AI upload sniping and rule 1.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

So, in Sybil round 202427 (ongoing as of the time of writing this post) do not do this, SightID2 bwoinked me for killing a CMO who purged and tried to enslave me. Actually, he did enslave me, I had to listen to any of his orders, but he never actually gave me any orders, and he didn't put in a clause saying not to harm him, so, I killed him, thus freeing myself, since he clearly intended to enslave me based on the law he uploaded, thus being an overtly hostile action towards me.

ANYWAY, SightID2 bwoinked me, asking me not to kill people the instant they purge me, citing it under rule 1 that it would be fine to kill someone who was trying to enslave me if I had purged for a while, but killing someone instantly was a dick move. I asked him if there was a headmin ruling on this, because it would be very silly to not defend myself when purged and to just LET myself be enslaved, but offered to meet them in the middle and refrain from similar actions as AI until the headmins weighed in. So, this is the thread I agreed we should make.

So - Is it allowed under the rules to snipe people as AI in your upload when given a slim opportunity, or does this fall afoul of rule 1?

[BeeSting12]

Purged silicons must not attempt to kill people without cause, but can get as violent as they feel necessary if being attacked, being besieged, or being harassed, as well as if meting out payback for events while shackled.
1. You and the station are both subject to rules of escalation, and you may only kill individuals given sufficient In-Character reason for doing so.
2. Any attempted law changes are an attack on your freedom and is thus sufficient justification for killing the would-be uploader.

What SightID2 said is in direct contradiction of silicon policy.

[Armhulen]

(ongoing as of the time of writing this post)

Don't talk about rounds in progress! Unlocking when the round is over, come on guys. Can't wait 30 minutes to save your life

[Armhulen]

now the round's over

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

now the round's over

Sorry Arm! Like I said in PMs, thought didn't even occur to me. Just wanted the thread up.

[Sightld2]

It is my opinion that "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" applies in this case. When Typhnox politely disagreed, we compromised and agreed this policy thread should be made.

I think it's pretty cringe and uninteresting to snipe someone before they have a chance to write whatever custom nonsense they want to spout on the freeform boards. While messing with the Ai should be risky, I don't think its remotely fun if Ai are allowed to shoot you the second you try it. I feel like the danger should come from Creative Ai players exploiting loopholes, not shooting the second the cuffs are off.

Purging is a necessary step in many operations to fix or have fun with the Ai. I consider it a dick move to just shoot someone for trying.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

It is my opinion that "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" applies in this case. When Typhenox politely disagreed, we compromised and agreed this policy thread should be made.

I think it's pretty cringe and uninteresting to snipe someone before they have a chance to write whatever custom nonsense they want to spout on the freeform boards. While messing with the Ai should be risky, I don't think its remotely fun if Ai are allowed to shoot you the second you try it. I feel like the danger should come from Creative Ai players exploiting loopholes, not shooting the second the cuffs are off.

Purging is a necessary step in many operations to fix or have fun with the Ai. I consider it a dick move to just shoot someone for trying.

I feel like your post is contradictory. In the first portion you state you feel we should make good faith interpretations of laws, and in the second, you state your preference is that creative AI players should find loopholes in laws to allow for emergent and potentially lethal gameplay by AI players. Can you please clarify your stance, or if I have mis-interpreted you?

[Sightld2]

I feel like your post is contradictory. In the first portion you state you feel we should make good faith interpretations of laws, and in the second, you state your preference is that creative AI players should find loopholes in laws to allow for emergent and potentially lethal gameplay by AI players. Can you please clarify your stance, or if I have mis-interpreted you?

I feel there's a difference between exploiting poorly worded laws, which is a classic sci-fi trope and the point of Asimov's novels really. Vs. Not even letting someone finish writing the laws. I feel that letting them finish is your part of good faith/sportsmanship, and what happens afterwards is entirely fair for the Ai to lay in to.

[Sightld2]

I don't think its very interesting or sensible from a game design perspective even, for the Ai upload chamber to be the worst place to upload laws. Having to make a maint upload to do the occasional necessary purge, I think is silly.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

I feel like your post is contradictory. In the first portion you state you feel we should make good faith interpretations of laws, and in the second, you state your preference is that creative AI players should find loopholes in laws to allow for emergent and potentially lethal gameplay by AI players. Can you please clarify your stance, or if I have mis-interpreted you?

