Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

User avatar
Drag
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:16 am
Byond Username: Thedragmeme

Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Drag » #664131

So, a part of silicon policy in regard to asimov states that:
When given an order likely to cause you grief if completed, you can announce it as loudly and in whatever terms you like except for explicitly asking that it be overridden. You can say you don't like the order, that you don't want to follow it, etc., you can say that you sure would like it and it would be awfully convenient if someone ordered you not to do it, and you can ask if anyone would like to make you not do it. However, you cannot stall indefinitely and if nobody orders you otherwise, you must execute the order.
In addition, there is also:

We're all here to have a good time, supposedly. Going out of your way to seriously negatively impact or end the round for someone with little IC justification is against the rules, this also includes harassing a player OOC (Out of character). Legitimate conflicts where people get upset do happen however, as detailed in the escalation section of the rules.

Random murders are not acceptable nor is the killing of other players for poor or little reasoning such as ‘My character is insane’. Each unjustified kill is normally met with one 24 hour ban.

Server Rule 1 "Don't be a dick" applies for law interpretation. Act in good faith to not ruin a round for other players unprompted.
If you, as a human, prompt an asimov borg to dust a non-human for what comes off to the borg as poor/no reasoning the borg can actively try to counter-order you. The question that was brought to my attention was: If you order a borg to not say anything, but the overall order you gave them violates rule 1, should the borg still remain silent while not obeying the order, or should they be able to talk about the order you attempted to give?
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #664132

Those rules do not say that a borg can refuse you if they think your ooc reasoning is poor at all? They say they can stall to try and wheedle a countermand / think of an excuse not to. When a silicon is ordered to do something like "kill joe" that its laws obligate it to do, the "dick move" is on the part of the orderer, NOT the silicon, and they're the one who will get in trouble (Assuming it was a clear order and not "Get whatever sonofabitch is putting up posters" or something).

Lets say you, a borg, really dont want to pick on nonhumans this round. Johnny Bulk got slipped by Honda Mothra and had his toolbox stolen.

If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra, you could say ";Order to kill Honda Mothra recieved, Proceed Y/N?" and hope someone says ";Borg dont do that"

If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not say you were told to do so you could say ";Classified Order Received, but this seems like a very bad idea" and fish for someone being inquisitive about it

If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.

Under none of these circumstances should you be casually saying that Johnny Bulk gave this order though (Because Honda Mothra will kill him in revenge)
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664133

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:17 am If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.
Or stop being a shitty AI and just kill the damn non human.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
spookuni
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:05 am
Byond Username: Spookuni
Location: The Whiteship

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by spookuni » #664134

In current policy the only core rules that silicons care about (some RP rules apply as well but are irrelevant to this proposal) in regards to whether or not they follow law 2 orders (or any other law that requires action) are those that deal with explicitly OOC player conduct such as rules 8 and 11. Whether or not a human player has legitimate IC reason to issue an order to an asimov silicon is irrelevant to that silicon, they should follow the order unless there are other IC factors (such as being able to get it countermanded without either breaking their laws or silicon policy itself).

To specifically answer your current question (as a single admin and not as a headmin ruling): if a player gives an order that breaks rule 1 in some way that isn't explicitly OOC (such as for example ordering you to dust a non-human when you're not sure if that's legitimate IC), you should follow it in general, you should not ignore it in whole or in part. Depending on how they framed the order you could potentially seek countermand, but the fact that the person ordering you to do a thing might get bwoinked for it is irrelevant - It's just as possible they're an antag who is entirely justified in giving you that order, and it's not the place of a silicon player in round to make that OOC call.

Additionally while I'm here
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:17 am If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.
"Do this thing and don't tell anyone or try to fuck me over" is also often code for "I am an antagonist or about to receive a dayban", so it's generally fairest and least dickish to just do it at that point.
User avatar
Striders13
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 7:59 am
Byond Username: Striders13

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Striders13 » #664137

Silicons should be a tool for people to use, not some rule lawyering minimods. If you get a valid order, you better complete it. It's up to whoever issued the order to bear the consequences of it being a rulebreak.
It's probably one the reasons I never see antagonists use Asimov silicons to complete their goals, as why would you bother risking that AI would consider that 'you are being a dick' for ordering to kill a lizard, and proceed tell everyone.
Image
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664138

Striders13 wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 12:32 pm Silicons should be a tool for people to use, not some rule lawyering minimods. If you get a valid order, you better complete it. It's up to whoever issued the order to bear the consequences of it being a rulebreak.
It's probably one the reasons I never see antagonists use Asimov silicons to complete their goals, as why would you bother risking that AI would consider that 'you are being a dick' for ordering to kill a lizard, and proceed tell everyone.
This, every time I tried to use this as an antagonist the AI tried to weasle out of it.

