[X] My Assistant

[Mordinvan]

No, they do not. At least not the rules for playable AI and such shenanigans.

Yep, none of them have ever been interviewed by the media, had any translations of simsense made from their experiences, or interact with the public in meaningful ways, like say as a professional cab driver, or T.V. celebrity in desert wars or anything.

[hermit]

So you know the anatomy of a cab driver from being driven in a cab. You know the physical limits of the human body by watching a couple people talk on Ophra.

That is like saying people can learn dragon magic because hey, Wyrm Talk.

Post-crash new-and-improved AI have yet to be extensively studied and these results have then yet to be mae public. Neither has happened sufficiently so far.

[Mordinvan]

So you know the anatomy of a cab driver from being driven in a cab. You know the physical limits of the human body by watching a couple people talk on Ophra.

That is like saying people can learn dragon magic because hey, Wyrm Talk.

Post-crash new-and-improved AI have yet to be extensively studied and these results have then yet to be mae public. Neither has happened sufficiently so far.

No, its more like saying 'they are not gods because they drive a taxi'. Its a reasonable statement. Why would an omnipotent entity bother driving a cab? It does things like place limits on them for the general public. It also puts a name and a 'face' on the concept of A.I.'s.

In the years since their coming, many people have hand a chance to interact with them. There is 50+ thousand of them on the planet. Of those, at least a few are likely willing to talk, and answer questions about themselves and the others of their kind they have met. Also their interactions with the nodes in which they live can and likely HAVE been carefully studied, and every process which occurs in that node has been rigorously analyzed. There is no reason they should be as unknown as you say they should be. Given it should be possible to create simsense recording off their experiences, it should also not be entirely unreasonable that some people will have had a chance to experience the mind of an A.I. first hand.

This is not to say some people won't still hate them, but they will have a hard time using the argument of 'fear the unknown'.

[blackwulf]

Correct if I am wrong We are talking about a world were a big chunk of the poulation gets no education at all. Seattle barrens anyone? Another big chunk get educated by the corps, The company teachers wouldn't the company line at all of course not. I find it truly amazing how many of you buy into the holding hands hugging and kisssing point of view. I find incredible when you play characters who kill off large numbers of innocent 9 to 5 schmucks just trying to earn a living in every adventure you play. C doubt the security guard you hosed in the last adventure committed any capitol crimes. But you believe everyone is going to hug kiss and love ai's. This is a world were human life is pretty much valueless and you think joe blow is going to care about ais? What are you thinking?

[DeathStrobe]

This is not to say some people won't still hate them, but they will have a hard time using the argument of 'fear the unknown'.

Well, to be fair, magic has been around in the 6th World a lot longer then AIs and there is still a lot of fear and paranoia in the general public about magic. So seeing how even magic isn't very well excepted, what makes you think AIs would be magically understood by everyone in 2 years, when magic hasn't been able to do that in 60 some years?

Even if people have seen AIs on the trid and sim sense, that's how people normally get their information on magic, and like Street Magic has shown, its usually very wrong information.

And most people have never even met a AI because they're suppose to be even more rare then magic users, and considering very few people have seen a mage cast magic, odds are most people have never even seen an AI in "person."

A lot of people don't have time to read up on every article on AIs and with the smear campaigns that some of the Mega Corps are running against AIs and Technomancers, there is very little chance that people would understand if only because of all the misinformation being spread about them. The only place that AIs and technomancers are excepted are in Horizon and Evo corporate enclaves.

[Matsci]

A lot of people don't have time to read up on every article on AIs and with the smear campaigns that some of the Mega Corps are running against AIs and Technomancers, there is very little chance that people would understand if only because of all the misinformation being spread about them. The only place that AIs and technomancers are excepted are in Horizon and Evo corporate enclaves.

Keep in mind that Horizion ( The corp that P.R. got onto the CC), is running a counter-smear campaign against that. It's not like they own 90% of all broadcasting stations, and have a reason to back technomancers or AI.

[Mordinvan]

Well, to be fair, magic has been around in the 6th World a lot longer then AIs and there is still a lot of fear and paranoia in the general public about magic. So seeing how even magic isn't very well excepted, what makes you think AIs would be magically understood by everyone in 2 years, when magic hasn't been able to do that in 60 some years?

Because that BP oil spill in the gulf is reasonably well understood by anyone who cares too, and its not been terribly long at all. The fact is information travels at the speed of light in a digital age, and many of the writers of SR forget that. Spell books, and training manuals are openly available online, and as such anyone who has the slightest interest could have a reasonably complete understanding of how magic works. That so few do, is in my opinion a fault of the setting. The knowledge is out there, and anyone with access to a comlink can have it, the writers have said no one knows about it, but there is no setting justification for such a statement.

