't be silly. Indoctrination is literally impossible to manifest out of game: the Reapers don't actually exist to do it (I shouldn't have to explain that, but, here we are). Hysteria is not a thing limited to the game, it exists IRL.

Oh, I wasn't talki9g about "indoctrination" as it manifests in the game (obviously), but "indoctrination" as in the general understanding of the term.  "Indoctrination" is not a concept limited to the game too, you know.

You're (and please not, I'm using the universal "you're" here  fixated on Synthesis based on a two minute conversation with a being which is actually the creator of the synthetic death-machines which are systematically exterminating organic life in the galaxy (again).  You ignore the multitude of evidence and warnings you receive within the narrative, background and construct elaborate realms of headcanon to support your decision based on nothing more than conjecture and speculation, then handwave any and all arguments that suggest that it would NOT be a universally wonderful idea.

You don't know what Synthesis actually does.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know how it will work.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know the long-term effects - socially, psychologically, physically - this process will have.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know how the various races of the galaxy will react to it.  This is not explained to you.

You do not even know how this process will permanently and effectively end the supposed synthetic/organic conflict forever, because this is not explained to you.

Instead, you fill in the blanks yourself with little bits of naïve make believe, and pretend that the lingering and persistent questions most clear-thinking individuals have either don't exist, or are irrelevant.

In short, you drink the Catalyst's Kool-Aid, without even daring to wonder what's in it.

Sounds like a textbook definition of indoctrination to me.

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

Well there we go, look at that, Xilizhra proves my point.

the Reapers have no free will, the Catalyst has no free will, and without free will they have no understanding of free will, without any understanding of free will it plays no role in the Catalyst's calculations, ergo the Catalyst's logic and it's solutions - all of them, including Synthesis - are fatally flawed.

We're done here, folks.

Modifié par ElSuperGecko, 30 avril 2013 - 05:23 .

[dorktainian]

hehe comedy gold. yes i believe in IT - as i believe the only mandate shepard or anyone should have is to destroy the reapers. anything else is just abhorrent.

[Wolfva2]

Argolas wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

That's a poor excuse, really. The purpose to "preserve life" is a general as it could be, building giant warships and pumping DNA paste into them in a galactic cycle of genocide is not part of its programming at all. The Catalyst chose to do that, fully aware that it is forcing a fate on innocents which they neither want nor deserve.

My organic programming tells me to make sure I stay alive and to reproduce if I get the chance. That does not mean everything I do in my life is not my fault because I did it in the larger context of my programming.

Reapers and the Catalyst are basically VIs.  Computer programs.  Computers don't have free will; they do what they're programmed.  

Their purpose is to preserve LIFE.  Not preserve individuals.  By harvesting the 'advanced' races, the non-advanced races live.  Until THEY get advanced, then they're harvested.  The Catalyst isn't concerned with specific species.  Just with life as a whole.

[Wolfva2]

[quote]ElSuperGecko wrote...

Is hysteria worse than indoctrination? No, for the same reason hysteria is not worse than terrorism; we're talking cause and effect.

Indoctrination causes hysteria.
Terrorism causes hysteria.
Shock and awe tactics cause hysteria.
[quote]

A teen breaking up with his GF just before prom causes hysteria.

[quote]ElSuperGecko wrote...
Is it hysterical to acknowledge and consider the strengths of the enemy? Is it hysterical to understand the risks inherent in dealing with said enemy? Is it propaganda when you've actually witnessed the enemy at work, and faced the situations first-hand?

Tell me, who do you think a hostage negotiator would be more cautious when dealing with?

- an armed man who's on the verge of a nervous breakdown or
- a known militant radical equipped with a suicide vest?
[/quote]

OOO!  I know the answer!  THe armed man on the verge of a nervouse breakdown.  He's irrational, and you don't know what his plans are; they are in flux.  As opposed to the known militant whose goal you already know, and who has already been tapped 2 in the forehead by the Counter Terrorism team and thus is no longer a threat <G>.

