Apostrophe
You do realize who are you trying to convince? Poor xenos forgot the moment he stopped just roleplaying long time ago.
Not necessarily. The whole Reaper motivation story could have been cooked up to lure a certain protagonist into making certain choices.
"We helped them ascend..."
Why don't we just let them rest in peace already? After all what Wallters did to them, it's the best thing we can do. No Reaper corpses, no husks, no obelisks. Keep Andromeda free from their agony.
Well, with how the Imperium looks like, I don't really have any warm fuzzies toward it and its ideals.
The saying that the God Emperor is merely the "chaos god of order", has merit to it.
And with the way things are developing there, the humans are going to lose anyway, so...
Pff, as soon as the Emperor's physical shell 'dies' he will fully transcend and become the first true God of Order in opposition to Chaos. The only thing holding him back now is his shell sitting on Terra, once that dies (which is supposedly 0.0M42) he will ascend and humanity will rule the stars and cleanse the filth of Chaos and purge the Xenos!!
=)
Pff, as soon as the Emperor's physical shell 'dies' he will fully transcend and become the first true God of Order in opposition to Chaos. The only thing holding him back now is his shell sitting on Terra, once that dies (which is supposedly 0.0M42) he will ascend and humanity will rule the stars and cleanse the filth of Chaos and purge the Xenos!!
=)
Well, when "She Who Thirsts" was born, the "Eye of Terror" exploded into being and most of the Elves Eldar died.
Should The Emperor become a God, he would not only become the God of Order, but also the god of fanaticism, hate, merciless determination, etc.
His birth would not be a quiet, gentle affair...
Also, if his rebirth was a certainty, you don't think that the Inquisition would have stopped feeding him Psykers, or outright killed him?
Well, when "She Who Thirsts" was born, the "Eye of Terror" exploded into being and most of the Elves died.
Should The Emperor become a God, he would not only become the God of Order, but also the god of fanaticism, hate, merciless determination, etc.
His birth would not be a quiet, gentle affair...
Also, if his rebirth was a certainty, you don't think that the Inquisition would have stopped feeding him Psykers, or outright killed him?
Have Faith in the Emperor of Man!
A little bit of bloodshed is a small consequence for the ascension of our God and the return of his loyal Sons!
If we were able to play as Veetor we'd know what that's like.
I have a feeling that Quarian Master Race stole your credit chit.
Why don't we just let them rest in peace already?
See, I have no expectations for Andromeda, either, but that's a huge step up for where I would be if they were sticking in the Milky Way and continuing from where they left off. If they did that, I'd have a ton of expectations and they'd all be horrible.
VI is simply an advanced piece of software. Why wouldn't we have those?
The "Siri" on your IPhone is a VI.
As for AI, I wouldn't mind seeing them. The problems I had with ME3, had nothing to do with the existance of AI.
AIs are forbiden if the departure is before ME3 ending
I'll go all Peter Singer here and pick the latter.
Congratulations, you shouldn't be taken seriously on anything ever
You still haven't provided your own definition. You do have one, right? This isn't just disconnected ranting?
EZ.
"Life: Living matter and, as such, matter that shows certain attributes that include most of the following: abiogenesis, homeostasis, responsiveness to stimuli, growth, metabolism, adaptation, energy transformation, and reproduction. Although a noun, as with other defined entities, the word life might be better cast as a verb to reflect its essential status as a process. Life comprises individuals, living beings, assignable to groups (taxa). Each individual is composed of one or more minimal living units, called cells, and is capable of transformation of carbon-based and other compounds (metabolism), growth, and participation in reproductive acts."
Just copypasta'd that from Britannica and modified slightly for clarity.
ME synthetics are not results of abiogenesis, but artificial and deliberate creations designed with a purpose (i.e. servitude). They obviously don't grow, metabolize or adapt (i.e. evolve, and no, code upgrades are not evolution anymore than giving yourself a prosthetic limb is). They also don't reproduce, they simply make exact copies of the programs the quarians created. They can respond to some stimuli it seems, but this in and of itself means nothing as inorganic crystaline structures can do the same.
Humans (and all other ME species) are life. Dogs are life. Ferns are life. Prokaryotic bacteria are life. Toasters are not. Trying to equate them with such is scientifically flawed methodology.
If you are aware of your own existence, of the fact you can die and are still able to self-sacrifice for the sake of somebody else, you are alive.
lol, what a fool. What education system produced this gibberish, nonsense defintion might I ask?
Nearly every existing organism on earth that has ever existed apparently isn't life according to you.
I would venture to say that if we were to create or encounter an A.I. that was intelligent, fully aware of it's own existence, and possessed free will, that AI would be entitled to more rights than a dog or other animal would.
