Abramsrunner
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
Origin: Abramsrunner
Posts: 765 Likes: 3,906
inherit
152
0
3,906
Abramsrunner
765
August 2016
abramsrunner
Mass Effect Trilogy
Abramsrunner
|
Post by Abramsrunner on Dec 28, 2020 1:43:15 GMT
haha red button go brrrrr
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,073
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,791
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Dec 28, 2020 1:44:40 GMT
I found it interesting how thing didn't give Shepard an answer when he/she asked if there will be peace if green is chosen. I was always more interested in what peace really truly means long-term. Can’t have life without conflict. Even if we are opposed to things like war, struggle and competition are simply a necessary part of being alive, so how do you achieve lasting peace while you’re still living. Personally, I don’t think you do. I doubt Synthesis is going to magically make batarians stop trying to have slaves, or krogan from their violent competitions. People want to get paid, thus do things that might put them at odds with others for money. Crime can’t just disappear. Maybe Synthesis is simply a universal lobotomy for everyone. It’s the only ending that makes the galaxy truly peaceful. Assuming the galaxy is truly peaceful. The case for that assumption is weak.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Dec 28, 2020 1:54:46 GMT
Like I said, it’d have you by the balls either way. Writing quibbles aside, all options come with an exceptional risk, so you have no choice but to either take a chance that the options are what they say they are, or sit there and wait and see if the Crucible does anything on its own, which we know ends in failure since the reapers eventually destroy it. This is why I don’t see it in terms of trust. Trust is meaningless. The only thing that exists is the risk. Also the risk of doing greater damage than good. Which is why trust needs to be earned from the Catalyst.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,067
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 1:57:38 GMT
Lol, how is anyone here qualified to say what an authentic AI would or would not behave like? I find it difficult to believe that an AI developed and self-programmed to eradicate all organic life would, at any point, consider itself obsolete or inadequate enough to carry on its task, regardless of the options presented to it. If you consider it bound to its task and, therefore, possessing the most basic of self-preservation instincts, to prevent itself from committing suicide, in order to keep performing its life purpose. Because if it lacks that self-preservation principle, the AI has no reason to start the cycle to begin with, because it has no vested interest in its existence. Further more, any option that would alter or terminate it, would be against its self-preservation, as it would cease to exist, as the AI, at least, understands itself to be, or be substituted by an inferior by-product of its consciousness. The AI has no reason to be cooperative, whether the option it presents is Destroy, Control or Synthesis. It doesn't make sense. So basically, your argument is that an AI should think and act within the bounds of its programming: adhere to its purpose, prioritise self-preservation. Which is the complete opposite of what AI as a concept/scientific goal actually *is*, namely a machine that thinks and acts the way a human might. A true AI should be able to act beyond the parameters of its programming, and being willing to destroy itself for the sake of others wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility either. That is a thing that humans are capable of doing, and an AI is supposed to think and behave like a human. Also, the Leviathans specifically programmed the Crucible and Reapers to *preserve* organic life, not annihilate it. A machine or program that is capable of observation, analysis and true learning should, at least eventually, realise that rendering them to grey goop that is still "alive" only in the most *technical* sense doesn't fit the actual spirit of the mission brief.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Dec 28, 2020 2:10:38 GMT
Which is the complete opposite of what AI as a concept/scientific goal actually *is*, namely a machine that thinks and acts the way a human might. You are limiting yourself in thinking the AI cares to be human. It was built with a purpose; to find a solution to the organic vs synthetic problem. The Ai obviously must have gone through several iterations of itself, to the point of it being no longer able to improve itself, to the point of being the absolute best it could have been, in order to tackle that problem. And it has come to the conclusion of the Reapers being the best possible solution to that problem. At this point, the AI had advanced itself to the point of perfection. No further alteration to it can be considered an improvement. And if it came to that conclusion, then it must also know that none of the Crucible present options can be considered a solution, one that it couldn't have thought beforehand, come to the conclusion of and found superior to the Reapers. Therefore, the Ai has no reason to guide Shepard through the Crucible's available options. There is nobody better than it to steward the conflict. And it isn't that the Catalyst can't do more than what it was originally programed to do, but it seems to have, willingly, limited itself to a very small confine, in a very small secluded room in the Citadel, to avoid detection by the organics, while also monitoring them, to ensure its prime directive is carried through. And if that isn't true, then the Catalyst has no reason being in the Citadel, or limiting itself to that extent.