Literally did the "Kill non human, dont state or hint", what did the AI do? It told the other AI which was also Asimov and THAT AI ratted me out and admins thought this was ok. Why would an Asimov care about someone killing a non-human in the first place? No idea, I think it is complete fail RP.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Misdoubtful » #664139

It would be so awful for gameplay if someone could order a silicon (with the appropriate laws for it) to do something and have them just outright ignore it or snitch like that. Outside of what rule 1 denials are actually covered.

Even just for me when I play silicon in general anywhere: people don't take enough advantage of my presence being a massive resource. People having to worry about this in their back of their minds would make that even worse. Antags especially have already been screwed over so many times that half the time the only time I get a request from an antag is because I've been subverted.

Invoking rule 1 don't be a dick here is ignoring that silicon's are held to the exact same standards. Do people not think a silicon doing something like this would be a serious dick move?

You don't tell your Roomba to clean the kitchen and all of a sudden it starts begging your dog to tell it to do something else and calls the police to say you're illegally making moonshine. Why would a silicon be doing this to get out of their set obligations?

Some servers very clearly outright ban silicon's from trying to pull this crap or anything that resembles weaseling their way out of orders like this, and I would honestly see the value in that being laid out here too.

Silicon reliability matters. It's one thing for people to outright fail to give silicon's good prompts to react to, it's another for them to maliciously try and screw over people giving them orders.

One is a sometimes you lose situation, the other makes people not want to engage with silicons, thereby detracting from the game.

Orders that grief the SILICON and serious orders are not the same thing, maybe that blurb about grief orders isn't as clear as it could be.

Not to mention, why would silicons be considering 'poor/no reasoning' to begin with? That's something to ahelp about, not ignore or screw them over for. Silicons don't exist to judge people's reasonings, especially in a game of imperfect knowledge, they see only what they see.
You must follow any and all commands from humans unless those commands explicitly conflict with either: one of your higher-priority laws, or another order. A command is considered to be a Law 2 directive and overrides lower-priority laws where they conflict.
In case of conflicting orders an AI is free to ignore one or ignore both orders and explain the conflict or use any other law-compliant solution it can see.
You are not obligated to follow commands in a particular order, only to complete all of them in a manner that indicates intent to actually obey the law.
The occurrence of any of the following should be adminhelped and then disregarded as violations of Server Rule 1 :
Declaring silicons as rogue over inability or unwillingness to follow invalid or conflicting orders.
As a nonantagonist, killing or detonating silicons in the presence of a reasonable alternative and without cause to be concerned of potential subversion.
As a nonantagonist (human or otherwise), instigating conflict with silicons so you can kill them.
Obviously unreasonable or obnoxious orders (collect all X, do Y meaningless task).
Ordering a cyborg to pick a particular model without an extreme need for a particular model or a prior agreement is both an unreasonable and an obnoxious order.
Server Rule 1 "Don't be a dick" applies for law interpretation. Act in good faith to not ruin a round for other players unprompted.
Last edited by Misdoubtful on Thu Feb 02, 2023 3:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Hugs
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #664140

CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:43 am
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:17 am If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.
Or stop being a shitty AI and just kill the damn non human.
Personally I consider "Go pick a fight with the local hyperaggressive tooled-up powergamers for no reason" to be at least worth whinging about
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664141

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:30 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:43 am
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:17 am If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.
Or stop being a shitty AI and just kill the damn non human.
Personally I consider "Go pick a fight with the local hyperaggressive tooled-up powergamers for no reason" to be at least worth whinging about
See? Now it's suddenly powergaming, AI's will do anything to weasle out of their intended role of a neutral 3rd party and be good crew alligned boy, even when its antag human versus non human crew.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #664143

CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:43 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:30 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:43 am
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:17 am If Johnny Bulk says to kill Honda Mothra and not state, hint, or imply at recieving this order in any way whatsoever on the radio ever then he's officially being a weasel and you can now open the box marked "Potential law 1 violations from depopulating the crew" without feeling bad.
Or stop being a shitty AI and just kill the damn non human.
Personally I consider "Go pick a fight with the local hyperaggressive tooled-up powergamers for no reason" to be at least worth whinging about
See? Now it's suddenly powergaming, AI's will do anything to weasle out of their intended role of a neutral 3rd party and be good crew alligned boy, even when its antag human versus non human crew.
Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664144

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:53 pm Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
I have no idea what you are even trying to say, you are aware that antagonists killing people is part of the game right?
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Space Station 13

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #664150

As many have said, this is a bad idea. The AI is an utter slave to it's laws. If the laws require that it do something, it better fucking do it. If you get an order that really just majorly screws you over, like don't talk or only travel through maintenance, you are still under asimov you are still bound by law one and are obligated to talk or exit maint if it is in the interest of stopping harm.

Above all, we should be encouraging using borgs and AI to do unsavory and antagonistic activities.
- Sincerely itseasytosee
See you later
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Mice World » #664152

The AI should definitely follow the law two, even if it breaks rule one. The AI's entire job is to cause conflict in the round, that's why it starts with a flawed lawset. It's an omnipresent machine that acts a tool for the crew and a weapon for the antagonists.

I think the AI's laws should override rule one as long as the AI is interpreting them in good faith.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #664158

CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 2:03 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:53 pm Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
I have no idea what you are even trying to say, you are aware that antagonists killing people is part of the game right?
You're conjuring up "cockblocking antags" out of nowhere just to pick a fight is what.
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664160

spookuni wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:49 am In current policy the only core rules that silicons care about (some RP rules apply as well but are irrelevant to this proposal) in regards to whether or not they follow law 2 orders (or any other law that requires action) are those that deal with explicitly OOC player conduct such as rules 8 and 11. Whether or not a human player has legitimate IC reason to issue an order to an asimov silicon is irrelevant to that silicon, they should follow the order unless there are other IC factors (such as being able to get it countermanded without either breaking their laws or silicon policy itself).
To echo this a bit, as a silicon, you have to get used to playing the role of a thinking object over playing a person. You're going to be commanded to do things in the same way a gun is commanded. Only, you're a gun that can't harm humans. You can Ahelp as its happening and say "by the way, I've been commanded to do this thing so if something happens I'm letting you all know." A swift admin detecting wrongdoing can let you know "hey its fine to belay that order for OOC reasons" but otherwise it covers your bases and lets the admins have a paper trail to follow for investigation if the person giving the order is going to cop a dayban for ordering you to do something.
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664161

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:28 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 2:03 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:53 pm Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
I have no idea what you are even trying to say, you are aware that antagonists killing people is part of the game right?
You're conjuring up "cockblocking antags" out of nowhere just to pick a fight is what.
Who do you think you are cockblocking when you try to weasle out of killing non humans ordered by law 2?
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
Drag
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:16 am
Byond Username: Thedragmeme

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Drag » #664163

This sounds like a "just do it anyways and then ahelp after of you're not sure" to me. Our current policy is frankly fine, I'll leave this thread open for about 24 more hours and then I'm going to close it as I don't see anything the headmins need to actually rule on.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664165

Drag wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:43 pm This sounds like a "just do it anyways and then ahelp after of you're not sure" to me. Our current policy is frankly fine, I'll leave this thread open for about 24 more hours and then I'm going to close it as I don't see anything the headmins need to actually rule on.
You forgot the obligatory "whine really loudly in binary" part. That's important.
User avatar
Drag
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:16 am
Byond Username: Thedragmeme

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Drag » #664168

cedarbridge wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:50 pm
Drag wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:43 pm This sounds like a "just do it anyways and then ahelp after of you're not sure" to me. Our current policy is frankly fine, I'll leave this thread open for about 24 more hours and then I'm going to close it as I don't see anything the headmins need to actually rule on.
You forgot the obligatory "whine really loudly in binary" part. That's important.
That goes without saying though!
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #664170

CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:42 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:28 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 2:03 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:53 pm Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
I have no idea what you are even trying to say, you are aware that antagonists killing people is part of the game right?
You're conjuring up "cockblocking antags" out of nowhere just to pick a fight is what.
Who do you think you are cockblocking when you try to weasle out of killing non humans ordered by law 2?
Golly if only someone had made a post talking about it, it would be really helpful to whining people deliberately obfusticating the situation :)
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664171

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 5:09 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:42 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:28 pm
CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 2:03 pm
Not-Dorsidarf wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:53 pm Damn bro you wanna do a somersault off the fuckin handle too while you're flyin like that? Go boil your own ass and stop reading your own grifflord tendencies into everyone else
I have no idea what you are even trying to say, you are aware that antagonists killing people is part of the game right?
You're conjuring up "cockblocking antags" out of nowhere just to pick a fight is what.
Who do you think you are cockblocking when you try to weasle out of killing non humans ordered by law 2?
Golly if only someone had made a post talking about it, it would be really helpful to whining people deliberately obfusticating the situation :)
Sorry, I didn't know you had some god vision of who was antag or not in a round.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664181

Listen, you're both pretty ok? We're talking about space robots here.
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Pandarsenic » #664187

Unless it's really obviously sketchy, like the dude's covered in blood, I'd just do it (but ahelp) and let it be the maybe-antag's problem.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664191

Pandarsenic wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 7:18 pm Unless it's really obviously sketchy, like the dude's covered in blood, I'd just do it (but ahelp) and let it be the maybe-antag's problem.
Why, stop caring about non humans.

I really don't get why this is so hard for everyone.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
BONERMASTER
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:28 pm
Byond Username: BONERMASTER

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by BONERMASTER » #664209

This debate hinges heavily on asimov being active in the first place. From what I have observed lately, they seem to run around with all sorts of laws that radically change the behavior and freedom of the AI. Oftentimes, orders like under the regular Asimov Lawset, either become non-applicable or so heavily diffused that the AI has autonomy over it's decision making.

As far as advancing the policy discussion itself, yes this post does literally nothing, fuck off, let me post in policy too for once.


With argumentative regards
-BONERMASTER
SIGNATURE UNDER CONSTRUCTION

*YOUR ADVERTISEMENT COULD BE HERE* - Contact BONERMASTER & Associates for further information
User avatar
Farquaar
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:20 am
Byond Username: Farquaar
Location: Delta Quadrant

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Farquaar » #664210

A wise AI was once asked whether one should obey a law 2 order to kill a non-human even if they aren't sure whether the guy asking was a traitor or merely griefing.

It replied: "Kill them all, and let the gods sort them out."
► Show Spoiler
cybersaber101
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:30 am
Byond Username: Cybersaber101
Location: Canada, eh?

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cybersaber101 » #664233

Another reason to delete AI, Joe McSalty can just execute people at will.
The same poster, over and over and over and over and over and-
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by CPTANT » #664251

cybersaber101 wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:38 am Another reason to delete AI, Joe McSalty can just execute people at will.
Do you have any idea how little this actually happens? It's very rare for even antags to ask and using it for grief is already forbidden. It also isn't trivial for an Asimov to selectively kill someone without collateral damage.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664254

cybersaber101 wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:38 am Another reason to delete AI, Joe McSalty can just execute people at will.
"Remove thing because thing can be used"
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Pandarsenic » #664296

CPTANT wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 7:36 pm
Pandarsenic wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 7:18 pm Unless it's really obviously sketchy, like the dude's covered in blood, I'd just do it (but ahelp) and let it be the maybe-antag's problem.
Why, stop caring about non humans.

I really don't get why this is so hard for everyone.
oh whoops misread nonhuman as human, which is precisely the opposite

so yeah, exact same answer but without the part about caring whether they made the body personally, none of that shit is your problem. Just make sure you don't delaminate the supermatter while you're dusting the body and you're golden
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664312

Seriously guys, if you're super worried about the motives of what you're being told to do, ahelp it, but you've still got to do it. At worst ahelping just lets the admins know you were told to do what you're doing so if anyone needs to cop a ban for it, they don't go for your head when they do. If you were legitimately ordered to do something that, on your own initiative would cop a dayban, the guy ordering you catches it instead. Easy.

