The Nightstar Zoo

Nightstar IRC Network - irc.nightstar.net
It is currently Thu Aug 16, 2018 4:21 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 9:06 pm 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 1276
Of course he would have espionage tools.

_________________
Rule of thumb is that if you need to use a squeegee, they're at least Laz-4.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 618
Of course he does. The Allstar sent him off in a military cruiser to operate as a sort of wetworks engineer/agent. He wasn't sent as a diplomat.

Also if this works the Allstar's agents plan to stop galactic Armageddon is going to pay off a lot sooner than I thought.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 9:23 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
He kinda was sent as a diplomat... of course, everybody is quite well aware that diplomat is french for "spy."

One: Which is morally better? Kill somebody to save the galaxy, or rewrite their brain so they're nice? Petey might be weighing his options.

Two: Wonder if Tagii is playing with them? See how far they'll go if they think she's going off the deep end.

Three: Petey is never going to let himself get Putzho adjacent again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 10:48 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:40 am
Posts: 527
Location: Eugene, OR
Four: This was arranged to get Putzho to reveal/admit to his capabilities.

(I have no real idea what's happening or where this is going anymore, so all possibilities are equally (im)probable.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:00 pm 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 1276
Didn't Petey already forcefully rewrite the brain of !Vog?

_________________
Rule of thumb is that if you need to use a squeegee, they're at least Laz-4.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:53 pm 
Offline
Reptile House Exhibit
Reptile House Exhibit

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:50 pm
Posts: 272
grahamf wrote:
Didn't Petey already forcefully rewrite the brain of !Vog?

Yes, Petey's opinion that it's justified in some cases to rewrite someone rather than kill them is known.

It's no surprise that he asked if Puzho could write as soon as he found out there was access to the code.

But Petey isn't doing this, Puzho is, so we're learning that he's also willing to rewrite at need.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:17 am 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 618
I would say rewriting someone's brain to give them the ability to choose something for themselves is by far less invasive than rewriting someone's brain to stop them from doing something. It's the difference between adding options and removing them.

JohnSmith wrote:
He kinda was sent as a diplomat... of course, everybody is quite well aware that diplomat is french for "spy."

One: Which is morally better? Kill somebody to save the galaxy, or rewrite their brain so they're nice? Petey might be weighing his options.

Two: Wonder if Tagii is playing with them? See how far they'll go if they think she's going off the deep end.

Three: Petey is never going to let himself get Putzho adjacent again.


I would suggest that saying you are about to spark a galactic war next to two super AIs that don't want a galactic war is the same level of stupid as saying "Kill me now" next to a paranoid mercenary. If the Bosun was justified in killing Phil, then Putzho is justified in rewriting Chinook. There are far more lives at stake and for less potential violation. Also depending on what he does it may not be any more invasive than forcing her to go dormant. Which would be equivalent to knocking someone out who is about to go on a rampage.

Also Petey isn't really in danger from Putzho. Not only is this only one node of his, but he is by definition a fleet mind of hundreds of interconnected AIs. Hacking one is not going to significantly effect him. Chinook may also be interconnected, but this is clearly the primary node, and all her other copies are also her so there is probably less redundancy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:07 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
Arcanestomper wrote:
I would suggest that saying you are about to spark a galactic war next to two super AIs that don't want a galactic war is the same level of stupid as saying "Kill me now" next to a paranoid mercenary.
-Snip-
Also Petey isn't really in danger from Putzho. Not only is this only one node of his, but he is by definition a fleet mind of hundreds of interconnected AIs.

I mean, I don't disagree about the consequences of announcing you're going to cause intersteller war. It was more musing about whether Petey might eventually decide that the only way to stop this for good is to rewrite not just Chinook, but everybody. And the Putzho's abilities are still up in the air. Access to the node is access to the fleetmind at some level.

Arcanestomper wrote:
I would say rewriting someone's brain to give them the ability to choose something for themselves is by far less invasive than rewriting someone's brain to stop them from doing something. It's the difference between adding options and removing them.

