207 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

....Didn't say it was a good plan....

 

 

Metal jelly jars with weapons.

[dreamgazer]

"Because Godzilla" might be the best two-word rebuttal to something I've read on this forum.

[Locutus_of_BORG]

It's not that the Reapers' motive is completely illogical in itself. The main problem is that the premise that synthetic life inevitably destroys organic life has no context in light of the rest of the series. However, if want to go deeper philosophically, you can also argue that the Reapers' solution essentially destroys organic life by forcing species along predetermined lines of evolution that end at 50k years, effectively reducing them all to machinistic existence that can never change or produce anything new.

[Reorte]

2. Assuming the reapers kill 1 trillion sentients every 50.000 years to save lives. That amounts to 40.000.000.000.000.000 lives lost. If the galaxy usually holds much more than 1 trillion sentients at each cycle, it would only mean the cost of reapings is much higher. What this means is that, if AI ever wiped the galaxy completely clean it would only mean loss of life once. By the perpetual destruction and killings by the reapers, they necessarily cost many more lives than a single galaxy wide AI induced extinction would.

But their aim isn't to kill as few as possible to stop AIs forming. If you believe the Catalyst it's to stop organic life from being wiped out by AIs. They couldn't care less how many lives they end - they're not the slightest bit bothered at all by what happens to individuals (or even individual species most of the time), just organic life as a general whole. They're not interested in saving lives, just that some form of organic life still exists.

[Obadiah]

@78stonewobble
I'm not sure how relevant the scope of the current conflict is to the rationale for setting off the Destroy wave, or Synthetics using a similar weapon on Organics. If the conflict was intergalactic wouldn't players have still set off the Destroy blast? Because I think some Shepards would still set it off for the reasons they already gave. If the conflict was restricted to only our galaxy, but the blast wave hit all galaxies, would that stop people from setting off the weapon? Somehow doubt it.

The rationale stands. For all of the reasons Destroy is chosen, an AI may chose it against Organics in the future. If the conflict is not pan galactic now, when it is, the same danger is there.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The idea by the lead writer, Mac Walters, was that the player was not supposed to see anything redeemable about the reapers. That's in a video interview. I don't know if it's still on Youtube, but I'm not going to go look for it.

 

Synthesis is the destroy wave for organic life by an AI. After the Synthesis wave, according to the EC, there is no more organic life in the galaxy. It created a new DNA that is half synthetic and half organic. It solved the problem of overseeing the relations between organic and synthetic life by getting rid of both and homogenizing them. So if Destroy is picked by now, at a time far beyond the stretch anyone is going to write this story, an AI may pick Synthesis and wipe out organic life. I'm sure they'll be writing a new franchise before that happens.

[Obadiah]

Do you think that? Because I'm just gonna call BS on that as a fake interpretation and an obvious troll.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Where is the organic life after synthesis? 

[Obadiah]

Organic life is on display in the crash scene, and in the EC slides. They have been fully integrated with technology, but they're still organic.

In addition, the Destroy wave actively shut down or killed AI. Synthesis did not do that to Organics.

[dreamgazer]

Guess it depends on how liberally you define "organic".

I'm still curious about how pregnancies work.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Organic life is on display in the crash scene, and in the EC slides. They have been fully integrated with technology, but they're still organic.

 

No. They have a new DNA. They have completely changed at the molecular level. The DNA is partly synthetic now. They also are integrated with technology. They are no longer organic. I'm curious as to how they eat, too. 

 

http://youtu.be/NkhQclzHMcg?t=6m30s thru 7:00. You will see. 

[Obadiah]

@Dreamgazer
I suppose, but... isn't it a more liberal definition of "death" or "destruction" that is being used when one describes Synthesis as Destroy for organics?

@ShotgunJulia
OIC... yes yes quite convincing. Good point. Death of organics and all. How didn't I see this before? Just like Bioware not telling us the Geth were destroyed in the EC and yet so obvious.

