137512 réponses à ce sujet

[damage incorp96]

sihill90 wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

Here's the thing imho, if the quarians do find a reaper and control it I don't think it will just be a Geth vs Quarians war. Maybe it would be to start, but the quarians have been sh*t on so long they may decide they want more than just their world and they have a reaper to back them up. or.. if the quarians find a reaper and become indoc'ed then it will also be a quarian vs everyone war. Not sure if any of that would enter into the equation when Bioware writes me3. I am rooting for a good quarian race that doesn't find a reaper, but are the key (because of their experience w/ AI) to defeating them.

I honestly doubt that the Quarians could control a Reaper. They (Rael'Zorah and Daro'Xen) are having trouble controling/defeating the Geth. One can assume that Reaper "code", if they really are AIs (they could be organics who "ascended" into machines, overcoming physical boundaries) is a lot more sophisticated than the Geth. How could Quarians, even with all their knowledge, be able to even remotely influence a machine like a Reaper ?

Not sure, but as I said it what some in the conclave would like to do in the me book Ascension. Never said it was a feasible or even smart idea.

[MasterMegatron]

damage incorp96 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

MasterMegatron wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

No, I probably would too. I couldn't respect myself if I let the geth get enslaved to the aggressors simply because I was infatuated with Tali. Could I even respect the relationship if I was forced to go against my belief's purely for racial bias?

Luckily I have the meta game knowledge that I can eventually Paragon bandaid everything......probably

Are the geth a 'race'? Tali states they aren't any smarter than a varen, on an individual basis and only gain 'intelligence' when linked together. I'm not for wiping them out either, but don't know where they fit in as a species. Of course if the quarians had implemented Asimov's laws for robotics it wouldn't be an issue.

Geth are sentient beings now, even if the do need numbers to be so. And freedom is the right of all sentient beings.

[epoch_]

The_KFD_Case wrote...

epoch_ wrote...

listen to this, its long, but o so worth it.
http://twiturm.com/2ju2p

I've listened to about a quarter of that radio broadcast. I'm not sure I'm going to finish listening to it. If she has been doing what the broadcast says she has been doing then the boyfriend is fully justified in ending matters, but I cringe at public humiliation in general. Not to mention the unnecessary cruelty of leading her on.

Its worth finishing. It doesn't seem justified at first, but as you'll find out, it probably was.

[The_KFD_Case]

R34P3RR3D33M3R wrote...

MasterMegatron wrote...

I must be the only one who'd side with Legion, if given no other options.

Not the only one, I've seen a few others, but mostly in other threads.
I'd side with the Quarians, if war was the only way.

Realistically speaking there would also be the option to not actively side with either faction. Personally I'm highly optimistic there will be a peace option in ME3. If so that will be the one I will want to pursue first and foremost. A number of things would have to change before I'd advocate for the Quarians to go to war against the Geth. The Geth are the superior force at present it seems and while this does not automatically guarantee them victory in a war with the Quarians it does give them an advantage. I do not trust admiral Xen's motives and would likely not side with her.

[damage incorp96]

Weiser_Cain wrote...

What I don't understand is why they don't hollow out a moon. I mean if they can live indefinitely on ships why not settle on a lifeless planetoid and transform the surface with tech modules.

true, but how many lifetimes would it take, and the energy required? They would probably need outside help, which I don't think would happen.

[DarkwanderStorm]

damage incorp96 wrote...

Weiser_Cain wrote...

What I don't understand is why they don't hollow out a moon. I mean if they can live indefinitely on ships why not settle on a lifeless planetoid and transform the surface with tech modules.

true, but how many lifetimes would it take, and the energy required? They would probably need outside help, which I don't think would happen.

better off finding another planet with life or get thier old one back

[The_KFD_Case]

Jake71887 wrote...

The_KFD_Case wrote...

Jake71887 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

Could you imagine not having claws and trying to scratch an itch? Hell.

I can scratch with the palm of my hand, as well as teeth. 

Facial stubble can do wonders in that department as well.

Nah, I use my stubble as a torture device, not an itch remover... 

Yeah, I've found not all women are equally appreciative of a few days stubble rubbing their necks and cheeks while engaging in bedsheet gymnastics.

[damage incorp96]

MasterMegatron wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

MasterMegatron wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

No, I probably would too. I couldn't respect myself if I let the geth get enslaved to the aggressors simply because I was infatuated with Tali. Could I even respect the relationship if I was forced to go against my belief's purely for racial bias?

Luckily I have the meta game knowledge that I can eventually Paragon bandaid everything......probably

Are the geth a 'race'? Tali states they aren't any smarter than a varen, on an individual basis and only gain 'intelligence' when linked together. I'm not for wiping them out either, but don't know where they fit in as a species. Of course if the quarians had implemented Asimov's laws for robotics it wouldn't be an issue.

Geth are sentient beings now, even if the do need numbers to be so. And freedom is the right of all sentient beings.

