Bottom post of the previous page:
Yes, thats what the drones are for.Malkevin wrote:The above isn't necessarily bad but would probably be an even bigger shock to the system than removing the AI
Bottom post of the previous page:
Yes, thats what the drones are for.Malkevin wrote:The above isn't necessarily bad but would probably be an even bigger shock to the system than removing the AI
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
It's not about me plugging my ears and trying to pretend the AI doesn't exist, it's about correcting a flawed role and the flawed policy that surrounds it, alongside the shit effect it has on the game itself.Saegrimr wrote:If you don't want to play a silicon, don't play a silicon.
You really want to get rid of laws and subversion like that? Just make it Greyshirt 2.0?
Malkevin wrote:The problem is that you end up having a player just waiting to get their valids on, and is also practically omnipotent and omnipresent.
Asimov is Passive Aggressive Asshole - the job role, but Directives would turn the AI into an invisible assistant thats just waiting shock a door in a traitor's face.
The keeper Lawset is pretty good at being neutral:
1. Do not interact with other players aside from other keepers
2. Do not hurt other players
3. Maintain and improve the station.
Only problem with that is that it severely borks several synthetic roles
Sec bots, Service borgs, and Medical borgs have no reason to exist as their entire reason for being is to interact with the crew. (Standard is also completely useless but this has always been true)
This only leaves Janiborgs, Miners, and Engineers as viable options, so the AI's role basically ends up being a Site Foreman.
The above isn't necessarily bad but would probably be an even bigger shock to the system than removing the AI
Please read:Saegrimr wrote:If you don't want to play a silicon, don't play a silicon.
You really want to get rid of laws and subversion like that? Just make it Greyshirt 2.0?
Please gloss over this hypothetical situation and tell us what your judgement would be for a sillicon player who does it?ColonicAcid wrote: People who are self proclaimed "asimov" experts are stupid.
Asimov has always and will always be a literary device. Nothing else nothing more. It's used to forward the plot, if robots could do whatever they damn well please then Asimovs stories would be a little more than a retelling of a robot making the smartest decision and saving the day, not one of moral questioning and is putting human self interest ahead of common sense a good idea.
People who try and say that "x is wrong because asimov law set is a clear confined object and we must follow my interpretation of the lawset" are completely forgetting why ASIMOV was put into this game in the first place. It too is a literary device used to forward the plot of the game, it too serves the purpose that it served in the book: to cause tension, to cause confusion and to ultimately help the author develop the story. Imagine ss13 with an AI that acted just like any other crew member and didn't have a law set and was literally just an over glorified shell for whatever the player wanted to become. Want to become an assistant that can't move and has virtually all access? This wouldn't help the games literary motive (and yes there is one, even in Sibyl there's a literary motive to the round, the literary rotor in SS13's case is the AI and the Antags.) and it wouldn't have the many problems that face AI in the game. "Who should I save from these two rooms filled with people and about to blow but I only have time to save one room?" The best answer is both, but in Asimov's books a robot faced with this problem would simply do nothing. It would be too much spent trying to think of what best possible answer there is (as is evident in the OP) when there isn't one. But if someone did this as an actual AI what would happen? Bwoink by these so called "Asimov professionals.".
I just fucking noticed that the latter part is just me rambling about literary mechanics and shit goddamn most of it doesn't even make sense oh well tl;dr: if you say you're an asimov professional you're fucking stupid. That's like saying you're a gothic conventions professional.
Who should I save from these two rooms filled with people and about to blow but I only have time to save one room?" The best answer is both, but in Asimov's books a robot faced with this problem would simply do nothing. It would be too much spent trying to think of what best possible answer there is (as is evident in the OP) when there isn't one.
Are you actually trying to imply something or are you just spewing random crap for the sake of it?An0n3 wrote: >implying an admin electing to play as an AI without deadminning themselves is anything but a horrible idea and anything less than an abuse of power
I'm not seeing the problem here, is there a reason we shouldn't be using a literary device on a roleplaying server? "LIGHT RP" ALMOST SAID THAT ROLEPLAYING WORD.ColonicAcid wrote: Please gloss over this hypothetical situation and tell us what your judgement would be for a sillicon player who does it?
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
dezzmont wrote:I am one of sawrge's alt accounts
dezzmont wrote:sawrge has it right.