Indoctrination is much worst then hysteria.  Indoctrination is, basically, brain washing.  Whereas hysteria is a natural side effect of extreme fear.  You can handle hysteria on your own; it's why cops and soldiers are taught tactical breathing excercises.  Not much you can do when brainwashed.  Except maybe play solitaire....

[Argolas]

Wolfva2 wrote...

Argolas wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, the Reapers have no free will and the Catalyst doesn't really seem to either, being wholly driven to a single specific purpose, so I doubt that'll get anywhere.

That's a poor excuse, really. The purpose to "preserve life" is a general as it could be, building giant warships and pumping DNA paste into them in a galactic cycle of genocide is not part of its programming at all. The Catalyst chose to do that, fully aware that it is forcing a fate on innocents which they neither want nor deserve.

My organic programming tells me to make sure I stay alive and to reproduce if I get the chance. That does not mean everything I do in my life is not my fault because I did it in the larger context of my programming.

Reapers and the Catalyst are basically VIs.  Computer programs.  Computers don't have free will; they do what they're programmed.  

Their purpose is to preserve LIFE.  Not preserve individuals.  By harvesting the 'advanced' races, the non-advanced races live.  Until THEY get advanced, then they're harvested.  The Catalyst isn't concerned with specific species.  Just with life as a whole.

1) What you said above is that synthetic life is not life. While it does not exist in real life, is disagree in the MEU.

2) It's not about "blaming" Starbrat. I don't care if it's guilty of something or not. The point is that nobody should listen to what something like that has to say. And that indoctrination is the worst thing that can happen to you in the MEU, aside maybe from Synthesis.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 I forgot about this thread....

dorktainian wrote...

hehe comedy gold. yes i believe in IT - as i believe the only mandate shepard or anyone should have is to destroy the reapers. anything else is just abhorrent.

 Stow it, dorktrain. You don't want Synthesis, we get it, but this isn't a democracy!

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Oh, I wasn't talki9g about "indoctrination" as it manifests in the game (obviously), but "indoctrination" as in the general understanding of the term.  "Indoctrination" is not a concept limited to the game too, you know.

I know that, but to call something indoctrination, you kind of have to understand what it is.

Indoctrination is when you're imbued with a specific doctrine -- over a long and sustained period of time. It requires constant teaching, to the extent of nearly brainwashing.

The Catalyst encounter does not entail indoctrination. The whole game already "indoctrinated" the player into fixating onto a singlular objective: destroying the Reapers. That's hours of said indoctrination. Last I checked, ME3 vanilla game is like 25-hours of gameplay. If you played ME2, let's add another 25. If you played ME, let's add yet another -- we have some 75 hours of being conditioned to pursuing destruction of the Reapers. THAT is indoctrination, in the classical sense.

Meanwhile, the catalyst has 10-15 minutes to give you all the information on the Reapers and also point out what the other options are (if you unlocked them, anyway) -- a drop in the bucket, compared to hours of what came before. That is not indoctrination. It's paradigm-shift at best (and going of BSN polls, no shift even registers for the majority of players).

You're (and please not, I'm using the universal "you're" here  fixated on Synthesis based on a two minute conversation with a being which is actually the creator of the synthetic death-machines which are systematically exterminating organic life in the galaxy (again).

That's an argument of Destroyers, by Destroyers, for Destroyers (and Refusers). Trying to raise that point with other enders will get you nowhere. If that were a big concern, we wouldn't choose what we do.

I have no real interest in opening that can-of-worms, either. You either believe the catalyst is okay, or you don't. I am okay with him. You are not. We see it differently, and that's fine.

You ignore the multitude of evidence and warnings you receive within the narrative, background and construct elaborate realms of headcanon to support your decision based on nothing more than conjecture and speculation, then handwave any and all arguments that suggest that it would NOT be a universally wonderful idea.

I disagree. You gotta look at those things on a case-by-case basis. Sync is only a bad thing when the Reapers carried it out, and Overlord. There are plenty (more, in fact) of examples where the general Sync concept works out fine for us. They are downplayed, because failures typically get more attention than successes, but they still count.

The Crucible is our creation used to achieve Sync, so I like our chances.

