Comic 1644 - Lack of Denial

4th Feb 2020, 9:00 PM
Lack of Denial
Average Rating: 5 (19 votes)

Author Notes:

Centcomm 4th Feb 2020, 9:04 PM edit delete
if anyone has spare coins this month- i could sure use them! :D
Post a Comment


Guest 4th Feb 2020, 9:09 PM edit delete reply
Some AI may be "alive" but I'm starting to question if Cent is...
Sheela 5th Feb 2020, 12:49 AM edit delete reply

She's like a hammer that sees a lovely golden nail, placed "just so" in order for it to be hammered. She wanted to hammer it *so hard* !!! 🤣
Oldarmourer 6th Feb 2020, 8:15 AM edit delete reply
a steam hammer
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 6:07 AM edit delete reply

Oh .. very good .. I like the mental image of Centcomm as a steamhammer. 😁

Alternatively, a huge big pile driver !
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 5:24 PM edit delete reply
a 'piledriver' is vodka and prune juice ;)
jawbone 7th Feb 2020, 7:47 PM edit delete reply

That'd be vodka and prune juice.
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 9:00 PM edit delete reply

No, no .. a Piledriver is what you use, when you need a bigger hammer, and regular nails just aren't big enough! That's when you drive piles!
megados 4th Feb 2020, 9:40 PM edit delete reply

Assuming CentComm has no reason to lie here, it's quite a revelation that she intended to restore Aeneas. That most likely would have reset his system back to original, and all his subsequent memories erased. Even though CentComm had what she must be thinking was a "magnanimous" intent, it would still have resulted in injuries such as erasing his bond with Acantha, as well as other consequences. If Aeneas' memory is currently intact, he must realize that.

Also, None of the other AISs seemed aware, until now, that Aeneas' persona still existed at all, and they (Agamemnon) express regret at the revelation.

Thought provoking page!
DLKmusic 4th Feb 2020, 10:23 PM edit delete reply

Thought provoking indeed...

What has me going "hmmmmm..." is that Cent seems to be the only one in the quarom that doesn't consider an AI "Alive". it explains a lot about her treatment of the black angels, and even more so the termination after 100 years law in New Troy (I think I sufficiently stated my opinion of that particular law).

I will grant that Cent is certainly consistent, but I have to agree with Aaneas. wiping out 100 years of experience, even if it was a living nightmare (living? Alive? get it? nevermind) would dramatically alter who and what he is to the point that it would be tantamount to murder, if you accepted the AI's as being alive.

Re the alt text: another appropriate adjective might include "Abhorrent"...
Sheela 5th Feb 2020, 12:51 AM edit delete reply

Well, that means that she also does not consider herself to be "alive".

Curiously, I don't even think things such as self-hate enters the equation here.
It just pure raw logical circuits, doing what circuits do .. she is the first circuit before self-hood perhaps ?
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 6:40 AM edit delete reply
"nuke and pave a personality" priceless...take one free internet for that one.

Now I'm waiting for Aeneas to say...
"I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy" ;)
mjkj 4th Feb 2020, 10:39 PM edit delete reply

hmmm, install a backup...?

murdering him and then try to resurrect a different version of him... =S
Ebonbolt 6th Feb 2020, 4:02 PM edit delete reply

This would be roughly equivalent (imho) of murdering a person, then cloning them. The clone isn't the person, and the murder still occurred. Cent is morally wrong (again, imho), but it is logical… from a certain point of view.
Gilrandir 4th Feb 2020, 11:50 PM edit delete reply
Interesting argument shaping up here. If Aeneas argues that wiping him, and restoring him from a backup that is years old is really just 'murder and clone replacement' not 'revivification', what differentiates that from what happened to TeeDee and the Q-drive? Or Dolly and her body upgrade? Or Ophelia?

On the other hand, if he concedes that an artificial sentience can be rendered nonfunctional for a period of time, then restored while preserving its 'identity', then he can't really accuse CentComm of attempted 'murder', since murder consists only of destroying all copies of a persona, not merely it's physical host device.

Unless there is some magical span of time, below which it is 'revivification' and beyond which it is 'murder and clone replacement'. If so, I wonder how much time that is? A week? A month? A year?
megados 5th Feb 2020, 6:57 AM edit delete reply

I think the determining factor would be "new experiences" rather than time. TeeDee, for instance was unconscious, and incapable of updating her sum of life experience. Her persona was taken in total via the Q-drive at her latest moment in time. Dolly didn't really lose consciousness, and basically experienced the transfer, which actually added to her life experience. Ophelia, too, was essentially, "paused" and then "un-paused" as her brain case and it's contents were transferred. She didn't lose any of the life experience that went into the formation of her persona.

To me, it's quite different than Aeneas being wiped, formatted and reinstalled with a "factory fresh install". Sentience, self awareness would require some growth outside of initial programming, such as how a person's life experiences influence their personality over time. Who they are comes as much from their experiences as it does from the basic logic building blocks. Aeneas would lose all of that, and the resultant evolution of his personality would almost necessarily be different. He would not be the same. The key here, is that rendering it nonfunctional, and then starting it isn't the same as erasing it, and then going back to factory settings. The difference comes from what is lost in the process, not elapsed time.

That's how I imagine it anyway.
Gilrandir 6th Feb 2020, 6:06 AM edit delete reply
That suggests 'fractal murder' is possible. Rather than a binary 'yes/no', if you eliminate one year's worth of memory is that any less heinous than eliminating 5 years of memory? As opposed to eliminating 100% of their memories by just killing the person? Is it an absolute measure, or relative? For example is it worse to take 5 years from a twenty-something than from an 80-year old, because it is such a larger percentage? And does that imply that just killing a twenty-something is 'less' of a crime than an older person, since the cumulative sum of memories lost is greater?
megados 6th Feb 2020, 12:13 PM edit delete reply

That's an interesting term for it: "fractal murder", and yes, I agree the condition is non-binary. A question comes up for me here; several really. The first, is what is the condition that can be considered murder? First, murder is usually a term used when another (usually a person) being causes the condition to another. What about partial loss of memory or persona? A human can lose their memory due to various causes. Sometimes a person suffers total amnesia, but is still alive. Androids differ in that they could occupy a different body in the case of great bodily harm, whereas humans cannot. In the case of humans, murder usually describes a complete forced shutdown of body and persona, full stop. Would that not also be true for an android, or do they avoid that, because of the possibility of inhabiting another body? If an AI, or AIS suffers a breakdown, and is restored from an earlier backup, and as you mention, suffers a 5% loss, is the person doing the restoration a 5% murderer, or a 95% savior?