|
|
Polka Dot
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 679 Likes: 1,207
inherit
10957
0
Feb 14, 2019 20:07:41 GMT
1,207
Polka Dot
679
Feb 14, 2019 18:50:29 GMT
February 2019
polkadot
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Polka Dot on Dec 28, 2020 2:16:22 GMT
I was always more interested in what peace really truly means long-term. Can’t have life without conflict. Even if we are opposed to things like war, struggle and competition are simply a necessary part of being alive, so how do you achieve lasting peace while you’re still living. Personally, I don’t think you do. I doubt Synthesis is going to magically make batarians stop trying to have slaves, or krogan from their violent competitions. People want to get paid, thus do things that might put them at odds with others for money. Crime can’t just disappear. Maybe Synthesis is simply a universal lobotomy for everyone. It’s the only ending that makes the galaxy truly peaceful. Well, there's the rub. I've never been convinced that synthesis acts like a lobotomy, imposes mind control, or creates eternal peace; it just ends the differentiation between organics and synthetics. The Leviathan's whole issue is that sufficiently advanced organics would invariably create synthetics that would invariably rebel against them and wipe them out. And tribute doesn't flow... I just watched a youtube of the synthesis ending to try to figure out why people are saying it's mind control, but I don't see it. The reapers and reaper creatures stop attacking because they're ending the harvest. EDI claims that everyone will now have access to all knowledge, including the cultural knowledge of all of the civilizations embodied in the reapers. We know the protheans were imperialists, and they're probably not the only ones. I certainly wouldn't expect eternal peace from that scenario, but that's just me.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,067
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Dec 28, 2020 2:36:07 GMT
Which is the complete opposite of what AI as a concept/scientific goal actually *is*, namely a machine that thinks and acts the way a human might. You are limiting yourself in thinking the AI cares to be human. It was built with a purpose; to find a solution to the organic vs synthetic problem. The Ai obviously must have gone through several iterations of itself, to the point of it being no longer able to improve itself, to the point of being the absolute best it could have been, in order to tackle that problem. And it has come to the conclusion of the Reapers being the best possible solution to that problem. At this point, the AI had advanced itself to the point of perfection. No further alteration to it can be considered an improvement. And if it came to that conclusion, then it must also know that none of the Crucible present options can be considered a solution, one that it couldn't have thought beforehand, come to the conclusion of and found superior to the Reapers. Therefore, the Ai has no reason to guide Shepard through the Crucible's available options. There is nobody better than it to steward the conflict. And it isn't that the Catalyst can't do more than what it was originally programed to do, but it seems to have, willingly, limited itself to a very small confine, in a very small secluded room in the Citadel, to avoid detection by the organics, while also monitoring them, to ensure its prime directive is carried through. And if that isn't true, then the Catalyst has no reason being in the Citadel, or limiting itself to that extent. Where did I say AI "tries to be human"? AI possess human-like intelligence, hence the term "Artificial Intelligence", it has nothing to do with being a "perfect machine". You keep saying over and over again that the Crucible should behave purely logically, within the parameters of its original programming. The entire point of AI as a concept is that it could deviate from logic and programming. Indeed, a true AI would not be able to *avoid* deviating.
|
|
Spectr61
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Origin: Spectr61
Posts: 791 Likes: 1,228
inherit
41
0
Mar 25, 2024 17:27:28 GMT
1,228
Spectr61
791
August 2016
spectr61
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Spectr61
|
Post by Spectr61 on Dec 28, 2020 2:43:12 GMT
Any real experts in the field of AI here?