[Mordinvan]

Correct if I am wrong We are talking about a world were a big chunk of the poulation gets no education at all. Seattle barrens anyone? Another big chunk get educated by the corps, The company teachers wouldn't the company line at all of course not. I find it truly amazing how many of you buy into the holding hands hugging and kisssing point of view. I find incredible when you play characters who kill off large numbers of innocent 9 to 5 schmucks just trying to earn a living in every adventure you play. C doubt the security guard you hosed in the last adventure committed any capitol crimes. But you believe everyone is going to hug kiss and love ai's. This is a world were human life is pretty much valueless and you think joe blow is going to care about ais? What are you thinking?

The greater to access of knowledge present in any society, the more tolerant that society becomes. Atleast in the western world. Anyone with a comlink has access to the vast majority of all practical, philosophical, and historical knowledge of the combined collective of the human species.

[hobgoblin]

The greater to access of knowledge present in any society, the more tolerant that society becomes. Atleast in the western world. Anyone with a comlink has access to the vast majority of all practical, philosophical, and historical knowledge of the combined collective of the human species.

if one can be bothered to look it up, rather then repeat "truisms" from their peers.

[MortVent]

if one can be bothered to look it up, rather then repeat "truisms" from their peers.

Edwards: Why the big secret? People are smart. They can handle it.
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

[Walpurgisborn]

Because that BP oil spill in the gulf is reasonably well understood by anyone who cares too, and its not been terribly long at all. The fact is information travels at the speed of light in a digital age, and many of the writers of SR forget that. Spell books, and training manuals are openly available online, and as such anyone who has the slightest interest could have a reasonably complete understanding of how magic works. That so few do, is in my opinion a fault of the setting. The knowledge is out there, and anyone with access to a comlink can have it, the writers have said no one knows about it, but there is no setting justification for such a statement.

Actually, that's a perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect. Truth is, most people are fundamentally ignorant about the nature of the engineering problems involved in the Gulf Spill. That hasn't stopped some rather intelligent friends from voicing their own "solutions"--many of which are infeasible, and could very possibly make the situation worse.

[hermit]

Actually, that's a perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect. Truth is, most people are fundamentally ignorant about the nature of the engineering problems involved in the Gulf Spill. That hasn't stopped some rather intelligent friends from voicing their own "solutions"--many of which are infeasible, and could very possibly make the situation worse.

Nukes! Nukes solve every problem.[/russian Accent]

Given it should be possible to create simsense recording off their experiences, it should also not be entirely unreasonable that some people will have had a chance to experience the mind of an A.I. first hand.

And where do you get the idea from that a simsense recording from an AI could be processed by the human brain with any accuracy at all? That's like saying you could run MS office for Windows 3.11 on any system because hey, it's a program! Even IF there was a way to create simsense recordings (basically, recordings of potentials and neuron rearrangement in a brain, which the AI does not have) from an AI, I see little way that a human brain could figure them out and the user endig up with anything but weirdness and some sort of potentially hazardous biofeedback.

Of those, at least a few are likely willing to talk, and answer questions about themselves and the others of their kind they have met. Also their interactions with the nodes in which they live can and likely HAVE been carefully studied, and every process which occurs in that node has been rigorously analyzed.

And yet they cannot be copied or their program output be understood. This flies in the face of how AI work. They have been studied since the 2050s, and yet noone has figured them out so far. Add in their willingness to commit genocide on a whim because they feel mistreated by the studies you just proposed to understand them, and your pink shades wonderland of everyone loving AI falls flat onto it'S face.

This is not to say some people won't still hate them, but they will have a hard time using the argument of 'fear the unknown'.

Never proposed that as a prime motivation. My motivation is 'fear of what we know of them so far', which isn't exactly an entry that is likely to endear AI to anyone.

The greater to access of knowledge present in any society, the more tolerant that society becomes. Atleast in the western world.

That is just extremely naive. Even within the western world, currently, it's working in the opposite direction. Not to mention places like the Middle East, where only access to reasonably free media gave rise to the current hyper-fanatism and intolerance. Same with the rest of the islamic world, and to a lesser degree in Russia and India, where neonazi parties are rising to power because most people feel threatened by the 'free' information that is often understood as the West imposing it's values onto them.

