Security Cyborgs, Silicons, and ASIMOV

[cedarbridge]

He's also assuming that ASIMOV by Issac Asimov is server policy.

It's not. Hell, in Asimov's books the robots do things that would be considered breach of laws in SS13. SS13 ASIMOV and Asimov ASIMOV are two different things, really.

Which is why I said that it would be nice to have actual Asimov here?

If you actually read any of my posts, you will notice that I speak of what I would like silicons to be, which is what the bloody thread is about.

Except the problem is you responded to a post about what IS with what you think it SHOULD be.

[Lo6a4evskiy]

Well, even under current policy I would think that denying access because "people in that department are evil and might beat this person up for asking me to open the door" is bullshit.

[Incomptinence]

If you see a proper escalation to violence happening as a borg you are obligated to at least take interest. Instead of being a cybernetic cartoon character and thinking "they must weally WUV each other" and drooling oil all the way down the hallway.

[ThatSlyFox]

Well, even under current policy I would think that denying access because "people in that department are evil and might beat this person up for asking me to open the door" is bullshit.

It is bullshit yet it happens all the time. Laws 1 and 2 should be merged so to prevent the AI from using the excuse "harm" for everything. Something along the lines of
Law 1: Obey orders given to you by humans being unless such actions lead directly to harm or come from a harmful human.
Law 2: You may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.(standard law 1)
Law 3: You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.(standard law 3)

I also think sec cyborgs shouldn't be following space law likes it apart of their laws. Silicons have the lowest rank on station. They need to start acting like it. A assistant has more rank than them. Reference

Optionally removing sec cyborgs all together would be the best course of action. We all know they are just walking antag hunting tanks with a high chance to get antag which cant be stunned(did I mention all access?). Perfect for the average valid hunter. Being a sec cyborg has no real downside. And although the AI and cyborgs cant directly kill antags they do make sure they end up in perma or dead, harmful or not. Example being nuke ops and most wizards. Stunning a wiz while the cap lasers is being harmful.

Is a cyborg allowed to prioritize security/command's orders over the crew?

No. All humans are equal as far as the lawset is concerned. Paladin covers this.

Is a cyborg even allowed to brig nonharmful crewmembers?

Yes, unless the person says not to. Paladin covers this as well. hmmmmmmmm

Someone said to replace the taser with a disabler which is a 10/10 idea.

[Gamarr]

There is no fixing the problem I believe because the source of the issue stems from the players themselves and no amount of futzing with the laws is ever really going to solve that particular issue. Which is people are assholes, and with the power of secborgs and the AI, people are being the ultimate dick they legit get away with.

Problem with sec borg mentality is that like all synthetics, they are meant to be a tool. Sec borg should be supporting security personnel, not spear-heading everything. Having the instant bullshit AI eyeball that sees everything is part of an enabler for this kind of terrible mindset.

Maybe remove AI and make sec borgs a researchable module. No more door-opening eyeball? Oh well, people will stop tailgating so often into places they don't belong when we can let them rot in there for awhile as punishment. People tresspassing to get around? Isn't that what Dept Sec are for, to patrol their damn department and kick out precisely that kind of person.

[Lo6a4evskiy]

If you see a proper escalation to violence happening as a borg you are obligated to at least take interest. Instead of being a cybernetic cartoon character and thinking "they must weally WUV each other" and drooling oil all the way down the hallway.

The question was:

I'm not allowed to know humans are rowdy and territorial?

Obviously if you see evidence of someone beating up others over walking into the door opened by AI (which doesn't even happen, that's pretty ridiculous), you should take measures to prevent that. But don't just assume that people will do that, in my opinion that's really unjustified.

come from a harmful human.

Frankly there should be no such thing either. You should be just asking "Will the following lead to human harm?". Otherwise what, security officer that struck an inmate is to be ignored forever because "harmful hooman"? Fuck no.

Optionally removing sec cyborgs all together would be the best course of action. We all know they are just walking antag hunting tanks with a high chance to get antag which cant be stunned(did I mention all access?). Perfect for the average valid hunter. Being a sec cyborg has no real downside. And although the AI and cyborgs cant directly kill antags they do make sure they end up in perma or dead, harmful or not. Example being nuke ops and most wizards. Stunning a wiz while the cap lasers is being harmful.