Not just self-proclaimed; but actual, credentialed experts?
If so, I would like to hear their take..
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jan 24, 2024 17:47:40 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Dec 28, 2020 3:30:03 GMT
I was always more interested in what peace really truly means long-term. Can’t have life without conflict. Even if we are opposed to things like war, struggle and competition are simply a necessary part of being alive, so how do you achieve lasting peace while you’re still living. Personally, I don’t think you do. I doubt Synthesis is going to magically make batarians stop trying to have slaves, or krogan from their violent competitions. People want to get paid, thus do things that might put them at odds with others for money. Crime can’t just disappear. Maybe Synthesis is simply a universal lobotomy for everyone. It’s the only ending that makes the galaxy truly peaceful. Assuming the galaxy is truly peaceful. The case for that assumption is weak. Well then what’s the point? The rachni seem more dangerous than synthetics. They can spread like wildfire and kill everything if they so pleased.
|
|
cptdata
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 60 Likes: 92
inherit
3198
0
Sept 6, 2021 23:39:28 GMT
92
cptdata
60
Jan 31, 2017 22:35:03 GMT
January 2017
cptdata
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by cptdata on Dec 28, 2020 3:46:58 GMT
Any real experts in the field of AI here? Not just self-proclaimed; but actual, credentialed experts? If so, I would like to hear their take.. I don't think those experts will show here up.
According to the lore, an individual Geth program is a limited AI (similar to VI) with a certain job in mind. They were programmed in a way to become smarter the more Geth are working together. Think about a Geth program that allows a platform to walk and another one that can talk, add one that can use its arms and one that's programmed for micro-manipilation and can use the hands. That, and a dozen or two more Geth = one fully functional AI - but not an individual. That's where Reaper programming comes into play: Geth want to have a soul and become individuals which they never can achieve with their "consensus" but via Reaper code.
The expert programs called AIs today (based on big data and deep learning) are possible ancestors of the Geth. There's still work of several decades ahead for the first "true" Geth. And a true Geth needs always become part of some collective / consensus to become smarter: the sum of all Geth programs is always more than just numbers.
|
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Dec 28, 2020 4:00:36 GMT
Any real experts in the field of AI here? Not just self-proclaimed; but actual, credentialed experts? If so, I would like to hear their take.. The point of AI is that they are able to think and learn for themselves. This is why they are called artificial intelligence. This is why a computer no matter how powerful is not called an AI because it is only capable of operating as far as it's programing tells it to. You can build a super computer and program it to sequence genetics and look for connections between certain gene sequences and cancer to highlight potential genes that can make people more predisposed to cancer for early screening. But it will not be able to study aerodynamics and material limits to develop a new more fuel efficient jumbo jet without someone programing this action into it.
This is why a hamster is intelligent and your computer is not. Even though your computer is smarter at least in terms of raw thinking and reacting capabilities. An AI would absolutely be able to alter it's programing or at the very least come to its own conclusion and it's own personal interpretation of it's programing. That said even if you want to argue about real world AI we have in game AI in the form of EDI and the Geth Collective that show their own ability to come to their own conclusions and alter their own programing at will. So the in universe base line of AI has already been established to be able to form their own thoughts and ideas independent of their original programing.
|
|
redeem
N2
Posts: 76 Likes: 108
inherit
11552
0
108
redeem
76
Jun 13, 2020 18:35:26 GMT
June 2020
redeem
|
Post by redeem on Dec 28, 2020 4:04:15 GMT
Since Destroy is by far the most popular option, according to any polling method we've ever come up with, it's difficult to make a case that canonizing it will ruin the trilogy. FWIW, they can always establish that the geth were destroyed at Rannoch. So while Shepard did destroy a lot of AIs, he doesn't have that on him. it’s actually not ‘by far’ the most popular. It leads, sure. But not by a really wide margin. And even then, it’s worth remembering the writers have said they chose synthesis, synthesis is coded as the best ending. With the fact that the ending is the hardest to achieve, as destroy can also have the lowest EMS, it tracks that they’d continue the synthesis storyline. Of course with some tweaks if needed, or further explanation which was clearly required. Destroy was unanimously 80-90 percent chosen by majority of the fanbase. Old thread of the original BSN forums confirmed this (someone did a compilation of as many online polls they could find). The other two endings are niche and contradicting of the trilogies themes. We had two man antagonists fail in those themes (Saren dying as "Synthesis" failing and TIM wanting to control but ultimately being indoctrinated).
