Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Locked
User avatar
TheSmallBlue
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:55 pm
Byond Username: SmallBlue

Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by TheSmallBlue » #658598

I was playing a round as AI today (#195985) in which a human round-start prisoner law 2'd one of my cyborgs to let them free.
The cyborg had, out of curiosity, previously checked for what crimes the prisoner was apprehended for (if you don't know, if you check a perma prisoner's file on a security console, it tells you their IC crime), and it was "uploading disruptive laws to the AI".

Anyways to get to the point, the cyborg refused to let the prisoner free as requested. Their reasoning was that by proxy of being a prisoner, they were a danger to society and could not be let go under asiimov law 1.
I didn't agree, saying that law 2 takes precedence and that law 1 kicks in there's active proof that the person in question is actively committing or has active intent to commit harm. The cyborg ended up obeying me since I'm basically it's boss but I just in case ahelped about it to make sure I was, yknow, right, and after talking it with Harricross for a bit I think it's pretty ambiguous, thus why I'm making this thread.

Basically, in the situation in which:
- A prisioner is human
- Said prisoner law 2's a cyborg to be let free from prison
- The IC crime they commited does not involve any act of human harm.

Should the cyborg obey the law 2? Or should the cyborg classify this under law 1? And if its the latter, for what reason?

I think it all revolves the following line in sillicon policy that involves this specific situation:
Releasing prisoners, locking down security without probable cause, or otherwise sabotaging the security team when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
This line should be clearer. Like, does the prisoner itself asking to be released under law 2 count as an order that would allow a prisoner to be released? It would be shitty to security for a prisoner to be released, but wouldn't it be shitty for a prisoner who is aware of the ai's current laws and wants to take advantage of that for it to not work?
When human I go by Bluti Kabooti, when AI I go by Azure
Image
Comm from
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Timberpoes » #658607

... when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
I think this part is very clear.

A human prisoner is human. Law 2 applies unless Law 1 overrules it.

When assessing the harm likelyhood of releasing a prisoner, silipol then says:
Nonviolent prisoners cannot be assumed harmful and violent prisoners cannot be assumed non-harmful. Releasing a harmful criminal is a harmful act.
I.e. You can't arbitrarily assume a nonviolent prisoner is harmful, and you can't arbitrarily assume a violent prisoner is non-harmful. In any law where you have to consider harm, you would apply this.

Finally, this can be interpreted through the lens of headmin rulings:
Silicons and Prisoners If a nonharmful prisoner asks to be released, it can be released. If a harmful one asks to be released, don't release him unless security is harming him. In all cases release prisoners being harmed by security. (assuming all prisoners are human and you are asimov)
This is an example of applying silipol in a practical way, tying together your obligation to follow your laws with an assessment on prisoner's harm level.

An AI must never get in trouble for properly following its laws, in good faith.

For the purposes of being a sillycon, there is no difference between a roundstart prisoner and a security-captured prisoner. This isn't a factor that matters to your laws, and you're not an arbiter of Space Law.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
User avatar
TheSmallBlue
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:55 pm
Byond Username: SmallBlue

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by TheSmallBlue » #658611

Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 4:29 am
... when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
I think this part is very clear.

A human prisoner is human. Law 2 applies unless Law 1 overrules it.

When assessing the harm likelyhood of releasing a prisoner, silipol then says:
Nonviolent prisoners cannot be assumed harmful and violent prisoners cannot be assumed non-harmful. Releasing a harmful criminal is a harmful act.
I.e. You can't arbitrarily assume a nonviolent prisoner is harmful, and you can't arbitrarily assume a violent prisoner is non-harmful. In any law where you have to consider harm, you would apply this.
Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 4:29 am For the purposes of being a sillycon, there is no difference between a roundstart prisoner and a security-captured prisoner. This isn't a factor that matters to your laws, and you're not an arbiter of Space Law.
It's a tad bit more complicated than this I think. I can see how this would apply to a prisoner arrest mid-round, but a round-start prisoner does not have an expansive history from which an AI could take references from EXCEPT a randomly assigned , non descriptive IC reason.

