Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 18/10/2007 at 10:08
Quote Posted by Papy
I'm against war, yet I support the idea of a strong military. I even did two years of military service. When I'm in a position of authority, I generally choose for myself the worst task. I believe in the idea of democracy, yet I refuse to vote. I like the idea of a quiet life, having some hens, a garden, maybe even a few cows, yet I chose to live in a city spending most of my times with computers...
Sometimes, desires are what decide what I choose to do, but most of the time it's either direct needs or my own moral values which dictate what I
must do.
A lot of that just convinces me that you're...odd. You refuse to vote..why, exactly? Even if all the parties are awful, register your disgust by turning up to vote and writing "ALL THE PARTIES ARE AWFUL" on the ballot paper. Just going "Meh" is the worst form of laziness.
When I'm in a position of authority, I generally choose for myself (and others) the tasks at which we are respectively best at, rather than hogging the worst one for myself.
And I think you DO like the
idea of a quiet life with cows and hens, but the idea is ALL you like, and you're realistic enough to know you'd find the reality far less fun. Would you suddenly drop everything and push avidly for a pastoral existence? We'll live in villages! It'll be awesome, honest! :nono:
Quote:
So here's the question : Why did Tong choose to have all his modifications ? Desire, need, integrity ?
General fascination with technology, was the impression I got. Like an extreme version of the computer salespeeps who already have all the latest quintuple-core processors and whatnot, just because they love it. This handily also means they're in the best position to advise clients on the ins and outs of the latest tech, too.
Quote:
Here's two interesting things from your quote :
- "Unwilling to ask his clients to do anything he wouldn't do himself" (What does this imply ?)
That unlike, say..Everett, he's actually principled enough to not deliberately send flunkies off on suicide missions 'because it might be useful possibly but they're flunkies anyway so who cares'.
If Tong wanted to send you on a suicide mission, it'd be one he considered important enough to sacrifice himself for. Which in effect he IS doing by making you nuke Aquinas...but that doesn't make it a sensible decision, or (to my mind) a rational one.
Quote:
- "he doesn't tend to make use of those capabilities in his daily life" (Then why the modifications ?)
Like gun ownership (allegedly), or carrying around a condom "because you never know": he'd rather have them and not need them, than need them and not have them.
You don't need ballistic armour to make cheese on toast (unless you're REALLY bad at it), but if you're in an area with frequent gang fights, it might be nice to know you have it anyway.
Papy on 18/10/2007 at 14:16
Dr. Dumb_lunatic : You assume too much. For example, I told I "refuse" to vote, and you assumed I meant "meh". Don't you think there couldn't be a difference between refusing to vote and simply not caring enough to vote? I won't elaborate here on what is democracy to me (writing in English takes me too much time and I make too many grammatical errors anyway), but let's just say that I believe the best way to live one day in a democracy would be to first stop voting. (Hint : I love rhetoric... :ebil: )
I told you that I choose for myself the worst task, and you replied that a better solution is to give tasks according to abilities. Guess what... This is also what I do, but most common tasks don't require much abilities. Yet, you assumed a specific situation, instead of considering the general situation (where what I said would make sense).
You assumed "I'm realistic enough to know I'd find the reality of living in a village far less fun". Is it really that hard to imagine that one of the reason for my decision is not about "fun" but about personal, professional and (perceived) social responsibilities? Is it really that hard to imagine that I'm aware of our despicable human nature and the consequences of our social organization ? (Don't waste too much time trying to guess what I mean with that, it is not important, it is just to make you understand that you assumed wrong and I really think if I could live in villages it would be a lot more "fun")
Of course it's normal to assume when we don't know, but we should always keep in mind that what we imagine is only that, something we imagine. Don't you think it's best not to draw a definitive conclusion from what we assume? If something is odd or irrational as a consequence of what I assumed, then the first thing I do is to try to "assume" another explanation. Do you think I'm wrong?
So here's a game for you : can you imagine a personality for Tong that would be logical and rational based on how the game describes him?
(BTW, sorry for the patronizing, but as I said, I love rhetoric... and patronizing is on some occasion an effective way to influence the perceived value of what we say)
Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 18/10/2007 at 15:00
Quote Posted by Papy
Dr. Dumb_lunatic : You assume too much.
As, technically, do you. You give me generalisations, I give you generalised responses, and then you berate me (inaccurately) for using 'inaccurate' responses. Forgive me for not knowing exactly what precise situations each and every one of your general statements actually pertained to.:rolleyes:
By all means, clarify. Explain exactly how you 'choose not to vote'. If it's sitting at home going "nope, not gonna vote", then it's identical to going 'meh'. If it's going outside and shouting at everyone "nope, not gonna vote", then it's...also identical. But possibly more likely to lead to arrest for public noise pollution.
Quote:
You assumed "I'm realistic enough to know I'd find the reality of living in a village far less fun". Is it really that hard to imagine that one of the reason for my decision is not about "fun" but about personal, professional and (perceived) social
responsibilities? Is it really that hard to imagine that I'm aware of our despicable human nature and the consequences of our social organization ? (Don't waste too much time trying to guess what I mean with that, it is not important, it is just to make you understand that you assumed wrong and I really think if I could live in villages it would be a lot more "fun")
....what? Is that basically saying "I would SO DEFINITELY GO LIVE IN A VILLAGE but I can't because I have a social responsibilty to stick it out in a city with computers?"...because that REALLY needs clarification.