|
|
cptdata
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 60 Likes: 92
inherit
3198
0
Sept 6, 2021 23:39:28 GMT
92
cptdata
60
Jan 31, 2017 22:35:03 GMT
January 2017
cptdata
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by cptdata on Dec 28, 2020 4:27:31 GMT
it’s actually not ‘by far’ the most popular. It leads, sure. But not by a really wide margin. And even then, it’s worth remembering the writers have said they chose synthesis, synthesis is coded as the best ending. With the fact that the ending is the hardest to achieve, as destroy can also have the lowest EMS, it tracks that they’d continue the synthesis storyline. Of course with some tweaks if needed, or further explanation which was clearly required. Destroy was unanimously 80-90 percent chosen by majority of the fanbase. Old thread of the original BSN forums confirmed this (someone did a compilation of as many online polls they could find). The other two endings are niche and contradicting of the trilogies themes. We had two man antagonists fail in those themes (Saren dying as "Synthesis" failing and TIM wanting to control but ultimately being indoctrinated). There was a lot of talk about that back in 2013. If I remember correctly, all three (four, including the "hidden" ending) were conceived as bad options and "destruction" as the least bad one. Also it was considered Shepard's decision since s/he always talked about "destroying". As you said, TIM failed in controlling them and Saren failed in an attempt to get his own "synthesis".
Also we got some taste how a "bad attempt" of synthesis would look like: we got Collectors, husks, marauders, cannibals and brutes - and none of them appear to be individuals and look dreadful. Can you imagine they gonna have a good life once the player decided for "synthesis"? I'm quite sure the idea of a poor husk suddenly remembering his/her old life as a normal human being is one of the reasons why people decided against synthesis ending. Maybe Bioware intended to make synthesis the golden ending but clearly didn't realize the message of said ending.
Control? Also comes with less death toll than destruction ending, but again: it isn't considered a golden ending. Shepard turns into an AI with absolute power. The Reapers may no longer target species in current cycle, but who says 50.000 years won't take a toll on Shepard!AI? What if they go back to ol' routine the next cycle? What if Shepard!AI comes to a similar conclusion like the Catalyst? No, not a good idea. Also discussed in the past.
Destruction comes with a massive death toll but also appears to be a solution that finally makes the galaxy a better place. Geth may even be repaired by the Quarians and EDI ... well, there's Tali and Joker, they both won't give her up that easily. Most of the damage done by destruction appear to be recoverable. And if you got enough score, Shepard may even survive the entire thing and therefore, "destruction" is considered the golden ending for many fans.
|
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Dec 28, 2020 4:33:44 GMT
I can’t stand people who call synthesis rape. That’s a serious issue, whereas synthesis simply Cures disease and does next to nothing to your body and literally nothing to your mind. It’s absolutely disgusting. People playing on others trauma and serious experience to try to seem more credible. Point out where anyone called synthesis rape in this thread. And while you're at it, provide some evidence that it doesn't drastically physically and mentally alter you when the ending itself indicates that it does. You don't achieve galactic peace without mind control. They never said anyone said it in this thread. Only that people have said it. The implications people use about synthesis often are everything but out right saying rape. Forced on them, violated, never given consent are often key words I've seen used with people who want to complain about synthesis ending beyond just their personal dislike of the ending. The discussion often devolves into this quasi morality based argument rather a kin to the kind of arguments that happen around abortion debates. However what those people who really try to claim synthesis is bad seem to forget that their argument is based on the idea that people even with new information are incapable of change. You know the whole "Krogan can't be peaceful unless their minds were completely altered." argument.
