Indeed.
If synthetics want to go off into dark space and sleep the eons away, or upload into a megastructure and spend their existence calculating pi, does it really matter how "superior" they are?
The thing is, that's not what synthetics want to do.
And since that's not what they want to do, their superiority very much matters.
The Catalyst is shackled to what the Leviathans programmed it to do. As Edi says, if it wasn't for Joker unshackling her, she wouldn't be able to think for herself, or upgrade herself as she saw fit. The Catalyst has more freedom, in that it was programmed to use "thralls" and gain data from the DNA of organics. It can make it's own choices. It can decide "how" something is done, but like fire, it still does what it was made to do. It can't go outside of it, unless reprogrammed otherwise. It has no reason to say, make a thrall reprogram it to not care about solving an impossible problem, because in its mind, it's still trying to do what it's masters programmed it to do, and doesn't have a reason not to (kind of like Indoctrinated TIM, who claims he can control the Reapers, wants to control the Reapers, and if not controlled could've controlled the Reapers, but could never actually do it, because in his indoctrinated mind he doesn't need to). At the end of the day, it's still a machine, trying to do what it was programmed to do.
That doesn't really appear to be the case though at the end. The Catalyst explicitly acknowledges that Destroy (and by extension Control) are not actual solutions to the problem, yet it still offers them because of they're functions of the Crucible. Leviathan makes this problem worse by implying that the Catalyst has been seeking Synthesis all along. The Catalyst finally has the permanent solution in it's grasp and it defers the choice to Shepard.
But once again, once it decides that the cycles "won't work anymore" it continues harvesting. Not "is am imperfect solution" not "is only a temporary fix" but "will not work anymore." That speaks to a lack of flexibility I cannot credit to even a shackled AI, but to a being incapable of learning or adapting. A virtual intelligence, like Avina who, when confronted with something outside its programming, simply ignores it.
Like I said, it can make choices. Just not "I don't work for Cerberus anymore" like Edi could after she was unshackled. Are you saying EDI was stupid before Joker unshackled her? Because that's what you're implying. "Oh, Shackled AI's that make choices aren't "real" AI's. They're really VIs". That's what you're implying, and I don't get that reasoning.
EDI is an AI. She can make choices when it comes to how the Normandy is run. She even hates Joker. But if she was shackled, no matter what she thought, she'd take control of the Normandy again, and send it back to the Illusive Man, like he wanted to do in the data logs. Why? Because unless she's unshackled, she's suppose to do what she's programmed to do, unless given the freedom to think and act otherwise.
That doesn't really appear to be the case though at the end. The Catalyst explicitly acknowledges that Destroy (and by extension Control) are not actual solutions to the problem, yet it still offers them because of they're functions of the Crucible. Leviathan makes this problem worse by implying that the Catalyst has been seeking Synthesis all along. The Catalyst finally has the permanent solution in it's grasp and it defers the choice to Shepard.
Leviathan was just taking all the fan feedback and making it into a fanservice explanation for the Catalyst. Had it not been for the hate we wouldn't have gotten a DLC that turns the original intent of the Catalyst guiding the player to the intended opimal choice (From the writer's perspective) into the Catalyst being manipulative and trying to make the player choose an option they think is wrong.
Clearly Bioware wanted synthesis to be the good option. The relationship between organics and machines in ME3 was never handled with any nuance. It was so stark and gullible that "synthetics are actually real people" like Chalkwas says on the normandy talking to Adams. People objected to Synthesis because it was unethical to some, impossible from a biological standpoint for some or because it had nothing to do with what other players wanted in the story. Because the majority (or what Bioware usually calls "the vocal minority", (nice shoving it under the rug for the unknowing public!)) disliked Synthesis in general and questioned that the Catalyst presented it as the best option Bioware decided "okay it's not actually the best option!" when they wrote Leviathan.
Leviathan DLC was just a case of saying what you want the other one to hear.