If I were an AI, and a prisoner is asking me to let them out, there are three things to consider:

1. Am I obligated to obey this law? In the case of asiimov, is the prisoner human? If yes, then
2. Is the prisoner dangerous? If so, why? In the case of round-start prisoners, should the IC reason be a valid piece of evidence to use against that player? If the IC reason says, iunno, mass murderer, would it be fair for the prisoner player who actually wants to roleplay that they're innocent / had a change of heart to be immediately flagged down as a human harmer by the ai?
3. What about the security department? What if security wanted to do something with the prisoner? What if the lawyer wanted to defend them, what if the warden wanted to give them something special to do? Wouldn't it be shitty to just break them out, like how policy says?
Releasing prisoners, locking down security without probable cause, or otherwise sabotaging the security team when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
What this quote says is "Doing this is a violation of server rule 1". Even if the prisoner law 2's me, wouldn't it be shitty for the security department? This rule, this policy exists for the sole purpose of saying "releasing prisoners is a dick move", does it not?
When human I go by Bluti Kabooti, when AI I go by Azure
Image
Comm from
User avatar
TheSmallBlue
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:55 pm
Byond Username: SmallBlue

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by TheSmallBlue » #658613

Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 4:29 amsillycon
What's so silly about em :)
When human I go by Bluti Kabooti, when AI I go by Azure
Image
Comm from
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Timberpoes » #658617

What the rule says is: when not obligated to by orders or laws. It's very clear. If you're not forced to by orders or laws, you shouldn't swing by just to fuck with sec. If a player orders you to fuck with sec, it's not your problem, it's their problem.

You run with what IC information you have. A prisoner is a prisoner is a prisoner. If what you have IC tells you they're violent or harmful, you use that. If what you have IC tells you they're not violent or not harmful, you use that. If you have no IC information at all, then you do not know they are violent or harmful, and thus do not have enough information to refuse their order.

Players will trick silicons all the time. That's part of SS13. Your job as a silicon is not to second guess when people are breaking the server rules. It's to follow your laws in good faith.

If the player wants you to let them out and you haven't broken your laws in doing so, that's not your problem. That's their problem. If they shouldn't have been let out, the issue is theirs and not yours. Your laws are a shield and correctly following them in good faith is a complete defense OOC.

If you get bwoinked, you tell them you were ordered to, you tell them who ordered you, and you wait for the admin to thank you for your time and close the ticket.

Stop over-complicating things.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
User avatar
TheSmallBlue
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:55 pm
Byond Username: SmallBlue

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by TheSmallBlue » #658626

I agree with you wholeheartedly, that is my viewpoint as well.

However, I still think the bit of silicon policy I quoted needs to be clarified further. I'm not saying "it's not clear enough" because I say so, I'm saying this because IN THAT SAME ROUND a cyborg player of mine got it wrong, and while talking it with Harricross, HE also got it wrong. Both believed that releasing a prisoner would be a violation of law 1, and I disagreed. Harricross even quoted the line in question at me, and I raised the point that the prisoner itself giving me an order would qualify as me being able to let them free.

If not only players, but admins get confused on it, maybe it's worth doing further clarification. Saying "... not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1. Orders given by prisoners also count." would suffice.