[Mordinvan]

And where do you get the idea from that a simsense recording from an AI could be processed by the human brain with any accuracy at all? That's like saying you could run MS office for Windows 3.11 on any system because hey, it's a program! Even IF there was a way to create simsense recordings (basically, recordings of potentials and neuron rearrangement in a brain, which the AI does not have) from an AI, I see little way that a human brain could figure them out and the user endig up with anything but weirdness and some sort of potentially hazardous biofeedback.

I don't actually see how a simsense recording of a human brain could work anyway, the brain of each and every human is 'wired' differently. Each neural net creates connections based on how it in specific adapts to a situation. The fact is, no 2 human brains work the same way, yet sim sense works. So I invoke the same levels of handwavium and plot the game writers do.

And yet they cannot be copied or their program output be understood. This flies in the face of how AI work. They have been studied since the 2050s, and yet noone has figured them out so far. Add in their willingness to commit genocide on a whim because they feel mistreated by the studies you just proposed to understand them, and your pink shades wonderland of everyone loving AI falls flat onto it'S face.

I don't think they'd care about having the integral processes of the cpu monitored. Its when their code gets dissected they tend to get pissy. I can only imagine you'd find people 'looking' at you far less problematic then the idea of someone cutting into your arm while you are still attached to it and using it. Being observed does not cause tortuous agony, being vivisected however does. That you equate the two of them is comical. Also I don't recall saying everyone 'loves' A.I.'s, I do recall saying ignorance of the capabilities of this new breed of A.I. is not going to be as profound as you claim. Since an increase in understanding of a group often decreases the fear of it, and there are many reasons and ways to understand these creatures, there is a good chance that while not everyone will want to down load them into their sex toyz, fewer people will have the genocidal hatred you are proposing.

Never proposed that as a prime motivation. My motivation is 'fear of what we know of them so far', which isn't exactly an entry that is likely to endear AI to anyone.

You are proposing a nearly nonexistent knowledge base, and I have repeatedly and justifiably said that knowledge base is far more expansive then you are willing to accept.

That is just extremely naive.

No, its actually a fairly well infromed opinion based on evolutionary, psychologically, and anthropological evidence.

Even within the western world, currently, it's working in the opposite direction.

Really? Can you state a single concept where understanding it is less dangerous then previously believed causes people to become MORE afraid of it?

Not to mention places like the Middle East, where only access to reasonably free media gave rise to the current hyper-fanatism and intolerance.

Yes and no. Its for entirely different reasons. I am also of the opinion that a complete discussion of the intricate nature and causes of this would not only a) prove you totally and completely wrong, but b) violate the TOS, we'll have to put discussions of the history of real world religions on hold, is only because Islam is not included in the western philosophies I was speaking of.

Same with the rest of the islamic world

Which is easily explainable in terms of how their religion functions since about the 12th century.

and to a lesser degree in Russia and India, where neonazi parties are rising to power because most people feel threatened by the 'free' information that is often understood as the West imposing it's values onto them.

I can't speak for russia, but Indian society as a whole would be suffering from the lower cast levels coming to realize the needless position that has been imposed upon them by the higher cast levels, and the higher cast levels realizing the threat the knowledge itself would pose by empowering the lower classes. It is not a fear created by having knowledge, but a fear of what will happen when others have knowledge.

[hermit]

I don't actually see how a simsense recording of a human brain could work anyway, the brain of each and every human is 'wired' differently. Each neural net creates connections based on how it in specific adapts to a situation.

Sure, but at least the hman brain follows a basic scheme. An AI living in some household applicance's electronics would not. And please note that I am aware that full-VR tech generally has a couple logical flaws, but the setting handwaives this for human brains, so we have to accept that.

I can only imagine you'd find people 'looking' at you far less problematic then the idea of someone cutting into your arm while you are still attached to it and using it. Being observed does not cause tortuous agony, being vivisected however does.

AI have no nervous system. AI have no pain receptors. That something causes them pain is anthropomorphising them again. Look, AI do not work like human bodies if they live in a toaster, a taxi cab, or a mainframe computer. You cannot constantly anthropomorphise them. That's a flawed argument. Find another that isn't flawed.

You are proposing a nearly nonexistent knowledge base, and I have repeatedly and justifiably said that knowledge base is far more expansive then you are willing to accept.

You are proposing somehow everyone knows everything about AI, even though the background clearly says that is NOT the case. Do you think pretending will make that go away? You have repeatedly defied this because it does not suit you. That does not make your claims any more substantial. So please, accept that AI do not have human physical functions, they don't need to shit, they don't need to eat, they will never get fat or starve, and they cannot feel pain the way humans do.

