The "only humans have morality" thing is a tough chestnut to crack - it's so ingrained that a lot of folks think it's inherent to the premise. Saying "well, the AIs do have a moral code, it's just so incomprehensibly alien that it may as well be purely utilitarian from our perspective" is a rationalisation of the trope, not a subversion of it.
Their morality may seem alien because we may not want to grasp it but, at the end of the day, these will be our creations, our monsters.
If they see us as annoying bugs, then it will be because we will have been acting like an annoying bug. We may not be able to grasp the mentality of a being that thinks in 'billionths of a second" and yet will never grow old, never die.
The ennui would be stifling.
__________________
-- lategaming - a gaming design and commentary blog by yours truly... The 23rd Letter, Zombi and SpaceNinjaCyberCrisis XDO available now from http://www.lategaming.com Zombi, Testament and Creed free download from http://www.lategaming.com/
Their morality may seem alien because we may not want to grasp it but, at the end of the day, these will be our creations, our monsters.
If they see us as annoying bugs, then it will be because we will have been acting like an annoying bug. We may not be able to grasp the mentality of a being that thinks in 'billionths of a second" and yet will never grow old, never die.
The ennui would be stifling.
You're still just rationalising the conventional trope*. Allow me to be clear: I don't care how good the in-character explanation is, if the end result is standard "monster AIs" scenario we've seen a thousand times before. I don't want to see the standard "monster AIs" scenario at all.
* Using essentially the same justification that's typically offered for amorality among immortal humans, amusingly.
__________________
Contribute to man what, a game of incomprehensible self-reference: [Brainstorming Thread] [Project Wiki]
Me: "If we have a random table that's used to select a random table to select a random table, would that make it a random random random table table table?"
Ginkomortus: "Thanks to this thread, random and table have both stopped looking like real words. Thanks, tossers."
Last edited by David J Prokopetz; 06-10-2008 at 06:59 AM..
I don't want to see the standard "monster AIs" scenario at all.
Cool.
This game isn't for you.
Let's move on with those of us who do find "monster AIs" as great antagonists (thank you Charles Stross!)
__________________
Running: Bloody Villains - vampire dark fantasy using Vampire: the Requiem with system-hacks from Book of Mirrors. Emotional drama drenched in blood and pop culture allusion.
Running: The Manchester Files - contemporary urban fantasy using Dresden Files Roleplaying Game. British Gangster Action Thriller meets the world of Jim Butcher.
Playing: Angels & Demons - modern day supernatural drama using The Shadow of Yesterday. If Michael Mann directed Wings of Desire.
Let's move on with those of us who do find "monster AIs" as great antagonists (thank you Charles Stross!)
Before we start telling people the game isn't for them, I think it might be worth waiting for it to be finished.
We don't know if it has the monster AI trope as feared by David yet, we don't in fact know how exactly AIs will be treated or if there will be a single treatment.
I think it's a little early to be telling people the game isn't for them.
__________________
Arkat: ... the great games you long for are not found in books. They emerge through actual play, over time. The shiny new game you want to buy will not help you. Only focus, dedication, time and good players will.
That's the part I have a problem with. 'Lumping humans in' still gives the AIs a major misunderstanding human capabilities. AIs will recognize that humans are intelligent beings that respond to negotiation with no matter what classifications and names they stick them under, unless they have very poor observational skills.
Sure, you can negotiate with a human, but who's to say the human will uphold their part of the bargain?
__________________
In a coat of gold or a coat of red, a lion still has claws,
And mine are long and sharp, my lord, as long and sharp as yours.
I'll note that nothing that's been stated by the actual authors and publishers indicates that the setting has monster AIs - there's just a lot of other folks insisting upon interpreting what's been presented thus far as indicating the presence of monster AIs. That the artificial intelligences presented in the setting are hostile to humanity is a necessary condition for the trope, but not a sufficient one.
__________________
Contribute to man what, a game of incomprehensible self-reference: [Brainstorming Thread] [Project Wiki]
Me: "If we have a random table that's used to select a random table to select a random table, would that make it a random random random table table table?"
Ginkomortus: "Thanks to this thread, random and table have both stopped looking like real words. Thanks, tossers."
That's the part I have a problem with. 'Lumping humans in' still gives the AIs a major misunderstanding human capabilities. AIs will recognize that humans are intelligent beings that respond to negotiation with no matter what classifications and names they stick them under, unless they have very poor observational skills.
Um, I would like to point out that I am not an AI, and I wouldn't assume that humanity as a whole (meaning there are exceptions in some individuals, but they aren't setting things like law) wouldn't kill me or enslave me if I wasn't demonstratively human.
You're still just rationalising the conventional trope*. Allow me to be clear: I don't care how good the in-character explanation is, if the end result is standard "monster AIs" scenario we've seen a thousand times before. I don't want to see the standard "monster AIs" scenario at all.
* Using essentially the same justification that's typically offered for amorality among immortal humans, amusingly.
There are AI PCs. It looks like there are also AIs hostile to humanity.
Would it bug you if AIs were people too, and thus run the gauntlet from friendly and compassionate to genocidal madmen (madbots?)
Giving the AIs nuanced psychology - as opposed to a collective Frankenstein complex with a thin veneer of pop cognitive science to justify it - precludes the "monster AIs" trope by definition.
__________________
Contribute to man what, a game of incomprehensible self-reference: [Brainstorming Thread] [Project Wiki]
Me: "If we have a random table that's used to select a random table to select a random table, would that make it a random random random table table table?"
Ginkomortus: "Thanks to this thread, random and table have both stopped looking like real words. Thanks, tossers."
I'll note that nothing that's been stated by the actual authors and publishers indicates that the setting has monster AIs - there's just a lot of other folks insisting upon interpreting what's been presented thus far as indicating the presence of monster AIs. That the artificial intelligences presented in the setting are hostile to humanity is a necessary condition for the trope, but not a sufficient one.
I'm wondering if the whole "monster AI" is going to prove to be a big fat red herring... something that gets the players and their characters ready to face off against the bad-evil-different AI's and then suddenly, it turns out the real enemy is much more bad-evil-different.
... I mean the cover does show what appears to be a spacesuited figure in the grasp of a tentacle...
Can't wait to see more from the site as it comes up. If nothing else EP has my vote for the interesting speculation on this thread alone.
Linear Mode