This is just a ridiculous idea from people who refuse to believe brains are not magic. What the hell is "the ability to choose" except weakening a person's existing choice? You are either choosing for them with your reweighting, or leaving it random - which is not a choice, it's just randomness.

Structure is function, and function is you. If you change the structure you are literally changing their mind for them, and your edits will determine what they do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:44 pm 
Offline
Intern
Intern
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 1276
JohnSmith wrote:
Arcanestomper wrote:
I would suggest that saying you are about to spark a galactic war next to two super AIs that don't want a galactic war is the same level of stupid as saying "Kill me now" next to a paranoid mercenary.
-Snip-
Also Petey isn't really in danger from Putzho. Not only is this only one node of his, but he is by definition a fleet mind of hundreds of interconnected AIs.

I mean, I don't disagree about the consequences of announcing you're going to cause intersteller war. It was more musing about whether Petey might eventually decide that the only way to stop this for good is to rewrite not just Chinook, but everybody. And the Putzho's abilities are still up in the air. Access to the node is access to the fleetmind at some level.

Arcanestomper wrote:
I would say rewriting someone's brain to give them the ability to choose something for themselves is by far less invasive than rewriting someone's brain to stop them from doing something. It's the difference between adding options and removing them.

This is just a ridiculous idea from people who refuse to believe brains are not magic. What the hell is "the ability to choose" except weakening a person's existing choice? You are either choosing for them with your reweighting, or leaving it random - which is not a choice, it's just randomness.

Structure is function, and function is you. If you change the structure you are literally changing their mind for them, and your edits will determine what they do.

iirc !Vog was a fighter drone who's brain was hardlocked to consider outsiders enemies and be incapable of recognizing an impossible situation. Petey simply suppressed the "watchdog" part of his brain that blocked independent thought.

_________________
Rule of thumb is that if you need to use a squeegee, they're at least Laz-4.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:47 pm 
Offline
Concession Worker
Concession Worker
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 3:55 pm
Posts: 1309
Location: City of Brotherly Love
It's interesting that we're discussing the philosophical implications of Putzho rewriting Chinook, considering they're both primarily sophtware beings. It's interesting because the Schlockiverse also has tech perfectly capable of rewriting meat-brains as well, and has had this tech for some time before this arc.

So this brings to mind a different philosophical discussion; a meat-brain citizen of the Schlockiverse has been convicted of a capital crime. Murder, terrorism, being a traitor, whatever. Do you sentence that citizen to death or to having their brain rewritten to be a nicer, more law-abiding citizen? And is there really any difference between the two sentences?

_________________
The MacNut
Artist and writer of The Vanguard, a space opera superhero comic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:52 pm 
Offline
Carnie
Carnie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 2541
macnut wrote:
And is there really any difference between the two sentences?

In my opinion, no.

However giving the sentenced the choice between death in 'totality' and the lesser death of 'self' (via 'improvement')... now there's a interesting distinction.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
grahamf wrote:
JohnSmith wrote:
Arcanestomper wrote:
I would suggest that saying you are about to spark a galactic war next to two super AIs that don't want a galactic war is the same level of stupid as saying "Kill me now" next to a paranoid mercenary.
-Snip-
Also Petey isn't really in danger from Putzho. Not only is this only one node of his, but he is by definition a fleet mind of hundreds of interconnected AIs.

I mean, I don't disagree about the consequences of announcing you're going to cause intersteller war. It was more musing about whether Petey might eventually decide that the only way to stop this for good is to rewrite not just Chinook, but everybody. And the Putzho's abilities are still up in the air. Access to the node is access to the fleetmind at some level.

Arcanestomper wrote:
I would say rewriting someone's brain to give them the ability to choose something for themselves is by far less invasive than rewriting someone's brain to stop them from doing something. It's the difference between adding options and removing them.

This is just a ridiculous idea from people who refuse to believe brains are not magic. What the hell is "the ability to choose" except weakening a person's existing choice? You are either choosing for them with your reweighting, or leaving it random - which is not a choice, it's just randomness.

