Spacedocks take on the versus debate

SWvST: the subject of the main site.

Moderator: Vympel

Post Reply
User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-02 11:37pm

texanmarauder wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:No, I said that this (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_tr ... erything-0) exists. Which it does. Which is a droid starship that can manuever in under three seconds. Given that it is an unknown starship, assuming humans control it is foolish.
nobody ever assumed that humans controlled it. you are a liar. a fighter isn't a starship and it wasnt even the ship in question. we were discussing the malevolence. here is the quote from the other thread that started the whole "droid" thing.
Rhadamantus wrote:They have subluminal weapons. A ship, especially one with droids, could detect shots fired from that range and dodge.
not once did you ever state anything about the tri-fighter. which i might add is NOT a starship. followed by
They have droid brains controlling at least some of their ships. Moving a several thousand g for even 1 second would let them dodge dozens of kilometers. Also, you've managed to massively derail the entire thread into whether they should have fired earlier in one episode of the clone wars.
again, no mention of fighters. this was the link you tried to sell me. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_brain so when your argument failed again, you tried this....
Literally every single example in the movies shows thousands of gs.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... sion2.html.
If a ship is already moving, it's engines are clearly powered up and they can jink it.
The ship was directed by a cyborg with inhumanly fast reflexes.
Canon is canon.
i can go on and on. and wtf does jink mean? directed doesn't mean controlled by.
Rhadamantus wrote:And the book it is citing from is currently mostly canon and has 1000g+ accelerations as canon.
again a liar. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... ed_to_Know the disclaimer in the book even says that its mostly legends material.

and you started that whole thing when i called into question the ranges from the ICS book. and then blamed me for that whole tangent that you started. so go to hell.
You assumed people controlled it, and refused to admit that there were any ships ever that droids controlled. The droid fighters are ships with droid brains. That is very easy to get, but instead you will insist on not getting it, because you cannot admit that you could be wrong. And the book is a canon book. Parts of it that contradict canon materials are not. The accelerations are a confirmation of canon, which you are seemingly unable to admit exists.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-02 11:38pm

Also, just to clarify, do you dispute that the droid fighters exist and are controlled entirely by a droid brain?
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 09:17am

Rhadamantus wrote:Also, just to clarify, do you dispute that the droid fighters exist and are controlled entirely by a droid brain?
What exactly is a droid brain in distinction to a computer?

Do you have canonical evidence that there are droid fighters that are controlled exclusively by one droid brain?

Do you have evidence that the fighters you may have in mind are not controlled remotely - similar as the android army on Naboo was controlled remotely?

Do you have evidence that no one else controls the fighters, that no one else can give them orders, tell them when to attack whom and where?

I do not dispute that many fighters used by the Separatists have an on-board computer which can work as an advanced auto-pilot - maybe even with rudimentary fighting capabilities. But I have no data from which I could conclude how autonomous, sapient or sentient these computers are. I can not remember to have seen anything that proves that these fighters are not controlled in any way by operators who orders them what to do. This seems to be a non sequitur - unless you can provide evidence supporting your claim that there are droid fighters that are controlled exclusively by one droid brain.

What I know is that fighters used by the Separatists could be destroyed by fighters manned by clones and that I did not see any extraordinary maneuverability or reaction time or other superior capabilities from the fighters used by the Separatists.

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 09:30am

Even if the fighters used by the Separatists that were destroyed by fighters controlled by clones are equipped with a droid brain that controls them entirely , it does not seem to give them a significant advantage against fighters controlled by clones.

texanmarauder
Padawan Learner
Posts: 243
Joined: 2017-04-11 06:13pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by texanmarauder » 2017-07-03 10:30am

Rhadamantus wrote:Also, just to clarify, do you dispute that the droid fighters exist and are controlled entirely by a droid brain?
i do not dispute that the separatists had droid fighters that could follow commands like "attack this target". that we see in AOTC when they are chasing dooku and dooku sics his trifighters on the LAAT chasing them. he types the commands into his speeder and motions the trifighters away. trifighters, vulture droids, hyena bombers, all are basically big droids. all of this is irrelevant since the matter we were discussing at the time was the MALEVOLENCE, NOT SOME STUPID DROID FIGHTER.

texanmarauder
Padawan Learner
Posts: 243
Joined: 2017-04-11 06:13pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by texanmarauder » 2017-07-03 10:38am