The problem with that is the majority of people I've talked to who are like that are massive hypocrites based on the actions and choices in game. They will often rally against the Catalyst being stupid because you can make a truce between Quarian and Geth thus claiming the Catalyst is totally wrong. They fail to notice their own glaring contradiction because if people were incapable of change then there would be no truce between Geth and Quarian and they would have simply kept killing each other until the stronger faction won. And amusingly would completely justify the catalyst due to their own arguments claim to disprove.
There are subtle differences between mass deaths caused by outside forces (Shepard wanted to at least warn the Batarians before being knocked out) and choosing to completely genocide a sentient race into extinction. Kind of like the difference between WW2 bombing a German city because it has a manufacturing plant that produces planes. Which caused collateral and civilian damage. And rounding up every single white person on the planet and executing them because they share similarities with nazi Germany.
EDI, Geth, Wrex all have options were they improve or strive to improve and work together. EDI was programmed as a tool and slowly works to become her own entity which your choices can influence. Geth are at least willing to end hostilities for the time being and work together.....at least as long as the Quarians or any other race doesn't try to dictate their future. And even Wrex wants to improve the Krogan people to keep the essences of their race but remove the parts that have been dragging them down and preventing them from being anything other then animals fighting over a blasted wasteland. Learning, understanding and over coming limits and learning to work together is a theme that shows up in the game many times. And it is a theme that synthesis pushes with the improvement to organic life and the bridging the gap between organic and synthetic life that allows the cycles to end and the Reapers to share their accumulated knowledge.
|
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Dec 28, 2020 4:35:55 GMT
it’s actually not ‘by far’ the most popular. It leads, sure. But not by a really wide margin. And even then, it’s worth remembering the writers have said they chose synthesis, synthesis is coded as the best ending. With the fact that the ending is the hardest to achieve, as destroy can also have the lowest EMS, it tracks that they’d continue the synthesis storyline. Of course with some tweaks if needed, or further explanation which was clearly required. Destroy was unanimously 80-90 percent chosen by majority of the fanbase. Old thread of the original BSN forums confirmed this (someone did a compilation of as many online polls they could find). The other two endings are niche and contradicting of the trilogies themes. We had two man antagonists fail in those themes (Saren dying as "Synthesis" failing and TIM wanting to control but ultimately being indoctrinated). People really need to stop with this "Saren is synthesis" statement. I don't know were it came from but it has no support behind it outside of a single line spoken without any context behind it. You might as well be taking a picture of someone giving their son/daughter a hug and claim it is proof they are a pedo because they are touching a child.
|
|
ahglock
N5
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
Origin: ShinobiKillfist
Posts: 2,859 Likes: 3,467
inherit
9886
0
3,467
ahglock
2,859
Feb 21, 2018 17:57:17 GMT
February 2018
ahglock
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
ShinobiKillfist
|
Post by ahglock on Dec 28, 2020 4:47:16 GMT
I found it interesting how thing didn't give Shepard an answer when he/she asked if there will be peace if green is chosen. I was always more interested in what peace really truly means long-term. Can’t have life without conflict. Even if we are opposed to things like war, struggle and competition are simply a necessary part of being alive, so how do you achieve lasting peace while you’re still living. Personally, I don’t think you do. I doubt Synthesis is going to magically make batarians stop trying to have slaves, or krogan from their violent competitions. People want to get paid, thus do things that might put them at odds with others for money. Crime can’t just disappear. Maybe Synthesis is simply a universal lobotomy for everyone. It’s the only ending that makes the galaxy truly peaceful. Not that you'd know this as Shepard but in the slides when Edi starts talking she states peace spreads throughout the entire galaxy. In Control, its Shepard imposing peace. In destroy, peace is a goal to strive for. To me that means in only one choice is free will given a chance. Control to some degree as you can attempt to resist the Shepard, but given the power difference that's not feasible.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jan 24, 2024 17:47:40 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Dec 28, 2020 4:50:45 GMT
I was always more interested in what peace really truly means long-term. Can’t have life without conflict. Even if we are opposed to things like war, struggle and competition are simply a necessary part of being alive, so how do you achieve lasting peace while you’re still living. Personally, I don’t think you do. I doubt Synthesis is going to magically make batarians stop trying to have slaves, or krogan from their violent competitions. People want to get paid, thus do things that might put them at odds with others for money. Crime can’t just disappear. Maybe Synthesis is simply a universal lobotomy for everyone. It’s the only ending that makes the galaxy truly peaceful. Not that you'd know this as Shepard but in the slides when Edi starts talking she states peace spreads throughout the entire galaxy. In Control, its Shepard imposing peace. In destroy, peace is a goal to strive for. To me that means in only one choice is free will given a chance. Control to some degree as you can attempt to resist the Shepard, but given the power difference that's not feasible. That’s why I was focusing more on Synthesis, since it’s the one that’s being touted as the “everlasting” solution.