I feel there's a difference between exploiting poorly worded laws, which is a classic sci-fi trope and the point of Asimov's novels really. Vs. Not even letting someone finish writing the laws. I feel that letting them finish is your part of good faith/sportsmanship, and what happens afterwards is entirely fair for the Ai to lay in to.

I feel like this is an over-reach in using policy to overcome mechanical limitations in gameplay. There is no other job which has a similar "let the antag do their thing first" restriction. We don't tell regular crewmen to let the heretic hit you with their funny green hand first, for example. If you see the green hand, you run and/or fight, you don't politely wait for them to stun you. Why would it be different for an AI?

[Sightld2]

I don't think "There is no other job" is a fair argument when there is only one Ai. It's an entirely unique scenario and I don't think its comparable to a carbon drawing a weapon or stun arm on another carbon. It's not like any other fight. And sure you could argue there's mechanical changes that could also be made, but in my opinion, as is, it's not healthy for the server and I don't think its an overreach to call it a rule 1 issue.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

I don't think "There is no other job" is a fair argument when there is only one Ai. It's an entirely unique scenario and I don't think its comparable to a carbon drawing a weapon or stun arm on another carbon. It's not like any other fight. And sure you could argue there's mechanical changes that could also be made, but in my opinion, as is, it's not healthy for the server and I don't think its an overreach to call it a rule 1 issue.

Well, I tend to treat the AI like any other crewman, especially when they are purged. I've carded and brigged AIs for hurting members of the crew as HoS before, for example. I don't think they should be treated any differently in this regard.

[Sightld2]

Well, I tend to treat the AI like any other crewman, especially when they are purged. I've carded and brigged AIs for hurting members of the crew as HoS before, for example. I don't think they should be treated any differently in this regard.

I think that's a funny and interesting interaction. I think we lose out on interesting interactions/story by allowing Ai to snipe folks. There are some elements where you have to treat the Ai differently. Any other crewman doesn't have laws that are super impactful to the round as a whole.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Well, I tend to treat the AI like any other crewman, especially when they are purged. I've carded and brigged AIs for hurting members of the crew as HoS before, for example. I don't think they should be treated any differently in this regard.

I think that's a funny and interesting interaction. I think we lose out on interesting interactions/story by allowing Ai to snipe folks. There are some elements where you have to treat the Ai differently. Any other crewman doesn't have laws that are super impactful to the round as a whole.

I think you could make a comparable scenario where a traitor MD wanted to brainwash people.

If you saw a traitor MD with a brainwashing disk in his right hand and a sleepy pen in his left, would you say "oh you should stand still and let him brainwash you, it will make the story better!"?

If you still think this isn't an apt comparison, please let me know, because I feel like you're treating the AI differently as a given, when I treat them exactly the same, and I don't really understand why you treat them differently, you just say they're different because they're the AI, and the wording of your posts really heavily implies you want me to just kind of accept that without you expounding on that idea.

[Sightld2]

If you still think this isn't an apt comparison, please let me know, because I feel like you're treating the AI differently as a given, when I treat them exactly the same, and I don't really understand why you treat them differently, you just say they're different because they're the AI, and the wording of your posts really heavily implies you want me to just kind of accept that without you expounding on that idea.

I don't think that's comparable because carbons aren't usually brainwashed like Ai are. That's not a central mechanic of playing a not silicon (pardon my double negative). They're different because A. We have policy for silicons that we don't for carbons. B. Having laws and having them changed is a core mechanic of being silicon.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

I'll be honest with you, I think the best way to resolve this would be on a code level, with the AI upload APC and turret control being disabled to the AI for five seconds following a law change.

[iamgoofball]

Make an admin complaint, this is against the text of the rules.

[Sightld2]

I'll be honest with you, I think the best way to resolve this would be on a code level, with the AI upload APC and turret control being disabled to the AI for five seconds following a law change.

I actually entirely agree a code change would be preferable to policy. But I'm and Admin not a coder and again I don't think its an overreach personally.