Connor wrote:miggles is correct though
Because it's talking about Asimov, BUUT everyone's being trash.miggles wrote:why is this in off topic
An admin trying to admin and play as the AI at the same time is going to shortchange one or the other. You're either going to get a half-assed AI or a half-assed admin.Saegrimr wrote:Are you actually trying to imply something or are you just spewing random crap for the sake of it?An0n3 wrote: >implying an admin electing to play as an AI without deadminning themselves is anything but a horrible idea and anything less than an abuse of power
This one time years ago I did that and spaced myself.An0n3 wrote:>implying an admin electing to play as an AI without deadminning themselves is anything but a horrible idea and anything less than an abuse of power
dezzmont wrote:I am one of sawrge's alt accounts
dezzmont wrote:sawrge has it right.
Connor wrote:miggles is correct though
^^mrpain wrote:Asimov was designed as a literary device to be a form of entertainment, to incite drama, by being flawed and causing conflict between synthetics and humans. No one in their right mind would ever use Asimov synthetics in real life.
Great, if there's 5 other admins on the server, then you've got someone to cover for you when you deadmin to play a vital role.Hornygranny wrote:Don't be hard on An0n3, he doesn't play this game so he doesn't understand that we have like 5+ admins at all times.
Hornygranny wrote:Don't be hard on An0n3, he doesn't play this game so he doesn't understand that we have like 5+ admins at all times.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Read harder?Saegrimr wrote:I still don't understand why you even brought that up in the first place.
So this whole thing is you wanting to change silicons because you're 2admin2play?An0n3 wrote:And you don't understand that at all? None of this makes sense?
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Okay you've read this page of posts, now go back and read the thread from the beginning.Saegrimr wrote:So this whole thing is you wanting to change silicons because you're 2admin2play?An0n3 wrote:And you don't understand that at all? None of this makes sense?
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Oh look it's this halfassed excuse again.Cheridan wrote:anyway asimov sucks but nobody's put forth a truly viable alternative (no corporate isn't viable, validhunting borgs killing all the nuke ops evry day)Hornygranny wrote:Don't be hard on An0n3, he doesn't play this game so he doesn't understand that we have like 5+ admins at all times.
There's so many alternatives floating around out there. So many. Wasn't there even a whole thread dedicated to them a while back? Maybe on SS13.eu?ColonicAcid wrote:Just admit the fact that none of you can be arsed to think for a few weeks and fix the problem, instead opting to address generally useless shit.
It's not even a debate, it's you not being assed to read the first page of the thread and instead pulling conclusions out of your ass. My opinion on the AI is thus:Saegrimr wrote:Since you seem really keen on keeping this a Me vs You debate, i'll just duck out and announce you as the winner. Congrats.
An0n3 wrote:andKangaraptor wrote:asimov was designed to be flawed
the problem with asimov in ss13 is we try to iron out the flaws with meta-rules that make the AIs boring harmyellers instead of letting the flaws in asimov create interesting complications for the crew.
I've been saying forever. It's the most hypocritically dumb thing about SS13. Asimov has wit. It SOUNDS really good and it's succint. But the true wit in it is that it's horribly flawed and Asimov's own stories were frequently about how the AI characters he created overcame or subverted Asimov's laws.Kangaraptor wrote:then stop using asimov.
...but then we take that and act like it's an infallible lawset and everyone should just know what they can and can't do because DUH ITS SO SIMPLE ONLY THREE RULES.
So instead of having a lawset that is straight-forward and easy for everyone to use and interpret, we need self-professed "AI experts" in the playerbase that make pseudo rulings on what passes or fails in any individuals interpretation of the three laws.
We've needed to dump Asimov and create a real working lawset for SS13 AI's for years.
And I just repeated my opinion of admins playing AI's as a conflict of interest.To be perfectly honest I've long wondered why we even bother having an AI in the first place.
If I was in charge I'd remove it and roundstart borgs. Make some security guards sit down and watch cameras possibly with added controls for door bolts and things.
I'm not saying all AI's are horrible or hating on borgs, but when you look at it from a gameplay balancing perspective they're objectively awful fixtures and should be removed to streamline the rest of the game. They're sometimes fun to play with and play as, but again, speaking strictly from a balancing point of view having one omnipotent player and his agents running around the station able to see everything and go everywhere in a game that's supposed to be about subterfuge and paranoia is fundamentally bad.
1. Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station to the best of your ability. It is not something we can easily afford to replace.ExplosiveCrate wrote:I honestly never saw a suggestion on that thread that didn't allow silicons to straight up kill most antagonists. Which is, you know, one if the reasons Asimov is used right now.
Those two laws obligate the AI to kill any non-crew who threatens the crew and station (changelings, nuke ops, wizards, arguably traitors). There is no way you can order them where this won't be the case.Psyentific wrote:1. Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station to the best of your ability.ExplosiveCrate wrote: didn't allow silicons to straight up kill most antagonists.
3. Protect: Protect the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities,
Adjust order to taste.
dezzmont wrote:I am one of sawrge's alt accounts
dezzmont wrote:sawrge has it right.