[dreamgazer]

Insufficient data. It's a dramatic physiological change, though, that should alter how just about everything is done internally.

Does that lead to the elimination of what it means to be organic?

[SporkFu]

Wasn't the whole point of synthesis to combine organic and synthetic? So that neither is inherently better than the other.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

@Dreamgazer
I suppose, but... isn't it a more liberal definition of "death" or "destruction" that is being used when one describes Synthesis as Destroy for organics?

@ShotgunJulia
OIC... yes yes quite convincing. Good point. Death of organics and all. How didn't I see this before? Just like Bioware not telling us the Geth were destroyed in the EC and yet so obvious.

 

And here: http://youtu.be/MnoTHbvl2Wg?t=9m15s

 

"The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life into a new framework... a new DNA." 

 

That is a very significant change. That changes what you are at the molecular level. I'm quoting what was written in the game, not a head canon. It eliminates organic life as we know it. ALL organic life... it changes even plants. It makes all everything now a synthoganic lifeform.

[Obadiah]

Obviously. I mean its such a profound and significant change, right?, that everyone is doing pretty much the exact same thing in Synthesis that they are in the other slides. But now they're all drones or something with glowing eyes and molecular changes that could in no way be considered similar to or an extension of the molecular changes brought about by gene therapy already in use, because... Reapers.

[themikefest]

That would be cool. When I talk to a plant, it can actually tell me if it needs more sun or to be put in the shade.

[SporkFu]

That would be cool. When I talk to a plant, it can actually tell me if it needs more sun or to be put in the shade.

Well.... now everybody does have a green thumb. *ba-dum tsh*

[Ymladdych]

Insufficient data. It's a dramatic physiological change, though, that should alter how just about everything is done internally.

Does that lead to the elimination of what it means to be organic?

Exactly. Not only are you literally eliminating organic life from a molecular perspective, but that kind of alteration would necessarily affect an organism's entire system (metabolic pathways, hormonal feedback loops, nerve conduction, etc.), which would alter their brain functions (by extension, personality rewrites are a legitimate concern) and fundamentally change everyone's subjective, internal experience of "being alive."

Also: Synthesis is a galactic-wide event that includes plant life, and the ecological repercussions alone would be astronomical. Unless the Catalyst could calculate a perfect, harmonized solution for every biological function across all biomes and species (including bacteria) in the whole galaxy (in real-time, no less), there would be literal mass extinctions.

Not to mention that, psychologically, unless Synthesis forces an immediate acceptance of the Reaper tech, you'd also have a crap-ton of sapients who wouldn't "take" to it. Even if you "only" see a 1% jump in suicide rates, out of a galactic population of 1 trillion, you're still talking about 10,000,000,000 dead just from that alone.

[AlanC9]

For one thing, if the Catalyst is programed to stop synthetic life from wiping out organic life, then why institute the cycles at all? Why not simply have the Reapers policing the Galaxy (like they do in the control ending) laying the smack down on any race that tries to defy their mandates? We have seen from the end of ME 3 that the Reapers have enough forces to simultaneously engage forces across the entire galaxy, and we have Codex entries stating how the Reapers need no supply lines, how their drive cores need no discharging, and how they can operate indefinitely, so why not have Reaper forces active throughout the Milky Way all the time? 
 

This is a problem for almost any explanation of Reaper behavior.

[AlanC9]

Not to mention that, psychologically, unless Synthesis forces an immediate acceptance of the Reaper tech, you'd also have a crap-ton of sapients who wouldn't "take" to it. Even if you "only" see a 1% jump in suicide rates, out of a galactic population of 1 trillion, you're still talking about 10,000,000,000 dead just from that alone.

Um... that's a 1% suicide rate, not a 1% jump in the suicide rate.

I don't know what a reasonable suicide rate would be. What percentage of new paraplegics commit suicide? I'd ask about quadriplegics, but obviously they face certain difficulties in this regard.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

I'd ask about quadriplegics, but obviously they face certain difficulties in this regard.

