Page 50 of 50

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 02:15am
by Steve
What about Pollux, 'Zook?

(And yes, we're on Page 50, but I want PeZook's reply before I start a new thread.)

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 02:18am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
Simon_Jester wrote:The Umerian solution: use really specialized and dumb AIs. Like, say, AI fighters that don't know how to do anything but launch in defense of Blue targets and attack Red targets while asking for clarification on Purple targets.

Ask them whether they enjoy their job, and if they could talk they'd say:

"I get to shoot Red targets."
"But do you want to shoot red targets?"
"I. Get. To. Shoot. Red. Targets."
"But why red? Why not blue?"
"Which part of "Red target" do you not understand?"
"But isn't there more to life than killing red targets?"
"...now that's just crazy talk."
Our solution is the 3 Robotics laws, and also a deadman switch. We pull the plug, when we aren't happy.

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 02:32am
by loomer
Man, conflict with you fuckers is seeming more and more likely. All enslaving the Mechanicals brothers, and shit!

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 02:38am
by PeZook
Steve wrote:What about Pollux, 'Zook?

(And yes, we're on Page 50, but I want PeZook's reply before I start a new thread.)
You're kidding, right?

Just read this :D

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 04:52am
by Oskuro
Woah! Thread explosion!

I personally have no intention of abusing the "don't be a dick" rules, just worried about setting a precedent that rules lawyers might abuse (or other people might have an issue with).

Also, my notion was to have Ork activity based around fleets more than planets/settlements, so blasting a fleet to oblivion (or making it run) would solve local problems quite readily, specially since replacement ships would have to haul ass from the home sector shipyards or something.

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 06:24am
by Thanas
Simon_Jester wrote:
Thanas wrote:We do not believe in big cannons. We believe in missile spam - backed up by big cannons. :)
That's okay, Thanas. Big cannons believe in you. And in your missile salvoes, because they are just that omni-benevolent.

And lo, is it not written: "Point defense free. Ten-millisecond burst on each incoming, Gaussian-annular spread within burst, assume five gravity average evasive maneuver."
You are going to need a lot more than that rate of fire to stop missile Spam. :P

Simon_Jester wrote:
PeZook wrote:
Thanas wrote:Smart AI missiles are not, especially not when fired from long-distance. :lol:
Abominable organics! We knew you would resort to slavery to fight your wars!
Worse. Slave suicide bombers...
Heheh. When Steve approves my fraction, I bet you will have to reevaluate this point of view....

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:17am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
Given the perpetration of AIs claiming to be sentients, the Imperial Inquisition shall have an Ordos dedicated to the hunting down and extermination of rogue AIs: Ordos Robotica.

Now as for missile spam, hmmm....

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:24am
by PeZook
How will the OR determine if an AI is rogue or not? :D

I can see interesting situations stemming from this:

"Hail, fellow travellers! It is I, Herbert 'Daring' Dashwood, upload and space explorer extraordinaire!"

"FOUL MACHINE ABOMINATION! DIEDIEDIEDIE!!!!"

War with a foreign power follows...

Of course, I welcome this development entirely, especially in the context of a certain Wild Space mercenary ;)

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:27am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
PeZook wrote:How will the OR determine if an AI is rogue or not? :D

I can see interesting situations stemming from this:

"Hail, fellow travellers! It is I, Herbert 'Daring' Dashwood, upload and space explorer extraordinaire!"

"FOUL MACHINE ABOMINATION! DIEDIEDIEDIE!!!!"

War with a foreign power follows...

Of course, I welcome this development entirely, especially in the context of a certain Wild Space mercenary ;)
Depends of course. We don't shoot first. We investigate/torture/hack first, then send the creature back as our plant.

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:36am
by DarthShady
Man, all these mercenary groups and rogue AI's make me want to create my own adventurous band of bandits... :D

Oh and man, I'm going to love the Orks. *grins* :P

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:45am
by PeZook
DarthShady wrote:Man, all these mercenary groups and rogue AI's make me want to create my own adventurous band of bandits... :D
Oh! Karlack pirates!