Rhadamantus wrote: You assumed people controlled it, and refused to admit that there were any ships ever that droids controlled. The droid fighters are ships with droid brains. That is very easy to get, but instead you will insist on not getting it, because you cannot admit that you could be wrong. And the book is a canon book. Parts of it that contradict canon materials are not. The accelerations are a confirmation of canon, which you are seemingly unable to admit exists.
i never assumed that humans controlled the trifighter because you didn't mention the droid fighters. again, we were talking about the malevolence. trying to dodge the topic seems to be a habit for you. and the book has few canon parts to it. even the fucking author said so. and from what i have seen it doesn't confirm anything you have bleated about so far in terms of acceleration.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 10:55am

WATCH-MAN wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:Also, just to clarify, do you dispute that the droid fighters exist and are controlled entirely by a droid brain?
What exactly is a droid brain in distinction to a computer?

Do you have canonical evidence that there are droid fighters that are controlled exclusively by one droid brain?

Do you have evidence that the fighters you may have in mind are not controlled remotely - similar as the android army on Naboo was controlled remotely?

Do you have evidence that no one else controls the fighters, that no one else can give them orders, tell them when to attack whom and where?

I do not dispute that many fighters used by the Separatists have an on-board computer which can work as an advanced auto-pilot - maybe even with rudimentary fighting capabilities. But I have no data from which I could conclude how autonomous, sapient or sentient these computers are. I can not remember to have seen anything that proves that these fighters are not controlled in any way by operators who orders them what to do. This seems to be a non sequitur - unless you can provide evidence supporting your claim that there are droid fighters that are controlled exclusively by one droid brain.

What I know is that fighters used by the Separatists could be destroyed by fighters manned by clones and that I did not see any extraordinary maneuverability or reaction time or other superior capabilities from the fighters used by the Separatists.
They are internally operated ( Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters,). And they can manuever on their own. Whether at some point they might be remotely operated (no evidence for this) doesn't change the point.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 10:57am

texanmarauder wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:Also, just to clarify, do you dispute that the droid fighters exist and are controlled entirely by a droid brain?
i do not dispute that the separatists had droid fighters that could follow commands like "attack this target". that we see in AOTC when they are chasing dooku and dooku sics his trifighters on the LAAT chasing them. he types the commands into his speeder and motions the trifighters away. trifighters, vulture droids, hyena bombers, all are basically big droids. all of this is irrelevant since the matter we were discussing at the time was the MALEVOLENCE, NOT SOME STUPID DROID FIGHTER.
Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters. These are clearly supposed to be self-operated, which means the seppies have ships that can manuever and fire on their own, which means that the clone who said it was out of range could have supposed it was droid-operated, which means you insistence on super-short ranges is wrong, and also settled, and also NOT PART OF THE THREAD.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 10:59am

texanmarauder wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote: You assumed people controlled it, and refused to admit that there were any ships ever that droids controlled. The droid fighters are ships with droid brains. That is very easy to get, but instead you will insist on not getting it, because you cannot admit that you could be wrong. And the book is a canon book. Parts of it that contradict canon materials are not. The accelerations are a confirmation of canon, which you are seemingly unable to admit exists.
i never assumed that humans controlled the trifighter because you didn't mention the droid fighters. again, we were talking about the malevolence. trying to dodge the topic seems to be a habit for you. and the book has few canon parts to it. even the fucking author said so. and from what i have seen it doesn't confirm anything you have bleated about so far in terms of acceleration.
THE DROID FIGHTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY DROID BRAINS. THEY ARE A SHIP THAT IS CONTROLLED BY A DROID BRAIN.
And the book is non-canon in parts that are contradicted by new material or the movies. The accelerations are confirmed.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 11:38am

Rhadamantus wrote:They are internally operated ( Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters,). And they can manuever on their own.
Please explain what "they" is.

I spoke of "fighters used by the Separatists" and "fighters manned by clones ".

You reply with: "They are internally operated ( Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters,)."

Refers your "they" to "fighters used by the Separatists", "fighters manned by clones ", "standard Separatist droid fighters", "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighters"?

How are "fighters used by the Separatists", "standard Separatist droid fighters", "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighters" related to each other?

Are "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighter not used by the Separatists?

Are "Vulture-class starfighters" "standard Separatist droid fighters"?

What else are "standard Separatist droid fighters"?