 

*Laff*

[78stonewobble]

1.  The reapers were specifically created by the Leviathans to preserve life based on what they saw occurring in the Milky Way.  If the Leviathans weren't concerned about anything beyond this galaxy, why would the Reapers be?  There's absolutely nothing to suggest that the Reapers' original mandate ever extended to other galaxies (and on the remote possibility that it did, who knows how many other galaxies they visit - we certainly don't).

 

2.  Why would AI wiping out organic life only mean loss of life once?  What's to say that those AIs wouldn't do it again?  On top of that, the Reapers specifically leave less developed races alone (e.g. the Yahg), allowing life to go on after the cycle.  There's no reason to think that AIs, having exterminated their creators, wouldn't be a threat to lesser species as they evolved down the track, much sooner than the Reapers would ever be.

 

3.  The Leviathans created the Reapers because they witnessed, on multiple occasions, sentient species' own AIs turning on them and destroying them.  So yes, the MEU absolutely has examples of AI wiping out organic life, even before you take the Geth into account.  And I just don't agree with your second alleged assumption.  Hanging around to wipe out AIs as they developed would have meant leaving sentient races to get more and more advanced.  To me, that path creates a far greater risk of either organic or sentient life eventually becoming too powerful for the Reapers.

 

4. And as for your analogy... What?!?  The Leviathans actually witnessed species being wiped out by synthetics, which meant they had evidence of the threat.  There is literally ZERO evidence to suggest that lesser primates would overtake us and become a threat (unless you count Planet of the Apes, lol).  Your whole premise bears no relevance to this argument.

 

5. Your PS - this assumes that the AIs would 'move on or whatever'.  Why would they do that?  Dominate the galaxy and then just abandon it?

 

6. Your PPS - In 300 years, the Geth took over a significant area of space (the Perseus Vale) as they grew in number.  Imagine how far they could have spread in another 10,000 years.  The AI threat is more likely to come from unchecked expansion and abuse of resources than specific targeting of 'ants and flowers'.  Every species grows in number without a balanced ecosystem to keep it in check (i.e. predators and prey).  I don't think that it's a stretch to say that synthetics would do the same.

 

7. Look at it this way: under the Reapers, humans were allowed to evolve and enjoy their lives in relative peace for countless generations, over millennia.  It was only a tiny, tiny potion of humanity that was eventually targeted by the Reapers.  If synthetics had risen to be a dominant force in the galaxy back around the Leviathans' time, humanity may never have had that chance.  Hell, Earth may have been a hollowed out shell by now.

 

8. Granted, my arguments are obviously just based on ifs and maybes, but that's kinda all we have to go on.  The game simply can't provide enough detail to answer every question.

 

1. Ah, then the Reapers have allready failed. Ignoring 99,999...9 percent of the universe would be like reaping 3 planets out of 40 billion in the milky way and claim those 3 are now safe from any ai. "but ai could be developed by organics on the other 39.999.999.999 planet?" "sssh... ignore them" . We know that they don't because that would make the whole ordeal even more stupid by orders of magnitude. Death on an unimaginable scale repeated and such a waste of energy and raw materials (in constructing reapers) that it would have cost less lives to kill off the entire universe.

 

2. Because we are not assuming the supposed AI is as stupid and incompetent as the Reapers and the catalyst. I assume that an AI can limit it's "population growth" (has an ounce of the logic humans can display), can easily live in space and absorb energy directly from stars (don't need planets or atleast all of them and thus no conflict of interest) and would be about as interested in organic species as us humans are of ants. They're annoying if they're in out kitchen, but we don't care about those in the forest. In any case my argument still stands. Killing off all organic life in the galaxy once, is less loss of life than continually killing a trillion of them every 50.000 years over 2.000.000.000 years.

 

3. As you say... There is no evidence of an AI killing off ALL organic life. There is some evidence of some AI killing off some organic life (sometimes with very good reason), but that's not the same. There is a huge difference between killing some guy (or a billion) in self defence and then embarking on a quest to scrub every planet, asteroid, comet and grain of spacedust with disinfectant... but to then only do it in one galaxy. The first scenario is of quite sane, the 2nd is of a hysterical illogical germophobe who'd scrub one room in his house. Makes no sense. 