I don't disagree with you that all life wants (and should be) free. But, I don't think it is a right, it is something that must be fought for (not saying it's right, just a truth), freedom is never free. But enough political stuff, I think they should find a peaceful solution, but not convinced they will.

[The_KFD_Case]

MasterMegatron wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

MasterMegatron wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

Lareit wrote...

damage incorp96 wrote...

No, I probably would too. I couldn't respect myself if I let the geth get enslaved to the aggressors simply because I was infatuated with Tali. Could I even respect the relationship if I was forced to go against my belief's purely for racial bias?

Luckily I have the meta game knowledge that I can eventually Paragon bandaid everything......probably

Are the geth a 'race'? Tali states they aren't any smarter than a varen, on an individual basis and only gain 'intelligence' when linked together. I'm not for wiping them out either, but don't know where they fit in as a species. Of course if the quarians had implemented Asimov's laws for robotics it wouldn't be an issue.

Geth are sentient beings now, even if the do need numbers to be so. And freedom is the right of all sentient beings.

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings (self-defence resutling in violence is acceptable as long as it appears to be in proportion to the scale of the initial attack(s), IMO), which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

P.S. The self-defence clause does open the door for the possibility of pre-emptive strikes though, which becomes another issue open to debate.

Modifié par The_KFD_Case, 20 février 2010 - 05:48 .

[Lareit]

Weiser_Cain wrote...

What I don't understand is why they don't hollow out a moon. I mean if they can live indefinitely on ships why not settle on a lifeless planetoid and transform the surface with tech modules.

The problem is they can't live indefinately on their ships. Their children can't realisitically be expected to bring in new ships larger then small transport vessels or frigates  during their pilgrimage. They also lack a good supply of trade goods for which to barter with other species.

They were always going to have to eventually find a habitable planet and colonize it, or retake their home.


Personally I have no idea how the council could be so damn irresponsible and allow a race to survive so close to extinction for 300 years and not take drastic measures to intervene. When I read the planet lore tidbit about how the council kicked the quarians off an council owned planet, I truly regretted saving their lives. The council is impotent and incompetant.

[turelhimvampire]

The_KFD_Case wrote...

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings, which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

Even if said sentient beings WERE trying to destroy other sentient beings, what difference does that make? It all depends on the scale of it - if they were attempting genocide then yes. But the genocide of one species just to prevent the genocide of another species is still genocide.

Ethics doesn't even factor into it - we're all as bad as each other when it boils down to it. The only difference is perspective.

[The_KFD_Case]

turelhimvampire wrote...

The_KFD_Case wrote...

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings, which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

Even if said sentient beings WERE trying to destroy other sentient beings, what difference does that make? It all depends on the scale of it - if they were attempting genocide then yes. But the genocide of one species just to prevent the genocide of another species is still genocide.

Ethics doesn't even factor into it - we're all as bad as each other when it boils down to it. The only difference is perspective.

Welcome back Turel. Please read the changes I made to my referenced post while you were posting yours.

[Lareit]

turelhimvampire wrote...

The_KFD_Case wrote...

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings, which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

Even if said sentient beings WERE trying to destroy other sentient beings, what difference does that make? It all depends on the scale of it - if they were attempting genocide then yes. But the genocide of one species just to prevent the genocide of another species is still genocide.

Ethics doesn't even factor into it - we're all as bad as each other when it boils down to it. The only difference is perspective.

When it's them or us, you side with the person who didn't throw the first blow. I like the quarians alot, but siding with them simply because I like them more then the geth, if they're the ones causing the problem......I could not do it and retain my honor.

[damage incorp96]

[quote]The_KFD_Case wrote...

[quote]MasterMegatron wrote...

[quote]damage incorp96 wrote...

[quote]Lareit wrote...
[quote]MasterMegatron wrote...
[quote]Bester76 wrote...
[quote]Lareit wrote...
[quote]damage incorp96 wrote...
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings (self-defence resutling in violence is acceptable as long as it appears to be in proportion to the scale of the initial attack(s), IMO), which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

[/quote]

True, I am wondering if there will be a law here about restricting AI's sometime in the future, similar to laws restricting clones. The way our tech is growing though our laws may lag behind our tech and we may create an AI to see if we could before we ask if we should. It will be an interesting time and one that will come, just don't know if I want to see it.

[sihill90]

turelhimvampire wrote...

The_KFD_Case wrote...

Agreed as long as the sentient beings in question are not actively trying to destroy other sentient beings, which the Geth aren't. Thus I support their right to exist. It's all too easy to think of them as just mindless machines. Should our own reality ever construct AIs it will raise some significant ethical questions, just as the issue of cloning does.

Even if said sentient beings WERE trying to destroy other sentient beings, what difference does that make? It all depends on the scale of it - if they were attempting genocide then yes. But the genocide of one species just to prevent the genocide of another species is still genocide.

Ethics doesn't even factor into it - we're all as bad as each other when it boils down to it. The only difference is perspective.