And please provide evidence for your claim that
  • "they" - whatever "they" are - are internally operated and
  • the other - whatever "they" are not - are not internally operated,
  • tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters
  • Vulture-class starfighters do not feature more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters
  • "they" - whatever "they" are - "can manuever on their own" and
  • the other - whatever "they" are not - can not manuever on their own.

Rhadamantus wrote:Whether at some point they might be remotely operated (no evidence for this) doesn't change the point.
Is there any evidence that they are never remotely operated?

Is there any evidence that they can work without being remotely operated?

Is there any evidence at all - regardless which conclusion it would affirm?

texanmarauder
Padawan Learner
Posts: 243
Joined: 2017-04-11 06:13pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by texanmarauder » 2017-07-03 12:11pm

Rhadamantus wrote: Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters. These are clearly supposed to be self-operated,
dooku giving it orders contradicts you.
which means the seppies have ships that can manuever and fire on their own,
no, they have fighters. and they maneuver and fire by following their programmed orders.
which means that the clone who said it was out of range could have supposed it was droid-operated,
it WAS droid operated. by battle droids. which is how all capital ships in the seppy navy were operated. do i need to show you the youtube video again? we were talking about the malevolence. was it controlled by some central droid brain? nope. and you cant prove it was. and droid brain processors don't operate the way you think.
which means you insistence on super-short ranges is wrong, and also settled, and also NOT PART OF THE THREAD.
and that whole load of shit is just that, a load of shit. canon is canon. and you are trying to twist shit around in a desperate attempt to make your million km ranges vseem valid. you got proven wrong. again.
THE DROID FIGHTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY DROID BRAINS. THEY ARE A SHIP THAT IS CONTROLLED BY A DROID BRAIN.
droid fighters are droids, not a ship. that's like saying a battle droid is a ship. its not.
And the book is non-canon in parts that are contradicted by new material or the movies.
most of it is non canon. the author said so. you keep trying to minimize how much of it is canon. probably because it makes your source look bad. bad sources seem to be your MO.
The accelerations are confirmed
confirmed by who or what? the movies again? i never heard those accelerations stated. i hear stuff like "full throttle" and "accelerate to attack speed". and looking at ships traveling over the course of ~200,000km over several different scenes and angles over the course of more than 5 minutes doesn't give a whole lot of info. so far, you give vague statements saying "its the movies" or "wong said so" or in the case of range, "the ICS said so". your sources are either non canon or fan sites. so no, not confirmed. confirmed only in your pathetic mind.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 12:19pm

texanmarauder wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote: Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters. These are clearly supposed to be self-operated,
dooku giving it orders contradicts you.
which means the seppies have ships that can manuever and fire on their own,
no, they have fighters. and they maneuver and fire by following their programmed orders.
which means that the clone who said it was out of range could have supposed it was droid-operated,
it WAS droid operated. by battle droids. which is how all capital ships in the seppy navy were operated. do i need to show you the youtube video again? we were talking about the malevolence. was it controlled by some central droid brain? nope. and you cant prove it was. and droid brain processors don't operate the way you think.
which means you insistence on super-short ranges is wrong, and also settled, and also NOT PART OF THE THREAD.
and that whole load of shit is just that, a load of shit. canon is canon. and you are trying to twist shit around in a desperate attempt to make your million km ranges vseem valid. you got proven wrong. again.
THE DROID FIGHTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY DROID BRAINS. THEY ARE A SHIP THAT IS CONTROLLED BY A DROID BRAIN.
droid fighters are droids, not a ship. that's like saying a battle droid is a ship. its not.
And the book is non-canon in parts that are contradicted by new material or the movies.
most of it is non canon. the author said so. you keep trying to minimize how much of it is canon. probably because it makes your source look bad. bad sources seem to be your MO.
The accelerations are confirmed
confirmed by who or what? the movies again? i never heard those accelerations stated. i hear stuff like "full throttle" and "accelerate to attack speed". and looking at ships traveling over the course of ~200,000km over several different scenes and angles over the course of more than 5 minutes doesn't give a whole lot of info. so far, you give vague statements saying "its the movies" or "wong said so" or in the case of range, "the ICS said so". your sources are either non canon or fan sites. so no, not confirmed. confirmed only in your pathetic mind.
That they can follow orders doesn't mean they can't operate independently. If there are separtist ships which can be droid operated, which there are, then thinking the Malovolence might be one is excusable. Your sources, meanwhile, are nonexistent, and you seem unable to ever admit anything that disagrees with you might be canon. You resort to nothing but willful ignorance and false accusations of bias. This is also a massive derailment of the thread.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 12:20pm

WATCH-MAN wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:They are internally operated ( Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters,). And they can manuever on their own.
Please explain what "they" is.