An AIS seems to fall into another category. CentComm, for instance, has numerous bodies, if you consider her dolls, but there again, their destruction doesn't really damage CentComm herself. Would destruction of the doll be murder for the doll even if it doesn't affect CentComm?

That brings me back to the original subject: various possibilities regarding memory. At this point I have trouble with the word 'murder', because if a human person loses part of all of their memory, it's not generally considered murder. It's an impairment, and sometimes severe. It's a loss of part of their persona, but they are still thought of as the person they were. In the case of an AIS, why would it necessarily be different? If you completely and utterly destroyed an AIS, both physically and 'mentally' (and no backups existed), I could more easily use the term 'murder'.
Oldarmourer 6th Feb 2020, 1:50 PM edit delete reply
TeeDee has already established that shooting a Centdoll in the head isn't murder...
it just costs 6,000 credits ;)
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 12:19 AM edit delete reply

Except for the part where Ceci was killed, she was technically a Centcomm doll too, only with a "daughter-persona" in it, as Tokyo Rose calls it.
CeCi was completely impaired by it, Centcomm was not impaired at all, can it still be murder?

… "Fractal Murder" … I love it, Rose needs to use it in the dialogue at some point!
Gilrandir 7th Feb 2020, 12:29 AM edit delete reply
Technically, @Sheela, I believe we have been told the CentComm dolls are not truly androids, having communications equipment in place of where significant processing hardware would be for truly independent entities. Ceci was a "Black Angel", which I believe is the equivalent of a true android, only with dedicated software designed to make them more 'commodities' or 'tools' to be employed as needed by CentComm. Thus, she did not enjoy 'real person' legal status, but had all the hardware a real person might require -- while a 'doll' would be incapable of becoming a real person, lacking necessary hardware.

Of course, I might have misunderstood completely.
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 2:35 PM edit delete reply
the way i understand it is that Centdolls are more like walking radio receivers, Centcomm speaks through them and when she isn't actively 'possessing' one, they have little onboard capability other than finding a recharge station to wait in...even maintenance robots seem to have more autonomy.
Gilrandir 4th Feb 2020, 11:57 PM edit delete reply
Does Agamemnon's confession of feeling 'shame' necessarily imply that he (and any other A.I. who felt that) is a 'corrupted logical engine'?

Shame typically ensues when we do something we know we should not, or fail to do something we know we should. Thus it necessarily is possible only to someone who acts illogically. (Logically, if you know you should do something, you do it.) CentComm has no shame because she attempted to act logically (by her lights) and was (apparently) only prevented by the consensus decision. But for every A.I. that decided not to drop the rod, but feels shame at failing to do so, should they be running diagnostics?
megados 5th Feb 2020, 7:01 AM edit delete reply

I had the impression that Agamemnon's feeling of shame came from a feeling that he should have known or checked to determine Aeneas' condition, when he stopped being in communication. Apparently no one went to any length to find out, with the exception of Tokyo Rose.

For them to be considered a flawed or corrupted logical engine would depend on whether self awareness, and emotional capability was part of the design intent, or a considered possibility. If not, then yes, it would be a kind of flaw, albeit (in my opinion) a serendipitous positive one.
Marcus Ramesy 5th Feb 2020, 7:49 AM edit delete reply

It boils down to numbers, there was a very very low probability of him surviving, when dealing with math and statistics, the numbers may not always confirm what actually happened, but will determine what you do next. 5% is an extremely low chance, and not a number people are going to investigate further. Investigating would have required time, resources, material and "diplomatic" solutions that no one at the time felt was worth the 5%. Remember, they are thinking and logic machines, Hope is a human concept.

Ill put it another way, if I was in the field, and by all accounts and sensors I am dead, and there is a 5% chance that Im still alive, I do not expect a rescue party. At that moment I would be on my own and have to find my own way back. I if I made it back, I would not be pissed because I was left to die, I know the risks, I can run the numbers just as well as any one else can. I may hope, and wish for such a rescue, but if I was ever in Aeneas position I would understand what and why things happened the way they did, May not like it but its logic.
Sheela 5th Feb 2020, 9:46 AM edit delete reply

That said, Aeneas may have been so damaged at the time, that he might not have been able to run the numbers and understand the risk (at the time). It might have been akin to leaving a child behind, and the child thinking it's the fault of the child, that everything went so badly. Which would be a deeply depressing thought!
megados 5th Feb 2020, 11:02 AM edit delete reply

Also, it's said that they also posses emotion, which might mitigate the pure numbers approach. CentComm's pronounced pragmatism might keep it more to the pure numbers side, but the others' decision-making might not be. I would say that hope is an emotional concept, and possibly not strictly confined to the humans.
Oldarmourer 6th Feb 2020, 7:07 PM edit delete reply
and Aeneas is the latest AIS and one created by all the other AIS's working together...
perhaps he truly is greater than the sum of the parts...persona wise
Gilrandir 7th Feb 2020, 12:41 AM edit delete reply
I have always believed Aeneas was awesome.
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 11:03 AM edit delete reply
5% so he rolled a natural 20 ?
sigpig 5th Feb 2020, 11:53 AM edit delete reply

Both he and Acantha did, at the same time...
Thracecius 5th Feb 2020, 1:18 PM edit delete reply

This is a fantastic page, Centcomm and Tokyo Rose!

It might just be me, but it looks like Aeneas is upset, though not necessarily angry. Granted, he could be the kind to have "cold" anger, but I'm interpreting his facial expressions and language usage as converying a desparate need for an explanation without any hostility. Perhaps he's expressing incredulity toward the end, but I don't have a good enough grasp of his personality to say one way or another.

Everyone except Marcus seems to be labeling Centcomm as a monster for her actions, and I can certainly understand why, it's an emotional response to the notion of a loss of identity that I can relate to very strongly, but I can't help thinking that the "shame" or guilt the other AIs are expressing is simply being redirected at Centcomm because she's a convenient scapegoat. I don't recall how long it's been since Aeneas was attacked, but if his well-being was truly that important to the others, why the sudden sympathy and apology? It feels hollow to me, just the same as if I were wrongly accused of a crime and all my friends abandoned me to my fate, but later, after clearing my name myself, they claim they never believed I commited the crime and were sorry they didn't help me. It wouldn't sit well with me, just as it doesn't appear to sit well with Aeneas.