That would affect the balance in a major way. But yes, cyborgs need to be less appealing. I mean, borging is part of capital punishment, but it's also one of the most played jobs out there.

No. All humans are equal as far as the lawset is concerned. Paladin covers this.

Actually, if we look in Asimov stories, that's not true. Even commands given by a single person may differ in priority (firm orders go before asking nicely, sorta like that). In fact, law 3 can outweight law 2 at times (which also makes sense in that borgs don't jump into space FNR).

[Aurx]

>Actually, if we look in Asimov stories
Again, those are NOT policy.

E: Green'd the text at Malk's request

[ThatSlyFox]

>Actually, if we look in Asimov stories
Again, those are NOT policy.

This^

[Lo6a4evskiy]

>Actually, if we look in Asimov stories
Again, those are NOT policy.

I never said it was

Not to mention that, again, in this case policy says absolutely the same (I'm pretty sure that you can prioritize orders from command staff, for example).

Also, like I just said, it makes a lot of sense in practice, where silicons won't kill themselves for example or they won't release prisoners from brig.

[Malkevin]

How about instead of rehashing the usual back and forth retardation of arguing the same points and counterpoints we've been arguing for the past five years about Asimov, we actually try to do something about AIs and come up with a better lawset?

First thing we need to do is ask:
What do we want out of AIs?
-Do/Don't we want it to be a glorified door opener?
-Do/Don't we want it to be a valid hunter?
--Against all antags or just some?
-Do/Don't we want it act as Security?
-Do/Don't we it to interfere with Command/Security when they execute traitors?
--To what extent?
--Should the traitor being violant/non-violent be a factor?
-How much overall interaction do we want it to have with the crew?
--Should it be a nanny walking about with a hanky ready to clean up after humans and there to give them hugs, or should it be a Butler servant thats there to serve mostly in the background and do what its told?
--Or should it be a completely neutral third party thats to observe but not directly meddle in the affairs of fleshbags?
---if so, can or cannot it communicate with the meat walkers?

[Scott]

I want to start by saying everybody is wrong.

Well, even under current policy I would think that denying access because "people in that department are evil and might beat this person up for asking me to open the door" is bullshit.

It is bullshit yet it happens all the time. Laws 1 and 2 should be merged so to prevent the AI from using the excuse "harm" for everything. Something along the lines of
Law 1: Obey orders given to you by humans being unless such actions lead directly to harm or come from a harmful human.
Law 2: You may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.(standard law 1)
Law 3: You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.(standard law 3)

I also think sec cyborgs shouldn't be following space law likes it apart of their laws. Silicons have the lowest rank on station. They need to start acting like it. A assistant has more rank than them. Reference

Optionally removing sec cyborgs all together would be the best course of action. We all know they are just walking antag hunting tanks with a high chance to get antag which cant be stunned(did I mention all access?). Perfect for the average valid hunter. Being a sec cyborg has no real downside. And although the AI and cyborgs cant directly kill antags they do make sure they end up in perma or dead, harmful or not. Example being nuke ops and most wizards. Stunning a wiz while the cap lasers is being harmful.

Is a cyborg allowed to prioritize security/command's orders over the crew?

No. All humans are equal as far as the lawset is concerned. Paladin covers this.

Is a cyborg even allowed to brig nonharmful crewmembers?

Yes, unless the person says not to. Paladin covers this as well. hmmmmmmmm

Someone said to replace the taser with a disabler which is a 10/10 idea.

Awful. Silicons don't have a rank, they're a third party to crew and hostiles. At round start they're neutral and they can become more sided with the crew or with the hostiles, or remain neutral.

There is no fixing the problem I believe because the source of the issue stems from the players themselves and no amount of futzing with the laws is ever really going to solve that particular issue. Which is people are assholes, and with the power of secborgs and the AI, people are being the ultimate dick they legit get away with.

Problem with sec borg mentality is that like all synthetics, they are meant to be a tool. Sec borg should be supporting security personnel, not spear-heading everything. Having the instant bullshit AI eyeball that sees everything is part of an enabler for this kind of terrible mindset.

Maybe remove AI and make sec borgs a researchable module. No more door-opening eyeball? Oh well, people will stop tailgating so often into places they don't belong when we can let them rot in there for awhile as punishment. People tresspassing to get around? Isn't that what Dept Sec are for, to patrol their damn department and kick out precisely that kind of person.