This. The difference between Quarians and Geth is that (some) Quarians want to annihilate/enslave the Geth, while the Geth only want to defend their independence. Geth do NOT want to eradicate Quarians.

[DarkwanderStorm]

werd

[Lareit]

Commandr Bond wrote...

Lareit wrote...

Personally I have no idea how the council could be so damn irresponsible and allow a race to survive so close to extinction for 300 years and not take drastic measures to intervene. When I read the planet lore tidbit about how the council kicked the quarians off an council owned planet, I truly regretted saving their lives. The council is impotent and incompetant.

Agreed 100%.

The Quarians are punished for disobeying the council's "no AI" rule, but there's no way in hell each of those species (Asari, Salarian, Turian) wasn't developing AI themselves. Humans were taking the risk even after the geth had come about, you can't tell me that the council races wouldn't have been doing the same before.

Thus, they punish the first race to let it get out of hand, even though it easily could have been one of their own.

Bigoted fascists. I hope in ME3 I get to reconstruct galactic government. There are going to be a few changes...

I have a loose theory that ME3 will invovle shepard leading an assault to destroy the citadel and thus keep it from being a relay that allows the repears to port in from dark space.
Which would obviously mean bye bye council.

It'd also mean bye bye Captain Baiely and Lia'Vael  
which sucks.

[CaIIisto]

Lareit wrote...

Commandr Bond wrote...

Lareit wrote...

Personally I have no idea how the council could be so damn irresponsible and allow a race to survive so close to extinction for 300 years and not take drastic measures to intervene. When I read the planet lore tidbit about how the council kicked the quarians off an council owned planet, I truly regretted saving their lives. The council is impotent and incompetant.

Agreed 100%.

The Quarians are punished for disobeying the council's "no AI" rule, but there's no way in hell each of those species (Asari, Salarian, Turian) wasn't developing AI themselves. Humans were taking the risk even after the geth had come about, you can't tell me that the council races wouldn't have been doing the same before.

Thus, they punish the first race to let it get out of hand, even though it easily could have been one of their own.

Bigoted fascists. I hope in ME3 I get to reconstruct galactic government. There are going to be a few changes...

I have a loose theory that ME3 will invovle shepard leading an assault to destroy the citadel and thus keep it from being a relay that allows the repears to port in from dark space.
Which would obviously mean bye bye council.

It'd also mean bye bye Captain Baiely and Lia'Vael  
which sucks.

Not necessarily. Bailey seemed quite reasonable and self-motivated. A warning would likely get him off the station I'd have thought.

[turelhimvampire]

Lareit wrote...

The problem is they can't live indefinately on their ships. Their children can't realisitically be expected to bring in new ships larger then small transport vessels or frigates  during their pilgrimage. They also lack a good supply of trade goods for which to barter with other species.

They were always going to have to eventually find a habitable planet and colonize it, or retake their home.


Personally I have no idea how the council could be so damn irresponsible and allow a race to survive so close to extinction for 300 years and not take drastic measures to intervene. When I read the planet lore tidbit about how the council kicked the quarians off an council owned planet, I truly regretted saving their lives. The council is impotent and incompetant.

Whilst I agree with your outrage over the council kicking the quarians off of that colony, I don't agree with the narrow minded view on the council being impotent and incompetent.

Look at it this way: the quarians are NOT a council race - they gave up that right when they unleashed the geth onto the universe. The council will ALWAYS look after council races first, in the same way that any nation on Earth looks out for it's own interests before those of others.

You seem to see this as a black and white - which it simply isn't. You have to factor into it that if they HADN'T evicted the quarians they could have pissed off one or more of their own species to the point where a war would break out.

Then you have not only a war on your hands, but also the blame for said war being pointed solely at the quarians. The council would have met with uproar, of course, but they also have the benefit of positive history with the warring species - having recently done things to benefit those races.

The quarians are almost universally hated for the geth, what chance would they have in anyone defending them when the blame was thrown their way.

For all we know the council are actively seeking a new home world for the quarians. We know that the STG was investigating the disappearing human colonies, which could have been at the behest of the council. Just because they refused to openly assist due to negative public response from non human species doesn't mean they weren't throwing everything they could toward a solution OUTSIDE of the public eye - STG are mainly black ops and espionage anyway - not exactly public knowledge.

We only see the deed, not the reason FOR the deed. Evicting the quarians from that planet may have been beneficial to them in the long run. We just don't know.

[DarkwanderStorm]

lol black and white reference from garrus loyal mission XD

[DarkwanderStorm]

that turian council member still like to put a boot to his face

[turelhimvampire]

Lareit wrote...

When it's them or us, you side with the person who didn't throw the first blow. I like the quarians alot, but siding with them simply because I like them more then the geth, if they're the ones causing the problem......I could not do it and retain my honor.

Not really. When it's them or us, I side with the person who I have my own personal vested interest in. If the world went along with your logic we'd be at war with the USA right now. But we aren't, because we have our own vested interests in the well-being of the USA.

Politics mate - you're better staying out of it.