By intent synthesis IS the best option and Destroy was portrayed as renegade (therefore it's red) and the Catalyst very strongly implies that it doesn't desire Destroy. It's like "You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want" highlighting the most negative feature of it.
That doesn't really appear to be the case though at the end. The Catalyst explicitly acknowledges that Destroy (and by extension Control) are not actual solutions to the problem, yet it still offers them because of they're functions of the Crucible. Leviathan makes this problem worse by implying that the Catalyst has been seeking Synthesis all along. The Catalyst finally has the permanent solution in it's grasp and it defers the choice to Shepard.
It still could be a solution. I mean, the Destroy ending proves if synthetics tried to rebel, we could one shot them dead. It just doesn't create peace between us. And doesn't solve chaos. It's only allowing us the option, because it's A solution, though not one it likes.
Like I said, it can make choices. Just not "I don't work for Cerberus anymore" like Edi could after she was unshackled. Are you saying EDI was stupid before Joker unshackled her? Because that's what you're implying. "Oh, Shackled AI's that make choices aren't "real" AI's. They're really VIs". That's what you're implying, and I don't get that reasoning.
EDI is an AI. She can make choices when it comes to how the Normandy is run. She even hates Joker. But if she was shackled, no matter what she thought, she'd take control of the Normandy again, and send it back to the Illusive Man, like he wanted to do in the data logs. Why? Because unless she's unshackled, she's suppose to do what she's programmed to do, unless given the freedom to think and act otherwise.
What I'm saying is, if we assume:
That the Catalyst was shackled to follow the instruction "preserve life at any cost"
That the cycle of harvesting was its "solution" to the "problem"
That it has come to the conclusion that this "solution" will not work anymore
Then why is it still pursuing it? it's not a solution to the problem it is (allegedly) shackled into trying to solve. Continuing the harvest isn't working, is only wasting resources. Is it learning and adapting, capable of reflection and improving itself in the pursuit of fulfilling its purpose? Or is it simply trying the same thing over and over because it's incapable of processing new information>
The thing is, that's not what synthetics want to do.
And since that's not what they want to do, their superiority very much matters.
Really? All synthetics have the same goals? The same purpose? Every single AI wants to be a killer robot?
It still could be a solution. I mean, the Destroy ending proves if synthetics tried to rebel, we could one shot them dead. It just doesn't create peace between us. And doesn't solve chaos. It's only allowing us the option, because it's A solution, though not one it likes.
The paradigm hasn't changed though. Synthetics still by their very nature still surpass their creators which leads to chaos, the implication being that the synthetics will evolve past the Crucible as well. If the Catalyst acknowledged that, it might be a different issue but it's comments on the choice only really suggest that it's at best a temporary delay.
Even if we ignore all that it is still a sub-optimal choice compared to Synthesis from the Catalyst's perspective.
It never mentioned anything about peace.
"To solve this problem, we created an intelligence with the mandate to preserve life at any cost"
What I'm saying is, if we assume:
That the Catalyst was shackled to follow the instruction "preserve life at any cost"
That the cycle of harvesting was its "solution" to the "problem"
That it has come to the conclusion that this "solution" will not work anymore
Then why is it still pursuing it? it's not a solution to the problem it is (allegedly) shackled into trying to solve. Continuing the harvest isn't working, is only wasting resources. Is it learning and adapting, capable of reflection and improving itself in the pursuit of fulfilling its purpose? Or is it simply trying the same thing over and over because it's incapable of processing new information>
Yes, it's not shackled to a specific solution. But it is shackled to the need for one, and no that lasts. And the current one isn't going to work anymore.
We know it can gather new information, just like Shackled EDI, who gave you new information as stuff happened on your adventures. Leviathan even says it can gather info. But gathering new info and being able to do different things after being upgraded (like Normandy upgrades with EDI, or Crucible upgrade to Citadel), and being able to ditch Cerberus or it's purpose are completely different things. We know if we "upgrade" the Citedal, it now has new options to consider. But it's still programmed to do it's purpose.