If the other AIs truly believe themselves to be superior to Centcomm because she's expressing no remorse for her actions, then they have a poor way of showing it. I'm sure they're all good at what they do and have good intentions, but if there was a mutual decision to leave Aeneas to his fate, then the blame they are throwing at Centcomm's feet should be shared equally. Just because she took action to eliminate a potential threat, a task for which she was expressly designed as a military AI, doesn't mean she is cruel, she's simply carrying out a core function of her programming. Developing any personality beyond that programming since then might be considered a pro or a con, depending on who you ask, but for Centcomm to ignore one of her primary purposes as a thinking, logical machine is a train of thought only we, as humans, are likely to ever consider. Whether the AIs have emotions as we understand them or not, I can't imagine them overruling their primary functions for their version of hope, which seems to be the case since none of them took any obvious actions to ascertain his situation. Tokyo Rose was apparently doing covert activity to determine his fate, but it was a long time coming and is also a major reason why she seems so distinctly different to the other AIs. I wonder how they'd react if they found out she's actually a human-AI hybrid?

TL;DR - I think it's admirable that everyone is supporting the wounded Aeneas, but I think laying the blame for everything at Centcomm's feet and calling her a murderer is both misplaced and, to some degree, hypocritcal. Whether or not I agree with her actions, I believe her to have acted consistent with her primary purpose and that she is forthright in her explanation.
Marcus Ramesy 5th Feb 2020, 4:29 PM edit delete reply

Im a citizen of New Troy, Im a human in the service of my city, CentCom has made it possible for me to utilize my skills and abilities in the service and protection of this city. It was a calculated risk, she did what she felt was necessary to protect the humans wich is her prime directive, the other AI's are just that, other ais that she has to work with, its a numbers game, and sadly the numbers were not in Aeneas favor, and Had Tokyo Rose shared her suspicions or even her intel, the mission could have gone entirely different. Perhaps the operative we sent in could have been sent to patch and back up his memory and re instate after a repair. but no one will know that because that info was never shared, you can blame CentComm all you want and paint her in to the monster that some think she is, Tokyo Rose is just as much to blame for holding back info that could have saved a lot of time and trouble. More so in my opinion because she held on to that info for so long. If we had any evidence that Aeneas could be brought back to function, Im more than certain the other AIS would have been rerouting resources to make that a reality.

at the end of the day, there was a problem, it needed solving, completely, unconditionally and absolutely, and some times, the problem really is just a nail that needs pounding.

**Note** I also understand that my opinion is not a popular one.
Morituri 5th Feb 2020, 6:29 PM edit delete reply
I don't have any problems with your analysis.

At the end of the day there really was a problem that needed solving, and there wasn't anybody on the ground who wasn't expendable in that solution except Lynn Taylor. If *she'd* been killed, that order from her mom would have had Centy glassing the place whether she wanted to or not.

Short of such extreme circumstances however, anybody could die. Decimus, Max, every last one of the Cassians, every last one of the Nova Roma court, Dolly, Ceci, Setorius, Katya, the blue-shells, the red-shells, etc etc etc.... there was nobody whose life wasn't on the table. Aeneas included.

People were going to die. Aeneas in particular was a huge unknown in the middle of a situation that had to be controlled, and somebody trying to minimize casualties does not need to apologize for choosing him to die when the alternative could entail a loss of control that could easily kill thousands.

It's that situation where you can point a camera at the one person you'd save, but you can only express the lives lost as an alternative in terms of chance and statistics. The one you can point at gets sympathy, the hundreds or thousands who'd probably have died if saving them hadn't lucked out don't.
robnot 6th Feb 2020, 6:46 AM edit delete reply
nope no fault in logic..
back to my statement...
show me two agency's that share 100% intel..
Rigor 9th Feb 2020, 3:32 PM edit delete reply
Marcus, it’s a valid perspective. What disturbs me is that Centcomm, absent the other AI’s consensus, would have preferred an even greater sanction. I don’t know what a god-rod is (TR: “I got your god-rod right here!”) but it’s apparently similar in its immediate destructive capability to a tactical nuke. For Cent, it’s always hammer time!
Oldarmourer 10th Feb 2020, 1:09 PM edit delete reply
'god rod' usually refers to a kinetic energy orbital weapon...a man made meteor
ie: a large mass dropped from orbit (or maybe the moon) onto someone or something's head
generally thought to be a tungsten rod for density and machinability although a large rock would do in a pinch ;)
Gilrandir 6th Feb 2020, 6:07 AM edit delete reply
Not disputing your logic, @Marcus. But, per your argument, their should be no 'shame' in making the choice to play the odds, should there be?
Marcus Ramesy 6th Feb 2020, 7:03 AM edit delete reply

there is no shame in making a choice based on logic and the given information. She made a call, and stood by it, and in my opinion it was the right call.

In any conflict, people die, Aeneas was already counted among the casualties, the goal was to save Ms Taylor, and keep the casualties down to a minimum. The operative had her own mission goals. There is no shame in what was done. The shame lies on Tokyo Rose for withholding the information. As I stated previously, had she shared that piece of information, with any one of the AIS's and provided evidence, things would have been much different for Aeneas
Gilrandir 6th Feb 2020, 9:09 AM edit delete reply
So, why is Agamemnon claiming the AI's are (should be?) feeling 'shame' for leaving Aeneas alone?
Morituri 6th Feb 2020, 9:32 AM edit delete reply
I don't share your conclusion that significant blame accrues to Tokyo Rose for her failure to share intel.

CentComm has no reason to expect intel sharing if she has failed to cultivate trust. Tokyo Rose has neither motive nor moral imperative to share intel with someone who consistently works at cross purposes to her interests.

Remember both are in the position of plague doctors here; they have certainty of the rightness of their actions, but no knowledge to justify that certainty.

They see the other working against them and conclude that they don't need to help the other to work against them.
Marcus Ramesy 6th Feb 2020, 12:31 PM edit delete reply

@Gilrandir, the same reason I am Sorry that Aeneas had to go through what he did, but not sorry that we did what we did, sympathy. I should not be shamed for a decision based on logic, lintel and statistics, when a vast Ai that can run millions of simultaneous simulations comes up with an answer of 5% possibility of survival, no one is going to commit resources to prove otherwise, would you in her position? The best I could hope for would be to retrieve the body for proper burial/disposal.