Dogs and other animals at least have sentience (i.e the ability to perceive subjectively or "feel" in layman's terms). Toasters lack this entirely, and admit it in gameplay on multiple occasions.
I value sapience above sentience.
Dude, you know I'm just going to ask for the reasoning there. Why not put it in the post? It would have been more efficient.Congratulations, you shouldn't be taken seriously on anything ever
So only accidental evolution counts? Why is that? It's also completely possible for synthetic devices to evolve via random mutation and natural selection, if using a procedure that inefficient is necessary because reasons.ME synthetics are not results of abiogenesis, but artificial and deliberate creations designed with a purpose (i.e. servitude). They obviously don't grow, metabolize or adapt (i.e. evolve, and no, code upgrades are not evolution anymore than giving yourself a prosthetic limb is).
Where did you get that idea? Why would new geth be exact copies of earlier geth? If anything, the history shows that they are not, since geth develop in ways that the quarians didn't expect.They also don't reproduce, they simply make exact copies of the programs the quarians created.
I'd keep going, but I don't want us to get too sidetracked here. Like I said upthread, before we get into this we need to ask why it's relevant whether or not something's "alive."
Like anything else, definitions change and evolve as conditions change. If AI aren't "life" by our definition, then either our definition needs to change or that definition simply isn't going to mean anything as circumstances evolve. Excluding the Geth really doesn't help here.
Hopefully they'll at least redesign the Geth into soccerball like droids or something.
Reapers = (sorta like) Borg.
Behold super evolved organic lifeforms = Species 8472, the new nemesis of the ME franchise!
Because the story feels incredibly unfinished. Shepard alive in the rubble. After everything it still feels like a monumental cliffhanger. Not to mention "did that all really happen?" and "one more story" (about "the Shepard").
Is it? EC was pretty clear on the fate of galaxy in next few dozens of years, only exception is Shepard, whom fate remained unclear on purpose, so everyone could keep their headcanon. I didn't like ending a little, but I don't see any important clifhangers here. Regardless of all that Reapers are done, their purpose was uncovered and their fate is decided.
I really have no expectations whatsoever for Andromeda. It feels like such a huge cop-out. I just can't help thinking "What if...", I guess, even if it's bleeding obvious we're not getting any answers as far as the endings go.
This discussion is pointless then. Why are you even here?
It's a new galaxy. It's going to have its own AI and who's to say we didn't make new ones since the plot bomb at the end of ME3? We shouldn't expect ships if that's the case, because it screwed those up too, and all tech. We just fixed it up and moved on.
Besides, the whole "Organics and Synthetics will always end in war" felt a bit forced to me anyway, so I'd be happy enough if they didn't carry those themes over to this one.
Because the story feels incredibly unfinished. Shepard alive in the rubble. After everything it still feels like a monumental cliffhanger. Not to mention "did that all really happen?" and "one more story" (about "the Shepard").
...
I dunno, I thought it was all wrapped up quite nicely either Shepard is now the Reaper god with and invincible army of Space Cthulhu's or everybody is dead and Liara made an infomercial for the next cycle.
The other endings do not exist for me.
Is it? EC was pretty clear on the fate of galaxy in next few dozens of years, only exception is Shepard, whom fate remained unclear on purpose, so everyone could keep their headcanon. I didn't like ending a little, but I don't see any important clifhangers here. Regardless of all that Reapers are done, their purpose was uncovered and their fate is decided.
This discussion is pointless then. Why are you even here?
Actually, I expect AIs and VIs in ME:A. Geth and *possibly* Reapers I can agree with.
Can we get a retro future-medieval setting and plot?
You know, in the same way that you can break down synthetic sentience into code lines and subroutines and call it fake, you can break down human emotions and decision making process into a chemical soup and some electricity.
More so, it should be easy to "hack" a human brain and rewrite it as it is to do so to a computer, and indeed some experiments show how easy it is to alter a human's morals and decisions merely by applying a little bit of electricity to an area of the brain.
So in the end, what is the difference really? We are toasters as well, we are just made from different materials.
Can you? The processes are intergrated in a completely different, non dualistic manner. Living organisms information processing and physical operating systems cannot be seperated, modified and reconstructed like software and hardware as far as modern science is concerned. Delete a computer program, you can make another and install it on the same hardware for the same results. In the geth's case, you can even install programs into different hardware and connect them to different networks. Lobotomize a human, and you can't simply pop in another prefrontal cortex for the same result. Moral calculations are resultingly very different.
Show me these experiments. I will concede this point if you can give an example of such that does not cause pain or damage to the human, and that can be replicated and reversed at will much as writing different software coding for a computer system is replicable and does not compromise its functions. If not, it is an admission that the two are fundamentally different despite some supposed similarities to the casual observer.
Both I and modern science would fundamentally disagree and reject your hypothesis. There are definitive differences.