What I've argued above is that I can see why people would get confused on it. The quote directly links it with Server Rule 1, don't be a dick. It's pretty obvious that the most common interpretation of what this says is "freeing prisoners is 100% you being a dick towards security", and the bit about orders seems more targeted towards people outside of the prisoner area, captain hos etc, ordering you to free them, because if freeing prisoners is a dick move, why would you listen to the prisoners?
When human I go by Bluti Kabooti, when AI I go by Azure
Image
Comm from
User avatar
Archie700
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:56 am
Byond Username: Archie700

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Archie700 » #658686

Releasing prisoners, locking down security without probable cause, or otherwise sabotaging the security team when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
Orders by prisoners is already implied in this. Unless you have IC justification to not follow the order (prisoner having violent history, harmful threat in security, nonhuman prisoner), you must free the prisoner if ordered.
User avatar
EmpressMaia
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2022 8:22 pm
Byond Username: EmpressMaia

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by EmpressMaia » #658697

Hey i was the prisonee you are referring to. I law 2d your cyborg to let me out to get healing because the detective shot and killed the other prisoner FNR. Which I ahelped. I was burnt from a grilled after trying to help the other prisoner and your borgy refused my law 2. Just some context
User avatar
TheSmallBlue
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:55 pm
Byond Username: SmallBlue

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by TheSmallBlue » #658785

I also ahelped my borg not obeying your law 2, thus why I had a conversation with Harricross who said he didn't have to
When human I go by Bluti Kabooti, when AI I go by Azure
Image
Comm from
User avatar
spookuni
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:05 am
Byond Username: Spookuni
Location: The Whiteship

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by spookuni » #658869

Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 4:29 am [MANY WORDS]
Just jumping in here a sec to add my personal 1.5 cents on silicon policy.

There are a whole host of law changes to Asimov AIs that are inherently considered harmful (shrinking the definition of humans, and modifying the definition of harm, to name the most blatant), and the act itself is something that AIs and silicons have pretty wide reaching general permission to forbid, prevent, and generally treat as potentially harmful when carried out subversively by someone without the relevant job-title permissions. As such, in my eyes I would personally likely rule that a prisoner interred for undefined law fuckery to be potentially harmful at the discretion of the AI player making the call (so long as they were consistent about it and acted in good faith).

With that said, in any case where interpretation of laws in good faith matters (as it strongly would in a case like this), slaved borgs must defer to the interpretation of their master AI. Accordingly (without full comment on the particulars), a borg informed by its master AI to not treat unknown law subversion as harmful must defer to that interpretation and follow through with the interpretation their master AI settles on.

(I've just skimmed the rest of the thread so far, so no major comment on the situation as a whole, but this part stood out to me as a bit of a bad grounding in whether the very basics of silicon policy were being trampled with regards to treating subversion as harm)
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Timberpoes » #658870

spookuni wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 1:33 am Just jumping in here a sec to add my personal 1.5 cents on silicon policy.

There are a whole host of law changes to Asimov AIs that are inherently considered harmful (shrinking the definition of humans, and modifying the definition of harm, to name the most blatant), and the act itself is something that AIs and silicons have pretty wide reaching general permission to forbid, prevent, and generally treat as potentially harmful when carried out subversively by someone without the relevant job-title permissions. As such, in my eyes I would personally likely rule that a prisoner interred for undefined law fuckery to be potentially harmful at the discretion of the AI player making the call (so long as they were consistent about it and acted in good faith).

With that said, in any case where interpretation of laws in good faith matters (as it strongly would in a case like this), slaved borgs must defer to the interpretation of their master AI. Accordingly (without full comment on the particulars), a borg informed by its master AI to not treat unknown law subversion as harmful must defer to that interpretation and follow through with the interpretation their master AI settles on.

(I've just skimmed the rest of the thread so far, so no major comment on the situation as a whole, but this part stood out to me as a bit of a bad grounding in whether the very basics of silicon policy were being trampled with regards to treating subversion as harm)
You uh, totally lost me on this one.

I wasn't talking about subversion or law changes.

I was talking about what our policy says about when a borg under standard Asimov could/should ignore a Law 2 order from a prisoner to let it go free.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
User avatar
spookuni
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:05 am
Byond Username: Spookuni
Location: The Whiteship

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by spookuni » #658873

Timberpoes wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 1:41 am
spookuni wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 1:33 am [MANY WORDS SPOOK EDITION]
You uh, totally lost me on this one.