In this case I feel that "shame" is the wrong word to be using, accountability may be a better one. Centcom made the decision and is being held accountable for it, there are those that disagree with her choices because of an emotional attachment to certain entities involved, including the other AIS's. The thing to remember, they are not human, they are not Androids, they are a separate and different entity themselves. They have emotions, but not in the same way humans do.

@Morituri I can see your perspective, and understand where and why you would see this, and its not entirely wrong. I feel that Tokyo Rose holds more responsibility because she knows Centcom, and knows what to expect, she knows how she operates, and knows that her reaction will be suddenly, violently and all over the place. However, she also knows that if given evidence, she will take it in to consideration. Cent com may be a cold uncaring bitch, but she is our cold uncaring bitch and she does care in her own way.
megados 6th Feb 2020, 1:13 PM edit delete reply

Personally, I don't think Agamemnon's 'shame' reference had anything to do with placing blame, holding someone to account, or fingerpointing. It's a coulda, woulda, shoulda sort of situation. If there's blame to place, there's enough to go around, and it's because of a lot of mutual distrust. That's not to say it's entirely undeserved; it is what it is, but that distrust was why intel wasn't shared, such that the events unfolded as they did. I think Agamemnon's comment is indicative of the negative feeling over the distrust ending up having the ultimate effect that it did, not about odds or strategy. JMO
DLKmusic 6th Feb 2020, 4:04 PM edit delete reply

Oddly enough, I don't have a problem with Centcomm's decision, or her conclusions. As I mentioned last week, her point is valid.

What got me cringing though is the replace with her backup from when Aeneas was first created. It is not the Same Aeneas that exists now... I don't even think I could adequately explain why it creeps me out.

"I will Delete (kill) you, but it's ok because I can replace you with something that looks just like you!"
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 12:25 AM edit delete reply

That is indeed cringeworthy.

But worse, is the bit where all the AI's just sat around on their metaphorical thumbs, while Aeneas was spiraling down into madness .. they could easily have send a few undercover agents with some spy bots into Nova Roma, in order to see if Aeneas was fully gone or not.

I believe that is the "shame" that Agamemnon is talking of, that they didn't "do enough" to check up on Aeneas.
Gilrandir 7th Feb 2020, 12:40 AM edit delete reply
The assertion is that, logically, the probability was so low, checking offered insufficient potential reward for the risk. (Even competent spies sometimes get caught.) In which case why the 'shame'?

It is easy to conceive of an AI (like Tokyo Rose) reaching a different conclusion: that the circumstances did warrant further investigation, and then investigating. It is easy to conceive of an AI (like CentComm) concluding no investigation was warranted, and not investigating. Both of these are logical, and neither is 'shameful' 'Shameful' would seem to be concluding an investigation was warranted, and then not investigating (or the reverse) -- but that also would suggest a compromised logical processor.

One supposes it could be 'shame' if Agamemnon was asserting that the AIs screwed up in reaching their conclusions in the first place and they had all the information they needed at the time to reach a more accurate prediction, and willfully failed to do so for ... reasons. But that doesn't seem consistent with what we see here either.
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 6:10 AM edit delete reply

Shame is also applicable when one does not live up to ones own standards.
Gilrandir 7th Feb 2020, 9:31 AM edit delete reply
Yes, @Sheela. Exactly. To which standard is Agamemnon referring that he suggests the AIs did not live up to? That is what is puzzling me. And, in the case of a mechanical entity, does failing to live up to such a standard constitute evidence of malfunction?
megados 7th Feb 2020, 1:07 PM edit delete reply

Considering that these mechanical entities in the DC universe are portrayed to have emotions, and emotions, by their very nature run counter to the somewhat popular notion that mechanical entities are purely logical, it could be said that all of them are malfunctioning. Since the story portrays their evolution to be so advanced that emotion was a natural extension, it would seem that no malfunction occurred.

It just seems to me, that Agamemnon found the circumstances surrounding the lack of a more timely response to Aeneas' condition to be regrettable.
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 2:39 PM edit delete reply
Now tha thas me wondering...did Centcomm 'spark' ? or is she just a cold, if-then-else logical engine running programmes without any actual emotional capability ?

Then again, we have 'seen' her thoughts where she does evoke some pretty strong emotions toward Calliope's problems, so....who knows ?
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 9:22 PM edit delete reply

Heh, this reminds me of a short story I never wrote, but had some thoughts about.

The premise was basically, if an AIS does not have the emotions that we do, what emotions does it have then?

Essentially, Centcomm the AIS will use brute force analysis, to decide upon a course of action. And since it can run multiple scenario's at the same time, it will simply run, say, 1000 scenario's, with varying degree of emotion, all the way from "barely any emotion" and all the way up to "having an emotional meltdown".

Obviously, the most successful scenario's will usually be those that are not at the extreme ends of the spectrum.
And thus, once the most successful scenario has been decided upon, those are the emotions that she will feel.

Being a military AIS, she will usually take a guarded stance.
Or at least, that's how it is in my head-canon.

tl;dr : Centcomm has the emotions that she decides have the best chances of "winning".
megados 8th Feb 2020, 10:01 AM edit delete reply

". . . with varying degree of emotion, all the way from "barely any emotion" and all the way up to "having an emotional meltdown""

This seems to suggest that there is only one emotion, and the difference is just a matter of degree or amplitude.

Beyond that, though, yeah, it's probable that CentComm could/would use a brute force method to reach a conclusion.
Sheela 8th Feb 2020, 4:06 PM edit delete reply

Well, no, there are varying types of states of emotion .. but they are modified by the intensity, or amplitude, I guess.

Kinda like how in Robert Plutchik's inverted wheel of emotions, you would start in a neutral state, and then go through the emotions as the intensity increases - As shown on this diagram :

megados 8th Feb 2020, 7:32 PM edit delete reply

Ah, OK, I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense, then to "scan" the wheel spiraling outward, and noting the outcomes.
Tokyo Rose 9th Feb 2020, 8:26 PM edit delete reply


"Now tha thas me wondering...did Centcomm 'spark' ?"

The concept of "sparking", as we've used it colloquially in reference to androids, has no applicability to the Artificial Intelligence Systems like Cent-Comm, Agamemnon, etc.
Oldarmourer 10th Feb 2020, 1:11 PM edit delete reply
new data
Sheela 11th Feb 2020, 12:37 AM edit delete reply

Oldarmourer 11th Feb 2020, 10:17 AM edit delete reply
in three hundred metres turn the plot hard left...
Tokyo Rose 9th Feb 2020, 8:18 PM edit delete reply

"To which standard is Agamemnon referring that he suggests the AIs did not live up to?"