"With great power comes great inability to go live in villages."
(of course! Without the big buildings what would you stick the webbing to?)
Quote:
Of course it's normal to assume when we don't know, but we should always keep in mind that what we imagine is only that, something we imagine. Don't you think it's best not to draw a definitive conclusion from what we assume?
I find the best thing to do is analyse the situation until a clearer picture appears, possibly performing a series of carefully controlled experiments, with replicates (at least 3), preferably.
Quote:
So here's a game for you : can you imagine a personality for Tong that would be logical and rational based on how the game describes him?
NO. That's the point. I can find no way to rationally intertwine "pre-A51 tong" with "A51 explosive-happy-nutjob tong". This is why we're having this whole discussion.
I mean, at least in IW they clear it up (marginally) by having him say stuff that essentially amounts to "God, yeah. I was a total dick back then. What the hell was I thinking?!?"
Pyrian on 18/10/2007 at 16:43
I really don't see what your issue is. A great deal of what Tong says and does is a fight against the harmful effects of technology. Yes, he uses technology to do so, you might call that an inherent contradiction but it's how he operates from the start so even if it is it's still a consistent trait.
Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 19/10/2007 at 13:00
Quote Posted by Pyrian
I really don't see what your issue is. A great deal of what Tong says and does is a fight against the harmful effects of technology. Yes, he uses technology to do so, you might call that an inherent contradiction but it's how he operates from the start so even if it is it's still a
consistent trait.
I just think that someone as obsessed, intrigued (and, admittedly, also worried) by the limitless potentials of technology would be smart enough to come up with something better than LOL BLOW TEH HUBZ0RZ UPZ, or, if unable to do so..would at least have the decency to sound a bit annoyed at being painted into that corner.
Also, I'm mostly arguing now to find out what Papy does for a living, and stuff. I'm intrigued. :p
heywood on 19/10/2007 at 23:33
The Tong ending is not an end to technology. You destroy the key router of a centralized internet, thereby stopping the main conduit for worldwide communication. That doesn't mean the rest of the communications infrastructure is destroyed, so it's only a matter of time before worldwide communications are restored, hopefully decentralized this time. You also destroy the Helios AI, which is arguably of some scientific value. But it's too dangerous to keep around and it's already starting to take over governance in some parts of the world, so there's no real loss there. You destroy Page's universal constructors, but you already have one at Vandenburg so the technology is not lost and you still have a way to manufacture the cure. And you destroy some old fusion reactors, which again could be of some scientific value except nobody has been able to figure out how to run them.
So basically, I don't see the Tong ending as anti-technology. I see it as an attempt to bring down global and national institutions and place power back in the hands of local and regional institutions which are more accountable to the people. To Tong, it also has the practical benefit of weakening the Chinese government so they stay off his back and leave him alone to practice his craft.
Papy on 20/10/2007 at 17:37
Quote Posted by Dr. Dumb_lunatic
Also, I'm mostly arguing now to find out what Papy does for a living, and stuff. I'm intrigued. :p
Why? ;)
Dr. Dumb_lunatic on 23/10/2007 at 13:35
Quote Posted by heywood
The Tong ending is not an end to technology. You destroy the key router of a centralized internet, thereby stopping the main conduit for worldwide communication.
The impression I got was that ALL electronic communications were now routed through aquinas (including anything that involves routing the signal at any stage), meaning that if that falls, you're left with..well,
direct broadcast radio transmitters, and cups with string in them.
So unless those dedicated radio hams can get off their arses and rig up some global coms pretty fast, a LOT of stuff is going to break down. Power stations, for instance, now pretty much depend on dedicated communication networks to ascertain what areas need power, and how much. Screw that up, and at best you'll lose power..at worse, you'll burn out a significant portion of the distribution network.
Anyone in an aircraft is likely screwed, and anyone requiring..well, any emergency services is likely screwed also. The military can't help, since they're in the dark too.
As we've seen demonstrated over the years, even as 'civilised' as we are now, we're only 3 or 4 missed meals away from barbarism. Things would go downhill, and downhill FAST. Tong might be ok, since he'd be able to rig up a response force fairly quickly (in advance, even), so he could carve out a nifty feudal Tong-town with the triads, but an awful lot of the rest of the world would be pretty horribly screwed.
It's really not a very nice idea.
Illuminatus on 28/10/2007 at 18:27
One thing that doesn't add up at all is Tong being augmented (which, by the way, is never actually mentioned in the game). It's kind of a loose piece of canon since anyone who can tolerate nanites already has the Gray Death, and therefore it would make no sense for him to catch it later. It's specifically stated that JC and Paul test positive for it (in the MJ12 lab where your rescue Paul). The "Gray Death" symptom is just what happens when your body rejects the nanites (as 99.9% of the population does).
This is of course assuming that Tong's supposed augmentations are nano-based (he sure isn't a mech anyway).
ZylonBane on 28/10/2007 at 19:45
Quote Posted by Illuminatus
It's specifically stated that JC and Paul test positive for it (in the MJ12 lab where your rescue Paul). The "Gray Death" symptom is just what happens when your body rejects the nanites (as 99.9% of the population does).
Methinks you extrapolate too much.