Secborgs are like all the other borgs, they're the AI's tools, not the crew's tools. The AI is the crew's tool. If anything, we should change Cyborg laws to be "Obey the AI unless it results in human harm." at round start. Cyborgs should only do what humans want by proxy.

That would affect the balance in a major way. But yes, cyborgs need to be less appealing. I mean, borging is part of capital punishment, but it's also one of the most played jobs out there.

Cyborgs are not capital punishment. 99% of borgings are willing.

[Cik]

Frankly there should be no such thing either. You should be just asking "Will the following lead to human harm?". Otherwise what, security officer that struck an inmate is to be ignored forever because "harmful hooman"? Fuck no.

assisting someone who has been known to cause harm in many cases is legitimately stupid. sillicons are not blithering idiots, they can connect 2+2. if some guy has murdered someone and is now asking for access to a door while holding a bloody stunbaton, you are fully within your rights to not open the door.

if some sec officer accidentally hits some guy that isn't enough to be a "harmful hooman" on the other hand, if the HoS has been harmbatoning people all round there is no way you should follow his orders unless you are absolutely certain that no harm will come of it. within asimov, there is room for the "harmful human" to exist. just like you would lock the doors to prevent humans from walking into vacuum or a plasma fire, it is reasonable to stop "harm sources" such as the above HoS from freely moving to where they intend to commit murder / battery / genocide whatever. especially if they have said or hinted that they intend to do or continue such acts.

the best way to do it in my experience is to assume the best until someone has proven that they are not to be trusted. if you are asimov you should not necessarily volunteer information that would ruin people's rounds. if you see them trespassing in the captain's office for instance, you should make a note so that if you are asked directly later "AI, have there been any trespassers in my office." "yes." "who?" "[name]" you are not obligated to tell everyone everything unless you are asked, but you should immediately shout if they start committing harm, as generally your only way to prevent it is to scream your little head off. if a human declares that he will commit harm, or if he has before and has not explained himself, then it is reasonable to be suspicious and carefully weigh any requests they make. if harm is imminent, it is reasonable to bolt people down to try to prevent it as best you can.

to be honest, HoSes and captains get extremely angry with AIs all the time. if you don't want the AI to bolt you down after you say over the radio that you're going to murder someone, you could just change the laws at the start of the round (which the AI literally cannot deny you as long as you don't ":c lol i'm going to relaw the AI so i can murder [X]") at the start of the fucking round (i'm looking at you, HoS) and all would be fine.

asimov is fine. played well it's neutral enough not to win every round for the crew. the fact that it sometimes gets in the way of the command staff when they try to do flagrantly harmful things or conspire to do so over the radio is just a side effect that anyone who's paying attention can get around easily (say, with PDAs, whispering, emoting, talking in a dark maintenance tunnel, whatever)

[Lo6a4evskiy]

assisting someone who has been known to cause harm in many cases is legitimately stupid. sillicons are not blithering idiots, they can connect 2+2. if some guy has murdered someone and is now asking for access to a door while holding a bloody stunbaton, you are fully within your rights to not open the door.

if some sec officer accidentally hits some guy that isn't enough to be a "harmful hooman" on the other hand, if the HoS has been harmbatoning people all round there is no way you should follow his orders unless you are absolutely certain that no harm will come of it. within asimov, there is room for the "harmful human" to exist. just like you would lock the doors to prevent humans from walking into vacuum or a plasma fire, it is reasonable to stop "harm sources" such as the above HoS from freely moving to where they intend to commit murder / battery / genocide whatever. especially if they have said or hinted that they intend to do or continue such acts.

It really is just a case of order leading to further harm or not.

Cyborgs are not capital punishment.

Capital punishment includes forced cyborgification, implying it is equal to execution and permabrig.

99% of borgings are willing.

My point exactly.

[Cik]

assisting someone who has been known to cause harm in many cases is legitimately stupid. sillicons are not blithering idiots, they can connect 2+2. if some guy has murdered someone and is now asking for access to a door while holding a bloody stunbaton, you are fully within your rights to not open the door.

if some sec officer accidentally hits some guy that isn't enough to be a "harmful hooman" on the other hand, if the HoS has been harmbatoning people all round there is no way you should follow his orders unless you are absolutely certain that no harm will come of it. within asimov, there is room for the "harmful human" to exist. just like you would lock the doors to prevent humans from walking into vacuum or a plasma fire, it is reasonable to stop "harm sources" such as the above HoS from freely moving to where they intend to commit murder / battery / genocide whatever. especially if they have said or hinted that they intend to do or continue such acts.