No, its actually a fairly well infromed opinion based on evolutionary, psychologically, and anthropological evidence.

Certainly. As the inevitability of communist world revolution is.

I am also of the opinion that a complete discussion of the intricate nature and causes of this would not only a) prove you totally and completely wrong, but b) violate the TOS, we'll have to put discussions of the history of real world religions on hold, is only because Islam is not included in the western philosophies I was speaking of.

Yeah, Middle East = religion. Conveniently ignoring russia and India, both being as religious as the States, or less. Yeah, I can totally see you winning there, but I happen to agree on the TOS.

Which is easily explainable in terms of how their religion functions since about the 12th century.

You never read about European late medieval/early renaissance history, I assume. Also, fail. Who was talking abotu violating TOS again? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Really? Can you state a single concept where understanding it is less dangerous then previously believed causes people to become MORE afraid of it?

Iraq in the early 2000s, for instance. It's not like the information there were no WMD was very secret. Yet America was in all-out attack mode because there just might be a stash of anthrax hidden somewhere. Or take France and it's muslim population. It is well understood that France has a couple rather dire social problems, but those are being ignored for the sake of keeping to a seriously outdated law (ironically, against discrimination). Or maybe, let's take global warming? It's not like the lack of viability of many of the more outrageous predictions are secret, yet the West believes the Earth will light on fire any second. Or maybe nuclear technology? There are well-described and even tested reactor concepts that will never explode, and even the one meltdown that ever occured occurred because unbelievable incompetence happened, not because the technology is inherently prone to explode, yet everyone is hysterical about it. Or, hey, electric cars. Internet file sharing. Cellphone radiation. Gene-modified food. Videogames.

Really, the world is not short of examples.

Indian society as a whole would be suffering from the lower cast levels coming to realize the needless position that has been imposed upon them by the higher cast levels, and the higher cast levels realizing the threat the knowledge itself would pose by empowering the lower classes.

Wow. Fail.

But you replicate a socialist or maoist textbook brilliantly. No, Hinduism does not work that way, and India has many problems but caste upheaval is not among them (Maoism is, though). The fact that many Shudra are dissatisfied and do not want to live many lives, as their religion tells, but achieve some sort of status in this one, has been aroun since the Mughals at least, and has been fueling conversions to Islam, the rise of Buddhism and Sikkhism, and more recently, Maoist militias. However, this has never been a threat to Hindusim as a whole since Siddharta, and it isn't now, either.

You impose your very western world view on a culture that is fundamentally different in outlook. That will not get you very far in undersdtanding them. But since you anthropomorphise AI as much as you do, I can only conclude you are rather set in your views and unwilling or unable to accept that your view of the world is neither the only valid one, not the only possible truth.

[Mordinvan]

Sure, but at least the hman brain follows a basic scheme. An AI living in some household applicance's electronics would not. And please note that I am aware that full-VR tech generally has a couple logical flaws, but the setting handwaives this for human brains, so we have to accept that.

But accepting that it could be made to work with an A.I. is beyond you?

AI have no nervous system. AI have no pain receptors. That something causes them pain is anthropomorphising them again. Look, AI do not work like human bodies if they live in a toaster, a taxi cab, or a mainframe computer. You cannot constantly anthropomorphise them. That's a flawed argument. Find another that isn't flawed.

Every description of the 'dissection' of the original A.I.s which is made refers to the process as anything less then pleasant, and bad enough to drive them insane.

You are proposing somehow everyone knows everything about AI, even though the background clearly says that is NOT the case. Do you think pretending will make that go away? You have repeatedly defied this because it does not suit you. That does not make your claims any more substantial. So please, accept that AI do not have human physical functions, they don't need to shit, they don't need to eat, they will never get fat or starve, and they cannot feel pain the way humans do.

I didn't say everyone knows everything. But I do say they are not the utter black box you propose. How can they be appearing on talk shows, and being actively monitored in systems they've been invited into? Also when did I ever say they had physical functions? I said they can feel pain, and that notion is supported in cannon.

Certainly. As the inevitability of communist world revolution is.

No, more like gravitational and atomic theory.

You never read about European late medieval/early renaissance history, I assume. Also, fail. Who was talking abotu violating TOS again? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

That would be YOU for insisting on bringing religion into the picture in the first place. Also its reasonably well known the Islamic world underwent a rather radical shift around the 12th century.