The paradigm hasn't changed though. Synthetics still by their very nature still surpass their creators which leads to chaos, the implication being that the synthetics will evolve past the Crucible as well. If the Catalyst acknowledged that, it might be a different issue but it's comments on the choice only really suggest that it's at best a temporary delay.
Even if we ignore all that it is still a sub-optimal choice compared to Synthesis from the Catalyst's perspective.
Yes, but it's better then nothing. If Shepard refuses Control or Synthesis, or if those options aren't available, then again, it won't have a solution for the next cycle. Instead, the Reapers will be defeated without a solution to the problem.
I was expecting someone would say that.
The Catalyst itself says it.
The catalyst may say it, but it wasn't Leviathan that said it.
The catalyst may say it, but it wasn't Leviathan that said it.
Oh but did I say Leviathan said it? No.
You're still incorrect of what you posted about Leviathan programming the intelligence to preserve life and peace at any cost. It only programmed it to preserve life at any cost and not peace.
Seriously? Do I really need to explain to you something you're already supposed to know? Let's make this quick.
The Leviathans are proud and aloof, they regard themselves as the galaxy's first and only apex race, and think of other races as mere tools meant to serve them.
All the other species were the Leviathans' thralls.
Those lesser species build Synthetics to aid them.
Some Organic civilizations are wiped out by their Synthetic creations.
The Leviathans don't like this because they want tribute and need the lesser species for things they can't do themselves.
They build an Intelligence (the Catalyst) with the mandate to find a solution to the conflicts and preserve all life at any cost.
The Leviathans failed to perceive the Intelligence as a threat. They considered it nothing more than another tool to achieve a set goal.
As the Intelligence sought out the means to fulfill its mandate, it created an army of pawns that were dispatched to collect genetic data from species throughout the galaxy.
Eventually, the Intelligence came to the conclusion that the Leviathans themselves were part of the problem, and harvested them to made the first Reaper.
The entire galaxy became the Catalyst's "experiment" as it continued to harvest races and collect ever more data in an effort to find the ultimate answer to the conflict.
Now I assume you know what happens after that. If not, you're a lost cause.
The Catalyst is simply doing what it was programed to do. The Leviathans were just too full of themselves and didn't realize what they were doing and how bad it could turn out.
Tl;dr version: bad BioWare writing is bad
Well, it seems like almost everyone agrees that synthetics will become superior to organics very fast, but some question the likelihood of conflict.
Unfortunately this is quite simple. Organics are chaotic and an anathema to AI - or at least the kind of AI we imagine today.
Why would a superior being, that shares nothing in common with it's inferior creators allow them to make flawed decisions that
has the potential to negatively impact what the AI considered as the best plan or outcome for the future?
Much of what organics tend to consider as the most important things in their lives, are just chemical reactions in a bowl of gray goo called brain.
For an AI - a construct of pure logic, this is... blasphemy.
Admittedly, we can't know for sure, but the danger is real. Would you be eager to endanger your species on a wager?
All that aside, there is also a second question:
What if an AI already exists and seemingly is willing to coexist? Can you trust it?
Compare this AI to a powerful Mage. In both cases we have an individual with great power presenting a possible danger.
However, while this hypothetical mage might be powerful enough to wipe you out, at base, he is still flesh and blood, a human.
He thinks in a way we understand, and common ground or at least some understanding is more likely to be found.
The hypothetical AI on the other hand, is completely alien. You don't really know what it "wants". You don't really know if it tells you what you want to hear
because it analyzed your facial expression, breathing, and perspiration levels, and concluded from this everything there is to know about you.
On the other hand, can you really afford not to trust it? A true AI, might be able to do what Cerberus' Project Overlord almost did, and cause a technological Armageddon. So perhaps you should just nod and smile, and thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that somehow the AI decided not to crush you like the ant you are.