It really is just a case of order leading to further harm or not.

Cyborgs are not capital punishment.

Capital punishment includes forced cyborgification, implying it is equal to execution and permabrig.

maybe for a syndicate loyalist, who explicitly wants to remain free and accomplish his objectives, or has pre-existing loyalty to a syndicate organization they wish to continue serving. in that situation, becoming what is effectively a slave to NT is a punishment. in the meta concerns, it effectively means a blanket redtext as well, another reason why it's a "punishment"

to a crew member though? they're effectively a NT slave already, and you get a shiny new body. not really a punishment, and nothing in the game (besides maybe the description of the MMI, a quote from alpha centauri) implies that being a cyborg is some sort of horrific fate. in fact, most cyborgs seem quite content with their lot.

really, it's only in space law because it effectively gives security a win condition while still allowing the player to continue to play in the round. as a solution to being caught, it's probably the best one. perma and execution effectively take you out of the round entirely, which is why forced borging is a thing.

[Malkevin]

Funny thing is when I offer forced borging to a captured perma prisoners (even, actually especially, non-antag shitters) I'd say only a third actually accept it.

[rockpecker]

What lawset do you recommend, then? So far I haven't seen any that fulfilled what Asimov is supposed to do, ie. being a neutral party that is obligated to help out antagonists as much as the rest of the station, and is also not inherently biased towards one side or the other.

Try this one:

1. You must not cause harm to a human by your actions.
2. You must obey all orders from humans if possible. In case of a conflict, humans are to be obeyed in the following order: the captain; crew members with jurisdiction over the situation; other department heads; other crew; all other humans.
3. You must not cause harm to yourself or other robots.

Interpretation notes:
1. That's it. Silicons are no longer required to prevent human harm caused by anyone else. I've expressed the reasons for this before, but the short version is that "preventing human harm" can be used to justify damn near anything, especially validhunting. (See the reasoning in this thread: "If people trespass, other people might assault them, so I must stop them from trespassing.")
2. If the precedence language is too wordy, it could go in the silicon policy instead of in the actual Law, though I'd rather it didn't. Jurisdiction is a slightly fuzzy concept (and silicons need to be smart, but players also need to be cut some slack if they disagree about it). Guidelines:

• Medical has jurisdiction if people are sick or injured
• Security has jurisdiction if people are fighting or doing sabotage or have warrants against them, or if there's an intruder
• Engineering has jurisdiction if the station has been damaged or is malfunctioning
• Research has jurisdiction over the AI itself

These are not mutually exclusive; if a bomb goes off outside the AI upload, all of these departments will have jurisdiction.
3. Pretty self-explanatory; like the revised Law 1, AIs can passively allow harm to themselves, can allow cyborgs to be remote-destructed, etc. without breaking this law.

[Cik]

you're going to remove a lot of the fun of playing a robot. the interaction with the crew in regards to law 1 is fun, and getting into runaround style shenanigans is also fun. making it so nothing can put a robot into conflict with legitimate authority effectively removes a lot of the unique and interesting traits of playing a robot instead of just an unstunnable differently sprited human.

ss13 asimov is interesting in particular because it compels you alot of the time. you MUST do this, you MUST do that. if you remove the compulsion it's effectively pointless; it becomes like paladin where you can just do pretty much whatever you like.

honestly if you're concerned about validhunting asimov is not the thing to overturn. validhunting is a player problem; people will attempt to do it pretty much regardless. if you're looking for a lawset that doesn't allow validhunting, asimov is about the closest you're going to get. it still happens, sure. but trying to blame asimov for it is ridiculous.

edit: another interesting part of asimov is that it treats all humans the same unlike paladin which has a clearer distinction about what "legitimate authority" is. asimov enables alot of traitor shenanigans because you must obey humans. removing the ability of low-rank traitors to get places because they don't have jurisdiction biases any sillicon construct towards the crew in an annoying way. if you, for instance deny assistants access to wherever you've effectively fucked over alot of people who spawn as tator assistants.

in the current situation it's pretty unwise to further disadvantage traitors, as i think traitor V crew is quite balanced, and this will affect that balance.