Iraq in the early 2000s, for instance. It's not like the information there were no WMD was very secret. Yet America was in all-out attack mode because there just might be a stash of anthrax hidden somewhere. Or take France and it's muslim population. It is well understood that France has a couple rather dire social problems, but those are being ignored for the sake of keeping to a seriously outdated law (ironically, against discrimination). Or maybe, let's take global warming? It's not like the lack of viability of many of the more outrageous predictions are secret, yet the West believes the Earth will light on fire any second. Or maybe nuclear technology? There are well-described and even tested reactor concepts that will never explode, and even the one meltdown that ever occured occurred because unbelievable incompetence happened, not because the technology is inherently prone to explode, yet everyone is hysterical about it. Or, hey, electric cars. Internet file sharing. Cellphone radiation. Gene-modified food. Videogames.

And NOT a single one of the above is an example of someone feeling something was dangerous, gaining enough knowledge to conclude it was not, and then feeling more terrified because of it.

Wow Fail.

I will agree with this statement but almost certainly not for the reasons you would.

As for the last part of your comment, I hold the views I do because of discussions I have had with my neighbors who left that country for the reasons I have given. Because they realized the class structure was intolerable and some because they realized that soon it would break down.

[hermit]

But accepting that it could be made to work with an A.I. is beyond you?

Since it cannot even work with dragons, corporeal spirits, or other intelligent critters, yes, I would say this is impossible (even if rules-wise possible thanks to the rules just not covering it).

No, more like gravitational and atomic theory.

Sociology does not even begin to come close to that kind of precise description.

Also its reasonably well known the Islamic world underwent a rather radical shift around the 12th century.

Sure, what with Baghdad burned to the ground and the radicals claiming (successfully) that happened because of lack of faith. That does not negate that Christianity of that time was the more fanatic, radical and warlike religion by far.

And NOT a single one of the above is an example of someone feeling something was dangerous, gaining enough knowledge to conclude it was not, and then feeling more terrified because of it.

People are dead afraid of gene modified foods because 'there's genes in them' and they think - all evidence to the countrary - those wheats and tomatos are going to turn into the plant from little shop of horrors somehow, and yet they eat organic food, which is especially rich in natural toxins the plant produces when something nibbles it - some of which would not pass EU agrochemical regulations if they were not built into wheat since 9000 years. That has also been proven. Does that stop anyone from eating organic? Cellphones have been proven not to cause anything like cancer or brain haemorrhages or anything in several studies, yet the crazyness about cell station radiation is nowhwere near to disappear, quite the countrary. Same with video games (which still are farmore at fault for stupid kids shooting up people than the automatic weapons you apparently can buy at an American flea market), or nuclear power. France knows full well it has problems with it's immigrants but cannot actually do anything about it because there's a law prohibiting the state from acknowledging it has (let alone act on it), because that would be racial discrimination. Internet file sharing has been shown in several cases to actually boost print sales - feel free to PM Adam about this - and yet the publishing industry is dead afraid of it.

All these are examples of situations where something is proven decidedly less dangerous than believed, but that proof is widely ignored because of hysteria or one or another taboo. Prejudice and preconception, social norms and taboos usually win out against scientific proof of harmlessness.

I said they can feel pain, and that notion is supported in cannon.

To feel pain you need a working neural system. If you don't have one, you won't feel pain (it's a condition with certain neural disfunctions, pretty awful actually). Pain is a physical function. The AI may feel all kinds of unpleasantness, but that cannot be pain as a human would because they just do not have the hardware to feel it (though, the brain being a hardware computer, they lack the hardware to be anthropomorphised in general).

As for the last part of your comment, I hold the views I do because of discussions I have had with my neighbors who left that country for the reasons I have given. Because they realized the class structure was intolerable and some because they realized that soon it would break down.

I hold the views I stated because of the Indians in India I know who did not pack up and leave for a foreign country. Your guy is kind of like judging the stability of America based on talking to John Walker Lindh. Not saying your guy is a terrorist or anything, but he apparently is on as bad standing with his roots as this guy was.

[DeathStrobe]

To help add to the point that AIs can not make Sim Sense in the same way we'd understand it, AIs can NOT jump in to drones because they ain't got no brains.

Runner's Companion p88

While a metasapient may reside in a drone, and even use a drone as its home node, it may not “jump into” a drone or other rigged device, as it has no motor cortex with which to interface.

So if an AI can't even jump in to a drone because a hardware issue like having no brain, I say they can't have simsense recording of themselves because of the same reason.

Really, now why would anyway want to make AIs boring by removing prejudices against them? It makes for a boring role to play if you don't get little flavor like that in to the mix.

[Mordinvan]

Since it cannot even work with dragons, corporeal spirits, or other intelligent critters, yes, I would say this is impossible (even if rules-wise possible thanks to the rules just not covering it).