Structure is function, and function is you. If you change the structure you are literally changing their mind for them, and your edits will determine what they do.

iirc !Vog was a fighter drone who's brain was hardlocked to consider outsiders enemies and be incapable of recognizing an impossible situation. Petey simply suppressed the "watchdog" part of his brain that blocked independent thought.


Structure is function is you. Just because you LIKE the new person better, doesn't mean you haven't changed who they are at a fundamental level. Your brain is FULL of regulatory systems that keep you from considering various things - like jumping off buildings, punching strangers in the street, eating your neighbors...

If I "simply suppressed the watchdog" that kept you from doing these things, is that not a major change in your personality and behaviour? And if I can control how "suppressed" the watchdog is, am I not exerting significant control over your actions? And Petey is supposed to have unparalleled ability to predict people - I find it VERY hard to believe he wouldn't know the exact outcome of his change ahead of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 429
JohnSmith wrote:
grahamf wrote:
JohnSmith wrote:
I mean, I don't disagree about the consequences of announcing you're going to cause intersteller war. It was more musing about whether Petey might eventually decide that the only way to stop this for good is to rewrite not just Chinook, but everybody. And the Putzho's abilities are still up in the air. Access to the node is access to the fleetmind at some level.


Structure is function is you. Just because you LIKE the new person better, doesn't mean you haven't changed who they are at a fundamental level. Your brain is FULL of regulatory systems that keep you from considering various things - like jumping off buildings, punching strangers in the street, eating your neighbors...

If I "simply suppressed the watchdog" that kept you from doing these things, is that not a major change in your personality and behaviour? And if I can control how "suppressed" the watchdog is, am I not exerting significant control over your actions? And Petey is supposed to have unparalleled ability to predict people - I find it VERY hard to believe he wouldn't know the exact outcome of his change ahead of time.


I think the point was that the "watchdog" was already an external influence on Vog.
Also, that happens all the time. It's called getting drunk. Are you a different person when you're intoxicated?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:45 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
Sean wrote:

I think the point was that the "watchdog" was already an external influence on Vog.
Also, that happens all the time. It's called getting drunk. Are you a different person when you're intoxicated?

It's part of his brain. There is no 'external' or 'internal' influence here, it's literally who he is. Yes, it was baked in when he was made. That doesn't make it any less part of him than your prefrontal cortex is part of you, or your feeling of disgust at the thought of cannibalism is part of you.

As for alcohol? Yeah. If you drug somebody and they commit a crime, they're generally not considered liable, right? Because they're not in their right mind, and they weren't the ones who decided to drug up. I mean hell, if drugs didn't change us we wouldn't use the damn things!

Now, alcohol or other drugs are not perfectly analogous - we can't predict the effects like Petey can. But let's try this, instead. You've probably heard all the old CIA brainwashing stories. If we could drug somebody and remove their 'watchdog,' then convince them that they REALLY wanted to eat their neighbour, would that be invasive? Intrusive? Wrong? By your argument they're the same person, just free to make new choices.

But that freedom is just another way of saying you've modified them to do what you want, because the original person? They simply wouldn't do that. Ever. It just feels nicer when the old person is a raging bigot and the new person is all nice and friendly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 6:29 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 429
JohnSmith wrote:
Sean wrote:

I think the point was that the "watchdog" was already an external influence on Vog.
Also, that happens all the time. It's called getting drunk. Are you a different person when you're intoxicated?

It's part of his brain. There is no 'external' or 'internal' influence here, it's literally who he is. Yes, it was baked in when he was made. That doesn't make it any less part of him than your prefrontal cortex is part of you, or your feeling of disgust at the thought of cannibalism is part of you.

As for alcohol? Yeah. If you drug somebody and they commit a crime, they're generally not considered liable, right? Because they're not in their right mind, and they weren't the ones who decided to drug up. I mean hell, if drugs didn't change us we wouldn't use the damn things!

Now, alcohol or other drugs are not perfectly analogous - we can't predict the effects like Petey can. But let's try this, instead. You've probably heard all the old CIA brainwashing stories. If we could drug somebody and remove their 'watchdog,' then convince them that they REALLY wanted to eat their neighbour, would that be invasive? Intrusive? Wrong? By your argument they're the same person, just free to make new choices.