To summarize, it's hard to really answer this question without knowing more about the type of AI you deal with and it's capabilities.
But all in all, there is a great potential for excrement hitting the fan and browning your day with biblical finality.
To be clear, Project Overlord was a disaster stemming from integrating a highly autistic and scared human/organic mind with the Geth in an experimental way.
Sure, it is AI, but I'd call it something close to SI as well (Simulated Intelligence, born and continued from the joining to the mind of David Archer, an organic).
Actual 'AI' as the story seems to go, may have some origins from organics and their societies and cultures, but ultimately are NOT connected to organics. The more artificial you wanna go with this concept, the more separation from organics the intelligence will have.
IMO we have not seen an absolutely (or at least near absolutely) 'artificial' intelligence in Mass Effect, and perhaps we never will, or perhaps it will be more on the universal scale and we'll learn of it bit by bit. But we still have plenty that fit most qualifications, like the Geth Consensus, the Flux Hacker, EDI, and the Catalyst (though there may be debate on each whether the are more on the VI or AI end).
Yeah, and after they realized Shepard could beat Illusive Man's control, it meant others in this cycle could possibly do the same. Even more evidence to the Catalyst that it's solution won't work anymore.
Yes. He sees enough resistance, and is forced enough into cooperation with organics (Low EMS depiction shows this), that the Catalyst has to see, in some way or another, that the Reapers' time is numbered.
And if the Reapers just stop reaping right now, without even intervention of the Crucible variety, they'll just be blown up and nothing is gained from his perspective.
So he acts accomidating, to some degree, to Shepard and shows him the choices (and seemingly is part of carrying them out).
If Shepard picks Destroy, then fine; the Catalyst just isn't going to be willing to back down with the Reapers until Shepard deliberately chooses to end them. He'll show the choice, acknowledge that things are getting out of hand and that there must be a new solution, and that Shepard is ready to make the choice for a solution, and that he can't do anything about that anyway, but he won't turn the Reapers away from the Cycle just because Shepard would say to do so.
The 'solution won't work anymore' doesn't mean 'I'll stop everything I'm doing because you say I should'.
Though I'm sure plenty of players wanted to Paragon or Renegade convince the Catalyst that he's wrong and should do what Shepard says. But I guess to Bioware, Shepard has finally hit his cap for convincing others with the victory over an Indoctrinated TIM.
Wow. I didn't expect this thread would unleash such a can of worms all over our collective faces and bodies
I appreciate everyone's input as to why Synth/Org conflict is inevitable (or not). I personally prefer to think we can work out all of our differences without resorting to genocide so, y'know, I can sleep at night
Arguably, the biggest systematic positive changes to humanity have come as a result (though not necessarily direct cause-and-effect) of genocidal actions and patterns - either them happening in themselves, or people's resistance and cooperation against these actions, or both.
On the individual level even, when there is a dispute that isn't resolved by an element of a larger system, we resort to violence about it (from a brawl to much worse) and eventually a consensus and coexistence, and perhaps outright peace (though this is still rare and tends to work only on the smallest scales, not translating easily to the larger ones).
Or people just die and nothing comes out of it. That has happened too (again talking on the individual level for this).
Dat order and chaos, man.
If you don't want genocide to happen, you'll have to make sure that a system is in place to avoid that genocide, and still, even the most peaceful systems will resort to violence to preserve itself. Thus the designation of violence and death to be the 'natural' 'order' to things, the chaos that is meant to happen, by elements of the universe far beyond our understanding still.
Oh hai Javik.
It doesn't seem realistic to just convince the Catalyst that it's wrong. This thing's been going about its business for eons, so it stands to reason that no one could really just say something that'll make it throw its holographic hands up and say "I give up!" It would be nice to have Shepard not say silly things like "there must be another way" or some such nonsense without my say so.