I value sapience above sentience.
a dangerous line of thinking given that sapience isn't in and of itself particularly impressive. The processing power and storage capacity of the human neocortex is quite limited in theoretical terms, and such an ideology would consider any system which is superior to the human brain in this regard to be of greater moral value.
Dude, you know I'm just going to ask for the reasoning there. Why not put it in the post? It would have been more efficient.
because the guy's version of "utilitarianism" is preposterous. Presupposing that sentience is a guarantor of equal rights in relation to all other sentients is absurd. Of course, that's not to say that animal suffering is irrelevant, but due to their place in nature as inferiors they should not be given precedence if one wishes to maximize aggregate utility and minimize suffering. Living beings, at least in their natural and modern state, cannot sustain themselves without destruction and consumption of other living beings. There is nothing inherently wrong with this as long as the suffering of the inferior being was not needless (i.e., contributed to the pleasure or minimization of the pain of the superior being).
Singer's philosophy does not stand up to scrutiny. His "solution" to the supposed explotiation of lesser animals is based around veganism, which is completely ignorant of the fact that plants and fungi are also living beings that can suffer. It seems that he is capable of anthropomorphizing and willing to extend rights to other members of the animal kingdom, but not to the other kingdoms. He is guilty of the very same "speciesm" he attempts to decry, which is why no one takes his ranting seriously.
So only accidental evolution counts? Why is that? It's also completely possible for synthetic devices to evolve via random mutation and natural selection, if using a procedure that inefficient is necessary because reasons.
Natural selection isn't accidental. It is a response to evolutionary conditions that can be replicated given enough time and controlled conditions. Expressing such an opinion shows a gross misunderstanding of science.
Provide examples of such devices evolving. Nonfiction examples so that we needn't waste time speculating on the ill elucidated processes of fantasy technlolgies. Keep in mind the scientific definition of evolution as a change in heritable traits of populations over successive generations via the process of reproduction. Given that both modern machines and ME synthetics are incapable of reproduction, this seems literally impossible.
Where did you get that idea? Why would new geth be exact copies of earlier geth? If anything, the history shows that they are not, since geth develop in ways that the quarians didn't expect.
I'd keep going, but I don't want us to get too sidetracked here. Like I said upthread, before we get into this we need to ask why it's relevant whether or not something's "alive." It's my fault that I didn't get into that question right away.
As I read it, you're calling sentience important rather than sapience. OK. But why? And why don't sentient non-sapient animals count?
"There is no I, there is only We. The difference in geth is perspective"- The talking toaster.
It is the fundamental nature of the geth, on a process based level (the closest thing to an "individual" for geth) there is no differentiation between individual programs. Geth copy their code into new platforms/ server hubs and the unique sensory data from that program's experiences is incorporated into the runtimes of that specific unit, and eventually added to the collective intelligence. The code itself is the same code that the quarians originally wrote. When the geth need more processing power, they copy more of the programs and construct more hardware to house them (the whole point of the idiot, system destroying Dyson sphere which we rightfully blew to pieces), but it doesn't actually create more "individuals". The only exception is of course the Heretics, where a mathematical error in the base coding caused a different form of operation. The cause of this error is not elucidated, but circumstantial evidence points to Sovereign/ Reaper interference via deliberate use of a virus which changed the base programming to something different than what the quarians created. Neither is reproduction, only copying and modification.
Calling something "alive" is relevant in this instance because the toaster huggers in this thread keep refering to the machines as such. I am deconstructing this scientifically false claim in response. You can't just toss terms around wherever you want them, they have a meaning.
Sentience is more important most (but not all) of the time for moral calculations because without it suffering and pleasure are impossible. For beings who have it, any action in relation to objects which don't is completely justified if it achieves maximum aggregate utility. For artificial constructions made for a specific purpose, deviation from that purpose is only justified if it improves this calculation. Such creations differ from one another only in the levels of pleasure or reduction of pain they can deliver to sentients (i.e. a geth unit is still potentially more useful and therefore more valuable than most other technologies). If that calculation becomes a ratio in favour of pain/suffering, the moral course of action is destruction or modification of the flawed machinery.
Non sapient animals do count, just obviously not as much as the sapient ones which are their natural superiors.
... stuff ...
Liked not because I necessarily agree with any of it - I just love the amount of effort you put into being QMR 
You should agree with all of it, because it is the truth. However, this board and community in general seems to have a ubiquitous problem in that regard when it comes to the toasters. They want to believe their flappy faced brobot is a real people. Too bad, because it's a toaster.Liked not because I necessarily agree with any of it - I just love the amount of effort you put into being QMR
Now I'm going to abandon this thread incase someone decides to be an arsehole and throw Halo 5 spoilers around in here because they know I haven't finished it yet (this wouldn't be the first time something like that happened).
Retour en haut