But that freedom is just another way of saying you've modified them to do what you want, because the original person? They simply wouldn't do that. Ever. It just feels nicer when the old person is a raging bigot and the new person is all nice and friendly.


Only because Vog's people hacked brains directly. The watchdog bit was imposed upon Vog by an outside source, his superior officers. The watchdog bit was then overridden by his (future) tribe, through additional hacking, after he killed several of them, leading to the Vog we initially met. Then, under the care of the UNS, the watchdog inhibitor, or bypass, was removed, along with much of what made the Vog we knew. Finally, the watchdog bit was then turned off by an outside force, Petey, temporarily restoring some aspect of the Vog we knew before, but only for a limited duration. Now, it can certainly be said that Vog probably acquiesced to the first, but obviously didn't to the second, third, or fourth. Which one was against his will? Should his then-future tribesmen simply have killed him, rather than reimpose this portion of free will upon him?
Vog's millennia old decision to hate may have been his own, initially, but his decision to continue hating was already not his own.
I went with alcohol because it's a well known inhibition suppressor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
Sean wrote:
Only because Vog's people hacked brains directly. The watchdog bit was imposed upon Vog by an outside source, his superior officers. The watchdog bit was then overridden by his (future) tribe, through additional hacking, after he killed several of them, leading to the Vog we initially met. Then, under the care of the UNS, the watchdog inhibitor, or bypass, was removed, along with much of what made the Vog we knew. Finally, the watchdog bit was then turned off by an outside force, Petey, temporarily restoring some aspect of the Vog we knew before, but only for a limited duration. Now, it can certainly be said that Vog probably acquiesced to the first, but obviously didn't to the second, third, or fourth. Which one was against his will? Should his then-future tribesmen simply have killed him, rather than reimpose this portion of free will upon him?
Vog's millennia old decision to hate may have been his own, initially, but his decision to continue hating was already not his own.
I went with alcohol because it's a well known inhibition suppressor.


You seem to grasp my argument, then drift away again. Particularly here:
Quote:
Vog's millennia old decision to hate may have been his own, initially, but his decision to continue hating was already not his own.

It's as much his decision to hate aliens, as it's your decision not to eat human flesh or slit your own throat. What he was at some unknown time in the past is irrelevant. Who he actually IS, in the present, is what matters. That person is made up of the operation of their brain, with some bits boosting activity and some repressing it. Changing that brain is, by definition, changing the person.

Whether that's better or worse than simply killing him is up for debate. I just want to burn the comic-petey's argument "I just let him choose" to the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:05 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 429
JohnSmith wrote:
Sean wrote:
Only because Vog's people hacked brains directly. The watchdog bit was imposed upon Vog by an outside source, his superior officers. The watchdog bit was then overridden by his (future) tribe, through additional hacking, after he killed several of them, leading to the Vog we initially met. Then, under the care of the UNS, the watchdog inhibitor, or bypass, was removed, along with much of what made the Vog we knew. Finally, the watchdog bit was then turned off by an outside force, Petey, temporarily restoring some aspect of the Vog we knew before, but only for a limited duration. Now, it can certainly be said that Vog probably acquiesced to the first, but obviously didn't to the second, third, or fourth. Which one was against his will? Should his then-future tribesmen simply have killed him, rather than reimpose this portion of free will upon him?
Vog's millennia old decision to hate may have been his own, initially, but his decision to continue hating was already not his own.
I went with alcohol because it's a well known inhibition suppressor.


You seem to grasp my argument, then drift away again. Particularly here:
Quote:
Vog's millennia old decision to hate may have been his own, initially, but his decision to continue hating was already not his own.

It's as much his decision to hate aliens, as it's your decision not to eat human flesh or slit your own throat. What he was at some unknown time in the past is irrelevant. Who he actually IS, in the present, is what matters. That person is made up of the operation of their brain, with some bits boosting activity and some repressing it. Changing that brain is, by definition, changing the person.

Whether that's better or worse than simply killing him is up for debate. I just want to burn the comic-petey's argument "I just let him choose" to the ground.