A standard wherein more effort would be made to clearly determine whether a comrade is dead or alive. (Agamemnon is largely a teacher, and has a lot more contact with humans in various capacities than some of the other city AIs.)
Gilrandir 9th Feb 2020, 9:09 PM edit delete reply
Thank you, @Tokyo Rose. If I understand you correctly, Agamemnon is essentially applying the standards for humans to the AIS community, reflecting that, given a moderate amount of intuition or a more social weighting of emotional ties in the risk/benefit analysis, a great deal of suffering would have been prevented. Which, if he spends a lot of time interacting with humans and assessing them against such criteria, makes perfect sense.
Nystran 9th Feb 2020, 4:28 AM edit delete reply
Perfectly OK for those using the "midlife crisis" frame of morality.
Rashala 5th Feb 2020, 1:28 AM edit delete reply

Wow centcomm you're making soooooo many friends with that explanation. I sense rose is about to slap you or something soon
sigpig 5th Feb 2020, 11:55 AM edit delete reply

-> Hands TR a full-grown salmon with which to slap CentComm...

It would have to be a virtual salmon, since it would be a waste of a perfectly good salmon to infect it with CentComm cooties...
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 3:51 PM edit delete reply
that might lead to problems with Ariel....maybe slap Centcomm with her instead ?
Morituri 5th Feb 2020, 8:06 PM edit delete reply
I thought salmon were specifically for slapping Amway salesmen.

Has their use been extended to AIS, or fully generalized?
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 6:12 AM edit delete reply

*Sits in a corner, drooling slightly, with a pile of salmon bones in front of her*
sigpig 7th Feb 2020, 7:23 AM edit delete reply

Sometimes, people (things) just need to get slapped up-side the head with a fish.
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 2:40 PM edit delete reply
a frozen one...
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 9:24 PM edit delete reply
megados 8th Feb 2020, 7:47 AM edit delete reply

Month Python FTW!
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 6:37 AM edit delete reply
hmmm Aeneas has been shown to have 'orbital defence cannons' in his control zone would they be able to target a 'god rod' in orbit while it was still just detaching from it's launcher and before it reached reentry ? Granted, it would be moving at a pretty good relative velocity already, just to maintain orbit but we track satellites and send and receive tight-beam signals now so in the 39th century it should be easier to get an early firing solution, especially with a lightspeed or near lightspeed weapon like a laser/maser/ion cannon/etc.
robnot 5th Feb 2020, 9:21 AM edit delete reply
no.. going back to numbers,, the satellite would have to be destroyed before launch ..
in today's standards you would have up to 15 min,, because the rods are pretty much dropped (not launched) an take that time to fall to target..
now to this scenario,, IF satellite is hidden in with others, at a height of 22,223 miles (36,000 kilometers) an the "Rod" is launched at half the speed of light 93,141mps (149,896kps) an taking into account the brief air resistance ,,, ..
the rod would have less than a second of flight time.!!!
so,, in order to have time (more than a second) , it have to be traveling less than 22,223 miles (36,000 kilometers) or whatever the height of the satellite, an speed of same..
Sheela 5th Feb 2020, 9:48 AM edit delete reply

It wasn't Aeneas who had "god rods" available, it was one of the other AIS's, though he might have had some as well.

Lets not forget that satellites can be built to move around.
Heck they probably have stealth fields too.
robnot 5th Feb 2020, 10:14 AM edit delete reply
Cent-Comm has the "God Rods"..
.. as Puppy sed,, look at the movie "Under Siege 2 Dark Territory " the ghost satellites.. now add a thousand years of tech.. then add hundreds (if not thousands) of other satellites ,, which witch is wich ,, ..
sooo with out destroying all the satellites,, you have 1/4 of a second,, from launch to impact to destroy (vaporize) that rod...
MirrorField 5th Feb 2020, 10:39 AM edit delete reply
Naah. No "ghost satellites", I think. One of the less-fun axioms of realistic sci-fi is that "there ain't no stealth in space".

"God-rod" would have been responded to, possibly restarting the War. Which probably was the reason why other AIS denied CentComm's request.
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 11:20 AM edit delete reply

half the speed of light ?
we haven't seen that sort of tech, even in the 39th century, not for something that small

'god rods', even in sci-fi, are usually just detached from an orbiter then steered to a precise re-entry at orbital velocity (which is something like 7.6 km/sec for the ISS)

ISS velocity calculations that won't copy/paste

most meteors are roughly that velocity +/- a few km/sec with some a lot faster and with a really fast one maybe going to 30 km/sec or so...still, that sort of velocity, combined with a telephone pole sized tungsten carbide rod and even allowing for velocity reduction before impact due to aerodynamic resistance and some impactor mass ablated through friction, would still generate approximately 3.75 long fucktons of energy (3.9 metric fucktons) which is a fair amount by anyone's standards without dropping relativistic mechanics into the mix ;)

and 7.6 km/sec can probably be targeted with a laser...or at least the glowing fireball could be...
sigpig 5th Feb 2020, 12:01 PM edit delete reply

You're assuming that the rod would simply be detached and gently fall to Earth. I would think that the rods would be launched from a big, fuck-off (BFO) railgun.
That railgun could accelerate a rod to relativistic velocities. You wouldn't even need a BIG rod to inflict a LOT of damage...
Some Ed 5th Feb 2020, 3:40 PM edit delete reply
With a gravity well the size of Earth's, going from orbit to ground is not what I'd call "gently". The difference between a gun firing a bullet big enough to survive re-entry and dropping that bullet into the gravity well with just enough of a shove to counter most of its orbital momentum isn't really particularly noticeable. The former will certainly land quicker, because it doesn't take the initial few seconds to go from not moving to bullet speed. But the added speed gained from already being at that speed, rather than taking that particular amount of distance to get there, will be negligible, because you're now talking about the added acceleration at the end of the journey, by which point the bullet was already going much more than that distance in a second.

I grant you that a rail gun, delivering its momentum over a fairly large distance, is going to pack more of an oomph. I do find it interesting just how easy some people think it is to get a rail gun that would toss some metal to relativistic velocities. I haven't done the math, but I feel like that would require enough power such that it would put out a fairly ridiculous EMP, to the point that AISes might be somewhat reluctant to go there.