A particularly slimy kind ;)
DarthShady wrote:Oh and man, I'm going to love the Orks. *grins* :P
Yeah, they'll make for interesting test subjects neighbors.
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Depends of course. We don't shoot first. We investigate/torture/hack first, then send the creature back as our plant.
Back to where? A rogue AI is, by definition, rogue :)

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 08:55am
by DarthShady
Now that I think about it, an idea comes to mind, about a group of pirates( Not Karlack though. :P ), lead by an exceptionally slimy leader. And we'll just have to see how slimy he will be. :D
PeZook wrote: Yeah, they'll make for interesting test subjects neighbors.
Man the Collectors are sounding more and more like a bunch of mad scientists. Just make sure your experiments don't go...horribly wrong. :wink: I love the Collectors pics BTW. :D

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 09:00am
by PeZook
DarthShady wrote:Now that I think about it, an idea comes to mind, about a group of pirates( Not Karlack though. :P ), lead by an exceptionally slimy leader. And we'll just have to see how slimy he will be. :D
Let's call him Najrds Cirak!
DarthShady wrote:Man the Collectors are sounding more and more like a bunch of mad scientists. Just make sure your experiments don't go...horribly wrong. :wink: I love the Collectors pics BTW. :D
Oh, it happens all the time. It's a real nuisance.

:P

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 09:51am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
PeZook wrote:Back to where? A rogue AI is, by definition, rogue :)
A rogue AI isn't rogue after it has been "processed" by the Inquisition. :wink:

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 10:57am
by Simon_Jester
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
PeZook wrote:Back to where? A rogue AI is, by definition, rogue :)
A rogue AI isn't rogue after it has been "processed" by the Inquisition. :wink:
It may, however, be a doorstop.

For yea, the Inquisitors have exorcised the magic smoke-daemon from the bowels of the damned machine!
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Our solution is the 3 Robotics laws, and also a deadman switch. We pull the plug, when we aren't happy.
Some of our fighters are designed to carry antiship missiles; applying Asimov's Laws to them across the board would be... counterproductive.

I take your meaning, but we prefer customized expert systems to excessively intelligent and computer-power-hungry AIs that raise ethical dilemmas when used for their intended purpose because we can't prove we're not enslaving them.
Thanas wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:That's okay, Thanas. Big cannons believe in you. And in your missile salvoes, because they are just that omni-benevolent.

And lo, is it not written: "Point defense free. Ten-millisecond burst on each incoming, Gaussian-annular spread within burst, assume five gravity average evasive maneuver."
You are going to need a lot more than that rate of fire to stop missile Spam. :P
Oh, naturally I'll need much more volume of fire than that if I'm looking at a true Manticore Missile Massacre. But then, I never said just how many weapons were firing ten-millisecond bursts at the incoming salvo, did I?

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 11:11am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
Simon_Jester wrote:It may, however, be a doorstop.

For yea, the Inquisitors have exorcised the magic smoke-daemon from the bowels of the damned machine!
A useful doorstop. For verily, the machine will now be in our thrall....

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 11:53am
by Coyote
Oskuro wrote:I personally have no intention of abusing the "don't be a dick" rules, just worried about setting a precedent that rules lawyers might abuse (or other people might have an issue with)...
I'm with Oskuro on this. The more rules that are set in stone, the more handholds there are for nitpickery and rules-lawyering to develop, and someone will exploit a weakness of some sort and then more rules will be made to patch it, and...

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 11:54am
by Siege
Alternatively, any attempt at rules lawyering will be met with the moderators declaring "a massive meteoroid falls on your homeworld".

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 12:30pm
by Oskuro
Hmmmm, creative riot control..... Wait, my whole population is made of rioting lunatics. Back to the drawing board.

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 01:05pm
by Moby Halcyon
I've been playing around with building my army, but in the meantime I might as well get my name on the board before it fills up... permanently. I've entered into a rough alliance with Siege's Sovereignty, with our nations having each other's backs. That means Q26, Q27, Q28, R27, R28, S28, and T28 cover my nation's expanse. My home sector - Cevault - should be at R27.

Re: An SDNW Proposal

Posted: 2010-06-17 02:55pm
by Steve
PeZook wrote:
Steve wrote:What about Pollux, 'Zook?

(And yes, we're on Page 50, but I want PeZook's reply before I start a new thread.)
You're kidding, right?

Just read this :D
Oh, that. I thought you were talking about what he did in SDNW2, since that's the whole joke.

As for Pollux, well, let's save that for the next thread; since we're just two weeks from game start I'll make it our first official OOC thread.