[X] My Assistant

[hermit]

All micro processors work on logic gates. Since an A.I. MUST live in a processor, A.I.'s require logic gates to exist.

If there was no mystical Resonance in SR, that would be a correct statement. However, as there is, it is false.

It is part of mathematics. It requires logic, as humans understand, to be true, in order for it itself to be true. I also do not understand how specifically categorizing of number of elements in a particular set is of any assistance in the discussion.

I'll try again. As I am not very familiar with mathematical terms in English, this may be a bit clumsy, though.

An infinite number of states does not necessarily mean every state possible is included. As an example, in a guven system there are states a, b and c. Now, a magnitude could well be made up of infinite repetitions of a and be and be infinite, yet never include state c. Just because something is infinitie does not necessiarilymean it is all encompassing. The magnitude N contains infinite and not repeating elements, yet many elements ofmagnitude R are not included in N. Does that make N less of an infinite magnitude?

If the program requires logic gates to run, which it does, then it rests on logic. (...) [U]ntil and unless a particular conclusion which is TRUE in our world is proven FALSE in S.R., it is not unreasonable to assume it continues to be true.

That computer processes always work according to logic gates already has been disproven by the whole Emergence,/Resonance/mancer/technomagic business.

Actually much of this stuff is intentionally left open ended so that a GM may fill in the missing pieces as needed to suit their needs.

So why, exactly, are you trying to impose your interpretation of the setting on everyone else again?

[Mordinvan]

For instance, if the last part of the Logic process has a distinct intelligence that may change its gates at a whim. It may be as simple as that: that an AI can change the formula as it goes, thus 'growing', such as it does with Karma.

Yes, but since the node can be switched off at any point in time and NOT kill the A.I. so long as it is not 'sleeping', that code is then 'fixed' can be read with a memory scan. While I have no really problem with the idea of the code dynamically reconfiguring itself, as it would have to inorder to store memory and to learn.

as an interesting point for some GMs to play with, part of the code may be in Resonance only and thus not able to be understood. It is possible that is what can change their code and allow them to restructure themselves. A simple final gate that reads the binary of "Alive" or "not Alive". While a Technomancer might be able to see it, they are employed with less frequency than Deckers/Hackers and may just not have noted it yet. Speculative, but see below.

This is actually a rather interesting possibility, and one which makes a great deal of sense. With the absence of trust, and knowledge about Technomancers, it does make sense that if part of what makes an A.I. alive is resonance, then the world would be largely ignorant of that fact, as few would think to ask a technomancer, and few mundanes would likely accept the answer as being true. It DOES however raise the question of why no A.I.'s have resonance abilities however. It would make sense that only a small proportion of them do, as a small proportion of mundanes are awakened, but all have bright lively auras. If even a small percent of them displayed such abilities it would strongly lend support to your idea.

See above statements. It comes down to the same, really. It cannot be denied that, in the setting, there is an unknown factor that makes it so it is not like a typical program. To argue otherwise is to say the setting is flat wrong about its interpretation of these entities. It has another layer that is beyond science. You may see it as the plot concealing it, but that is backward from how a GM should often look at these things: rather than say it can't happen and state that it is a hole, figure out why it did.

That is sort of how I look at it. Keep in mind just because something is concealed by plot, that plot is driven by the gm ultimately, and whatever is concealed or protected by plot does so only so long as plot says it is. As soon as that protection is no longer required for the sake of plot, it's shield vaporizes in a puff of logic.

[Inpu]

This is actually a rather interesting possibility, and one which makes a great deal of sense. With the absence of trust, and knowledge about Technomancers, it does make sense that if part of what makes an A.I. alive is resonance, then the world would be largely ignorant of that fact, as few would think to ask a technomancer, and few mundanes would likely accept the answer as being true. It DOES however raise the question of why no A.I.'s have resonance abilities however. It would make sense that only a small proportion of them do, as a small proportion of mundanes are awakened, but all have bright lively auras. If even a small percent of them displayed such abilities it would strongly lend support to your idea.