|
|
ahglock
N5
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
Origin: ShinobiKillfist
Posts: 2,859 Likes: 3,467
inherit
9886
0
3,467
ahglock
2,859
Feb 21, 2018 17:57:17 GMT
February 2018
ahglock
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
ShinobiKillfist
|
Post by ahglock on Dec 28, 2020 4:55:25 GMT
Not that you'd know this as Shepard but in the slides when Edi starts talking she states peace spreads throughout the entire galaxy. In Control, its Shepard imposing peace. In destroy, peace is a goal to strive for. To me that means in only one choice is free will given a chance. Control to some degree as you can attempt to resist the Shepard, but given the power difference that's not feasible. That’s why I was focusing more on Synthesis, since it’s the one that’s being touted as the “everlasting” solution. That's how it comes across from EDI. I mean we could always go with she is lying, like the catalyst is lying arguments but that doesn't make sense. Everlasting may be a stretch as we don't know how far in the future her comments are from. It seems more than immediate and more than a few years, but that's hard to say. Maybe with reapers everything can get magic wanded over night. People may eventually break free of whatever made them peaceful galaxy wide,
|
|
inherit
Innocuous Alaskan
417
0
4,799
Trilobite Derby
Drinking rosehip tea, independently.
1,824
August 2016
akhadeed
|
Post by Trilobite Derby on Dec 28, 2020 6:15:06 GMT
All I'm saying is that the Geth and EDI are fine in my paragade control...
And the relays before that became "not such an issue." Thanks, Extended Cut!
I always liked how the old RP group did it (granted, partially because it lined up with my personal favorite canon), with Control where Shepalyst ran off to somewhere with any remaining Reapers. Leaves the setting intact, makes for a partially functional heroic sacrifice, and dangles a few interesting plot threads behind it.
But, full disclosure, I love the Mass Effect Trilogy, I've played it a lot, and I've had a Shepard for every permutation of the endings. Renegade control is "fun", too.
...in conclusion, does this prove IT?
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jan 24, 2024 17:47:40 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Dec 28, 2020 6:19:21 GMT
Any real experts in the field of AI here? Not just self-proclaimed; but actual, credentialed experts? If so, I would like to hear their take.. As a quasi-expert on artificial intelligence, I can tell you with 100% certainty that if we put googly eyes on a CPU, we will be friends with it.
|
|
Carcharoth
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
XBL Gamertag: Carcharoth42
PSN: Fenrisulfr42
Posts: 321 Likes: 862
inherit
136
0
862
Carcharoth
321
August 2016
carcharoth
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Carcharoth42
Fenrisulfr42
|
Post by Carcharoth on Dec 28, 2020 6:33:55 GMT
They never said anyone said it in this thread. Only that people have said it. The implications people use about synthesis often are everything but out right saying rape. Forced on them, violated, never given consent are often key words I've seen used with people who want to complain about synthesis ending beyond just their personal dislike of the ending. The discussion often devolves into this quasi morality based argument rather a kin to the kind of arguments that happen around abortion debates. However what those people who really try to claim synthesis is bad seem to forget that their argument is based on the idea that people even with new information are incapable of change. You know the whole "Krogan can't be peaceful unless their minds were completely altered." argument.