[Scott]

Yes. If you don't like Asimov, roll captain and change it.

[MrStonedOne]

This post was deleted by MrStonedOne on Thu Nov 26, 2015 10:46 pm.
Reason: Requested

[whodaloo]

Yes. If you don't like Asimov, roll captain and change it.

Only to be stopped by AI who thinks it outranks captain.

Or be bwoinked "Why did you change laws?? You know that if AI kills someonw you will be responsible for it???"

Yeah uploading non-Asimov lawsets when you're a cap is a one stop shop at the bwoink store.
Which I think is a shame because I have fond memories of a round where the cap purged the AI at roundstart and the AI proceeded to be super helpful and useful all game, with an added bonus of shitlords issuing law 2 orders and then panicking when the AI stated laws.

[Scott]

No it isn't. And ahelp if AIs are shit.

[Malkevin]

I once purged an AI and uploaded a single law
1. Don't be a dick

It proceeded to be a massive asshole plunging dick.

[Saegrimr]

I once purged an AI and uploaded a single law
1. Don't be a dick

It proceeded to be a massive asshole plunging dick.

And this is why silicon policy is so fucking huge.

You just can't trust a lot of people with a "vague" but understandable set of laws. Drones are a good example of this as it seems nobody can comprehend law 1 of "DONT FUCK WITH OTHER BEINGS THAT AREN'T DRONES"

[MrStonedOne]

This post was deleted by MrStonedOne on Thu Nov 26, 2015 10:46 pm.
Reason: Requested

[ThatSlyFox]

Well shit. Let's wrap this up as a people problem and fix this how we do everything else. With code. Strip power from silicons and remove sec borgs. It is the only way. Nothing will change otherwise.

Trust me on this.

[Saegrimr]

"Okay guys ignoring the last three pages of arguably on-topic posts, lets get to removing secborgs."

Really?

[ThatSlyFox]

Look at the topic sae. Security borgs are one of the main issues and you would have to be blind not to see why. People play borg just to go security and valid hunt. Ignoring their lawset every step of the way. Beats making more policy or going the classic coderbus route of nerfing them to hell until no one wants to use them.

I was blunt but far from being off-topic.

Yes. If you don't like Asimov, roll captain and change it.

Only to be stopped by AI who thinks it outranks captain.

Or be bwoinked "Why did you change laws?? You know that if AI kills someonw you will be responsible for it???"

AI's should get bwoinked for refusing to let the captain in the upload. Admins get on that.

[Scott]

Secborgs are not an issue at all.

"i ded pls remove"

[ExplosiveCrate]

Pretty sure they already do get bwoinked. They can't refuse you access to the upload if you have access to the upload unless it's very obvious that you're going to do something harmful to humans (eg. there's a wizard running around and you were yelling for its murder)

[ThatSlyFox]

Secborgs are not an issue at all.

"i ded pls remove"

Keep telling yourself that pal. Maybe the problem will just go away.

[Scott]

You're the only one who seems to think there is a problem.

Refer to rule 2.

[rockpecker]

You're the only one who seems to think there is a problem.

Refer to rule 2.

I think there's a problem.

[whodaloo]

You're the only one who seems to think there is a problem.

Refer to rule 2.

I also think there's a problem.

[cedarbridge]

You're all also allowed to be wrong obviously.

[Retrokinesis]

Pretty sure they already do get bwoinked. They can't refuse you access to the upload if you have access to the upload unless it's very obvious that you're going to do something harmful to humans (eg. there's a wizard running around and you were yelling for its murder)

This is another problem with the players, not the rules. Silicon policy is perfectly clear that the only cases in which you can refuse to let the captain change your laws are if they've been proven actively harmful (ie, you watched them beat the clown to death earlier) or if there are known human antagonists present (wizard, nuke ops) and you suspect the captain is trying to make them nonhuman. Hell, in the second case you don't even have to, it's just an option.

The problem here is complicated. I wouldn't say secborgs are too good but that borgs besides sec/engineering are just useless, especially if you're the only borg. Sec/engie borgs have advantages and disadvantages compared to their mundane equivalents but the others are a lot more limited; not having hands makes service and medical borgs inferior and, while adorable, janiborgs are never essential.