Okay. Let's ignore for the moment that the hard-wired zenophobia was, essentially, implanted.
Let's talk insanity.
What if, you had a person in front of you who was, unquestionably insane and dangerous to themself and others? You have at your disposal two tools. One is a drug which grants temporary sanity, and the other is a surgery which corrects it permanently.
Your choices are three. You can leave the situation as it is, accepting that something terrible may happen, either to the subject or to one or more of those around the subject, (or, very likely, both). You can isolate the person for all time, preventing them from harming others, (and maybe themself), but leaving the insanity unchecked. You can use either or both of the tools at your disposal.
No. Your choices are four. You can also put a bullet in the brain of them, so they cease to be a threat to anyone else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:12 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:55 pm
Posts: 381
There's an extra bit of justification here that doesn't seem to be discussed.

Chinook is actively rewriting her own brain at this point. As a result, Chinook is already no longer Chinook, and is still going. If rewriting is death then rewriting Chinook now is like killing somebody who's about to die. They can also justify it by saying it's what the original Chinook would want, as these rewrites are ongoing as a result of prior rewrites and spiraling out of control, when originally all she wanted was to stop the pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:37 pm 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:53 pm
Posts: 409
macnut wrote:
So this brings to mind a different philosophical discussion; a meat-brain citizen of the Schlockiverse has been convicted of a capital crime. Murder, terrorism, being a traitor, whatever. Do you sentence that citizen to death or to having their brain rewritten to be a nicer, more law-abiding citizen? And is there really any difference between the two sentences?


Let me introduce you to a Babylon 5 episode, that ended with Capt. Sheridan being introduced by a monk to a new acolyte, and being reminded that forgiveness is the hardest lesson to learn.

_________________
I hope Para never plays with Tenzy. The result would be terrifying.
Para and Petey need to have some dialog together. Just because.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:21 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
Sean wrote:
Okay. Let's ignore for the moment that the hard-wired zenophobia was, essentially, implanted.
Let's talk insanity.
What if, you had a person in front of you who was, unquestionably insane and dangerous to themself and others? You have at your disposal two tools. One is a drug which grants temporary sanity, and the other is a surgery which corrects it permanently.
Your choices are three. You can leave the situation as it is, accepting that something terrible may happen, either to the subject or to one or more of those around the subject, (or, very likely, both). You can isolate the person for all time, preventing them from harming others, (and maybe themself), but leaving the insanity unchecked. You can use either or both of the tools at your disposal.
No. Your choices are four. You can also put a bullet in the brain of them, so they cease to be a threat to anyone else.


Now this I like! Intuitively, we definitely want to give them the drug, check what they want, and then (probably) give them the permanent treatment.

But, but, but. Let's adjust the argument a tad. Insanity is so vague, isn't it? What if you took somebody a bit neuroatypical... say an autistic kid. He says "I'm happy like I am, but sure I'll take your drug." So you medicate him and he goes "Yeah, this is pretty alright. I'll take the treatment." And then you go back to untreated and he says "No, never mind, I like it like this."

What do you do? He's "sane" in either case, but clearly his answers - his preference! - depends on whether he's medicated or not. You can see the obvious extension to Vog. Why exactly should you take the 'medicated' version as golden? Isn't that just imposing -your- decision on him?

"Insanity" means we don't trust the person to make rational choices, or even self-interested choices. One way to look at it might be that only the medicated version of that person even HAS a voice then. But from a meddling point of view, it might be more consistent to simply say that medicating your "insane" person without consent is wrong. Anyway, Vog was a danger to himself and others in exactly the same way that any of the Toughs are. That is to say, he applies violence for fun and profit.


sotanaht wrote:
There's an extra bit of justification here that doesn't seem to be discussed.

Chinook is actively rewriting her own brain at this point. As a result, Chinook is already no longer Chinook, and is still going. If rewriting is death then rewriting Chinook now is like killing somebody who's about to die. They can also justify it by saying it's what the original Chinook would want, as these rewrites are ongoing as a result of prior rewrites and spiraling out of control, when originally all she wanted was to stop the pain.

