Ad Victoriam, But Why?

[Fkemman11]

"Synths, created by the Institute, are cybernetic organisms designed to resemble humans. They are classified into one of three generations depending upon their complexity. Generation 1 synths are purely robotic androids, no smarter than a standard Protectron, and resembling a lanky, metal skeleton with mechanical organs and hydraulic muscles. Generation 2 synths are similar in appearance to their predecessors, but are hardier and sheathed in plastic "flesh" mounted on a thin metal lattice surrounding their mechanical skeleton. Though more human-like in appearance, Gen-2s still possess limited A.I. and superficially resemble a mannequin more than a human. Generation 3 synths represent the pinnacle of synth technology: they are completely indistinguishable from a human down to the cellular level, but are still able to be "programmed" and manipulated via voice commands."-Wiki

 

According to this they are not "Human" at all- merely machines made to look and act like them. They are designed as infiltrators, saboteurs, and assassins. So we are not really talking about Cyborgs here. They are mostly machine with a human-like endoskeleton- very much like the Terminators.

 

So just because they look and sound Human does not make them acceptable for the very reason that they can flip in an instant via the right voice command or whatever. They are "Tools" to be used( :laugh: ) and discarded. They are walking time-bombs and should be put down. Allowing them to exist even in isolation is a terrible risk that what's left of Humanity cannot afford to take.

 

Just caught that gen 3 Synths are supposed to be "indistinguishable" from Humans even down to the cellular level. That sounds more like some kind of Cloning with some Cybernetics thrown in. Still not Human- at least not a natural one. And certainly not trust-worthy. Does anyone remember Total Recall. Yeah that. :sad:

 

I would add that any accumulated data on gen 3 synths found in a subsequent sweep of Institute facilities be destroyed- lest that info fall into the wrong hands. If I found out the BOS was "safeguarding" any relevant info then I would regard them with deep suspicion as well.

 

Finally I would like to state that this is not simple paranoia. My personal reasons for not accepting any Synthetic as a viable species is based on the fact that they might supplant Humans as the dominant race on the planet. If mankind creates a "better human"- then what happens to all naturally imperfect humans? We become obsolete. :geek:

[Deleted4363562User]

Well, far as I can tell, the Institute isn't as far as making an AI that can pass the Turing test. They don't have a revolutionary positronic brain to put in their synths. All their computers, including what goes into synsths and the prototype cyborg Kellogg is byte-compatible with pre-war hardware. It's hard to stress that without a long nerdy discussion about computers and architectures, but basically they haven't actually designed a new CPU in 220 years. Hell, they never even fixed the software exploits, since the exact same techniques work to hack their terminals as on any pre-war terminal outside.

 

As I was saying, other than teleportation, their tech seems to have largely stagnated or in some cases even regressed.

 

So, anyway, I don't think they created a Mr Data. Essentially they just took DNA and created a human with some minor changes. Like I would wager they deleted the telomerase gene, which would explain why their synths both can't reproduce and are almost immune to getting cancer from radiation. But they don't seem to understand even the genetics much farther than that, as evidenced by both Virgil's lab and the fact that they needed to steal a pre-war infant. They're not really at the point where they can design much from the ground-up even in genetics.

 

So my take is that the Gen 3 synths basically ARE humans, with some extra chips and conditioning to keep them in line. Not very successfully at that. Maybe 3d-printed humans, but basically still humans. We're not really talking about a Mr Data here.

 

So normally I'd be very inclined to grant them human status, since, really, that's what I think they ARE.

 

BUT, well, here comes that big BUT again, they have those key changes that make them dangerous. And which you can't remove or even detect without killing them. So, well, sad as it may be since they're the victims already, I don't want them around.

 

The analogy I'd make is, well, imagine if someone took some guy from your vilage and returned him with a remote-controlled nuke-mine implanted in them. With some failsafes so you can't remove it without blowing up the village. He's the victim, make no mistake. But... I still wouldn't want him in one of my villages.