I spoke of "fighters used by the Separatists" and "fighters manned by clones ".

You reply with: "They are internally operated ( Unlike Vulture-class starfighters, the tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters,)."

Refers your "they" to "fighters used by the Separatists", "fighters manned by clones ", "standard Separatist droid fighters", "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighters"?

How are "fighters used by the Separatists", "standard Separatist droid fighters", "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighters" related to each other?

Are "Vulture-class starfighters" or "tri-fighter not used by the Separatists?

Are "Vulture-class starfighters" "standard Separatist droid fighters"?

What else are "standard Separatist droid fighters"?

And please provide evidence for your claim that
  • "they" - whatever "they" are - are internally operated and
  • the other - whatever "they" are not - are not internally operated,
  • tri-fighter featured more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters
  • Vulture-class starfighters do not feature more advanced brains than standard Separatist droid fighters
  • "they" - whatever "they" are - "can manuever on their own" and
  • the other - whatever "they" are not - can not manuever on their own.

Rhadamantus wrote:Whether at some point they might be remotely operated (no evidence for this) doesn't change the point.
Is there any evidence that they are never remotely operated?

Is there any evidence that they can work without being remotely operated?

Is there any evidence at all - regardless which conclusion it would affirm?
It was a direct quote from the wiki. Which has them has having advanced droid brains. As does legends. There is little to no evidence that they are remotely directed drones.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 9728
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: Bound in a nutshell

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Eternal_Freedom » 2017-07-03 12:29pm

texanmarauder wrote:
Eternal_Freedom wrote:Why would Yavin 4 have "a much higher standard gravity" just because it's orbiting a gas giant? IT clearly has Earth-like gravity because we see people comfortably walking around on the surface just as if it were Earth, so Yavin 4's surface gravity is 1g, or very close to that.
yavin 4 is much closer to yavin than the moon is to earth. the gravities of both affect the other. which is why i would think that being in such close proximity would affect yavin 4.
What evidence do you have that Yavin 4 is much closer to Yavin than the Moon is to Earth? I'm genuinely curious, I've never read the novelisations so if it's mentioned there I would be unaware of it.

And yes, it almost certainly does have an effect. Probably a similar effect that the Moon has on Earth re tides and such. It evidently does not have an effect on surface gravity and all things related to it, since we see it to be a perfectly habitable Earth-like envionment.
Also, Where do you get the idea that Yavin is bigger than Jupiter? And even if it were, with gas giants a larger diameter does not automatically mean it's heavier.
according to the novel, yavin has a diameter of nearly 200,000km. to my knowledge, most gas giants do have heavier gravity than earth.
Ok, that's a source for the number, thank you. Gas giants having higher surface gravity than Earth is perfectly true - and I never said otherwise, so I'm not sure why you bring it up. The point stands that with gas giants size does not automatically equate to mass. Case in point, Saturn has a mass slightly under 1/3 that of Jupiter, but has a mean diameter barely 20,000 km smaller than Jupiter (to be precise, Jupiter mean diameter, 138,000km, Saturn mean diameter, 114,000km). This is partly why Saturn's mean density is about half that of Jupiter - a simple size comparison tells you very little about gas giant planets.
Yavin's gravity being stronger than Earth's (or Yavin 4's) would have an effect if the fighters were climbing up from Yavin itself. As they're taking off from Yavin 4, a moon in a stable orbit, they are already have a hefty velocity relative to the gas giant, it's how orbits work.
i was asking because, like i said, i have never seen yavin taken into account.
Yavin won't have much of an impact on the accelerations or velocities needed - anything taking off from Yavin 4 is already in orbit around Yavin by virtue of starting on the moon, which is in orbit. This is why stuff launching from Earth doesn't need to gain ~30km/s of velocity to stay in orbit around the Sun, it already has that velocity from Earth.
Also, "if physics is to be believed." Physics works whether you believe it or not. That's the lovely thing about it.
but i think we can both agree that physics don't always get taken into account in science fantasy or science fiction. that's why when we try to apply physics to what happens on screen, then often what happens on screen doesn't make sense. hence the reason why i phrased it that way. star wars relies heavily on suspension of disbelief. as do most movies/tv shows having to do with space.
That I am fully aware of, I just dislike the expression as it implies physics or parts thereof are subject to belief in them working when this is manifestly not true.