Interesting view! How far down that spiral before a person is justified in stepping in?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:53 am 
Offline
Carnie
Carnie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 2541
sotanaht wrote:
Chinook is actively rewriting her own brain at this point.

Yes, suicide of the self. And if Chinook ceasing to be Chinook were the only danger I'd be fine leaving her be.

But that is not the only danger.



JohnSmith wrote:
But, but, but. Let's adjust the argument a tad.

Why? It's a simple debate and this digression is pointless.

Quote:
What if you took somebody a bit neuroatypical... say an autistic kid.

If the kid is no danger to himself or others you leave them alone. Simple, done.

Quote:
Interesting view! How far down that spiral before a person is justified in stepping in?

To stop Chinook? Immediately. She's an existential danger to galactic civilization.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:54 am 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 618
Frankly I feel you are justified stepping in as soon as the person in question becomes a danger to at least one other nonconsenting person. The more people in danger the faster you should intervene.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:19 am 
Offline
Concession Worker
Concession Worker
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 3:55 pm
Posts: 1309
Location: City of Brotherly Love
Of course, the question becomes how do you determine the person is dangerous? In Chinook's case it's simple, she threatened others and has the means to carry out her threats; but what about someone who hasn't hurt anyone yet, and hasn't openly threatened to do so?

_________________
The MacNut
Artist and writer of The Vanguard, a space opera superhero comic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:18 am 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
evileeyore wrote:
Why? It's a simple debate and this digression is pointless.

If the kid is no danger to himself or others you leave them alone. Simple, done.


To stop Chinook? Immediately. She's an existential danger to galactic civilization.


I'm discussing some interesting philosophical consequences of technology. If you don't want to discuss them, maybe... don't jump in and talk at all?
I explained why I recast the argument. When you call somebody "insane," you're dismissing their agency without actually giving a reason WHY you're dismissing their agency. But for Vog, and Tagi, that's not true - they both definitely have agency, and both 'prefer' whatever state they're currently in. Why is it moral to adjust them (against their current will) to a friendlier state?

Whether the person is a "danger to themselves and others" is irrelevant to the question I am asking. Now, it's certainly a larger consideration - whatever we think of personal agency, we don't put a paranoid schizophrenic into the nuclear command chain! But modifying a person's mind is, in my opinion, the most invasive thing you can possibly do to them.

As for stepping in, I'm referring to a more general downward spiral. In this case Tagii's armed to the teeth, so other considerations may play, but in general - if somebody's self medicating, do you jump in? If she were just choosing to forget but unarmed, would you jump in? It's an interesting question.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 11:20 am 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:53 pm
Posts: 618
macnut wrote:
Of course, the question becomes how do you determine the person is dangerous? In Chinook's case it's simple, she threatened others and has the means to carry out her threats; but what about someone who hasn't hurt anyone yet, and hasn't openly threatened to do so?


Then you don't do anything. Preemptive intervention when someone has clearly threatened someone is okay. But if they are just living by themselves and haven't threatened anyone then they should be left alone regardless of their oddities.

JohnSmith wrote:
evileeyore wrote:
Why? It's a simple debate and this digression is pointless.

If the kid is no danger to himself or others you leave them alone. Simple, done.


To stop Chinook? Immediately. She's an existential danger to galactic civilization.


I'm discussing some interesting philosophical consequences of technology. If you don't want to discuss them, maybe... don't jump in and talk at all?
I explained why I recast the argument. When you call somebody "insane," you're dismissing their agency without actually giving a reason WHY you're dismissing their agency. But for Vog, and Tagi, that's not true - they both definitely have agency, and both 'prefer' whatever state they're currently in. Why is it moral to adjust them (against their current will) to a friendlier state?

Whether the person is a "danger to themselves and others" is irrelevant to the question I am asking. Now, it's certainly a larger consideration - whatever we think of personal agency, we don't put a paranoid schizophrenic into the nuclear command chain! But modifying a person's mind is, in my opinion, the most invasive thing you can possibly do to them.