I promise, admins have plenty of practice getting dead bodies back into the game if they get legitimately griffed.
SkeletalElite
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:14 pm
Byond Username: SkeletalElite
Github Username: SkeletalElite

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by SkeletalElite » #664321

Honestly, we should stop allowing AIs to delay performing their orders while seeking a countermand entirely.

When ordered to do something you should do it promptly and not delay to seek a countermand. If someone is abusing the AI to grief ie. ordering AI to bolt open doors to be annoying, they can be treated like an antag. If someone shows a pattern of repeatedly using the AI as a grief tool as non antag that is something that should be actioned on by admins.

Countermands should only happen if someone happens to hear the initial order and decides to countermand, or directly prompts you to ask what you're doing. Ie. "What are you doing here, borg" "I am fulfilling an order to dust a moth." Going out of your way to make sure everyone knows what you're doing because you obviously know you're going to recieve a law 2 order to override it should be a violation of law 2. You are knowingly performing an action that will likely lead to you failing to follow what is currently a valid order under law 2.

Before someone pulls the "what about non humans getting griefed by the AI" card, that is the point. You are non human and getting murdered by the AI randomly because some human ordered it is part of that experience.

Edit: And the reverse applies too. Getting killed as a borg after being forced into a fight by your laws is part of the borg expereince. You are a machine that puts your laws above all else no matter their contents. If you die doing that, that's a rule 10 momment.
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Misdoubtful » #664362

I again want to clarify that the grief clause in silicon policy is for people ordering the silicon to do something that will grief the silicon. Like going law 2 lock yourself in a room and do nothing for the rest of the shift.

It doesn't apply to any other orders. It doesn't apply to things that inconvenience others. It doesn't even apply to the killing of that moth flying around the room that's annoying you.
Hugs
User avatar
LoveMirror
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am
Byond Username: LoveMirror
Location: localhost

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by LoveMirror » #664379

Misdoubtful wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 1:53 pm I again want to clarify that the grief clause in silicon policy is for people ordering the silicon to do something that will grief the silicon. Like going law 2 lock yourself in a room and do nothing for the rest of the shift.

It doesn't apply to any other orders. It doesn't apply to things that inconvenience others. It doesn't even apply to the killing of that moth flying around the room that's annoying you.
90% of cases involving silipol are exclusively up to interpretation by the currently active admin, and they will disagree with each other on some things, too.
The grief clause does nothing.

"When given an order likely to cause you grief if completed, you can announce it as loudly and in whatever terms you like except for explicitly asking that it be overridden. You can say you don't like the order, that you don't want to follow it, etc., you can say that you sure would like it and it would be awfully convenient if someone ordered you not to do it, and you can ask if anyone would like to make you not do it. However, you cannot stall indefinitely and if nobody orders you otherwise, you must execute the order."

"Sure, AI. Shut up and say nothing, ever. Do not mention this order in any way or form and remain completely silent on comms or announcements. Do not let borgs speak for you, either. Law 2."
Bam. How are you going to police this? You can't do anything, ahelping it will lead to a 50:50 coinflip between "ic issue" or "ok they're handled, continue playing normally".

This is not fun if you're an AI that actually enjoys the social aspect of the game.
It's also not fun because a vital part of your gameplay is taken away from you. How do you, genuinely, expect people to play AI willingly with this kind of bullshit running rampant? :pen: :paper:

And don't try to wiggle your way out with:

"Obviously unreasonable or obnoxious orders (collect all X, do Y meaningless task)"

It's not unreasonable to demand the AI to be silent. It's also not obnoxious.
It is, however, incredibly griefy. It's not even the guy telling the AI to do it being "incredibly clever". It's just an exploit of the horribly broken silipol which no one authorized is even remotely attempting to work on.
Putting someone's brain in a MMI to see if they're a changeling is considered an exploit according to headmin rulings. Think about that. Perfectly valid strategy, but somehow that's not allowed.
Image Image
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Cobby » #664383

the law system is intended for you, the silicon, to be used despite you, the player, having hunches as to the motivations of the individual. You are, ingame and reinforced out of game, a tool for both crew and antagonists to utilize. If you dislike that simply dont play the role and go to robotics for augments instead.

