Triyun Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 Let me start out this thread by saying I fully support a ban on AIs. I think that especially the creation of true AI military hardware spells disaster for CN RP. That said, I would like to start a discussion on what constitutes a VI versus AI. I am actually looking at this more on the civilian side rather than military side. As I said I'm quite a skeptic on the military side, if for no other reason than the effects it'd have on further making the top tier uber strong versus the bottom tier. What I would like to do with my nation is begin the creation of early Asimov style robots. These robots would primarily be used with my new burgeoning major space program as well as perhaps use it in undersea economic operations, in a way which can be less harmful ecologically to the Sea Floor (a major issue). Anyway I'd like to discuss where the red line is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 Can I have your definition of AI first? I don't see a problem with expert systems combined with voice recognization. which helps reduce the number of crew members needed. You know, like automatic targeting and stuff like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) I consider an AI a machine that can think creatively and evolve beyond the parameters of programing on its own. I consider a VI an incredibly comprehensive construction of if then statements. I think that a VI can adapt some based on input, and expand the data sets for its programing, but it shouldn't be able to change underlying behavior. Edited September 4, 2011 by Triyun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 So basically an upgraded version of the expert system, with the ability to somewhat update itself using new data. Can't see why we would be against that. What's your thought on my example in the previous post? Fine by your standards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 Personally I'd advocate maintaining two standards, a military one and a civilian one. Militarily a VI should be able to process instructions, analyze information and within some extent be able to modify its programming. In essence not anything near the human intelligence however a military VI would be able to improve itself slightly everytime it has seen combat. A military VI would have no self-awareness, no feelings, etc as those serve no military purpose. You don't want your fighter to complain about his terrible working conditions in the middle of a dogfight. Civilian I think the line should be a lot closer to AI. While a civilian VI should not be self-aware or be as or more effective than a human being. However a civilian VI should be able to have some form of problem solving integrated and perhaps even personalities. That said even those programs should be based on a core in hard code. I'd also see this sytem being able to alter its own coding more than a military vi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iKrolm Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 I am in agreement with Cent's two definitions and splitting military AI/VIs from civilian ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1315162923' post='2794741'] You don't want your fighter to complain about his terrible working conditions in the middle of a dogfight. [/quote] I totally want my fighter plane to be like Woody Allen in a dogfight. Oy, you call that a barrel roll? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted September 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1315173642' post='2794863'] I totally want my fighter plane to be like Woody Allen in a dogfight. Oy, you call that a barrel roll? [/quote] Be careful, if robots are too whiney I'll send Mascurians for my deep space missions instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 [quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1315173739' post='2794865'] Be careful, if robots are too whiney I'll send Mascurians for my deep space missions instead. [/quote] We'll just start whining when we run out of important things like turnips or oxygen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 I am for Cent's idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted September 4, 2011 Report Share Posted September 4, 2011 Definitely like Cent's standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted September 6, 2011 Report Share Posted September 6, 2011 Well, for use against other RPers, BAAL would most likely fall under the VI with the capability to adapt and catalogue output based on varying stimuli category. For fluff, I WAS going to start veering towards C&C CABAL territory and have it develop a disgust for humanity, while still being immovably binded to its masters - kind of like Rampage and Megatron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.