Pilot drones can jump into an operate a drone just as a rigger. Riggers use simsense. This implies that the signals the A.I. uses, and the signals the rigger uses are not completely different as they are being produced by the same systems of the drone for the same application.

Sociology does not even begin to come close to that kind of precise description.

I was actually referring to evolutionary biology, anthropology, and psychology. When 3 very different fields of study all give you same the same answer, you can safely assume there is some level of validity to it. You however seem to be of the opinion i'm using the communist manifesto.

Sure, what with Baghdad burned to the ground and the radicals claiming (successfully) that happened because of lack of faith. That does not negate that Christianity of that time was the more fanatic, radical and warlike religion by far.

This does not invalidate my statement.

Cellphones have been proven not to cause anything like cancer or brain haemorrhages or anything in several studies, yet the crazyness about cell station radiation is nowhwere near to disappear. Same with video games, or nuclear power. France knows full well it has problems with it's immigrants but cannot actually do anything about it because there's a law prohibiting the state from acknowledging it has (let alone act on it), because that would be racial discrimination.

I'm sorry, but I don't see those fears expressed by anyone who actually has a clue about the topics at hand, which is actually where the core of my point comes from. You claim everyone hates A.I.'s because truthful infromation about the capibilities and limitations does not exist. You claim that someone with access to this information would fear and hate them more. You claim you can provide examples of this all over the world. You point to a pile of knowledge, and then point to a group of people who do not know it, and say that is group is more fearful of the concept because that knowledge exists. Not only have you totally failed to meet the criteria of the requested example, but you're attempting to strawman the hell out of it.

To feel pain you need a working neural system. If you don't have one, you won't feel pain (it's a condition with certain neural disfunctions, pretty awful actually). Pain is a physical function. The AI may feel all kinds of unpleasantness, but that cannot be pain as a human would because they just do not have the hardware to feel it (though, the brain being a hardware computer, they lack the hardware to be anthropomorphised in general).

If you can find me a RAW passage which expressly states an A.I. is incapable of feeling pain to counteract the RAW claims that Megaera was driven mad by the agony of the experience of being dissected. You will note I never said 'feel pain like a human'. Dog's don't feel pain like humans, they feel pain like dogs, so why would I expect an A.I. to feel pain like a human? I would expect it to feel pain like an A.I.

All these are examples of situations where something is proven decidedly less dangerous than believed, but that proof is widely ignored because of hysteria or one or another taboo.

I didn't ask for evidence of large masses of ignorant humans lashing out in fear, if I wanted that, I'd go to a crowded theater, and call out a bomb threat. You claim all people should hate A.I. because of the example of Deus, regardless of how much knowledge that person possess which directly contradicts the notion that a particular A.I. is dangerous at all. You feel a publicly known A.I. who's abilities and limitations are a matter of public record, who only desires to drive a cab, is somehow going to be feared by everyone who had met it, and had a chance to view its operating processes on a diagnostic report is somehow going to mistake it for a deity level matrix entity who requires a network of super computers to run properly. You claim that someone see's a shadow in their room at night, turns on the lights, sees its a harmless stuffed rabbit, will then run away screaming because its a harmless stuffed rabbit. That is what you have been saying.

I hold the views I stated because of the Indians in India I know who did not pack up and leave for a foreign country. Your guy is kind of like judging the stability of America based on talking to John Walker Lindh. Not saying your guy is a terrorist or anything, but he apparently is on as bad standing with his roots as this guy was.

For starters, I don't live in America, second it wasn't 1 guy, but multiple families over the course of 2 decades, in addition to discussions with many students at the various schools I've taught at.

[Mordinvan]

double post.

[Mordinvan]

To help add to the point that AIs can not make Sim Sense in the same way we'd understand it, AIs can NOT jump in to drones because they ain't got no brains.

Pilot origin quality.

Really, now why would anyway want to make AIs boring by removing prejudices against them? It makes for a boring role to play if you don't get little flavor like that in to the mix.

I'm not arguing there should be none. I am arguing it should NOT be total however. Given the technical and media realities of the SR universe, there will be a wealth of knowledge gathered about how A.I.'s interact with computer systems, how they interact with humanity, and how they think, and even what 'feelings' they are capable of.

[hermit]

Pilot drones can jump into an operate a drone just as a rigger. Riggers use simsense.

No. See DeathStrobe's post.

Pilot origin quality.

Rules contradiction. Needs Errata (gah, SR4 is worse than SR3 in this). Besides, for that to work in the same spirit, the AI would need another Edge, along the lines of Simsense Imprint Producer. Is there such an Edge?

