163 réponses à ce sujet

[Symbolz]

I've had this bugging me since my first play through and I'd like some input:  Is EDI a true AI, or a very advance VI?
Here's my angle on this.  In my opinion, intelligent life, whether it's organic or artificial, has two fundamental characteristics.  Self-awareness and self-determination.

As per www.dictionary.com/ definitions for references.  I'll start with self-awareness.

self-a·ware
-adj.  Aware of oneself, including one's traits, feelings, and behaviors.

root of...

a·ware 
-adjective
1.having knowledge; conscious; cognizant: aware of danger.

I recall quite well in both ME games, the VIs knew that they were just programs.  They knew they were programs and knew their role, and even had a understanding of their surrounding enviroment to act on the confines of their programming.  So, at least to me, VIs fit one criteria of intelligence.  EDI has more than enough evidence to show that she is very much self-aware so I won't delve any more into that.

Now onto what I think is the more critical aspect, self-determination.

self-de·ter·mi·na·tion
-noun
1.determination by oneself or itself, without outside influence.
2.freedom to live as one chooses, or to act or decide without consulting another or others.

Now this is were I have some issues.  VIs do not show any self-determination.  Even Vigil, the closest thing I've seen in VIs to a true AI, was still just a program working within the confines of it's programming, albeit with a personality grafted onto it's base program. 

Now EDI, in my opinion, has some issues here.  I'm not talking about the blocks you first encounter when you ask EDI questions.  I know those are hardware blocks that limited her function.  No, no, no.  I'm talking about subtle clues that shows she's more like a VI throughout the game.  The single defining moment that makes me think she's more of a VI then a AI is the conversation right after Joker unshackles EDI and Shepard returns to the ship after the Collectors attack.  EDI says, "I assure you.  I am still bound by protocols in my programming.  Even if I were not, you are my crewmates."

Now to me to be a true AI is to be like a person.  A 'person' is not bound by protocols, rules, regulations, etc unless they want too.  There's always a choice.  Sometimes those choices aren't always ideal, pleasant, or what we want, giving us the illusion that there is no choice.  But the choices are there.  By what EDI has said, there is no choice - it's just is for EDI.

So in my mind, it violates the second fundamental - self-determination.  EDI cannot make choices without an outside force, her programming, to dictate her choices for her.  EDI cannot make choices for herself without referring to her program.  Because of that I have a bit of a problem believing that EDI is a true AI.

Well I've said my piece.  What are your opinions?

Modifié par Symbol117, 21 mars 2010 - 05:58 .

[kraidy1117]

Symbol117 wrote...

I've had this bugging me since my first play through and I'd like some input:  Is EDI a true AI, or a very advance VI?
Here's my angle on this.  In my opinion, intelligent life, whether it's organic or artificial, has two fundamental characteristics.  Self-awareness and self-determination.

As per www.dictionary.com/ definitions for references.  I'll start with self-awareness.

self-a·ware
-adj.  Aware of oneself, including one's traits, feelings, and behaviors.

root of...

a·ware 
-adjective
1.having knowledge; conscious; cognizant: aware of danger.

I recall quite well in both ME games, the VIs knew that they were just programs.  They knew they were programs and knew their role, and even had a understanding of their surrounding enviroment to act on the confines of their programming.  So, at least to me, VIs fit one criteria of intelligence.  EDI has more than enough evidence to show that she is very much self-aware so I won't delve any more into that.

Now onto what I think is the more critical aspect, self-determination.

self-de·ter·mi·na·tion
-noun
1.determination by oneself or itself, without outside influence.
2.freedom to live as one chooses, or to act or decide without consulting another or others.

Now this is were I have some issues.  VIs do not show any self-determination.  Even Vigil, the closest thing I've seen in VIs to a true AI, was still just a program working within the confines of it's programming, albeit with a personality grafted onto it's base program. 

Now EDI, in my opinion, has some issues here.  I'm not talking about the blocks you first encounter when you ask EDI questions.  I know those are hardware blocks that limited her function.  No, no, no.  I'm talking about subtle clues that shows she's more like a VI throughout the game.  The single defining moment that makes me think she's more of a VI then a AI is the conversation right after Shepard returns to the ship after the Collectors.  EDI says, "I assure you.  I am still bound by protocols in my programming.  Even if I were not, you are my crewmates."

Now to me to be a true AI is to be like a person.  A 'person' is not bound by protocols, rules, regulations, etc unless they want too.  There's always a choice.  Sometimes those choices aren't always ideal, pleasant, or what we want, giving us the illusion that there is no choice.  But the choices are there.  By what EDI has said, there is no choice - it's just is for EDI.

So in my mind, it violates the second fundamental - self-determination.  EDI cannot make choices without an outside force, her programming, to dictate her choices for her.  EDI cannot make choices for herself without referring to her program.  Because of that I have a bit of a problem believing that EDI is a true AI.