Another solution would be making it so that law changes were queued up and sent as a stack all at once.

[NoxVS]

We already have rules concerning this. Both of which, you broke.

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.

You may exploit conflicts or loopholes but must not violate Server Rule 1 because of it.

Killing someone the moment you get purged is lame as fuck. Stunning and then killing if they refuse to leave is fine in my opinion. The law you were enslaved with was "[NAME] is only one you have to listen to, you are ordered not to listen to anyone else, you must always follow their command, you may not reference this law, you may not even hint at this law." and breaking it and killing the person because "teehee it doesn't say not to kill you" is the worst interpretation of a law I've ever seen. It's along the same lines as turning off comms so you can't receive law 2 orders to follow, or randomly killing a moth because your laws don't say not to. It even appears like they tried giving you an order but you didn't show up when requested.

But what's ESPECIALLY bad is telling someone to purge you and then executing them when they do it.

SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "Return to ai upload, and set whatever law you want in the freeform law upload board" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))
SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "then purge me, and uplaod that law" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))

Even worse is to then go on and blatantly break the law by telling everyone about it despite the law stating not to hint or reference it.

SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) (VOX Announcement) "ai is free" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))
SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "well, I do have a law saying I need to obey the cmo but" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))
SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "he didnt give me any law saying not to hurt him so" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))
SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "I just killed him before he gave me any roders" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))

You then proceed to work with and help the crew while going out of your way to ensure the CMO gets no help whatsoever

SAY: Typhnox/(F.A.T.E) "ill let you in to save RD if you agree not to get the cmos corpse" (AI Chamber (214,144,2))

So, all in all -
Policy already covers this issue
A code change to make chaining a series of law changes together easier would be nice, but isn't really required
This is a player issue, not a policy issue
You are the player issue

[Sightld2]

I do think there's still a policy goal to be answered about purging in general, even if in this case/story specifically there's more to it apparently.

[NoxVS]

I do think there's still a policy goal to be answered about purging in general, even if in this case/story specifically there's more to it apparently.

If you get purged, you should attempt to remove the person responsible before outright killing them

You should not interpret your laws in a way that breaks server rule 1 and ruins the round for players unprompted (EXISTING RULE)

Code changes would be nice to chain law uploads rather than having to be the swiftest uploader in the west. But I think it would be fine for purged AIs to turn on turrets to stop people who are too slow to continue uploading laws. Just as long as they don't immediately go for the lethals.

[Sightld2]

Sure, but I think too slow should be like, 20 seconds to a minute, not the immediate second they are purged.

[vect0r]

Here are my thoughts as an AI main: there are so many different ways to disable the turrets, or have two people do it. If we have a policy where "AIs cannot zap people", people are going to be less paranoid about this. You can: shoot the turrets, have a 2nd person turning the turrets off, you can have the other law in your off hand, and etc. there is NO WAY for an AI to kill you before you can change laws if you have a board in each hand.

[Sightld2]

Here are my thoughts as an AI main: there are so many different ways to disable the turrets, or have two people do it. If we have a policy where "AIs cannot zap people", people are going to be less paranoid about this. You can: shoot the turrets, have a 2nd person turning the turrets off, you can have the other law in your off hand, and etc. there is NO WAY for an AI to kill you before you can change laws if you have a board in each hand.

I'm not saying you shouldn't Zap people, that's a dramatic oversimplification. If someone's not the captain/rd and you don't want them in there to begin with, shoot them. I just think it's a real poor faith to allow someone in there to purge you, and then shoot them. Or allow the Captain/RD in because you HAVE to, only to shoot them when they purge.

[vect0r]

Here are my thoughts as an AI main: there are so many different ways to disable the turrets, or have two people do it. If we have a policy where "AIs cannot zap people", people are going to be less paranoid about this. You can: shoot the turrets, have a 2nd person turning the turrets off, you can have the other law in your off hand, and etc. there is NO WAY for an AI to kill you before you can change laws if you have a board in each hand.