It is possible that they are too new to express it for now. We'll see in later products, I suppose. For now, it is also possible that they are not able to use Resonance Abilities because they use their Resonance to sustain their life and would thus not attempt to redirect it to other tasks. The Emulate Quality does come remarkably close to Threading as well. That can be explained a few ways, but it is interesting that they cannot keep something they would have had to code.

I am too new to Shadowrun to say if Deus or Mageara had much to do with Resonance, but I have read something about a bionetwork before, and that seems to imply that they at least had something that was compatible with Resonant/Dissonant bionetworks. Again, I don't know enough about Otaku to really say much on this and it is also worth noting that Deus and Mageara were on an entirely different level from Metasapients.

That is sort of how I look at it. Keep in mind just because something is concealed by plot, that plot is driven by the gm ultimately, and whatever is concealed or protected by plot does so only so long as plot says it is. As soon as that protection is no longer required for the sake of plot, it's shield vaporizes in a puff of logic.

Agreed.

[Mordinvan]

If there was no mystical Resonance in SR, that would be a correct statement. However, as there is, it is false.

Ok, which part of the text of mine you just quoted was false?

An infinite number of states does not necessarily mean every state possible is included. As an example, in a guven system there are states a, b and c. Now, a magnitude could well be made up of infinite repetitions of a and be and be infinite, yet never include state c. Just because something is infinitie does not necessiarilymean it is all encompassing. The magnitude N contains infinite and not repeating elements, yet many elements ofmagnitude R are not included in N. Does that make N less of an infinite magnitude?

I know what you are saying, however unless some constraint is placed what sorts of number can appear, then there is the same non zero chance that any given number can appear, as any given part of an infinite set. Given that, it is 'virtually' certain, that any given number will appear unless it is somehow excluded.

That computer processes always work according to logic gates already has been disproven by the whole Emergence,/Resonance/mancer/technomagic business.

No it has not actually, however as was recently suggested, they may also function according to some addition resonance factor. This does not remove their dependence on logic, but it does allow for some additional, reasonably stable X factor which is supernatural in nature. Given however most A.I.'s tend to follow a reasonably stable and predictable pattern of behavior this X factor, if it is resonance in origin SHOULD be able to studied and understood by technomancers atleast in some fashion.

So why, exactly, are you trying to impose your interpretation of the setting on everyone else again?

a) because it is the view I hold b) most other views thus far presented a grossly lacking in explanatory power c) I really do not like unexplained 'things' when explanations SHOULD be available d) because it is a time honored tradition of dumpshock.

[Walpurgisborn]

Then there is the classic example of rape, where a person passes their genes on by force. This is largely looked down upon for a number of reasons, one of which is the idea that such an option is considered a method for a creature who cannot properly court a partner and is at risk of not passing on the unique genetic line that would result.

You know, me and the boys always say, "I'm kinda okay with rape except for the possibility that the unique gene coding for social interaction may be lost over future generations."

I keed, I keed.

As a side note, that's an inversion of the original social evolutionary theory: man as barely-tamed rapist.

[Inpu]

You know, me and the boys always say, "I'm kinda okay with rape except for the possibility that the unique gene coding for social interaction may be lost over future generations."

Good to know. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) I abhor it, personally, but take it for the intent: there is a natural revulsion to it.

[Walpurgisborn]

Should have added the Sarcasm tags, but sarcasm seemed a little too harsh. Maybe Irony tags.

[Inpu]

Trust me, I heard it without the tags. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Walpurgisborn]

Trust me, I heard it without the tags. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Still, when I make my congressional bid, I don't want someone to go 'hey, there's the guy who's mostly ok with rape".

I should clarify though, my biggest issue isn't with evolutionary sociology as much as the statements coming out of evolutionary sociology described as fact, when ES is such a speculative field.

[Inpu]

Duly noted. How's the campaign going?

[Mordinvan]

Still, when I make my congressional bid, I don't want someone to go 'hey, there's the guy who's mostly ok with rape".

Don't worry we'll be sure to quote your statement out of context at every available opportunity.

[Inpu]

"You have the right to remain silent. What you say will be misquoted and used against you..."