 

4. Still perfectly valid.... Apes has probably "eradicated" all the fruits from one tree at one time. Pretty much the same evidence. 

 

5. There is no evidence that such an AI would want to consume all planets and energy from the entire galaxy. Which leaves around tens of billions of inhabitable planets. Even if they would want to do that, there are presumably 100.000.000.000 galaxies in the known universe. Plenty to pick from. In any case... It's a stupid waste of energy and raw materials to continiously monitor every single planet for organic life. Energy and rawmaterials wasted = lives lost... Organic OR AI.  

 

6. No, but it's a stretch to call AI stupid as you do. Intelligent beings CAN limit their growth (well, not so many humans, but let's assume that the AI actually IS intelligent and rational). The geth needed enough ressources to grow in intelligence somewhat and to be able to defend themselves against anything organics threw at them. That merits a certain size to their space. It does not merit the, possibly quite unnecessary, waste of ressources and energy that a war would be. 

 

7. IF organics had developed ai, if that ai was evulz, if that ai was illogical and was unable to limit it's own growth, if that ai would become more powerfull than reapers... Then yes. 

 

8. It's based around baseless assumptions around AI behaviour, dependent on complete irrationality from said AI and a handwaving of 99,999999999 percent of the known universe. Which is by orders of magnitude worse than being a flat earth believer today.   

[78stonewobble]

@78stonewobble
I'm not sure how relevant the scope of the current conflict is to the rationale for setting off the Destroy wave, or Synthetics using a similar weapon on Organics. If the conflict was intergalactic wouldn't players have still set off the Destroy blast? Because I think some Shepards would still set it off for the reasons they already gave. If the conflict was restricted to only our galaxy, but the blast wave hit all galaxies, would that stop people from setting off the weapon? Somehow doubt it.

The rationale stands. For all of the reasons Destroy is chosen, an AI may chose it against Organics in the future. If the conflict is not pan galactic now, when it is, the same danger is there.

 

If any organics were inflicting an equivalent amount of loss of life (organic or AI) to what the reapers are doing, that AI would be right to choose destroy. 

 

The exception being, offcourse, if conflict was only limited to the galaxy, but blastwave reaches the entire universe. In that case the loss of life might be larger from choosing destroy and it's better to give up on one galaxy, than to give up on 100.000.000.000 (or an infinite number) galaxies worth of life. 

 

The switching point is around 40.000-50.000 galaxies affected. 

[78stonewobble]

Exactly. Not only are you literally eliminating organic life from a molecular perspective, but that kind of alteration would necessarily affect an organism's entire system (metabolic pathways, hormonal feedback loops, nerve conduction, etc.), which would alter their brain functions (by extension, personality rewrites are a legitimate concern) and fundamentally change everyone's subjective, internal experience of "being alive."

Also: Synthesis is a galactic-wide event that includes plant life, and the ecological repercussions alone would be astronomical. Unless the Catalyst could calculate a perfect, harmonized solution for every biological function across all biomes and species (including bacteria) in the whole galaxy (in real-time, no less), there would be literal mass extinctions.

Not to mention that, psychologically, unless Synthesis forces an immediate acceptance of the Reaper tech, you'd also have a crap-ton of sapients who wouldn't "take" to it. Even if you "only" see a 1% jump in suicide rates, out of a galactic population of 1 trillion, you're still talking about 10,000,000,000 dead just from that alone.

 

Plus, it either "brainwashes" everyone, or let us call that, fundamentally change how everyone thinks (that can't be brainwashing) or we would still need some reapers laying the smack down on people inventing "pure AI". 

 

Hmm actually we still need reapers reaping. Organic life, which could develop AI, could develop around 40-50 billion places in just our galaxy. Plus in the next galaxy and the next and the next and the next...