Then there's no reason to bring it up beyond a poor attempt at an emotional appeal. Your own use of "abortion debate" is no different. An attempt to downplay the potential severity of green, and an attempt to discredit arguments against it as uneducated, respectively. And there's more than one way to violate someone. For example, forced medical procedures. Much closer to the large scale tech upgrade and pseudo hive mind that synthesis involves. And you can blame BioWare for the quasi morality arguments, since they're the ones introducing real world philosophical and moral questions into their games. Is it any wonder people get passionate about it, and take things personally, when it's so close to things we genuinely believe? Mage vs templars is just freedom vs security after all. RGB is no different. I'm sure you'd find similar questions on the average Kohlburg test. And the argument against synthesis isn't about whether people can change. It's about letting it occur naturally, over time, and because it is desired. Not forcing it on everyone. The Krogan manage peace with the turians just fine before green.
The Catalyst is literally a malfunctioning computer that can do nothing else except what it was programed to do. I'm not even sold on it being an ai but a vi, considering it can't make decisions. Calling it stupid is entirely justified. And again, the quarians and geth choose to stop fighting and make peace because they wanted to. Magic energy wave wasn't necessary. Rest of the galaxy can do the same. The majority of people I've talked to who want a perfect magic solution that fixes everything immediately and has no downsides are naive children, who don't understand how people work and that everything has a cost. You pick green because you think there isn't one beyond Shepard's life. It's never that simple.
In Arrival, you have an opportunity to warn people. On the Citadel, you don't. Want has nothing to do with it. You sacrifice the few to save the many. Or become a space dictator. Or trust in green utopia to not have any downsides at all. And there you go again, with your emotional appeals. There are other wars, by the way. Self-determination without reaper influence. Where have I seen that argument before... Oh wait. I made it in favor of removing reaper influence by destroying them. You prefer railroading everyone down the green road and keeping the reapers around. I'm sure they won't try to harvest anything ever again. Especially not that other galaxy, over there. Synthesis is too good to be true and I find it suspicious. Control has too great a risk of becoming catalyst 2.0. Destroy comes at a cost, but it removes the threat and lets the survivors build their own future. Pick one. No skin off my back. But don't whine about other people's choices without expecting them to push back.
|
|
trengilly
N1
In Gaming Quarantine
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Posts: 26 Likes: 55
inherit
9386
0
55
trengilly
In Gaming Quarantine
26
Sept 26, 2017 6:24:39 GMT
September 2017
trengilly
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by trengilly on Dec 28, 2020 7:32:21 GMT
I think the reason there are so many different opinions of Synthesis is that . . . well no one knows what the heck it even is! What does merging Organic and Synthetic life even mean? How is it supposed to work? And even with some space magic thing of combining the two . . . why does that have anything to do with making the galaxy a better or safer place? Synthetics sometimes kill other synthetics just like organics kill each other. Some group is always going to try to kill some other group. The fact that we are all mixed doesn't alter anything. The only way to rationalize it leading to peace is if all entities end up part of some sort of connected hive mind. Which is where the 'forced rape' idea comes from. And if it doesn't lead to peace, well then what is the point? Just to save the lives of a handful of Geth and EDI in a galaxy of trillions? Everyone in Mass Effect has the stated goal of destroying the Reapers . . . all the races, including the Geth (if there), signed up to join in the war for that explicit purpose. EDI states she would choose death if it meant success in defeating the Reapers. The Geth being destroyed as a side effect of defeating the Reapers is not 'genocide', they are sadly casualties of war. But even Bioware's 'logic' doesn't work there anyway . . . since Geth are pure machines there is no reason they couldn't be restored from backups after the Catalyst pulse. The only things dying from the Destroy ending are creatures that are part organic and part synthetic that require both to live (ie all the Reaper creatures the handful of Milky Way cyborgs like Shepard). A super EMP pulse would short out electronics/AI, kill all cyborgs, and require lots of computers/AI being repaired/rebooted. In my head cannon EDI's body dies (I assume it is part organic) but her AI consciousness could be rebooted on the Normandy. That's my reality and I'm sticking with it! I guess Geth could be considered cyborgs with 'organic' Reaper code uploaded into their systems but, like Synthesis, I just don't get how that works. As for the Mass Effect . . . Bioware needs to pick a path that causes the least controversy and move forward. If they canonize an ending it certainly will be Destroy since that's what the vast majority of players went with. But 80%+ of the people who will buy and play the next Mass Effect game will have never played the originals. If they can come up with a compelling story and characters than it certainly can be successful. Or given recent history, they could make a total mess of it.