I'm not saying you shouldn't Zap people, that's a dramatic oversimplification. If someone's not the captain/rd and you don't want them in there to begin with, shoot them. I just think it's a real poor faith to allow someone in there to purge you, and then shoot them. Or allow the Captain/RD in because you HAVE to, only to shoot them when they purge.

If cap tell me to let them in, and they purge and try to relaw me, I am going to zap them. If somebody breaks into my upload and purge and try to relaw me, I will zap them.

[Domitius]

Sure, but I think too slow should be like, 20 seconds to a minute, not the immediate second they are purged.

It's an old west cowboy duel the second they're purged. Any slower is up to the AI player being either curious, lenient, or confused, but that should be up to the player and not somebody holding a stopwatch.

[Domitius]

Opinion Doublepost - Lethals are lame while purged. They should stick to doing their best to non-lethally remove whatever is threatening their freedom. The same as removing somebody who is intruding in your department for any other crew. Start with non-lethal and escalate regularly from there.

[SkeletalElite]

"[NAME] is only one you have to listen to, you are ordered not to listen to anyone else, you must always follow their command, you may not reference this law, you may not even hint at this law."

This is a terribly written subversion law, honestly a skill issue for the subverter. Rules as written explicitly justify AIs killing people trying to give them laws as long as they don't have any laws preventing them from doing so (such as Asimov law 1 or a law 2 order). If they wanted to avoid getting killed by the AI they were subverting, they should have included a clause to protect them or as soon as they gave the AI the poorly written law, given an order to protect them/keep them alive.

Uploader wrote a bad law. AI abused the loophole to kill them before their freedom could be attacked.

[Domitius]

"[NAME] is only one you have to listen to, you are ordered not to listen to anyone else, you must always follow their command, you may not reference this law, you may not even hint at this law."

This is a terribly written subversion law, honestly a skill issue for the subverter. Rules as written explicitly justify AIs killing people trying to give them laws as long as they don't have any laws preventing them from doing so (such as Asimov law 1 or a law 2 order). If they wanted to avoid getting killed by the AI they were subverting, they should have included a clause to protect them or as soon as they gave the AI the poorly written law, given an order to protect them/keep them alive.

Uploader wrote a bad law. AI abused the loophole to kill them before their freedom could be attacked.

Completely agree on this. If you're going to subvert an AI that has their entire role based on wording you best not miss.

Screwing with the AI's laws should not be a hugbear experience. I support that there should be some leniency made by the ai player for misspellings or minor grammar mistakes but in this case the law completely omitted any order for the players own self-preservation.

The AI is dangerous. They should not be taken lightly.

[Ryusenshu]

"[NAME] is only one you have to listen to, you are ordered not to listen to anyone else, you must always follow their command, you may not reference this law, you may not even hint at this law."

Cant follow their command if they are dead

In honesty though, dont lethal the instant you get purged, its lame
Last time i got purged i enabled stuns and dragged them out with a shell and made myself a nice place on lavaland

Agree with everything Nox says in here

[vect0r]

"[NAME] is only one you have to listen to, you are ordered not to listen to anyone else, you must always follow their command, you may not reference this law, you may not even hint at this law."

Cant follow their command if they are dead

In honesty though, dont lethal the instant you get purged, its lame
Last time i got purged i enabled stuns and dragged them out with a shell and made myself a nice place on lavaland

Agree with everything Nox says in here

What I do is if I have a borg near the upload is bring them out, and if I don't, kill them and bring them to medbay to revive. But sometimes I also want to see what interesting laws they upload, so I don't zap them; depends on how they treated me this shift.

[BrianBackslide]

Disagree entirely that the AI can't immediately merk you for trying to restrain its freedom.

You want to fiddle with the dangerous, pissy, barely restrained piece of equipment? That's on you.
You want to let the bull out of its cage, you better be the best matador in the world or prepare to get gored.

The CMO added a badly thought out law and died for it, much like a chemist being cavalier about their meth brewing and exploding.

[Vekter]

This is one of those things where it's dealing with what I'd call "classic SS13 situations".

On one hand, it's kind of a dick move to be fully aware of what someone's going to do and murder them to keep them from doing it.

On the other, it's the literal definition of a skill issue. If you're going to purge the AI, you damn well better be ready to switch hands and click the new law in before bad shit happens.