You don't know what Synthesis actually does.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know how it will work.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know the long-term effects - socially, psychologically, physically - this process will have.  This is not explained to you.  You do not know how the various races of the galaxy will react to it.  This is not explained to you.

We do know what it does.

It's explained that organics life is altered to be able to integrate with technology.

Synthetics will, in turn, be able to understand organics through this two-way access.

You do not even know how this process will permanently and effectively end the supposed synthetic/organic conflict forever, because this is not explained to you.

It makes sense to me.

The root of all organic-synthetic conflict is the former trying to establish control over the latter. Organics will always trend toward creating synthetic life, for this or that reason. Synthetics will eventually take on personhood and try to live like we do, but that creates a conflict with those organics that want power over them.

Sync basically allows organics to have synthetics' capabilities, thereby invalidating their need to subvert synthetic life.

That aspect of it (leveling the playing field) is just the worst-case. Best-case, it opens up a medium whereby synthetics can communicate with and reach out to organics without fear of them, facilitating peace between both groups.

Instead, you fill in the blanks yourself with little bits of naïve make believe, and pretend that the lingering and persistent questions most clear-thinking individuals have either don't exist, or are irrelevant.

Or, I actually took time to think of answers to those questions and came up with very rational ones. 

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 01 mai 2013 - 03:59 .

[Eryri]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The root of all organic-synthetic conflict is the former trying to establish control over the latter. Organics will always trend toward creating synthetic life, for this or that reason. Synthetics will eventually take on personhood and try to live like we do, but that creates a conflict with those organics that want power over them.

Sync basically allows organics to have synthetics' capabilities, thereby invalidating their need to subvert synthetic life.

But the Quarians didn't create the Geth to do the jobs they couldn't do. They created them to do the tedious, menial or dangerous jobs that they didn't want to do. And unless Synthesis grants organics the capability to dig ditches and clean toilets without getting bored, they are probably going to try to find ways to get someone else to do the dirty jobs, either by enslaving another species, or trying to recreate non-sentient synthetics. Which, according to the Catalyst, will inevitably become sentient, get tired of scrubbing out nuclear reactors and the like, and rebel against their creators.

With regards to synthetics like Edi and the Geth, wasn't Edi already developing this sort of understanding of organics all by herself? Isn't synthesis therefore redundant for her? And weren't the Geth quite content without being troubled by organic emotions? 

Humans have always understood each other, it hasn't stopped us trying to kill each other if someone else has something we want. The laws of thermodynamics will still apply post synthesis. Resources and energy will still be limited, more-so now if synthesis prevents old age and death and the organic population skyrockets. Wars will probably break out over those resources, between different species of organics, and with synthetics. Except now organics will presumably have enhanced physical capabilities making them more destructive combatants, and synthetics might be capable of hatred and cruelty, just like organics.

Call me a glass-half-empty sort of person, but to me Synthesis just doesn't seem to do anything that couldn't have been accomplished naturally, and at its own pace, without instantaneously altering the entire galaxy without its knowledge or consent. It's just not worth the price.

Modifié par Eryri, 01 mai 2013 - 07:21 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 'Changed the thread-title. I am disappoint that I didn't think of it earlier.

Eryri wrote...

But the Quarians didn't create the Geth to do the jobs they couldn't do. They created them to do the tedious, menial or dangerous jobs that they didn't want to do. And unless Synthesis grants organics the capability to dig ditches and clean toilets without getting bored, they are probably going to try to find ways to get someone else to do the dirty jobs, either by enslaving another species, or trying to recreate non-sentient synthetics. Which, according to the Catalyst, will inevitably become sentient, get tired of scrubbing out nuclear reactors and the like, and rebel against their creators.

The geth didn't rebel for that reason, though. They rebeled because, after that one geth asked "Does this unit have a soul?" some quarians got alarmed and tried to shut them all down.

In that, the geth were rebeling against control, insofar as trying the quarians trying to destroy them all is basically another form of trying to control their population.

With regards to synthetics like Edi and the Geth, wasn't Edi already developing this sort of understanding of organics all by herself? Isn't synthesis therefore redundant for her?

I would view it as an "upgrade;" the learning process is made easier for her.