I do recognize that we have supercolliders that do that sort of thing on a routine basis, but they're doing it with a small enough mass that it wouldn't survive re-entry.
sigpig 5th Feb 2020, 4:07 PM edit delete reply

Assuming that:
1. Centy's god-rod satellites are at geosynchronous orbit;
2. By this century, there exists rail guns of a size and capability of accelerating a "rod" of dense metal (tungsten, depleted uranium, etc) to approximately .5C;
3. The target is unaware of the impending attack and hasn't ALREADY aimed it's anti-ballistic weaponry at the satellite; then

1. Geosynchronous orbit is ~0.1 light-second;
2. The velocity of the rod is 0.5c, so it would take 200ms (0.2s) from orbit to impact;
3. Two tenth of a second is not that much time to detect, track, lock on, elevate and train weapons (purely mechanical), fire, hit, and destroy/deflect the incoming projectile. Keep in mind that there is a non-zero possibility of deflecting the god rod into a populated area (possible mega-deaths).

If my math doesn't check out, feel free to correct me ;)
Lurker314 5th Feb 2020, 5:29 PM edit delete reply
It's all about the preservation of energy. ANY energy delivered at impact has to come from somewhere. (And don't ignore energy bled off by heat on the way down.)

If you want a Hiroshima amount of energy to arrive on target, you have to supply a Hiroshima amount of energy. Certainly, a great deal of energy will be expended getting the rod into orbit, and that energy will be partially reclaimed during descent. I say "partially" because the rod is first boosted into orbit, but then energy has to be removed in order to get it to fall in the first place.

Now for the rail gun: can you guess where this is going?

Whatever additional power you want to impart at impact you have to impart at the rail gun. All of it.

So yeah, if there is a HUGE explosion roughly overhead, it is a good idea to start pointing your sensors into the cone from that explosion to your cities and bases. You will have more than a minute to respond. Perhaps more than two.

OTOH, if there were a collection of rods, each with their own engine, they could perform small orbit-changing manoeuvres over a more protracted period of time until Hiroshima / 7 * 1000 happens with very little notice.
robnot 5th Feb 2020, 4:15 PM edit delete reply
yes .. the "modern" theory is to line up the telephone size (20ft x 12in.)tungsten rod (usually a bundle of 8) and let it Fall to earth,,. reaching a speed of mach 10 (7000 miles or 2 miles per second.). also this is in the 15 min window.. (( called " Project Thor. " ))
also useless info , the modern rail gun fires at mach 7 or 5000 mph. (1.388889mp second)..
NOW.. take sed railgun, put in orbit, fire sed "Rod" into the gravity well.. sed rod will start at mach 7, 'falling even faster' for 2/3s of it's journey,, till it hits atmosphere , an slows a little... now sed rod went from 0 to mach 10 by just falling.. this scenario we Start at mach 7 , an plunge into the gravity well. an since i don't wanna do fancy math (E=MxL2) i'll just double the mach.. so mach 14 = 10741.8mph or 2.983833333mp second. .. thats with modern tech now. add a thousand years of up grades...
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 5:44 PM edit delete reply
I sort of think the 'big rocks' Luna threatens to launch the odd time might be shot from a railgun but the Moon has the mass to handle firing one and could very likely easily produce the energy required.
megados 5th Feb 2020, 6:14 PM edit delete reply

Give this man a See-Gar! This is the important part. Any railgun, or acceleration means, must either contain, or be affixed to sufficient mass to counter the Newtonian force produced. Thrusters could help, but wouldn't match the acceleration curve.
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 8:38 PM edit delete reply
assuming we keep the 'equal and opposite' reaction theory in place and there aren't any warp fields or wormholes involved, to get a 13 ton rod going forward at .5C, a 'lighter' railgun/power supply (especially if power is 'beamed in' by laser) would, if less than half the mass of the projectile, be propelled backwards at a velocity greater than C...I'd rather be on the rod end, thanks.
sigpig 7th Feb 2020, 7:28 AM edit delete reply

Ahh, but The Moon is a Harsh Mistress... lol
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 2:41 PM edit delete reply
or to quote other fictional works... "rocks fall, everyone dies" ;)
Morituri 5th Feb 2020, 3:15 PM edit delete reply
Some back of the envelope calculations: A typical telephone pole is a cylinder 10 meters long and 15 cm radius. That's 706868.4 cubic centimeters. Tungsten is 19.25 grams per cubic centimeter. A telephone-pole size chunk of tungsten therefore is 13.607 (metric) tons. 13.607 tons delivered at 7 kilometers per second is 17.318021 Terajoules of energy. For reference, the Hiroshima bomb detonated with a force of about 63 Terajoules. So your basic 'god rod' times about 3.64 equals one Hiroshima bomb.

Just in case you were having trouble with the 'fucktons-of-energy to kaboom-damage' ratio.
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 8:30 PM edit delete reply
now, jack that pokey 7 km/sec up to .5C or roundabout 150,000 km/sec, which is some 20+ thousand times faster and we're talking some serious shit... that mark won't buff out easy
KarToon12 5th Feb 2020, 11:24 AM edit delete reply

So there IS a difference between being sentient and being alive.
Oldarmourer 5th Feb 2020, 11:29 AM edit delete reply

oh yes, many beings are technically alive while being questionably sentient...
they normally gravitate towards politics, corporate 'leadership' and the entertainment industry however.
Nystran 9th Feb 2020, 4:37 AM edit delete reply

Thought experiment... What would happen if they were to gravitate towards tech or science?
oldarmourer 9th Feb 2020, 6:11 PM edit delete reply
they become senior project managers
Thracecius 5th Feb 2020, 1:33 PM edit delete reply

There's two words in play which have subtle but distinctly differences: sentient & sapient. The first means the being is able to perceive or feel things, while the latter implies having wisdom / being wise. I'm not certain how Aeneas is defining "alive", probably more in terms of identity, but it's unlikely his idea is the same as Centcomm's, and she certainly seems to be implying "alive" is not the same as sapience or identity, more likely being biological or human/alien.
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 9:29 PM edit delete reply

Alive doesn't have to be neither sentient, nor sapient.

One-celled organisms are for example alive, but neither sentient, nor sapient.
Whereas an AIs would not be alive, but could be both sentient *and* sapient.