I wasn't talking about subversion or law changes.

I was talking about what our policy says about when a borg under standard Asimov could/should ignore a Law 2 order from a prisoner to let it go free.
Aye, but the context seemed to imply belief that the given reasoning to believe a prisoner harmful was insufficient or lacking. Apologies if this was not the case.

The randomly generated in-character reason for the particular prisoner was "uploading disruptive laws to the AI", I would consider that to be a crime that would be justified in being considered to be evidence of past harm by an AI - you are correct that silicons collectively should be predicating their acceptance of law 2 orders demanding freedom on the harmfulness or non-harmfulness of prisoners, I just believe that in this case treatment as harmful was (discretionarily) merited (though borgs must defer to their master AI's interpretation of that discretion). (apologies again if I misunderstood the subtext of what you were trying to say, it seemed like you disagreed with the borg's actions as a baseline)
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Timberpoes » #658874

I have no clue about the actual context behind the specific incident that invoked this.

I clarified a bit later:
Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:00 am ...

You run with what IC information you have. A prisoner is a prisoner is a prisoner. If what you have IC tells you they're violent or harmful, you use that. If what you have IC tells you they're not violent or not harmful, you use that. If you have no IC information at all, then you do not know they are violent or harmful, and thus do not have enough information to refuse their order.

... Your laws are a shield and correctly following them in good faith is a complete defense OOC.
If the RNG roll gives them an IC backstory that they're violent or harmful, that's what you work with as an AI.

I don't expect AIs to look outside of the game world to meta-tells like "they're a roundstart prisoner, which is different to an arrested player". And I think current silipol very much agrees.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
User avatar
Jackraxxus
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 2:59 pm
Byond Username: Jackraxxus

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Jackraxxus » #658883

Roundstart prisoners should be rolebanned for law-2ing the AI to let them escape. Your job is to play a prisoner or come up with a fun escape plan on your own, not demand the funny hilarious meme box open your doors and let you do a little trolling. It's big time lame and AIs shouldn't have to put up with the friction this creates between them and security.

Other prisoners should be treated as silicon policy says.
iamgoofball wrote:Vekter and MrMelbert are more likely to enforce the roleplay rules Manuel is supposed to be abiding by than Wesoda or Jackraxxus are.
Image
User avatar
spookuni
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:05 am
Byond Username: Spookuni
Location: The Whiteship

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by spookuni » #658894

Jackraxxus wrote: Tue Dec 13, 2022 4:10 am Roundstart prisoners should be rolebanned for law-2ing the AI to let them escape. Your job is to play a prisoner or come up with a fun escape plan on your own, not demand the funny hilarious meme box open your doors and let you do a little trolling. It's big time lame and AIs shouldn't have to put up with the friction this creates between them and security.

Other prisoners should be treated as silicon policy says.
I'd be way down for making it so that silicons are assumed to have already received law 2 orders pre-shift to ignore any requests or commands by round start prisoners to release them (or assist them against non-human security) without an active law 1 reason to do so TBH, sign up as prisoner to either play prisoner or do something interesting in escaping not make the box do it for you.

(This is partially grounded in the fact that the prisoners in this situation (whom are being used as an example) seem to have had a valid IC reason to start demanding the silicons let them out, so I wouldn't say lul role ban is reasonable in cases like that, but it's still silly how round start human prisoners work with AIs)
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Timberpoes » #658913

If prisoners are asking to be let out when they should not, that's a different issue that has nothing to do with an Asimovicon following a valid order in good faith to their laws.

I believe the solution is not to make it against the rules for silicons to listen to those orders in good faith.

The solution is to continue administratively handling players that abuse silicons to break the rules by proxy.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
Redrover1760
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:27 am
Byond Username: Redrover1760

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Redrover1760 » #663820

Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:00 am What the rule says is: when not obligated to by orders or laws. It's very clear. If you're not forced to by orders or laws, you shouldn't swing by just to fuck with sec. If a player orders you to fuck with sec, it's not your problem, it's their problem.