I was actually referring to evolutionary biology, anthropology, and psychology. When 3 very different fields of study all give you same the same answer, you can safely assume there is some level of validity to it. You however seem to be of the opinion i'm using the communist manifesto.

No, but you are taking from those three fields - two of which are about the opposite of science, and one is a fringe area - and interpreting it the same way as lefties in the 1970s and in the East did back in the day. There were meters and meters of books written on the scientific inevitability of global communist revolution based on anthropological, psychological and evolutionary biological studies of that time (the Nazis did that too, and the fundie Christians in the US are doing it wight now).

I'm sorry, but I don't see those fears expressed by anyone who actually has a clue about the topics at hand, which is actually where the core of my point comes from.

Given these studies are publicised in well read media, the average person has been exposed to them as much as it has been supposed in the SR universe to AI since 2070. You, however, seem to assume everyone in 2070 is an AI expert computer scientist somehow (at least, every decision maker is).

You claim all people should hate A.I. because of the example of Deus, regardless of how much knowledge that person possess which directly contradicts the notion that a particular A.I. is dangerous at all.

No. I am saying all people in power should consider AI a threat because so far, most AI theyknow have been openly hostile to humanity for no discernible reason, out of clumsyness and a cruel sense of curiosity. I am saying that taking such creatures' words of friendship at face value and trusting them unconditionally makes no sense. I am saying that such creatures would be needed to be controlled and/or preemtively destroyed.

so why would I expect an A.I. to feel pain like a human?

Because you have repeatedly compared AI 'pains' to human vivisection and the likes?

Not only have you totally failed to meet the criteria of the requested example, but you're attempting to strawman the hell out of it.

Ah, claims and insults, the resort of someone with a decisive lack of arguments.

I have met your criteria, which were: "example of someone feeling something was dangerous, gaining enough knowledge to conclude it was not, and then feeling more terrified".

Changing those criteria and insinuating what I supposedly say about AI does not change this.

For starters, I don't live in America, second it wasn't 1 guy, but multiple families over the course of 2 decades, in addition to discussions with many students at the various schools I've taught at.

That aside, you seem to take your ideas from talking to a specific social group (Hajiras?), who emigrated for feeling oppressed (rightfully, in all likelyhood). Accept these are not very representative to a society as a whole, much as talking to Chinese city folk functionaries will not tell you a damn thing about how the countryside lives in that country.

[Sengir]

Oh, and could one of the "THE END IS NIGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111" shouters be so kind and enlighten me why Shadowrun AIs have to follow the old world domination/destruction trope? It seems you guys are really disappointed by the fact that the new AIs have neither the intent nor (because they are little more than hackers iwthout meat bodies) the means to blow up the world, but why should each and every fictional AI do that?

I'm still waiting for an answer, BTW...

[Inpu]

A few key points:

AI have no nervous system. AI have no pain receptors. That something causes them pain is anthropomorphising them again. Look, AI do not work like human bodies if they live in a toaster, a taxi cab, or a mainframe computer. You cannot constantly anthropomorphise them. That's a flawed argument. Find another that isn't flawed.

They do however have an instinctual need to survive, like other self-aware entities. Letting someone at the core code means that they can threaten the AI's continued survival, and the act of observing such a complicated code and taking it apart changes and threatens the intelligence that lives within it. With no understanding of how the code sustains intelligence, any single line of code may be the key. Any changes, even separation, may annihilate the entity that was and replace it with a new one. Such a being would work under entirely different laws.

This is not necessarily arguing against Hermit's point. They do not have a nervous system, but they are more a sum of their individual parts than we might understand, and any tinkering may cause what could be understood as 'madness' when they change or 'pain' when they fight that change and will themselves to survive.

Rules contradiction. Needs Errata (gah, SR4 is worse than SR3 in this). Besides, for that to work in the same spirit, the AI would need another Edge, along the lines of Simsense Imprint Producer. Is there such an Edge?

This is not a good argument. It is a waiving of established rule that does not support your argument. It is conveniently ignored.

Also, to acknowledge that the setting waives certain aspects, such as Simsense, and then not acknowledge the same for another part of the system is not entirely logical.

Anyways, that's my two cents. Please continue.

[hermit]

They do however have an instinctual need to survive, like other self-aware entities.

No. Selfawareness decreases instinct, not increases. Every organism of any organsiation has a self sustaining drive. Since AI are no organism, however, and developed from something entirely different, that need not necessarily apply to them.