On the larger orbital mechanics question, I'm rather interested now. The fighters take off from a moon in a stable orbit. The DS is explicitly said to be orbiting Yavin (voice chatter on the bridge "we are preparing to orbit the planet") and catches up to the moon (or at least to a firing position) quite rapidly. Logically, the DS would be in a lower orbit with a shorter duration. So the fighters have to take off, shed velocity to lower their orbit, close on the DS (or intercept at any rate) and then slow to relative rest with the DS to do battle. That then can do that and a return trip, plus extensive dogfighting, on one fuel load is impressive indeed.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 01:09pm

Rhadamantus wrote:It was a direct quote from the wiki.
And since when is wiki canon or even a relevant source for anything regarding Star Wars?

I always thought that - if at all - it only could be regarded as a meta-source.
Rhadamantus wrote:Which has them has having advanced droid brains.
Are you arguing that because wiki says that they - whatever "they" is - are having advanced droid brains, it has to be the ultimate truth - regardless of what is shown or not shown in the movies or television series and that you do not have to provide any evidence for your claims as long as wiki confirms your claims?
Rhadamantus wrote:As does legends.

Are you putting wiki on the same dogmatic level as legends?
Rhadamantus wrote:There is little to no evidence that they are remotely directed drones.
Correct.

And there is little to no evidence that they are not.

There is little to no evidence that they are autonomous, sapient or sentient.

You not providing evidence as asked could be seen as a volition of your obligation to back up your claim.

Furthermore: If you quote something, state your source.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 01:15pm

WATCH-MAN wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:It was a direct quote from the wiki.
And since when is wiki canon or even a relevant source for anything regarding Star Wars?

I always thought that - if at all - it only could be regarded as a meta-source.
Rhadamantus wrote:Which has them has having advanced droid brains.
Are you arguing that because wiki says that they - whatever "they" is - are having advanced droid brains, it has to be the ultimate truth - regardless of what is shown or not shown in the movies or television series and that you do not have to provide any evidence for your claims as long as wiki confirms your claims.
Rhadamantus wrote:As does legends.

Are you putting wiki on the same dogmatic level as legends?
Rhadamantus wrote:There is little to no evidence that they are remotely directed drones.
Correct.

And there is little to no evidence that they are not.

There is little to no evidence that they are autonomous, sapient or sentient.

You not providing evidence as asked could be seen as a volition of your obligation to back up your claim.
The wiki quote was from a canon book. The canon and legends source both agree that they are at least to a substantial degree self-directed. :roll:
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 01:22pm

Rhadamantus wrote:The wiki quote was from a canon book. The canon and legends source both agree that they are at least to a substantial degree self-directed. :roll:
Please provide evidence that
  • the wiki quote was from a canon book
  • canon source agree that "they" - whatever "they" are - are at least to a substantial degree self-directed
  • legends source agree that "they" - whatever "they" are - are at least to a substantial degree self-directed.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 01:46pm

WATCH-MAN wrote:
Rhadamantus wrote:The wiki quote was from a canon book. The canon and legends source both agree that they are at least to a substantial degree self-directed. :roll:
Please provide evidence that
  • the wiki quote was from a canon book
  • canon source agree that "they" - whatever "they" are - are at least to a substantial degree self-directed
  • legends source agree that "they" - whatever "they" are - are at least to a substantial degree self-directed.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_tri-fighter
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... the_Galaxy.

The quote I gave you.
The bracing arms surrounded the fighter's droid pilot housed in a rotating, gyroscopic core. (From the legends pages).
Pre-and post reset, the droid tri-fighter has been shown as self-controlled.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 02:31pm

Rhadamantus wrote:http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_tri-fighter
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... the_Galaxy.

The quote I gave you.
The bracing arms surrounded the fighter's droid pilot housed in a rotating, gyroscopic core. (From the legends pages).
Pre-and post reset, the droid tri-fighter has been shown as self-controlled.
I just read through all your posts directed at me.

I couldn't find one in which you gave me a quote or those links.