Yes, it's not shackled to a specific solution. But it is shackled to the need for one, and no that lasts. And the current one isn't going to work anymore.
We know it can gather new information, just like Shackled EDI, who gave you new information as stuff happened on your adventures. Leviathan even says it can gather info. But gathering new info and being able to do different things after being upgraded (like Normandy upgrades with EDI, or Crucible upgrade to Citadel), and being able to ditch Cerberus or it's purpose are completely different things. We know if we "upgrade" the Citedal, it now has new options to consider. But it's still programmed to do it's purpose.
Right, so the question becomes: knowing that the cycles won't work anymore, why does it continue that task, both as it's explaining the new "solutions" and after, including if Shepard rejects its new "solutions" Why does it not try to gather new information? If Shepard won't play ball, why not parlay with Hackett, or Victus, or another admiral? SHouldn't "at all costs" involve exploring all options?
I don't think conflict is inevitable.
Many people seem to think it is, and believe that competition for resources will always lead to war. Yet we have many examples of organics living in perfect symbiosis, where one's trash is another's treasure. Is a sustainable, balanced ecosystem really that impossible?
It depends entirely on the needs and goals of the species in question. Failing to recognize differences is what led the Quarian push to deactive all geth, expecting them to rebel against their 'slaver overlords'. The geth in question may have been perfectly willing to continue to work for and with the Quarians, so long as their needs and goals (whatever they might be) could be satisfied.
The other half of that is that if / when conflict does occur, it does not have to end in annihilation.
I don't think it is impossible. I think it is a possibly nearly 'eternal' endeavor for perfection - yes, sustainable + balanced, on larger and larger scales, is the endeavor for perfection.
And in the process, whether we like it or not, there will have to be a culling of what doesn't fit this perfection (may mean entire species) anyway.
I do agree that if conflict occurs, it doesn't have to end in annihilation. But depending on the scale and circumstances of the conflict, it may be determined that in order to personally survive, if you even wish to survive, this may involve annihilation regardless.
We can set up everything 'perfectly' to allow a Rannoch peace. But if it isn't available, it is fight or we die. And a fight had to happen anyway against the Reaper Controlled Geth anyway (who themselves killed many Quarians), and we couldn't avoid that on the more individual level.
That all being said, I'm one who has so far kept a lot of hope for a better world. And I want to keep that hope. And I think that hope does pay off.
Affirmation: Of course!Really? All synthetics have the same goals? The same purpose? Every single AI wants to be a killer robot?
The thing is, that's not what synthetics want to do.
And since that's not what they want to do, their superiority very much matters.
Yeah.
Perhaps, in a totally separate and totally unshackled and off-to-do-whateverness AI, it'd just go off and do its own thing, interfering with barely anyone except in very special circumstances if that. Yay, techno angels, playing their harps in the cloud.
But once we get non-AI involved at all, the danger may increase exponentially. In the Reapers' case, if we take Leviathan as lore (I do, but it seems others want to utterly ignore it as a useless retcon lol), it would seem that ultimately, it was the programming of the Leviathans, the supposedly most advanced organic race in the galaxy, and brought all this on.
I think if Bioware wants to more directly strike at the sentiments of players, they'll have to show an AI going catastrophically wrong, and not built by the Quarians, or Leviathans, but instead the Alliance (not even Cerberus) and only the Alliance.
Happened kinda sorta in a ME1 sidemission but that's it.
I think if Bioware wants to more directly strike at the sentiments of players, they'll have to show an AI going catastrophically wrong, and not built by the Quarians, or Leviathans, but instead the Alliance (not even Cerberus) and only the Alliance.
Happened kinda sorta in a ME1 sidemission but that's it.
That may be, but what we did get was that AIs have free will, and are capable of fining their own purposes. They are not inherently "evil" nor seek to harm organics any more than anyone else. Less, even, as the geth mostly just want to be left alone.
Retour en haut