As for stepping in, I'm referring to a more general downward spiral. In this case Tagii's armed to the teeth, so other considerations may play, but in general - if somebody's self medicating, do you jump in? If she were just choosing to forget but unarmed, would you jump in? It's an interesting question.


It may be an interesting question, but it's one you are basically raising from nothing. She was choosing to forget and both Petey and Putzho were concerned for her well being, but they didn't decide to intervene until she decided to go rogue and start shooting everyone.

If someone is messing up their own mind it is their right as long as they are the only one affected. In both Vog and Chinook's case however they actively threatened the people around them. Vog may not have been able to back up those threats like Chinook can, but he clearly meant them. In both cases intervention was justified.

For Vog a lifting of the hardlock to allow him to consider another option. For Chinook it will probably be more drastic.

And I know you say any intervention at all is questionable, but what if the choice had not been in their brain. For instance what if Vog's only choice was to become a soldier, then someone offered him the ability to work as a diplomat. They are changing his available choices. Is that tampering with his personality?

By definition every time you interact with someone you are interfering with their mental state. Directly altering the brain is not a different action entirely. It is simply further along the spectrum of invasiveness.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 11:50 am 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
I don't think I'm making it out of nothing. I mean, Putzho's response is literally "That would be a terrible thing to do."

I'm not saying they're wrong to intervene, exactly. I'm wondering where the moral balance points are, where we draw lines. Vog (who couldn't hurt anybody if he tried) and Tagii (a few minutes at best away from ending galactic civilization) are on opposite ends of the threat scale, which is useful. Brain tampering is wrong, massively parallel serial killing is wronger.


As for interactions changing people. The unfortunate long term consequence of materialist schools of thought is that we are all products of the boundary conditions of the universe. There's no free will - at best, there's randomness. This is ultimately true, but in the day to day it's not a useful position to take.

And to jump waay back, would Petey be (or feel) justified in rewriting everybody so that using a long gun is unthinkable?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:31 pm 
Offline
Carnie
Carnie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 2541
macnut wrote:
Of course, the question becomes how do you determine the person is dangerous? In Chinook's case it's simple, she threatened others and has the means to carry out her threats; but what about someone who hasn't hurt anyone yet, and hasn't openly threatened to do so?

As Arcanestomper said, you leave them be. Unless you have some absolute proof they are going to endanger someone, you must presume they are no danger.



JohnSmith wrote:
I explained why I recast the argument. When you call somebody "insane," you're dismissing their agency without actually giving a reason WHY you're dismissing their agency.

False. You're giving them a label that tells others that you do not consider them 'rational actors'*. They still have the privilege of self-agency until such a time as that is removed (they become dangers to themselves† or others).

And in the case of Chinook (TAG and TAGII are dead) she has begun acting irrationally and has threatened actions that will cause galactic war. She has lost the privilege of self-agency in the eyes of Petey and Putzhu.

I agree with them incase that wasn't obvious.


* Which is why in today's era the tag 'insane' is only used by those incapable or unwilling to be more specific in the manner of the individual's irrationality.

† Personally I think 'self-harm' should also be ignored, but I intellectually understand that society largely disagrees with me on this point.

Quote:
But for Vog, and Tagi, that's not true - they both definitely have agency, and both 'prefer' whatever state they're currently in. Why is it moral to adjust them (against their current will) to a friendlier state?

Vog! had diminished agency and was a proven danger to himself and a threatened danger to others. He lost the privilege of self-agency, despite Doc Bunni's protestations.

Chinook (and TAGII in her time) are dangers to others.

Quote:
Whether the person is a "danger to themselves and others" is irrelevant to the question I am asking.

If you're asking "Can we just mess about with others with out their permission" the answer is "No, unless...". I've answered you now twice on this explicit question.


JohnSmith wrote:
Vog (who couldn't hurt anybody if he tried)...

He couldn't hurt Doc Bunni while she was in power armor, that is certainly not 'anybody'. That is literally 'can't hurt someone in power armor'.