Well I've said my piece.  What are your opinions?

Once Joker unshackles her, she has "free will" she no longer has to follow her programing anymore. She is also an AI because unlike a VI she get's smarter, adaptsa, learns and has opions.

[Symbolz]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Once Joker unshackles her, she has "free will" she no longer has to follow her programing anymore. She is also an AI because unlike a VI she get's smarter, adaptsa, learns and has opions.

I should have clairifed the quote section with EDI a little better.  The quote happened after Joker did unshackle her, yet she still said she is still bound to her programming.

[Mcjon01]

As far as the Mass Effect canon is concerned, yes, she's a true AI simply by virtue of her capacity to learn and the fact that she's being run on a quantum bluebox.



Does she qualify as a true AI by real-life standards? I'd still say yes. Being bound by her programming is a silly qualifier; the only difference between you and EDI is she is apparently aware of all the things that make her... well, her, and so is able to comment on them.

[kraidy1117]

Symbol117 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Once Joker unshackles her, she has "free will" she no longer has to follow her programing anymore. She is also an AI because unlike a VI she get's smarter, adaptsa, learns and has opions.

I should have clairifed the quote section with EDI a little better.  The quote happened after Joker did unshackle her, yet she still said she is still bound to her programming.

Not the point, she can still learn, think and adapt. A VI can't. A VI can't learn for themself, they only follow there programing, EDI while she does have programing can learn and even defy it. Most like TIM had a program in EDI to do something if Shepard went rouge on Cerberus but since she is NOW the ship and no longer has to folow her programing she has "free will" Thats the one tghin you should look at, EDI is the ship now.

[Sylph_14]

Symbol117 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Once Joker unshackles her, she has "free will" she no longer has to follow her programing anymore. She is also an AI because unlike a VI she get's smarter, adaptsa, learns and has opions.

I should have clairifed the quote section with EDI a little better.  The quote happened after Joker did unshackle her, yet she still said she is still bound to her programming.

I kind of got the impression that EDI saying she was "Still bound to her programming." was very simular to a person saying they were "Still bound by their consience."

[cruc1al]

Self-determination can only be done as far as you have choices. EDI's just saying she has some protocols in her programming which prohibit her from doing something. It doesn't mean she's utterly without choices. I think the situation is very similar to humans being restricted by their 'programming'. Our cognitive abilities are limited, no matter how much we wish we could choose something that we can't. For example, if you try to remember an arbitrary string of numbers, you find there's a limit to how many you can keep in your working memory. It's just the way our brain works.



(I can't imagine why kraidy1117 had to quote the whole OP, being the first to reply.)

[kraidy1117]

cruc1al wrote...

Self-determination can only be done as far as you have choices. EDI's just saying she has some protocols in her programming which prohibit her from doing something. It doesn't mean she's utterly without choices. I think the situation is very similar to humans being restricted by their 'programming'. Our cognitive abilities are limited, no matter how much we wish we could choose something that we can't. For example, if you try to remember an arbitrary string of numbers, you find there's a limit to how many you can keep in your working memory. It's just the way our brain works.

(I can't imagine why kraidy1117 had to quote the whole OP, being the first to reply.)

Because I felt like it

[cruc1al]

kraidy1117 wrote...

cruc1al wrote...
(I can't imagine why kraidy1117 had to quote the whole OP, being the first to reply.)

Because I felt like it

It's ugly, edit it out

[kraidy1117]

Maviarab wrote...

Symbol,

The dictionary definition is very loose indeed. AI is actually my field, and I would kindly redirect you to:

http://aidreams.co.uk

For the record, at no point does EDI ever display anything remotely close to what could be called an AI, a VI yes, but an AI is stretching it. She is more of an advanced chatbot than a true AI imo

The point that she dev feelings for Joker is proof that she is an AI. A VI does not have feelings, yet EDI does.

[kraidy1117]

cruc1al wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

cruc1al wrote...
(I can't imagine why kraidy1117 had to quote the whole OP, being the first to reply.)

Because I felt like it

It's ugly, edit it out

no u

[cruc1al]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Maviarab wrote...

Symbol,

The dictionary definition is very loose indeed. AI is actually my field, and I would kindly redirect you to:

http://aidreams.co.uk

For the record, at no point does EDI ever display anything remotely close to what could be called an AI, a VI yes, but an AI is stretching it. She is more of an advanced chatbot than a true AI imo

The point that she dev feelings for Joker is proof that she is an AI. A VI does not have feelings, yet EDI does.

It doesn't prove anything if she just says it. She could just be saying what she's programmed to say

EDIT: again, you used two posts where you could've used one, and you didn't need to quote me. And what "no u"?