You run with what IC information you have. A prisoner is a prisoner is a prisoner. If what you have IC tells you they're violent or harmful, you use that. If what you have IC tells you they're not violent or not harmful, you use that. If you have no IC information at all, then you do not know they are violent or harmful, and thus do not have enough information to refuse their order.

Players will trick silicons all the time. That's part of SS13. Your job as a silicon is not to second guess when people are breaking the server rules. It's to follow your laws in good faith.

If the player wants you to let them out and you haven't broken your laws in doing so, that's not your problem. That's their problem. If they shouldn't have been let out, the issue is theirs and not yours. Your laws are a shield and correctly following them in good faith is a complete defense OOC.

If you get bwoinked, you tell them you were ordered to, you tell them who ordered you, and you wait for the admin to thank you for your time and close the ticket.

Stop over-complicating things.
Actually, I've been bwoinked before for following law 2 orders by prisoners to release them if I didn't know whether or not they are harmful or not, and told to just ignore what they say unless you are certain they are not harmful.
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by Pandarsenic » #663823

Redrover1760 wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:44 am
Timberpoes wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:00 am What the rule says is: when not obligated to by orders or laws. It's very clear. If you're not forced to by orders or laws, you shouldn't swing by just to fuck with sec. If a player orders you to fuck with sec, it's not your problem, it's their problem.

You run with what IC information you have. A prisoner is a prisoner is a prisoner. If what you have IC tells you they're violent or harmful, you use that. If what you have IC tells you they're not violent or not harmful, you use that. If you have no IC information at all, then you do not know they are violent or harmful, and thus do not have enough information to refuse their order.

Players will trick silicons all the time. That's part of SS13. Your job as a silicon is not to second guess when people are breaking the server rules. It's to follow your laws in good faith.

If the player wants you to let them out and you haven't broken your laws in doing so, that's not your problem. That's their problem. If they shouldn't have been let out, the issue is theirs and not yours. Your laws are a shield and correctly following them in good faith is a complete defense OOC.

If you get bwoinked, you tell them you were ordered to, you tell them who ordered you, and you wait for the admin to thank you for your time and close the ticket.

Stop over-complicating things.
Actually, I've been bwoinked before for following law 2 orders by prisoners to release them if I didn't know whether or not they are harmful or not, and told to just ignore what they say unless you are certain they are not harmful.
For what it's worth, I'd much rather you addressed this by roleplaying (ask the prisoner why they're imprisoned, ask security why the prisoner is imprisoned, etc.) and then make a best effort at following the spirit of your laws based on the information you have.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
spookuni
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:05 am
Byond Username: Spookuni
Location: The Whiteship

Re: Sillicons and prisoners: Clarification needed

Post by spookuni » #664069

Roundstart prisoners abusing law 2 orders to immediately circumvent the starting conditions of their role is a pretty negative gameplay loop, but a general "don't listen to the roundstart prisoners" is something that upon reflection I'm loathe to implement (asimov silicons freeing legitimate antagonist prisoners is good gameplay and it would almost certainly result in some AIs over compensating).

As such We'll be taking the second option here and ruling that roundstart prisoners immediately using AIs or silicons to escape is a rule 1 issue that can be actioned by admins - AIs and Borgs can still follow these orders if they have have no reason to deny them, or if they have active reason to believe them legitimate.

Prisoner players can obviously still issue law 2 commands to silicons to assist them where legitimately necessary or without intent to escape (if for example perma is breached, security are legitimately abusing them, or if they'd just like a borg to bring them a nice drink from the bar), but drawing silicons into inevitable conflict with security to immediately subvert the intent of the role you sign up as is a dick move. As is mentioned in the prisoner redtext: earn your freedom, don't make other people do it for you.

Spook: As above
Rave: Agree with above
San: Agree with above
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users