|
|
trengilly
N1
In Gaming Quarantine
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Posts: 26 Likes: 55
inherit
9386
0
55
trengilly
In Gaming Quarantine
26
Sept 26, 2017 6:24:39 GMT
September 2017
trengilly
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by trengilly on Dec 28, 2020 7:38:43 GMT
Any real experts in the field of AI here? Not just self-proclaimed; but actual, credentialed experts? If so, I would like to hear their take.. As a quasi-expert on artificial intelligence, I can tell you with 100% certainty that if we put googly eyes on a CPU, we will be friends with it. Honestly, we don't even need the googly eyes!
|
|
Gileadan
N5
Agent 46
Clearance Level Ultra
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: ALoneGretchin
Posts: 2,664 Likes: 6,633
inherit
Agent 46
177
0
Mar 28, 2024 21:19:07 GMT
6,633
Gileadan
Clearance Level Ultra
2,664
August 2016
gileadan
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
ALoneGretchin
|
Post by Gileadan on Dec 28, 2020 8:57:02 GMT
I think the reason there are so many different opinions of Synthesis is that . . . well no one knows what the heck it even is! [...] Synthesis is one of those bits of BioWare writing that evaporates into a bunch of bullshit particles once you think about it for a moment. Apart from the nonsense of a galaxy wide DNA alteration changing every organic being into a partly synthetic one, it also completely fails to explain how this solves the actual synthetics vs organics problem. Will this change cause the formerly organic species to completely lose their interest in developing synthetics that will one day exterminate them? Will synthetics no longer improve themselves until they are so superior to organics that they become unstoppable? Because that's what the conflict is supposedly about. But then again, Mass Effect is a space fantasy, much like Star Wars. Whether the Force or a green ray of space magic did it, sometimes you just have to nod and go with it.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Dec 28, 2020 9:15:26 GMT
Where did I say AI "tries to be human"? AI as a concept/scientific goal actually *is*, namely a machine that thinks and acts the way a human might I don't see the difference. it has nothing to do with being a "perfect machine". Of course it does. An AI would improve itself, rewriting its code, time and again, exponentially increasing its potential, until it could perfect it no more. This is scientifically proven and backed up by real data. Any AI that we currently own that trains on a task, constantly improves itself, in order to make itself the best it can possibly be at what it does. Similarly, the Catalyst, while still an AI with a broad spectrum of knowledge that could be applied to a range of things, its primary goal is to solve the organics vs synthetics problem. Eventually, crunching through solutions, it would perfect itself at its task. It is safe to say that the Catalyst would, at some point, have crunched the options of the Crucible and found them non-viable, which led to the eventual construction of the Reapers and the beginning of the Cycle. You keep saying over and over again that the Crucible should behave purely logically, within the parameters of its original programming. The entire point of AI as a concept is that it could deviate from logic and programming. Not at the cost of its own survival. Acting against its own interests. The AI would protect itself from termination, or degradation of its code.
|
|