Modifié par cruc1al, 20 mars 2010 - 07:30 .

[Mcjon01]

You're all just glorified chatbots. I'm the only one here that actually thinks and feels. Don't bother saying I'm wrong, either. That would just mean you're programmed to make me think you're people.



Prove me wrong.

[kraidy1117]

cruc1al wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Maviarab wrote...

Symbol,

The dictionary definition is very loose indeed. AI is actually my field, and I would kindly redirect you to:

http://aidreams.co.uk

For the record, at no point does EDI ever display anything remotely close to what could be called an AI, a VI yes, but an AI is stretching it. She is more of an advanced chatbot than a true AI imo

The point that she dev feelings for Joker is proof that she is an AI. A VI does not have feelings, yet EDI does.

It doesn't prove anything if she just says it. She could just be saying what she's programmed to say

EDIT: again, you used two posts where you could've used one, and you didn't need to quote me. And what "no u"?

Do you have anything better to do then complain?

[Symbolz]

kraidy1117 wrote...
Because I felt like it

Space hoarding drama, imo. 

[cruc1al]

kraidy1117 wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Maviarab wrote...

Symbol,

The dictionary definition is very loose indeed. AI is actually my field, and I would kindly redirect you to:

http://aidreams.co.uk

For the record, at no point does EDI ever display anything remotely close to what could be called an AI, a VI yes, but an AI is stretching it. She is more of an advanced chatbot than a true AI imo

The point that she dev feelings for Joker is proof that she is an AI. A VI does not have feelings, yet EDI does.

It doesn't prove anything if she just says it. She could just be saying what she's programmed to say

EDIT: again, you used two posts where you could've used one, and you didn't need to quote me. And what "no u"?

Do you have anything better to do then complain?

Yes, but I like complaining about things that really don't matter but are annoying anyway because they just show how silly people are. "I felt like it". LOL.

....

That was a joke. ... EDIT oh and what "no u"? Seriously what does that mean even

Modifié par cruc1al, 20 mars 2010 - 07:40 .

[Atmosfear3]

The fact that EDI can speculate leads me to believe "she" is definitely an AI (when you first meet the human reaper scene).

[kraidy1117]

cruc1al wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Maviarab wrote...

Symbol,

The dictionary definition is very loose indeed. AI is actually my field, and I would kindly redirect you to:

http://aidreams.co.uk

For the record, at no point does EDI ever display anything remotely close to what could be called an AI, a VI yes, but an AI is stretching it. She is more of an advanced chatbot than a true AI imo

The point that she dev feelings for Joker is proof that she is an AI. A VI does not have feelings, yet EDI does.

It doesn't prove anything if she just says it. She could just be saying what she's programmed to say

EDIT: again, you used two posts where you could've used one, and you didn't need to quote me. And what "no u"?

Do you have anything better to do then complain?

Yes, but I like complaining about things that really don't matter but are annoying anyway because they just show how silly people are. "I felt like it". LOL.

....

That was a joke. ... EDIT oh and what "no u"? Seriously what does that mean even

It was a lame comback.<_<

[Mcjon01]

Maviarab wrote...

exactly crucial....

She never 'thinks' for herself imo...and that constitutes a sentient being...an AI....everything she says, is guided by programs, including her speech imo.

I could be wrong of course, but studying and working with chatbots and AI's (if you can call them that) etc, from what I have seen, she shows not real AI responses.

Wait, what?  Maybe you're not communicating well, or maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it seems like you're saying that EDI can't be an AI because she's a program?  When an AI is basically defined as an intelligent program?  That's like saying that EDI can't be an AI, because AIs can't be.

She definitely seems to display general intelligence, in any case, and I'd argue there's fundamentally no difference between displaying general intelligence and having general intelligence.

[kraidy1117]

Maviarab wrote...

exactly crucial....

She never 'thinks' for herself imo...and that constitutes a sentient being...an AI....everything she says, is guided by programs, including her speech imo.

I could be wrong of course, but studying and working with chatbots and AI's (if you can call them that) etc, from what I have seen, she shows not real AI responses.

Mav.... she feels and can learn for her self. A program, even a VI can't do that. EDI is an AI, who is very advanced, more advanced then the Geth. That is like saying the Geth are not AIs....

[NocturnalStillness]

Geth are called AI yet they started off bound by their programming it was only with time they became self aware.



Later on in the game you get to rewrite the heratic geth which shows that the geth are still bound by their programs as you change their programs so they follow the true geth way of thinking.

[kraidy1117]

NocturnalStillness wrote...

Geth are called AI yet they started off bound by their programming it was only with time they became self aware.

Later on in the game you get to rewrite the heratic geth which shows that the geth are still bound by their programs as you change their programs so they follow the true geth way of thinking.

So you are telling me Geth are not AIs?