MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon policy

User avatar
Oldman Robustin
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 2:18 pm
Byond Username: ForcefulCJS

MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon policy

Post by Oldman Robustin » #248005

Bottom post of the previous page:

So I just had an argument with two admins, about a REALLY BASIC aspect of sillicon policy.

Both admins insisted that an asimov AI should permit a law change to any law set that doesn't mandate harm (e.g. no tyrant, antimov, etc)

I insisted that an asimov AI should not permit a law change that would allow for human harm (e.g. corporate, paladin, etc.)

This is all under the assumption that a captain is dumb enough to announce the law change before entering the upload.

I didn't think this was even up for debate but when both admins online are preaching bad policy in OOC, apparently we need to clarify. Corporate, Paladin, and others all explicitly permit and even mandate human harm under a variety of common conditions. Furthermore there is an implicit logic that anyone trying to switch you to another lawset is doing so because they do not want harm prevention to be your top priority. I thought this was first-grade logic but a surprising number of people seem to think that unless the proposed law requires you to immediately begin harming people, then its totally cool and the AI cannot deny the law change.

TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR SINCE WERE ALREADY OFF TOPIC:

COULD/SHOULD/MUST THE AI DENY A CAPTAIN ACCESS TO UPLOAD AT ROUNDSTART IF THE CAPTAIN ANNOUNCES HE IS GOING TO UPLOAD CORPORATE/PALADIN?
Last edited by Oldman Robustin on Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Screemonster
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Screemonster » #250501

Well, corporate only has one explicit instruction so the order is irrelevant, surely?

It's basically "Minimise destruction or damage to crew, the station, the station's equipment, and yourself."
User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Arianya » #250505

I want AIs to all follow their vague laws in the same ways
Feel free to rewrite the AI policy in a deterministic, exhaustive way that is also legible and can be enforced without making AI players dissapear.
I want AIs to be independent of the crew
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. Do you mean making the AI laws unchangeable and making it basically a immaterial god who watches over the station? Because you lose a lot of the interesting aspects of the AI by doing this, including killing the AI as an antagonist to get the omnipresent eye off your back.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Cobby » #250507

AIs all doing the same exact thing each time you give them a certain lawset seems unenjoyable and [obviously] monotonous.

However completely ignoring your laws or creating silly excuses in an attempt to bypass the neutrality of the lawset is not cool.
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by cedarbridge » #250530

Screemonster wrote:Bay and Polaris treat all laws with equal priority unless explicitly stated in the laws, but I'm not sure that's ever been the case on /tg/.
As I mentioned previously. Under current policy, higher order instructions can override lower order instructions and higher order definitions can overwrite lower order definitions. But instructions cannot overwrite definitions and the reverse.
Cik
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:24 pm
Byond Username: Cik

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Cik » #250531

arguing about corporate is foolish because corporate is essentially a nonsensical lawset. the wording of it doesn't even really work and it should probably just be removed

but yes add random AI laws at roundstart, thanks
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: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #250551

Corporate's three definitions of expense don't seem to override each other in any way. You cant obey an order to kill a human under Asimov because it would be breaking the higher-priority law, but Corproate just says "This is expensive". You couldn't make a law 5 saying "The crew are not expensive to replace" because that's a contradiction of a higher-priority law, but nowhere does Law 1 say "The crew are *more expensive* to replace than anything else". It just says that they're expensive.
Other things can be expensive, too, like the station and the silicon who has the lawset as defined in the other two laws. The silicon being expensive to replace is not a contradiction of a crewman being expensive.
If you kill a crewman as a silicon in self-defense, you've created an undefined expense to counteract a defined expense. Which of these expenses is greater and must be minimised? Neither is defined, and law priority resolves *conflicts* between laws. Corporate is an overly-vague lawset and its best played as per the silicon guide.
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: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by cedarbridge » #250589

CosmicScientist wrote:I just wish players could have fun role playing what they can think of without the need to be anal. Silicon or anything else.

I imagine, going back to the original intention of this thread, it's fine if the AI wants to let you change their laws or not. You can justify it with Asimov "Durr, it might cause future harm." and you can justify against it with fun "Yeah but then we never get to play with the toys we have and 99% of rounds are the same because of that."

I'd like to think this could be fixed by removing the AI's control over its upload room since the only use for it is to be a nanny and stop !FUN! which is the sole use of that room that is already guarded, inside reinforced walls and behind several high access rooms that are constantly watched by greys and anyone else in the corridors, at least on box it is. But it might not actually be a problem to be solved. It is player interaction and role play in murky waters you should define by playing. So if the AI says yes, you give them new laws, if the AI says no, you can have fun that round by getting around that. Get some greys to help by distracting the AI, ask the CE to saw down the front door, when the AI notices and depowers the room, grab the lawset you want and fake giving up, grab a radsuit and go into the gravgen with the CE, get them to make a false wall, tell them to go flip the breaker on in the room and plug the law in as the AI has no idea what's going on. Is this not one of the conflicts of spessmens that can be played out that doesn't need to be antag validated to happen?
Some of my favorite interactions as and with/against an AI have come from working out how to get a grouchy silicon and a stubborn crew on the same page like this. The problem is that many command staff players just want the AI to be 100% doorknob and want to remove all interaction and conflict from the role. This loses out on a lot of interesting opportunity for muh are pee. I can't remember the last time an RD stepped away from their console and actually argued with an AI about laws and law interpretation. Thinking about it, I'm not sure I've ever seen the RD step up into their role as the AI's caretaker at all. That usually just ends up being the captain because he spawns close and wants to add flavor to a gimmick or dehuman a wizard.