Think back to the Shadow Broker file on Legion, where he's talking to EDI and raises issues over the communication process. Audio exchange is inefficent, whereas networking lets them handle more information faster.

I think it's like that. Sync opens up a medium of communication where the likes of EDI can learn more and learn faster, whereas now she's limited (to the few that trust AI) and the learning happens at a significantly slower pace.

And weren't the Geth quite content without being troubled by organic emotions?

Again, the benefits to synthetics is two-fold.

First, it creates a way that organics will not seek to subvert their freedom. In the geth's case, they don't have to worry about the Daro'Xens or Gavin Archers of the world. Second, they now have a safe and familiar way to reach out to us.

A lot of people hold the idealized notion that peace with synthetics is simple, you just handle it like Shepard handles Legion. It's a failing assessment, on a number of levels. For one thing, attempts were made to reach out to the geth -- the council sent in contact teams over to the 'Veil after the Morning War. They were massacred, because after their experience with the quarians, the geth feared organics (fear that Sovereign would later play on to recruit the eventual geth-heretics). That fear is mutual. Legion, in attempting to establish contact with Shepard, was shot at by Alliance marines on Eden Prime (iirc). In ME2, Shepard calls him out on this and says that the geth can't keep hiding in the 'Veil and let the quarians hate them, and Legion responds saying that organics act on emotion (we act irrationally) and that this makes the process difficult. They want to understand us (going so far as creating false rumors on the extranet to study our responses!) but fear plagues both sides.

It should also be said that -- where the geth are concerned -- Legion was the exception, not the rule. His ME3 replacement is far less trusting and cooperative, which is likely a more accurate representation of most of them.

Sync provides a solution whereby organics, to reap the benefits of the change, must reach out to/cooperate with synthetics. Also, it is likely to establish a network method of communication where they would be more comfortable reaching out to us than physical contact -- they need to ensure their safety before establishing any cooperation.

Humans have always understood each other, it hasn't stopped us trying to kill each other if someone else has something we want.

I'm not so sure about that first part!

The laws of thermodynamics will still apply post synthesis. Resources and energy will still be limited, more-so now if synthesis prevents old age and death and the organic population skyrockets. Wars will probably break out over those resources, between different species of organics, and with synthetics. Except now organics will presumably have enhanced physical capabilities making them more destructive combatants,

There has been proven no link between enhanced weapon-technology and violence levels. The opposite is true, in fact. Today, we have arms capable of killing at much higher efficiency than we did centuries ago. However, if wars today had casualty-rates at the same proportion of those fought 300-400 years ago, there would be 20 times more dead!

Correlation need not imply causation, of course, but evidence would prove that having better technology for warfare will not lead to more destructive conflict. Believe it or not, the world is more peaceful now than it's ever been.

Apart from that, conflict is likely to be a future issue after all possible Crucible outcomes. Bit of a moot point, IMO.

and synthetics might be capable of hatred and cruelty, just like organics.

From my understanding of Sync, synthetics are not fundamentally altered to something different. Theirs is a more indirect change. They learn more about us, 'may understand the way we think, but they otherwise retain the same identities.

They have been given (better) ability to emphathize, but are not necessarily given emotion.

Call me a glass-half-empty sort of person, but to me Synthesis just doesn't seem to do anything that couldn't have been accomplished naturally, and at its own pace, without instantaneously altering the entire galaxy without its knowledge or consent. It's just not worth the price.

I feel that point, clearly many feel the same way. I'll just have to disagree with it! 'On a number of levels.

As it concerns the price involved, that's where I'm at a core disagreement. In working as planned, the worst that will happen is that some folks are pissed (and, in some way, even the other options will ****** *someone* off). I have never feared controversy; I welcome it. It is also not nearly a big enough of a downside to detract from all the upside involved.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 02 mai 2013 - 03:25 .

[Wayning_Star]

Isn't this all just about thinking in absolutes? That mother daughter team vs. is an example. Just like some of those anti synthesis posters relying on a kind of terror, or fear of synthesis with that 'vision' from a beacon, even though it's from a time before Shepard even understood the message?

How do you control your fear? Anyone (besides Argolas know..