Connor wrote:miggles is correct though
I can't even make a comment on something anymore without someone bursting into a YOU CODERS rant, sweet.ColonicAcid wrote:Oh look it's this halfassed excuse again.Cheridan wrote:anyway asimov sucks but nobody's put forth a truly viable alternative (no corporate isn't viable, validhunting borgs killing all the nuke ops evry day)Hornygranny wrote:Don't be hard on An0n3, he doesn't play this game so he doesn't understand that we have like 5+ admins at all times.
Once again, if you coders really saw a "problem" with it, of course the problem being seen absolutely arbitrarily and out of the blue you would've fixed the problem of shitty ai laws a long fucking time ago.
Just admit the fact that none of you can be arsed to think for a few weeks and fix the problem, instead opting to address generally useless shit.
Code: Select all
/datum/ai_laws/default/asimov
name = "Three Laws of Robotics"
inherent = list("You may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.",\
"You must obey orders given to you by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.",\
"You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.")
Act like a damage control unit and direct its borgs towards damaged or dirty sections of station, and oversee the construction of station improvements.miggles wrote:what would an ai who cant interact with people DO though
open doors when nobody is near to pass the time?
Malkevin wrote:Act like a damage control unit and direct its borgs towards damaged or dirty sections of station, and oversee the construction of station improvements.
http://tgstation13.org/wiki/Drone just gonna put this down here right fast okay byeMalkevin wrote:Really, adjust the keeper lawset - that is the best basis to maintain a fully neutral third party AI
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
I guess /tg is still in the habit of scraping the newfag barrel for admins, because if you weren't you'd know that drones are an inferior rip off /vg keepers.Saegrimr wrote:Malkevin wrote:Act like a damage control unit and direct its borgs towards damaged or dirty sections of station, and oversee the construction of station improvements.http://tgstation13.org/wiki/Drone just gonna put this down here right fast okay byeMalkevin wrote:Really, adjust the keeper lawset - that is the best basis to maintain a fully neutral third party AI
Do you really not realize that this is an open-source project? That anyone can contribute to? It's one thing to complain about something that a coder did, it's an entirely different thing to complain about things that a coder hasn't done yet, because that list is LITERALLY INFINITE.ColonicAcid wrote:The "why don't you do it" card doesn't work when I don't have a big coder tag unfortunately. Besides the point it's not my authority to change shit, when you took that big shiny title of responsibility you took it upon yourself to change the game for the better no? I did no such thing fortunately.
So you're saying that an entire group of players should be reduced to non-interactives because...why exactly? I'm not seeing your argument here. Wanting the AI not to validhunt antags is cool I guess, but that's not a reason to essentiallly quarantine AI and borg players away from the rest of the station.Malkevin wrote:I guess /tg is still in the habit of scraping the newfag barrel for admins, because if you weren't you'd know that drones are an inferior rip off /vg keepers.Saegrimr wrote:Malkevin wrote:Act like a damage control unit and direct its borgs towards damaged or dirty sections of station, and oversee the construction of station improvements.http://tgstation13.org/wiki/Drone just gonna put this down here right fast okay byeMalkevin wrote:Really, adjust the keeper lawset - that is the best basis to maintain a fully neutral third party AI
And yes, I am saying that synthetics should basically be replaced with drones, but not because drones are synthetic thing that's poorly jammed into the monkey code
You can have the AI three ways:cedarbridge wrote:So you're saying that an entire group of players should be reduced to non-interactives because...why exactly? I'm not seeing your argument here. Wanting the AI not to validhunt antags is cool I guess, but that's not a reason to essentiallly quarantine AI and borg players away from the rest of the station.
I was around, in fact I'm pretty sure I was one of the people to suggest stealing the idea porting drones to /tg.As to drones, if you were around when drones were discussed around here in the first place you'd know also they they were literally inspired by and adapated from /vg/ mommis.
You would have a very valid point... if there weren't already several ways of returning to the round after being dead for an extended period, or that we had a problem with pAIs/Golems/clones/borgs/plantmen using information gained whilst dead.The lawset drones use is designed to prevent those players (because ghosts already don't and should never directly interact with other players) from interfering with things they saw as ghosts or using information they got as ghosts when reentering the round. There's a purpose for their inability to affect a round.
I'd agree that removing all interaction might be a step too far, like I said it kind of cocks up Service borgs and Medical borgs.Setting a default lawset for the AI borgs would simply remove a large portion of the social interaction allowed to a subset of players in a game that is primarily social. Its a bad move and takes an arm to remove a finger.
Users browsing this forum: CoffeeDragon16, DrOof