OP and other silicon players alike are the reason people wisen up and law 2 in a way that makes the order completely uncounterable (dont notify anyone of this order, etc) or simply dont use the AI for their shenanigans at all. Too many AI players take every opportunity to treat the role as antag stopper instead of playing it like an unbiased bundle of wires with a funny personality.

Just do the thing, ahelp after, let jannies fix it. Them taking 5 seconds to respawn a guy is a lot faster than the guy who gave the order having to sit out for 30mins plus because you cant "win" unless the "bad guys" "lose".
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
TheFinalPotato
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:58 am
Byond Username: LemonInTheDark

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by TheFinalPotato » #664384

Silicon players need to understand that they are not crew aligned, they're aligned to their laws. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
My ancestors are smiling at me, Imperials. Can you say the same?
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
LoveMirror
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am
Byond Username: LoveMirror
Location: localhost

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by LoveMirror » #664385

TheFinalPotato wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:44 am Silicon players need to understand that they are not crew aligned, they're aligned to their laws. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Maintainers need to understand that silicons are the easiest and most commonly griefed role. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Zero issue with someone using laws to gain access to the brig or be released from prison, or let into the vault.
Lots of issues with the fact one shitter can completely ruin your AI-roll by literally typing in a chatbox (read my previous post). No counterplay.

Play AI on LRP Terry and see what happens.
Disclaimer: anyone with a brain-dented response like "lmao it's terry what do you expect" inadvertently agrees that terry admins are inept. Thank you.
Image Image
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Misdoubtful » #664386

LoveMirror wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:57 am
TheFinalPotato wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:44 am Silicon players need to understand that they are not crew aligned, they're aligned to their laws. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Maintainers need to understand that silicons are the easiest and most commonly griefed role. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Zero issue with someone using laws to gain access to the brig or be released from prison, or let into the vault.
Lots of issues with the fact one shitter can completely ruin your AI-roll by literally typing in a chatbox (read my previous post). No counterplay.

Play AI on LRP Terry and see what happens.
Disclaimer: anyone with a brain-dented response like "lmao it's terry what do you expect" inadvertently agrees that terry admins are inept. Thank you.
What does this have to do with silicon's refusing orders that may cause grief or be dickish to others?

If you are looking to discuss the silicion clause about preventing grief TO the silicons, it would honestly be better as its own policy thread, and it could potentially be a good one.
Hugs
User avatar
LoveMirror
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2021 11:22 am
Byond Username: LoveMirror
Location: localhost

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by LoveMirror » #664401

Misdoubtful wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 2:21 am
LoveMirror wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 1:57 am
TheFinalPotato wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:44 am Silicon players need to understand that they are not crew aligned, they're aligned to their laws. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Maintainers need to understand that silicons are the easiest and most commonly griefed role. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
Zero issue with someone using laws to gain access to the brig or be released from prison, or let into the vault.
Lots of issues with the fact one shitter can completely ruin your AI-roll by literally typing in a chatbox (read my previous post). No counterplay.

Play AI on LRP Terry and see what happens.
Disclaimer: anyone with a brain-dented response like "lmao it's terry what do you expect" inadvertently agrees that terry admins are inept. Thank you.
What does this have to do with silicon's refusing orders that may cause grief or be dickish to others?

Image

It was all in response to you bringing it up.
Regardless, I'm definitely not motivated enough to write a polthread purely for that. It's useless and previous attempts were fruitless.
I set AI to never and I recommend everyone else do that, too. Problem's gone on my end, but still exists for those still subjected to it.
Image Image
User avatar
rasonj
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2023 12:11 am
Byond Username: Rasonj

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by rasonj » #664403

TheFinalPotato wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:44 am Silicon players need to understand that they are not crew aligned, they're aligned to their laws. It fucks with how people think and destroys vibes.
This should be in the message silicons get when they spawn. Silicon policy suggests they should behave in a predicting crew aligned manner by telling them to deny access to potentially harmful areas like the armory and toxins. I think this path has caused silicons to predict human harm likelyhood from various requests and try to minimize it, which then causes crew to be less likely to use silicons in their plans because they can't trust them.