 

 

The problem I have is that they still don't function like humans. Like I pointed out in the video, their brains go through a very different type of developmental process, if they even have one at all. Synths can be programmed, whereas humans need a few years from birth to develop language, motor skills and basic personalities. I'm no brain expert but I have a background in human development/childcare/preschool. The whole way synths are able to acquire knowledge and be programmed is not very human. So while, I am tempted to concede to some of your points, there's still ample evidence that they aren't simply humans with minor alterations. The alterations here are significant. It would seem that Synths are more like a bionic-human chassis with a very different brain.

[Fkemman11]

Blade Runner: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a science fiction novel by American writer Philip K. Dick. First published in 1968.

 

Not sure if anyone remembers the movie or read the book. It delves into a different post-apocalyptic world where androids are created to fill roles in society -subservient to humans. A detective is tasked with finding and "retiring" six androids that are on Earth illegally. I would recommend taking a look at either as it is a very complex story dealing with what truly defines a Human.

 

Another excellent movie on the subject is A.I. by Stephen Spielberg. This one made me really think about what man can create and how it could be viewed. Again this one is set in a dying futuristic Earth.

 

This begs the question that what really makes a Human- Human? If we were all machines and developed a machine like entity made of living tissue- what would be the difference?

 

I like where Beth went with this. By analyzing these things in FO4 we maybe gain some understanding of ourselves. :dry:

[Deleted4363562User]

Blade Runner: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a science fiction novel by American writer Philip K. Dick. First published in 1968.

 

Not sure if anyone remembers the movie or read the book. It delves into a different post-apocalyptic world where androids are created to fill roles in society -subservient to humans. A detective is tasked with finding and "retiring" six androids that are on Earth illegally. I would recommend taking a look at either as it is a very complex story dealing with what truly defines a Human.

 

Another excellent movie on the subject is A.I. by Stephen Spielberg. This one made me really think about what man can create and how it could be viewed. Again this one is set in a dying futuristic Earth.

 

This begs the question that what really makes a Human- Human? If we were all machines and developed a machine like entity made of living tissue- what would be the difference?

 

I like where Beth went with this. By analyzing these things in FO4 we maybe gain some understanding of ourselves. :dry:

 

 

"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe..."

[Tidus44]

While the question of the synths ultimate purpose is rather vague given the information one can glean from the game, it can be as easily argued that their intelligence is limited by programming and there is no possibility they could evolve to a superior intelligence. As is pointed out elsewhere, the 3^rd generation are closer to clones than robots and a visit to the robotics lab in the Institute seems to suggest this rather strongly. Given the advanced technology of the Institute scientists to create a human replica it is not impossible that the programming of the synths limits their ability to evolve beyond the level of intelligence the scientists program into the synths. This can be somewhat borne out by DiMA who has worked for a significant period of time to overcome its programming without much success.

I have a difficult time with the assertion that the BoS is the least racist faction. In looking at any other faction in the game there is no evidence of racism, fascism or misogyny, so I’m not clear on how the BoS is the least racist. In my mind the BoS is much worse than racist. A racist only dislikes a segment of society based upon that segments race. The BoS is elitist and anyone who is not a member of their “cult” is looked upon with distain. The BoS arrives in the Commonwealth and announces they intend to be peaceful, but then land troops and kill everyone and anyone who isn’t a member of their cult. While slightly more benevolent to peaceful settlers by not shooting them immediately, their means of gaining “donations” from the settlers suggests they are not the “good” guys and even less so the faction one would want to have in charge of others.

In the question of factions present in the game, it is obvious what the game developers intended in establishing the “personalities” of any given faction. The player is placed in a position to make a choice and the choice is not based on logic backed by fact, but much more on emotion based upon the players personal preferences and perhaps even prejudices.

I do not (and honestly cannot) find fault with any choice a player has made, but I do question the means they may have used to make their choice. It was a very good video, but it left me wondering how some of the ideas presented were evidenced within the game.

[Moraelin]

The problem I have is that they still don't function like humans. Like I pointed out in the video, their brains go through a very different type of developmental process, if they even have one at all. Synths can be programmed, whereas humans need a few years from birth to develop language, motor skills and basic personalities. I'm no brain expert but I have a background in human development/childcare/preschool. The whole way synths are able to acquire knowledge and be programmed is not very human. So while, I am tempted to concede to some of your points, there's still ample evidence that they aren't simply humans with minor alterations. The alterations here are significant. It would seem that Synths are more like a bionic-human chassis with a very different brain.