Please provide evidence that you gave me a quote as such.



Neither link proves that the wiki quote was from a canon book.

If it all, it proves only that wiki claims that such thing stems from "Star Wars: Ships of the Galaxy".

Problem:

Wookieepedia is a site that can be edited by anyone.

It is in itself no source for Star Wars but only - if at all - a meta-source.

Anyone can contribute to it - and everyone can - willfully or negligently - write things in it that are not correct.

I do not accept such meta-sources as evidence.

Such meta-sources are like double hearsay - if not like triple hearsay if you differentiate between Wookieepedia itself and the concrete author who wrote an article or edited it - whereas in this case one of the intermediaries - the concrete author - is unknown.

What I want is that YOU provide evidence that "Star Wars: Ships of the Galaxy" or any other canon source really states what YOU are claiming.

I want YOU to provide evidence that there is a Star Wars source that was considered canon until the reset that claims that the bracing arms surrounded the fighter's droid pilot housed in a rotating, gyroscopic core.

(And if it is speaking of a "droid pilot" does this not mean that droid pilot and fighter are two separate things?)

And I want YOU to provide evidence that there is a Star Wars source that was considered canon until the reset that shows that the droid tri-fighter is self-controlled.

And I want YOU to provide evidence that there is a Star Wars source that is still considered canon that shows that the droid tri-fighter is self-controlled.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 02:34pm

WATCH-Man, that's not how evidence works. I cited sources, multiple and reliable ones. Wookiee is a reliable source unless you can show otherwise. Making up shitty excuses doesn't change that. Please cite any sources which have the droid fighter with a droid brain in a universe full of droids actually being human controlled. If you can't, this argument is over.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 02:45pm

Rhadamantus wrote:WATCH-Man, that's not how evidence works. I cited sources, multiple and reliable ones. Wookiee is a reliable source unless you can show otherwise. Making up shitty excuses doesn't change that.
I have explained why Wookieepedia is not reliable.

Instead of showing why my considerations are fallacious, you simply claim that Wookieepedia is reliable - without any argument or evidence.

You simply claim that this is not how evidence works - without any argument or evidence.

But that's exactly how evidence works.

You can not simply claim that a source is reliable and demand that I provide evidence for the contrary.

If it is your source, you have to defend it.

You have to prove that it is reliable.


Rhadamantus wrote:Please cite any sources which have the droid fighter with a droid brain in a universe full of droids actually being human controlled.
Why should I?

I have never ever claimed that there are "sources which have the droid fighter with a droid brain in a universe full of droids actually being human controlled."

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 02:53pm

Rhadamantus, it is an interesting debating technique you have there.

I ask you to provide evidence for your claims again and again.

You ignore this and provide not one singly evidence.

And than you ask me to provide evidence for something I have never ever claimed.

And if I do not provide this evidence, you state that the argument will be over.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 02:56pm

WATCH-MAN, Wookiee is and will remain evidence. If you have counter evidence, provide. If you can show that the book doesn't say that, show me. Otherwise, I will default to the evidence we have, instead of your tired old tactics.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

WATCH-MAN
Padawan Learner
Posts: 409
Joined: 2011-04-20 01:03am

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by WATCH-MAN » 2017-07-03 03:02pm

And now you are like a petulant child.

Wookieepedia is reliable - because you say so ...

Wookieepedia will remain evidence - because you say so ...

And not you have to provide evidence for your claims.

If I do not agree with your claims, I have to provide evidence for the contrary.

That's an unique approach concerning the burden of proof.





And no: I will not provide evidence that a source YOU are referring to does not says what YOU claim it is saying.

It is your reference - not mine.

I will not buy this book only to prove that your claim is wrong when it is your obligation to provide evidence that it is correct.

User avatar
Rhadamantus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 380
Joined: 2016-03-30 02:59pm

Re: Spacedocks take on the versus debate

Post by Rhadamantus » 2017-07-03 03:59pm

A. Given you clearly have no intent of listening to evidence or participating in a honest debate, I'm done.
B. Wookiee is an accepted source. Your insistence that it is not will not change that.
"There is no justice in the laws of nature, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The Universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky.

But they don't have to! WE care! There IS light in the world, and it is US!"

"There is no destiny behind the ills of this world."

"Mortem Delenda Est."

"25,000km is not orbit"-texanmarauder

Post Reply