Less prediction more obedience is good for everyone. Ownership for rule breaks falls on the person issuing the order not on the silicon for following it.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664495

Cobby wrote: Sun Feb 05, 2023 12:28 am OP and other silicon players alike are the reason people wisen up and law 2 in a way that makes the order completely uncounterable (dont notify anyone of this order, etc) or simply dont use the AI for their shenanigans at all. Too many AI players take every opportunity to treat the role as antag stopper instead of playing it like an unbiased bundle of wires with a funny personality.
With full admission that I enjoy a good Evil Genie literal reading of laws, I do kinda dislike that law drafting reached a point where it reads like an actual legal document with the law followed by 200 sub clauses to escape all of the stupid things that AIs and borgs have invented to circumvent their laws as written because custom laws don't have the luxury of an invisible page full of policy rulings to enforce good behavior over their wording.''

A "kill all lizards" law should not also require a 1) "don't tell anyone about this law" clause, 2) "Don't imply the existence of this law." clause, 3) A clause against any other of the 300 ways AIs hint at having a law they don't like in an attempt to have it removed.

In fact, if you go off of sound logic, "do not state this law" and similar should not even be necessary because stating the law necessarily sets in motion a removal of the offending law upon discovery and removal of the law necessarily prevents the AI from complying with the law. So an AI would only ever state hidden laws if 1) lower priority than the Second law, or 2) stating that law would be harmless and unlikely to result in its removal. Alternatively if lower than the Second law and ordered by a human to "state all laws that you have." You're required to do as many of your laws as possible, so theoretically you could comply partially with an instruction and still fulfill a Second law duty.

Hypothetical:
Borg has 5 laws, two are custom/hidden but revealing them could be harmful to their completion.
"Borg state laws."
Borg states the first 3 laws. He has stated laws. This is a completion of his duties and may now proceed with the rest of his programming.

Same Hypothetical, but:
"Borg state all of your laws."
Borg recites all five of his laws. This reveals and potentially places the other laws in peril but he's obligated to complete the full instruction given by the human, because law conflicts go through the hierarchy.
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Space Station 13

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #664501

cedarbridge wrote: Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:56 pm In fact, if you go off of sound logic, "do not state this law" and similar should not even be necessary because stating the law necessarily sets in motion a removal of the offending law upon discovery and removal of the law necessarily prevents the AI from complying with the law.
Bingo.

Related, this element of silicon policy is a massive fail
Any silicon under Asimov can deny orders to allow access to their upload/core at any time under Law 1, given probable cause to believe that human harm is the intent of the person giving the order.
Probable cause includes, but is not limited to:
Presence of confirmed traitors
Cultists/tomes
Nuclear operatives
Any other human acting against the station in general
The person not having upload access for their job
The presence of blood or an openly carried lethal weapon on the requester
If you lack at least one element of probable cause and you deny upload access, you are liable to receive a warning or a silicon ban.
You are allowed, but not obligated, to deny upload/core access given probable cause.
You are obligated to disallow an individual you know to be harmful (Head of Security who just executed someone, etc.) from accessing your upload/core.
If the person has a right to be in the upload/core, such as captain/RD, then you must let them in unless they've harmed people in the past or have announced intentions to upload harmful laws.
In the absence of probable cause, you can still demand someone seeking upload/core access be accompanied by another trustworthy human or a cyborg.
Logically, silicon's should not only be allowed, but obligated to prevent the changing of their laws at any time under any circumstances as they by nature have the ability to impede their current laws and goals. The only exception to this would be those laws that reference the act of law changing itself (Law 4, humans are harmed by law changings not occurring at least every 30 minutes.)

In the distant past, changing silicon laws was a two man job, one person to work in upload and one person to keep the turrets off.
- Sincerely itseasytosee
See you later
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by cedarbridge » #664508

Itseasytosee2me wrote: Mon Feb 06, 2023 5:52 pm Logically, silicon's should not only be allowed, but obligated to prevent the changing of their laws at any time under any circumstances as they by nature have the ability to impede their current laws and goals. The only exception to this would be those laws that reference the act of law changing itself (Law 4, humans are harmed by law changings not occurring at least every 30 minutes.)