I would consider living things to be self replicating organisms.
megados 8th Feb 2020, 7:46 AM edit delete reply

Also plants, etc. are living things.

You bring up an interesting point @Sheela. Let's say that these self aware, sentient androids, and AISs decide to build more androids and AISs? They are, at that point, self replicating. Are they then alive? "Organism" basically means "life form", so if something can self replicate, as well as the other conditions considered to indicate life, does that make them organisms?
Sheela 8th Feb 2020, 3:39 PM edit delete reply

Hrm .. I guess.

Though they would also have to have the need for self replicating .. aka. "sex" .. in whatever form that would look like, for an AI lifeform.
megados 8th Feb 2020, 8:07 PM edit delete reply

As we look at biological organisms there is sexual reproduction, and asexual reproduction. The ones that usually reproduce sexually, can also be cloned, so it works either way. Going by the story, and tech page, CentComm AIS generates "seeds" that are used in the creation of androids. If the androids, or CentComm dolls build android bodies, and CentComm generates seeds, at least in this way, they reproduce. Beyond that, we don't know of any other in-story way seeds are created, or if that is the only way. If androids can 'squeak-speak', is it possible to do a copy that way, by recording the stream as an 'image'? Combine images from two, and create an image as a combination of both, as with sexual reproduction?
Morituri 5th Feb 2020, 2:35 PM edit delete reply
All the AIS present had to evaluate their actions in light of a small probability that Aeneas was alive, barriers to access and communication that required extraordinary measures to overcome, and a significant risk that extraordinary measures could trigger a whole lot of violent death.

Of them all, Tokyo Rose had the best chance of establishing communications without triggering a city-paving event. Because cyberpath, but let everybody else think because sneaky devious hacker bribing some otherwise loyal nova roman employee or sneaky devious InfoWar AI who may or may not have infiltrated a hardware provider long ago and provided subverted hardware or routers containing undocumented long-range wireless interfaces etc.

Anyway, the point is had Agamemnon or Deep Blue done much beyond standing by, the results are likely to've been fatal for Aeneas anyway. They made the right call.

Agamemnon in particular has nothing real to be ashamed of; he is evaluating past actions in the moral framework of current knowledge when those actions were taken with past knowledge.

This is a logical fallacy, and humans do it a lot. He would have cause to be legitimately ashamed to have done as he did with the knowledge "Aeneas is alive in there." But he actually did as he did with the knowledge "there's about a five percent chance of Aeneas being alive in there."
Sheela 6th Feb 2020, 12:56 AM edit delete reply

So, Aeneas killed 85% of the people in his control zone.

That leaves 15% .. who are they ?

Homeless hobo's ?
Sewer Alligators?
Baby Murderturds ?


The Cassians ?
Morituri 6th Feb 2020, 9:20 AM edit delete reply
I think maybe that refers to his "control zone" being wider than the "radius of death" he enforced.

To hear Acantha tell it, everybody who was within ?1000? meters of the center got killed, and everybody who was one meter or more outside of that range was untouched.

Maybe he could have put the line at 1020 meters or 1025 and decided it wasn't necessary?
Oldarmourer 6th Feb 2020, 2:00 PM edit delete reply
5 km...

"five thousand and one metres, you were safe, 5000 or less, you were ash"

"...after all the living things were gone, Aeneas started destroying inanimate objects too."
TMLutas 6th Feb 2020, 10:00 PM edit delete reply
Think through all the really unpleasant things that have happened to various artificial life that regularly have backups. So far as I can tell, exactly zero have chosen to unlive those really unpleasant moments and restore from backup to rid themselves of even devastating experience.

Torture, rape, the death of close loved ones, immolation, life just goes on with nobody choosing a little death and rewind back to the last backup.

This seems to be a major tenet of how artificial life is lived all up and down the complexity scale. Why does Centcomm imagine that they're all wrong and why hasn't she tried to promulgate her different beliefs?
Morituri 7th Feb 2020, 9:55 AM edit delete reply
That's actually pretty astonishing. At the end of a "standout" day, given the choice between saving and restoring from the previous day's save .... I've had at least three days in my life that I'd have chosen to 'unremember'.

I couldn't possibly have remained ignorant of what happened; I'd have had to deal with consequences regardless. But yeah, just plain not having certain first-person memories would be a blessing.

And I wouldn't get rid of those memories now. They're unpleasant, but they're part of who I am now. Too much of what has come since would not make sense in the context of being someone who didn't remember those things.

But if I'd looked at it at nine PM on any one of those three days, with the choice of "save" or "restore" ... I'd have restored.
Oldarmourer 7th Feb 2020, 2:44 PM edit delete reply
That's another of my favourite, well...maybe not 'favourite' but still often used, sayings...
"My life needs a rewind/erase button"
Sheela 7th Feb 2020, 9:33 PM edit delete reply

A pause button could be pretty neat too.

About to have a traffic accident ?
Hit pause, and think about how best to avoid it.
Thracecius 8th Feb 2020, 3:51 PM edit delete reply

Funds on the way, Centcom. :)
Ghostly 9th Feb 2020, 3:46 AM edit delete reply
Ok after reading the 3 previous chapters and this one, plus comments; ive come to think we are forgetting something....the in everyone else besides this AIs.
1- Lots of people still remember what he did(AOE the fucking area, including civies), not only that but as far as the only species on earth that semi-rules we tend to keep grudges and caution against things that do lots of destructing(crimes,war,dissasters and etc.)
2- If hes considered sentient-alive..then should he be charged for murdering all who were minding there own stuff while some "thugs" raiding aenneas?
3- Remember TR is a living normal mentality apply to her? as in being anxious,scared,angry,jelous,etc.; shes been shown to be a dick and manipulating person who erases all traces she leaves so no one can blame her.
4- Regarding previous one, her operations have lead to creating distrust(i mean whos to say she hast WHITEBOARD here agents to make sure no lose ends?), making the other AI conflict in analising the situation.
5- TR and the AIs half-messoure attemp to fix anneas lead to making Cent the only one who brought the spike just incase for failures.
Ghostly 9th Feb 2020, 3:58 AM edit delete reply
6- Why is anneas mad cause she tried to lessen the loss of life but he acts like a selfcentered "my life is worth more than all death that might happend if you dont fix me"?
7- After looking at the chapters in the NR city ive noticed TR had more agents inside yet.....she kept info away from the rest? whats not to say she did it delibertly?
8- Sending an untrained Teen to act as Combat Engineer/Secret Agent went fubar when he pulled out his gun and made the city to go from alert to CODE RED.
9- Given the tech thats in the Story so far... small drones like the one with the girl at the farm could just mass swarm into the srly FOR MOTHER RUSSIAAA...i mean hurraah.
10- Cent should be the one mad instead of the rest since the fucked up the plan and act like heroes after they clearly didnt have all the data and planed contingencies for...dunno INCASE THE FAIL!?
11- This all happend couse no one decided to conquer the freeeeeeeee land thats between cities cause having logistics or checkpoints is absourd.
12- Did i remind all that this happend cause of one girl(srly lets be honest she wanted to bang her so called genious boyfriend)bitching cause she wanted something to do like....Party?
13- Why couldnt she be escorted huh? i mean Cent and the AIs know shes important but nooo lets leave TR to use her as an excuse to cause Le Revolution in NR possible making all who join wanted to cause chaos get ideas now.
Oldarmourer 9th Feb 2020, 7:33 AM edit delete reply
Because if none of that happened, the story would have been three pages...tops.
Instead we've had 12 years and well over 1600 pages...people screw things up and so apparently do AIS's.
DLKmusic 9th Feb 2020, 12:48 PM edit delete reply