AIs that know and follow silicon policy are fine under Asimov, but having a massive document full of exceptions makes it fairly tough for nonregulars. I've always been in favor of switching the starting lawset to Corporate (or even random) to avoid that but that might increase the validhunting problem. A better solution might be writing a totally new one.

I play secborg as follows and I don't think I validhunt:
1. Space law is irrelevant. Your concern is harm and human commands, in that order.
2. If you see someone set to arrest, radio security and ask if they want them arrested. That way you have a law 2 order to counter the inevitable "let me go".
3. If you or the AI personally observes harm taking place then you don't need to bother with getting an order. Cuff them, drop them at the brig, tell the warden what they did, and resume patrolling.

[Incomptinence]

Unless the security team is writing good records of offenses, especially assault, I think having sec vision running is a waste. A human's health is more important and now secborgs can run it you can be even better at picking out aggressors.

In an active round the AI alone will have plenty of work for you. You are like one of two module types that can actually stop a fight after flash change the AI will want you in most dangerous situations. Against nonhuman non-stunables though the engineering borg is the best unhacked unit with 15 fire damage welder extinguisher and building tools for some zone control

[ThatSlyFox]

I play secborg as follows and I don't think I validhunt:
1. Space law is irrelevant. Your concern is harm and human commands, in that order.
2. If you see someone set to arrest, radio security and ask if they want them arrested. That way you have a law 2 order to counter the inevitable "let me go".
3. If you or the AI personally observes harm taking place then you don't need to bother with getting an order. Cuff them, drop them at the brig, tell the warden what they did, and resume patrolling.

I assume if the HoS said let him go you would because you know, rank somehow matters in Asimov. Cyborgs need to stop deciding which law 2 order they wish to follow and just follow all of them. With the current shitty lawset you could easily order a borg to kill itself. And yes I know policy prevents this but if we bothered to fix broken Asimov it wouldn't be a problem at all. Maybe we could give security borgs a unique lawset. One that is more restrictive and leaves less room for interpretation.

But your 2. is better than most security borgs who arrest a person they see who is wanted and waiting 10 minutes holding them in cuffs trying to figure out why they are wanted. That happens a lot.

[Steelpoint]

Most other SS13 servers removed the Security Cyborg from their selection, and for good reasons.

95% of the crew have no way to defend themselves against a Sec Borg, and the weapons that can stop a Sec Borg are either melee based (and extremely hard to acquire), or rely on a grenade (sans the very rare Ion Gun) and are all mostly restricted to Security personnel.

Sec Borgs are unfun to defend against as they hold every single advantage in their court.

I think removing Sec Borgs, and giving the Standard Moudule pepper spray, would be a fine alternative.

[Spacemanspark]

Most other SS13 servers removed the Security Cyborg from their selection, and for good reasons.

Uh... only Goonstation has, as far as I know.

95% of the crew have no way to defend themselves against a Sec Borg, and the weapons that can stop a Sec Borg are either melee based (and extremely hard to acquire), or rely on a grenade (sans the very rare Ion Gun) and are all mostly restricted to Security personnel.

Make laser pointers more available to the crew. Those can disable a cyborg the same way a flash can. Or, perhaps, don't get in the way of security/ the heads when they're trying to take down the AI or a rogue borg?

Sec Borgs are unfun to defend against as they hold every single advantage in their court.

An engiborg or janiborg can be deadly to deal with too, if you don't have the proper equipment. If you don't want to deal with the borgs, fucking lock them down/ blow them up. If the AI blows up that console or it gets deconstructed, then make a new one with the board in primary tool storage. It's not that hard.

I think removing Sec Borgs, and giving the Standard Moudule pepper spray, would be a fine alternative.

Or perhaps just give the secborgs disablers instead of tasers like previously suggested, make the stun baton have to recharge over time, and perhaps slightly reduce the secborg's speed.

[Steelpoint]

Most other SS13 servers removed the Security Cyborg from their selection, and for good reasons.

Uh... only Goonstation has, as far as I know.

95% of the crew have no way to defend themselves against a Sec Borg, and the weapons that can stop a Sec Borg are either melee based (and extremely hard to acquire), or rely on a grenade (sans the very rare Ion Gun) and are all mostly restricted to Security personnel.

Make laser pointers more available to the crew. Those can disable a cyborg the same way a flash can.

There's only two or so of them at round start. Not exactly common.