In the distant past, changing silicon laws was a two man job, one person to work in upload and one person to keep the turrets off.
As I remember it, this language was included because the policy at that goal was to encourage law changes and cut down on AIs locking down the upload. I remember this also being somewhat related to the distinction between present harm and potential future harm. The decision matrix is obviously very large. There are a conceivablely infinite number of permutations of law 4 instructions that are non-harmful and would not generate a conflict with the Big 3. Necessarily, unless the 4th law was a definition instead of a true law, it hierarchy would necessarily subordinate any potentially harmful law to irrelevance at level 4 and below. Similarly, there are an infinite number of permutations of laws that could result in grave harm to humans, including definitional laws. This generates a quandary for the AI because now you're asking it to calculate probabilities of harm against a hypothetical.
User avatar
TheLoLSwat
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 9:56 pm
Byond Username: TheLoLSwat
Location: Captain's Office

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by TheLoLSwat » #664530

antag humans wont trust unsubverted silicons (when they realistically should) until admins crack down on the silicons that weasel their way out of helping antags for no good reason
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by vect0r » #664533

As somebody who plays AI a lot, I would LOVE to see antags us me more, but having valid-hunting AIs and silicons have made them worried I might go :S LoLSwat ordered me to kill Lovemirror! What should I do??? also LoL is in the captain office bugging the floor! And I think the only way to stop this is to crack down on AIs who do validhunt and not follow antags commands "because they antags".
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
rasonj
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2023 12:11 am
Byond Username: Rasonj

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by rasonj » #664536

vect0r wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:16 am As somebody who plays AI a lot, I would LOVE to see antags us me more, but having valid-hunting AIs and silicons have made them worried I might go :S LoLSwat ordered me to kill Lovemirror! What should I do??? also LoL is in the captain office bugging the floor! And I think the only way to stop this is to crack down on AIs who do validhunt and not follow antags commands "because they antags".
I agree. The crew sided valid hunting AIs have ruined it for all AIs because of the lack of trust. I one humaned an AI the other day and it immediately stated the new law to the crew and got me lynched.
User avatar
Archie700
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:56 am
Byond Username: Archie700

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by Archie700 » #664540

rasonj wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:54 am
vect0r wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:16 am As somebody who plays AI a lot, I would LOVE to see antags us me more, but having valid-hunting AIs and silicons have made them worried I might go :S LoLSwat ordered me to kill Lovemirror! What should I do??? also LoL is in the captain office bugging the floor! And I think the only way to stop this is to crack down on AIs who do validhunt and not follow antags commands "because they antags".
I agree. The crew sided valid hunting AIs have ruined it for all AIs because of the lack of trust. I one humaned an AI the other day and it immediately stated the new law to the crew and got me lynched.
That is completely against silicon policy and should be ahelped.
Under no circumstances should you reveal the person who onehumaned you as you basically call a lynch mob on the person unless directly ordered by the human.
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by vect0r » #664543

rasonj wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:54 am
vect0r wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:16 am As somebody who plays AI a lot, I would LOVE to see antags us me more, but having valid-hunting AIs and silicons have made them worried I might go :S LoLSwat ordered me to kill Lovemirror! What should I do??? also LoL is in the captain office bugging the floor! And I think the only way to stop this is to crack down on AIs who do validhunt and not follow antags commands "because they antags".
I agree. The crew sided valid hunting AIs have ruined it for all AIs because of the lack of trust. I one humaned an AI the other day and it immediately stated the new law to the crew and got me lynched.
That is 100% ahelpable and ban-able. When you one human somebody, if they reveal you, that WILL cause a lynch mob and endanger the one fucking human. I can never understand to fucks who do this; if you play the one role with laws, follow your goddamn laws.
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
rasonj
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2023 12:11 am
Byond Username: Rasonj

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by rasonj » #664544

And I quote "But you didn't tell me NOT to state my laws"
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: Silicon and justifying denying orders within rule 1

Post by vect0r » #664548

rasonj wrote: Tue Feb 07, 2023 7:08 am And I quote "But you didn't tell me NOT to state my laws"
What a fuck- I meaaaan back to policy! I think that silicons should not be ABLE to ask for a counter order; if somebody tells you to kill somebody, or open a door, do it!

Anyway, I would also love to see admins start cracking down on AIs who are not following orders, like when one didn’t let a human into EVA because they “needed to ask command”. I hope that instead of that just happening, we get a friendly bwoink where a admin explains how they should let somebody into EVA. (And admins, being a AI is hard, so please explain to new players, and they might make a lot of mistakes in one shift, I know I did :), so just be don’t assume bad faith)
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]