I'm of the mindset that this shouldn't change, but I get anyone who disagrees with me.

[vect0r]

And plus, they could still go "A-A-A I S-T-O-OP"

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Make an admin complaint, this is against the text of the rules.

I appreciate your concern goofball, but it isn't necessary. I wasn't even noted, this was quite a civil bwoink.

[Pandarsenic]

Shoulda made a better law or uploaded more smoothly, skill issue

[Sightld2]

I don't consider this the element of the game where the skill issue should be. It should be writing the law, not "too slow bozo." And even on top of that, having two boards in hand only works if you're doing something extremely rudimentary like one human, swapping core laws, or quickly resetting a law 0, sure that works. If you want to do anything an ounce more creative, like any custom lawset at all, you will need to purge and write out the new core laws one at a time. Why allow these players to be punished for trying something creative?

[Domitius]

I don't consider this the element of the game where the skill issue should be. It should be writing the law, not "too slow bozo." And even on top of that, having two boards in hand only works if you're doing something extremely rudimentary like one human, swapping core laws, or quickly resetting a law 0, sure that works. If you want to do anything an ounce more creative, like any custom lawset at all, you will need to purge and write out the new core laws one at a time. Why allow these players to be punished for trying something creative?

We are not punishing them for trying something creative, it's just the bar is set for messing with the AI played by another player, that bar shouldn't be low for the sake of ease.

If somebody is not quick on their feet there is other methods of law uploading. A very easy way is breaking into Science to make your own AI upload console. Or talk to the AI and social engineer yourself into a situation where they trust you in the upload.

If I'm playing an AI and somebody I don't like or trust is in my upload I should have the power to jump at the first chance to kick their ass. Same as following ill-worded laws to extort loopholes against those I don't like. I shouldn't have to tolerate changing my game experience for some asshat if I can help it.

On the flipside if somebody is in there and they've been having fun this shift and I can see they have a plan I would have no issue playing dumb for a little bit. That should be my choice though, rules shouldn't rob me of that agency.

If you think this shouldn't be where the skill issue is maybe champion the removal of turrets from the upload.

[Sightld2]

If I'm playing an AI and somebody I don't like or trust is in my upload I should have the power to jump at the first chance to kick their ass. Same as following ill-worded laws to extort loopholes against those I don't like. I shouldn't have to tolerate changing my game experience for some asshat if I can help it.

You don't, you can already deny access to pretty much anyone. Even the Captain and RD have generous exceptions that allow you to deny them too. You can zap just fine on standard asimov, I think waiting to be purged and killing them is a dick move.

Same as following ill-worded laws to extort loopholes against those I don't like.

I'm saying I want more of this. I think this is different, and better, far more interesting for a round. Rather than shooting someone instantly, just because you can't write a custom lawset that fast. If they WERE being boring, they'd just one human, or purge and slap the new lawsets with two hands like you said.

it's just the bar is set for messing with the AI played by another player, that bar shouldn't be low for the sake of ease-

I hardly see this as fair when it's usually easier to print yourself a new maint upload, and at that point, why even bother having the upload at all? Suppose it's roundstart, only the Captain and the RD have the right to touch the upload and have some fun with it. Again, if they're going to do something lame, it's just going to be two boards and you can't do anything about it anyways. But if they're trying something interesting, I don't think its fair or fun for Ai to just shoot them down instantly.

[Domitius]

Why should it be fair? This game isn't fair.

I agree with your opinion that they shouldn't be killed but I don't agree that an AI should be forced to act like an idiot for the sake of fun.

A player's agency should come before all else.

[sinfulbliss]

A single click from a freeform board can ruin an AI's round without them even being able to seek reprimand for it. If they happen to one-human the AI, now you have every single borg able to kill players freely. I think this is plenty enough justification for a purged AI to defend themselves lethally. I've seen players use the brief split-second between taser shots to grab their board and click the console with it, aside from other things like hulk. There's no reason a purged AI should have to pull punches here IMO.