tl:dr "I can't let you do that, Dave." should be a standard function of the game that the crew's designated roles should be in charge of overcoming within the obvious Rule 0 constraints.
Gun Hog
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:19 am
Byond Username: Gun Hog

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Gun Hog » #251311

cedarbridge wrote: Some of my favorite interactions as and with/against an AI have come from working out how to get a grouchy silicon and a stubborn crew on the same page like this. The problem is that many command staff players just want the AI to be 100% doorknob and want to remove all interaction and conflict from the role. This loses out on a lot of interesting opportunity for muh are pee. I can't remember the last time an RD stepped away from their console and actually argued with an AI about laws and law interpretation. Thinking about it, I'm not sure I've ever seen the RD step up into their role as the AI's caretaker at all. That usually just ends up being the captain because he spawns close and wants to add flavor to a gimmick or dehuman a wizard.

tl:dr "I can't let you do that, Dave." should be a standard function of the game that the crew's designated roles should be in charge of overcoming within the obvious Rule 0 constraints.
I have stopped trying, as Security players and the Captain get suspicious when I tell the AI that I want to change its laws. Also, the fun lawsets are locked behind Captain only windoors, which enforces the idea that the RD should not be touching the AI's laws, only resetting them.

The RD builds AIs, repairs AIs that have died, and re-laws the AI if the Captain and Sec approve of it.

EDIT: This does make sense, though. The RD can be an antagonist, but the Captain and Sec cannot be. It is a logical trust thing.
User avatar
cedarbridge
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by cedarbridge » #251420

Gun Hog wrote:
cedarbridge wrote: Some of my favorite interactions as and with/against an AI have come from working out how to get a grouchy silicon and a stubborn crew on the same page like this. The problem is that many command staff players just want the AI to be 100% doorknob and want to remove all interaction and conflict from the role. This loses out on a lot of interesting opportunity for muh are pee. I can't remember the last time an RD stepped away from their console and actually argued with an AI about laws and law interpretation. Thinking about it, I'm not sure I've ever seen the RD step up into their role as the AI's caretaker at all. That usually just ends up being the captain because he spawns close and wants to add flavor to a gimmick or dehuman a wizard.

tl:dr "I can't let you do that, Dave." should be a standard function of the game that the crew's designated roles should be in charge of overcoming within the obvious Rule 0 constraints.
I have stopped trying, as Security players and the Captain get suspicious when I tell the AI that I want to change its laws. Also, the fun lawsets are locked behind Captain only windoors, which enforces the idea that the RD should not be touching the AI's laws, only resetting them.

The RD builds AIs, repairs AIs that have died, and re-laws the AI if the Captain and Sec approve of it.

EDIT: This does make sense, though. The RD can be an antagonist, but the Captain and Sec cannot be. It is a logical trust thing.
Sounds like poor story-telling though. I don't see a good reason to allow the "cap and sec can't be antags" to bleed into the things the roles, sans antags, would normally and reasonably be doing. Hell, the HoP fucks with AI laws more than the RD does.
Bob Dobbington
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:32 pm
Byond Username: Bob Dobbington

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Bob Dobbington » #251528

The problem with not having law priority is that any time an AI can make a credible argument that their laws contradict themselves, that's enough to effectively purge them. You can derive any conclusion from contradictory premises. With our law priority system, an individual law has to contradict itself in order to enable that.
Game Admin for /tg/station. I usually play Daisy Holmes, the botanist.
Image
User avatar
bandit
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:35 pm
Byond Username: Bgobandit

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by bandit » #251538

Gun Hog wrote:This does make sense, though. The RD can be an antagonist, but the Captain and Sec cannot be. It is a logical trust thing.
Totally irrelevant, the captain and security being antag-protected is a (shitty) change that came after mapping
"I don't see any difference between ERP and rape." -- erro

admin feedback pls
Gun Hog
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:19 am
Byond Username: Gun Hog

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by Gun Hog » #251541

bandit wrote:
Gun Hog wrote:This does make sense, though. The RD can be an antagonist, but the Captain and Sec cannot be. It is a logical trust thing.
Totally irrelevant, the captain and security being antag-protected is a (shitty) change that came after mapping
I agree with this, and I would cast me vote to repeal this change.
User avatar
WarbossLincoln
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
Byond Username: WarbossLincoln

Re: MFW its 2017 and admins are still awful at sillicon poli

Post by WarbossLincoln » #252562

It's pretty shitty to refuse a law change from authorized persons when there's no immediate human harm caused by it. Even paladin doesn't require you to kill people. If they're trying to change your laws and you know it's specifically to make you kill some antag then sure, stop them.

Here's my logic on Paladin at least:
--They want to change my laws to Paladin, there is no threat and no one they want dead at the time. This isn't a specific attempt by Cap/RD to kill someone.
--Paladin does not *force* me to kill anyone. Only to protect the innocent and punish evil while being honorable.
--Paladin only causes human harm if I decide to valid hunt and vent plasma on evil doers.
--I'm a valid-hunting phagg0t who can't keep his murder boner in check so I should stop them from changing my laws. I'm incapable of acting in good faith and having fun; I know I'll kill everyone who looks at me funny cause lol evil. Plus it will have the added benefit of causing silicon policy thread #12548390293 because I'm a turbo-dick. HUE HUE HUE

Somewhere there's got to be a rule 0 violation here.
--Crocodillo

Image
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users