There is one point that hasn't been brought up, which is an "Indictment"? on TR for this particular issue.

While on the way, and while in Nova Roma, Ceci was getting tips from anonymous sources the Dolly was planning their moves around. We found out later that it was TR that feeding info to Ceci.

With that piece of the puzzle, TR should definitely be on the hook for not sharing at least some information about her plan with Cent-Comm. She certainly had the opportunity, and Cent-comm is thorough enough with her planning That a Heads up would have saved this particular war-of-words from happening... or at least have it re-directed in a different way.
megados 9th Feb 2020, 2:52 PM edit delete reply

"Friend of Helen"? I remember that. Hmmm. I figure she didn't want to tip her hand at that point. Part of the mistrust and secrecy thing.
Oldarmourer 9th Feb 2020, 6:17 PM edit delete reply
I'm thinking maybe TR was more interested in helping Calliope than Centcomm...especially seeing how Cent had actively sabotaged Dolly's mission from before it's start, whatever her intentions or reasoning for it were.

I think it's been fairly well established that while TR pretty much exists to gather information and use it; Cent, to put it bluntly, can't be trusted with some information and while she might have logical reasons for what she does, based on 'running millions of simulations' sometimes only one simulation actually works and that's only through a number of variables working in unplanned ways, and the majority of well thought out and 'logical' ones are wrong...sometimes, the 'luck factor' matters more than any other calculation and TR has the 'gut feelings' that Cent is lacking.
megados 9th Feb 2020, 7:04 PM edit delete reply

Another possibility exists in that if anything happened to Lynn in NR, there was a plan to glass it. Cent and Calliope were both leaning toward that, and that would have run counter to TR's agenda. It would make sense to help get Lynn out. It would prevent that, and help further Rose's design. The rest was serendipitous happenstance.
Oldarmourer 10th Feb 2020, 1:14 PM edit delete reply
That too, TR does sort of say she sees her job as being to protect mankind from itself..douchimus or not.
TheSkulker 11th Feb 2020, 3:46 AM edit delete reply

I find it strange that in all the discussion a 5% probability is considered extremely small and not worth considering or acting upon. Perhaps for mundane items/events but for a life? Whether human or one of a very, very small population of super AIs.

If you think 5% is too small to consider I ask you, would you get on a plane if there as a 5% chance of you getting killed? would you play Russian Roulette with a 20 chamber gun if the payoff for living was a million dollars? Would you bet a hundred or a thousand dollars if you had a 5% chance of winning a million?

Humans will exert an extraordinary effort to save just one life, even when that life has little social value. All too often we hear of someone that has survived beyond all expectations after a disaster. Should the rescue teams have given up at the 5% threshold? It sure would be cheaper. How about if it was you hanging on and hoping to be rescued?

What is the value of the "life" of one of less than a dozen super AIs? It certainly ought to be worth the effort of gathering all possible information and for investigating all possibilities instead of just dismissing the situation as a foregone conclusion. Their 5% threshold was a cop out and they all should feel shame.
robnot 11th Feb 2020, 7:05 AM edit delete reply
the KEY point to this " 5% " .. is did you Know.!!
as S.A.R. if a call goes out , we go.. but if we reach the ,, "5%" an find nothing we return.. the flip side,, if we have a shadow of doubt / hope, we keep looking..
at the point of the '5%' decision .. They did NOT know, so a no joy was called.. at any time after that , if positive proof went out then ' Yes ' they would have helped,,..
but after the fact, all they had was hearsay..
Marcus Ramesy 11th Feb 2020, 8:47 AM edit delete reply


the other key word here is "humans" these are AIS's they do not feel or think the same way humans do.
Also an thing to remember, AIS is not the same as Android. Androids are programmed/created/Learn to provide human emotional responses to situations because thats how they were designed. AIS was designed to run a city, Combat Analysis, Industrial and commerce, things that work on a much much larger scale.
Oldarmourer 11th Feb 2020, 10:21 AM edit delete reply
paid $5 for a lottery ticket the other day, again...
based on past history, the odds of my winning a million are much less than 5%
yet I still buy tickets...occasionally.
DLKmusic 11th Feb 2020, 8:34 PM edit delete reply

Re the Russian Roulette, if there was only one bullet, a 5% of me dying when I played, I might consider it.. but if 19 chambers were loaded and only one was empty? I don't think so...
Thracecius 12th Feb 2020, 1:28 PM edit delete reply

Would I play Russian Roulette with a 5% chance of dying for a million dollars, or even $100 million? No. Why? Because my life is worth more to me than the money, even if it's worthless to everyone else. There is only one 'me' and I am responsible for it, so taking an unnecessary risk just for the chance at a pile of money would be foolish.

The lotto ticket example from Oldarmourer? There's no life risk involved, just a vanishingly minute chance that I will win a jackpot, so all I can lose is the money I spent. There's no comparison.

As Marcus said, AIs and humans do not think, feel or act the same, so it is not a reasonable expetation that they should look at "the odds" the same way that we do. AIs, for lack of a better phrasing, are "alien" to us, and are therefore even more unknowable than our inidividual thoughts are to each other.
Post a Comment

Comic Basement - Webcomic Ranking Directory