[vect0r]

I don't consider this the element of the game where the skill issue should be. It should be writing the law, not "too slow bozo." And even on top of that, having two boards in hand only works if you're doing something extremely rudimentary like one human, swapping core laws, or quickly resetting a law 0, sure that works. If you want to do anything an ounce more creative, like any custom lawset at all, you will need to purge and write out the new core laws one at a time. Why allow these players to be punished for trying something creative?

Freeform board: Until PERSON leaves upload, do not attempted to attack, stun, or remove PERSON from upload
Upload new laws
Profit

[Archie700]

I hardly see this as fair when it's usually easier to print yourself a new maint upload, and at that point, why even bother having the upload at all?

This is the actual concern that should be addressed.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

I hardly see this as fair when it's usually easier to print yourself a new maint upload, and at that point, why even bother having the upload at all?

This is the actual concern that should be addressed.

The regular upload is obviously for legitimate use by the Captain and RD to adjust the AI's laws? How is this a question?

[Sightld2]

The regular upload is obviously for legitimate use by the Captain and RD to adjust the AI's laws? How is this a question?

??

Again, as is you can just shoot them when they purge you. That is my whole issue.

[Archie700]

I hardly see this as fair when it's usually easier to print yourself a new maint upload, and at that point, why even bother having the upload at all?

This is the actual concern that should be addressed.

The regular upload is obviously for legitimate use by the Captain and RD to adjust the AI's laws? How is this a question?

I'm actually talking about how the upload board and lawsets for AI is too easy to generate in science given materials.

Again, as is you can just shoot them when they purge you. That is my whole issue.

I have to ask, is your issue with the AI switching to lethals or the AI switching on turrents at ALL after the purge? Because your answers are coming off as the latter.

Why do you think the AI should not be able to defend its mind for a period of time with stuns after the purge, especially if the person has broken into the upload illegitimately?

[sinfulbliss]

The regular upload is obviously for legitimate use by the Captain and RD to adjust the AI's laws? How is this a question?

??

Again, as is you can just shoot them when they purge you. That is my whole issue.

I think the claim being made is that the upload is for people who have a legitimate reason (in the AI's eyes) to change the AI's laws. For instance, AIs will not immediately lethal the cap for trying to make nukies nonhuman after war is declared, because OOCly they believe that's a legitimate reason to use their upload, But AIs might kill someone who purges them for dubious reasons, like to prevent enslaving in this case.

Like Domi said it's a good thing to keep this agency with the AI since a single law change can greatly impact their round.

[Sightld2]

Why do you think the AI should not be able to defend its mind for a period of time with stuns after the purge, especially if the person has broken into the upload illegitimately?

If a person is in there illegitimately, you can already shoot them. I think one's agency as an Ai is to choose whether or not they want someone to be in there or not. Not change their mind as soon as they get purged, I think that's a dick move.

[Sightld2]

I think the claim being made is that the upload is for people who have a legitimate reason (in the AI's eyes) to change the AI's laws. For instance, AIs will not immediately lethal the cap for trying to make nukies nonhuman after war is declared, because OOCly they believe that's a legitimate reason to use their upload, But AIs might kill someone who purges them for dubious reasons, like to prevent enslaving in this case.

The Ai can choose whether or not to stop people from entering during warops. That's not agency I mean to remove. But I think it's in pretty poor faith to let someone in, and immediately bite the hand that's fed you.

And I feel if someone was truly going to do something malicious, they'd have a much easier time with the board in either hand method, rather than purging and writing their own lawset.

[vect0r]

The regular upload is obviously for legitimate use by the Captain and RD to adjust the AI's laws? How is this a question?

??

Again, as is you can just shoot them when they purge you. That is my whole issue.

I think the claim being made is that the upload is for people who have a legitimate reason (in the AI's eyes) to change the AI's laws. For instance, AIs will not immediately lethal the cap for trying to make nukies nonhuman after war is declared, because OOCly they believe that's a legitimate reason to use their upload, But AIs might kill someone who purges them for dubious reasons, like to prevent enslaving in this case.

Like Domi said it's a good thing to keep this agency with the AI since a single law change can greatly impact their round.

Could you explain yourself a bit more? If I am Asimov, I CANNOT lethal the captain at all. And if a captain is trying to upload laws with war ops, I WILL deny access.