Letting someone at the core code means that they can threaten the AI's continued survival, and the act of observing such a complicated code and taking it apart changes and threatens the intelligence that lives within it. With no understanding of how the code sustains intelligence, any single line of code may be the key. Any changes, even separation, may annihilate the entity that was and replace it with a new one. Such a being would work under entirely different laws.

This is not necessarily arguing against Hermit's point. They do not have a nervous system, but they are more a sum of their individual parts than we might understand, and any tinkering may cause what could be understood as 'madness' when they change or 'pain' when they fight that change and will themselves to survive.

I agree here, but such concepts cannot be compared to human experience, and given their vastly different background, two AI may work on very different perceptions of disassembling and restructuring, too. Anthropomorphising them and comparing them to persecuted human minorities, comparing them being analysed with humans being vivisected, just does not fly. Some AI may purposely anthropomorphise themselves to manipulate human perception, but they are so far from humans in their basic 'anatomy' that even a dragon seems close kin compatred to them. Hence, just because it says it feels pain does not mean whatever it may or may not feel remotely resembles pain as understood by biological sentients derived from chordates.

This is not a good argument. It is a waiving of established rule that does not support your argument. It is conveniently ignored.

Also, to acknowledge that the setting waives certain aspects, such as Simsense, and then not acknowledge the same for another part of the system is not entirely logical.

SR4's matrix rules are so full of illogical constructs - AI cannot be copied, AI work according to "machine magic" called Resonance, Technomancers - you have to accept this works as it does. You can not, however, use this as a basis to assume something NOT covered by the rules works also because it is equally illogical. There is a specific eception to the "AI may not use Simsense tech because they have no brain" - the drone pilot edge. There is NO such egde for simsense recording. Hence, since we have to accept the SR4 matrix with all it's fallacies as is, there is no AI simsense recording.

[Inpu]

No. Selfawareness decreases instinct, not increases. Every organism of any organsiation has a self sustaining drive. Since AI are no organism, however, and developed from something entirely different, that need not necessarily apply to them.

Not entirely true in this case. Almost no matter how it is argued, in this case self-awareness would increase instinct because they had literally no instinct before that moment. A code will work itself into oblivion if it isn't told not to. AI have been shown to have a vested interest in their continued existence in Shadowrun. Plus, you are not accounting for emotion in this. While I cannot fathom what form of emotion they would have, or in what shade, the same sort of illogical goals and patterns that drive life drive AI in Shadowrun.

I agree here, but such concepts cannot be compared to human experience, and given their vastly different background, two AI may work on very different perceptions of disassembling and restructuring, too. Anthropomorphising them and comparing them to persecuted human minorities, comparing them being analysed with humans being vivisected, just does not fly. Some AI may purposely anthropomorphise themselves to manipulate human perception, but they are so far from humans in their basic 'anatomy' that even a dragon seems close kin compatred to them. Hence, just because it says it feels pain does not mean whatever it may or may not feel remotely resembles pain as understood by biological sentients derived from chordates.

Yes. I agree for the most part.

SR4's matrix rules are so full of illogical constructs - AI cannot be copied, AI work according to "machine magic" called Resonance, Technomancers - you have to accept this works as it does. You can not, however, use this as a basis to assume something NOT covered by the rules works also because it is equally illogical. There is a specific eception to the "AI may not use Simsense tech because they have no brain" - the drone pilot edge. There is NO such egde for simsense recording. Hence, since we have to accept the SR4 matrix with all it's fallacies as is, there is no AI simsense recording.

I also find it strange they cannot be copied, but it seems that there is a trigger event needed. There were other ways to go about it, but the basic idea is would an AI wish to copy itself, thereby foregoing improvement and inviting weakness due to a lack of evolution?

The rules specifically state when something is not doable in most cases. A GM must make a call either way, based off of every given situation. If it does not say SimSense cannot be done, then there is no basis for it not being doable. It would fall to individual preference at that point, with some GMs making it into an odd experience and others saying it fries a person outright. I do not see why they wouldn't be able to record an experience with SimSense, but I do agree that it would likely harm a person using it if they went Hot. When going cold, they are mostly looking at strange imagery, which could be useful to psychologists in theoretical fields.

My support for it not excluding the possibility is that the rules do not have a means of simulating when someone coughs, sneezes when they do not wish, trips, or the like when performing an action as simple as walking down the sidewalk. Glitches can be interpreted as such, if your GM decides to make you roll every time you walk, but that is more a case in point. Simply because there is no edge does not mean it is impossible.

Essentially, it boils down to opinion.