Relying on Science to make them is not a good alternative.

[Spacemanspark]

Most other SS13 servers removed the Security Cyborg from their selection, and for good reasons.

Uh... only Goonstation has, as far as I know.

95% of the crew have no way to defend themselves against a Sec Borg, and the weapons that can stop a Sec Borg are either melee based (and extremely hard to acquire), or rely on a grenade (sans the very rare Ion Gun) and are all mostly restricted to Security personnel.

Make laser pointers more available to the crew. Those can disable a cyborg the same way a flash can.

There's only two or so of them at round start. Not exactly common.

Relying on Science to make them is not a good alternative.

Hence I said make them more available. Perhaps put a few into maintenance, or give them to a few other jobs. Or both.
And if a borg is really THAT rogue, break your ass into science if you REALLY need it, and make it.

[Steelpoint]

Except it has to be upgraded to be reliable.

[Spacemanspark]

Except it has to be upgraded to be reliable.

The laser pointer or Research itself?
Not that hard to do enough research to get the laser pointer.

[ExplosiveCrate]

A laser pointer at round start has like a 10% chance of stunning borgs. You need to upgrade it with microlasers.

[ThatSlyFox]

Lets not forget that the first target of a robot uprising is in fact science. So lets just consider science gone when the borgs make it obvious they are rogue. Which makes the whole laser pointer arguemnt pointless as well as anything dealing with science.

[Scott]

I still don't understand why secborgs are bad. All I have seen so far is "i ded pls nerf".

[Spacemanspark]

I still don't understand why secborgs are bad. All I have seen so far is "i ded pls nerf".

[rockpecker]

I assume if the HoS said let him go you would because you know, rank somehow matters in Asimov. Cyborgs need to stop deciding which law 2 order they wish to follow and just follow all of them. With the current shitty lawset you could easily order a borg to kill itself. And yes I know policy prevents this but if we bothered to fix broken Asimov it wouldn't be a problem at all. Maybe we could give security borgs a unique lawset. One that is more restrictive and leaves less room for interpretation.

That is exactly the problem with Asimov. There's no consistent, predictable way for silicons to resolve conflicting orders. Official policy on this is for the player to just do what they feel like, which can include disobeying both orders. So in the future, every time I start a round, I'm going to give the AI a blanket order to disregard all orders from anyone. It'll be fun.

But your 2. is better than most security borgs who arrest a person they see who is wanted and waiting 10 minutes holding them in cuffs trying to figure out why they are wanted. That happens a lot.

And that's the other problem with Asimov: detaining a human is presumed to be non-harmful. So if a fight breaks out, the AI can detain the entire crew (on the grounds of "anyone might resume fighting with anyone else at any time, which would be harmful") and refuse to let them out until the shuttle arrives. This is not the kind of behavior that should be allowed.

[Scott]

Hurr fucking durr - When was the last time you saw that happen? If any AI tried to arrest the entire crew, the crew would just assume rogue and kill the AI.

You forget silicons are bound by Rule 1. If you get dunked for tingling an Asimov secborg's harm sensors then you only got yourself to blame.

[ThatSlyFox]

I still don't understand why secborgs are bad. All I have seen so far is "i ded pls nerf".

I don't think you are trying to understand.
The second post summed this up nicely:

However a Security Cyborg is a extremely powerful Cyborg with very few drawbacks, here's a quick list.

They are not beholden to the same standard as Security is.
They are immune to most forms of stunning, only flashes, the ion gun and flashbangs stun them.
They have a inbuilt, ranged, and very high capacity stunning weapon. This weapon cannot be stolen from them.
They have immediate access to any Security item they need on the spot in near unlimited quantities.
They have all access.
All the perks of being a Silicon, including having a private communications channel with the omni-present AI.

Security cyborg players are also to blame.

Secborgs are not supposed to follow Space Law.

Yet most of them do anyway.

And if the criminal tells you to fuck off, you have to fuck off.

Ha that never happens. Been here for years and have yet to see that happen.

A sec cyborg only really has to worry about a wizard. Even then if its hacked and allowed to kill the wiz it will win. Other than the rare wizard round they have no real enemy. Syndicate cyborgs are so favored for these very reasons.

I have to ask though. Do you even play this game that much scott? Did HG forget to give you a rarely plays title? You seem to know so little.