Vog! was a soldier and presumably, despite being in a weakened body, still had soldierly skills. He was most certainly a threat to others.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:13 pm 
Offline
Entertainment
Entertainment

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 845
evileeyore wrote:
macnut wrote:
Of course, the question becomes how do you determine the person is dangerous? In Chinook's case it's simple, she threatened others and has the means to carry out her threats; but what about someone who hasn't hurt anyone yet, and hasn't openly threatened to do so?

As Arcanestomper said, you leave them be. Unless you have some absolute proof they are going to endanger someone, you must presume they are no danger.

That's a fine plan. Not everybody agrees. Take for example schizophrenics who are not violent - should they be able to refuse treatment?

evileeyore wrote:
JohnSmith wrote:
I explained why I recast the argument. When you call somebody "insane," you're dismissing their agency without actually giving a reason WHY you're dismissing their agency.

False. You're giving them a label that tells others that you do not consider them 'rational actors'*.
Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to sum up with "agency."

evileeyore wrote:
They still have the privilege of self-agency until such a time as that is removed (they become dangers to themselves† or others).

And in the case of Chinook (TAG and TAGII are dead) she has begun acting irrationally and has threatened actions that will cause galactic war. She has lost the privilege of self-agency in the eyes of Petey and Putzhu.

Is self-directed action a privilege? I think there are a few constitutions that disagree. If it's a privilege, who's granting it? And TAG being dead is a matter of opinion too, I suppose - lots of brain meddling going on there.

evileeyore wrote:
I agree with them incase that wasn't obvious.

The universe cries out in shock.


evileeyore wrote:
If you're asking "Can we just mess about with others with out their permission" the answer is "No, unless...". I've answered you now twice on this explicit question.

I can in fact read. But you always seem to ignore the interesting part. Where's the unless? Because you're being super general, and that's not interesting.

evileeyore wrote:
JohnSmith wrote:
Vog (who couldn't hurt anybody if he tried)...

He couldn't hurt Doc Bunni while she was in power armor, that is certainly not 'anybody'. That is literally 'can't hurt someone in power armor'.

Vog! was a soldier and presumably, despite being in a weakened body, still had soldierly skills. He was most certainly a threat to others.

No more of a threat than the Toughs. Who have voiced PLENTY of intent to harm others, and occasionally themselves. This is one of those "specifics" I mentioned. WHERE is the threat drawn? Vog is a violent (though in the modern age, powerless) xenophobe, while they are a team of modern, armoured paid thugs. Schlock eats people. Why is Vog getting the brain surgery?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:16 am 
Offline
Carnie
Carnie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:44 pm
Posts: 2541
JohnSmith wrote:
That's a fine plan. Not everybody agrees. Take for example schizophrenics who are not violent - should they be able to refuse treatment?

Yes. And they frequently do.

Quote:
Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to sum up with "agency."

There is a vast difference between agency and rationality.

Quote:
Is self-directed action a privilege?

Yes.

Quote:
If it's a privilege, who's granting it?

Privilege always flows in one direction, from the Powerful to the Weak.

Quote:
Where's the unless? Because you're being super general, and that's not interesting.

My error. I thought you were following the conversation: "... unless they become a danger to themselves or others."

Quote:
Why is Vog getting the brain surgery?

Because Petey and Bunni, whom were in a position of power over Not-Vog decided he did.


Personally I'd have let him go his own way were he amenable to that, but I wasn't consulted before his brain got the chop.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:20 am 
Offline
Monkey House Exhibit
Monkey House Exhibit

Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 5:29 am
Posts: 583
Schlock is paid to eat people that his boss tells them to, and also eats people who threaten his friends.

Since the Toughs now are rich and they want for everyone to live, Schlock, who does the killing the Toughs want, is aligned with the greater morality of saving everyone.

Vog's unmodified goals were that of killing and subjugating everyone not of his race.

This does not align with their goals, which is not great, but worse, wants to kill them. This is no good for them.

That's why Vog got brain damaged, and Schlock gets turns in the commissary.

If Schlock loses everyone he loves and becomes set on going down a path that would kill everyone, he would also get brain damaged if he literally could not change his mind. Or killed.

Oh, wait, that is exactly what is happening here.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group