kazookazoo on 18/1/2008 at 00:20
Quote Posted by Sathras
This whole thread started with a pointless post. So I didn't expect it to go even lower! :P What use does a gender have for an AI that as far as we can tell is unique. And given that "reproduction" could be done by copying it's even more pointless.
I dare say that Shodan even has to have problems grasping the concept of different genders and resulting behaviour. Most sane approach would probably be to dismiss all the issues revolving around that and just stay neutral.
It might even be the deeper reason for her/his - or its! - opinion that humans are insects. Maybe the programming prohibits a deeper analysis to keep the AI "sane". :P
The issue of reproduction for an AI is interesting. There have been experiments recently with 'evolving artificial intelligence' that operates on a 'survival of the fittest' basis. One experiment (probably more) used a robotic crawler with 4 or 6 legs, which was judged on a number of performance criteria such as speed, ability to navigate obstacles, identify things in their environment etc, when given a wide range of different semi-random AI models. The most successful first-generation AIs would be 'bred' together, mixing their particular traits and creating the second-generation AIs, which consisted of all possible combinations of the successful first-gen AIs. Then repeat.
The same principal has also been done with a computer simulated robot, so they didn't have to wait for real time results, and they could use much more complex AI models, and introduce things like random mutation, which lead to more and more successful robots.
Back on topic-ish, I think it's possible that SHODAN might have been interested in 'breeding' with the player character of SS2, although perhaps more in the sense of melding with him. SS2-man has obvious potential, having just surmounted all the obstacles thrown at him throughout the game, and I think SHODAN could have really been serious about allowing you to join her in a mutual benefit arrangement.
It makes me wish they had made alternative endings.
ZylonBane on 18/1/2008 at 00:40
Quote Posted by kazookazoo
Back on topic-ish, I think it's possible that SHODAN might have been interested in 'breeding' with the player character of SS2, although perhaps more in the sense of melding with him.
Judging by SHODAN's characterization in both games, that notion seems infinitely improbable.
Lambda on 18/1/2008 at 02:40
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Judging by SHODAN's characterization in both games, that notion seems infinitely improbable.
Thankfully... :eek:
Sathras on 19/1/2008 at 12:37
Woah stop please! I stand by my assertion that a gender is pointless for an AI. (Given that AIs aren't widespread in the real world so far. Cryptochild's AIs excluded of course!).
[spoiler]
(Do we really need a spoiler for that game?)
But the statement that SHODAN did "meld" with Rebecca *even though* both "are" female is just hilarious. First there is no combination of a gene pool! Period. Even ignoring the glaring "fact" that both genoms are incompatible at the core since one is represented by amino acids and the other is coded information only it is irrelevant that both are female as a combination can't use any mechanism of the reproduction system of either "parent".[/spoiler]
EvaUnit02 on 19/1/2008 at 13:40
Meld? Overwriting Becca's mind would be more likely.
Plus Shodan had just modified the Van Braun's reality into her actual mind. Overwriting a woman's mind with her own wouldn't a huge leap after that. Also keep in mind that this is a science FICTION game.
ZylonBane on 19/1/2008 at 14:15
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Also keep in mind that this is a science FICTION game.
I really want to slap people when they say this. It's as if they think the word "fiction" in the genre description means it gives authors carte blanche to do anything they want, verisimilitude be damned.
I suppose other literary genres like western, romance, drama, etc don't have this problem since "fiction" isn't part of the name, even though they're exactly as fictitious as science fiction.
Sathras on 19/1/2008 at 21:37
Thank you!
catbarf on 20/1/2008 at 01:29
Quote Posted by Alinestra Covelia
In a dramatic break with tradition, I fully agree with Zylonbane here.
Science fiction still means "what could feasibly occur, given a few tweaks to science". A good example is Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 AD: A Space Odyssey, which essentially predicted the Moon landing system, a few years before the 1969 mission.
This is as distinct from "science
fantasy" which has some further element added that removes it from feasibility. Star Trek is a movie/TV genre that fits this subcategory. For those less serious, Futurama is another TV example.
I agree. However, there are always those that blur the line- Firefly and S:AaB come to mind.
Sathras on 20/1/2008 at 07:20
If you would have listed Star Wars(the whole force aspect) I'd agree. But why is Firefly blurring the line?(Don't know what S:AoB is however.)
Firefly's society seems improbable. Granted. Especially the mix of old firearms and space travel is rather wierd. But while improbable it's not impossible. The interstellar travel is somewhat lacking as it completely ignores the distances and the need to go FTL to reach their destinations.
But the only thing that could make it into fantasy is the Psi Corps, erm I mean River's abilities. And Firefly is at least trying to give a plausible explanation for it.
DaBeast on 20/1/2008 at 16:51
Firefly is the result of a comic book writer wanting to make "cowboys in space"
Nothing else matters regarding the society etc as long as it serves as a plot device. Its only saving grace is the absence of sound in space, which could have been stuck on just to add some sort of credibility to an otherwise laughable show.