The fact that a human brain can have someone else's memories up- or down-loaded just as well is stated quite unambiguously when you talk to Amari about downloading Curie's memory into a human brain. Apparently that's not only possible, but they do it all the time. (Which is a scary thought in itself.) She only needs the synth extra circuitry for the Mr Handy programming part.

 

So, no, you don't need a different kind of brain to just upload someone else's data into it. It's quite unambiguous in the game world.

 

So in the end that's like the difference between

A) spending some years mapping the streets on my tablet by just walking them and having the GPS track my position, and

B) downloading the map someone else made that way.

In the end, who cares? It's the same map app. That I didn't go through acquiring the data myself doesn't mean it will calculate a different route. And it sure as hell doesn't mean my tablet isn't a tablet in case B.

 

So what's the difference? The synapses still work the same. What's the fundamental difference in the end result? Sure, one spent many years acquiring that data, while the other just learned it in a flash. So?

 

Or let's put it this way: Herodotus spent many years acquiring the information (and a lot of misinformation) to write his history book, while I read it in a couple of days. Caesar acquired his information about the Gaul wars first hand and over many years, while I again read it in a couple of days. Oakeshott spent a lifetime figuring out the classification of swords, and studying archaeological finds to that end, while I "downloaded" all that in my brain via books and websites. I don't have to go study the geometry of a sword in a museum, I can just get the information from someone else.

 

Does that mean that I'm less of a human than Oakeshott? I mean, I'm obviously nowhere near being as good or dedicated a historian. But am I less of a human for learning the same information in a couple of weeks instead of spending decades forming and refining models? I should hope nobody would argue that it makes me not a human.

[kevkiev]

For me, the most difficult part of turning against the RR would still be that you have to kill them all. And, since I tend to do most of the side quests before the "end game", that would incorporate a huge betrayal. And I really like most of them. (Killing Tinker Tom, Deacon and Glory would be very hard.) Still.... some compelling arguments here.

 

And it's really got me thinking about Shaun, who's currently hanging out in Sanctuary "thinking" he's my son. I mean, I never did trust Father. Always seemed like he had a hidden agenda in the things he did. (Although the holotape he gives you says that he has no reason to believe that you'll comply with his wishes to take care of Shaun, I think he knows that it's overwhelmingly probable that you will.) Could it be that, before he died he was bitter and angry enough about the PC's betrayal that he programmed Shaun to be some kind of time bomb who, for example, upon reaching a certain age, would unleash some kind of nefarious plan programmed into him by Father? Or was that the plan all along? I.E. that he eventually realized that one day the PC would find him and there would be a good chance you'd eventually destroy the Institute? Iirc, none of the Institute scientists really knew Father's motivation in creating the child synth project so... maybe?

[Moraelin]

Out of all of them, killing Glory was actually the easiest. She KNOWS that mind-wiping a synth is erasing them from existence, and she's getting butt-hurt majorly when you do it to HER FRIEND. Even when her friend is in a coma from which 100% guaranteed she'll never recover. In fact, one of her answers -- namely that maybe she should just unplug G5-19 and let her die -- kinda indicates that she sees it as a fate worse than death. But she's A-OK with goading OTHER synths into it. Makes her a bit like a Muslim working for the Spanish Inquisition.

 

Plus, really, read the above again. She's a frikken hypocrite. She backpedals on what her supposed convictions are when it's about her friend, faster than you can blink an eye.

 

Just about the only ones I actually felt sorry about was Deacon. Out of everyone there, he was the only one who actually WANTED to help humans too.

 

The rest of the evil idiots? With pride. I just had Sabaton blaring "When the priest killed a maiden in the metal church / amoured saints and warlocks watched the slaughter" as I was going full auto with Aeternus on them, wearing my best shiny black power armour for the occasion :tongue:

[Moraelin]

And it's really got me thinking about Shaun, who's currently hanging out in Sanctuary "thinking" he's my son. I mean, I never did trust Father. Always seemed like he had a hidden agenda in the things he did. (Although the holotape he gives you says that he has no reason to believe that you'll comply with his wishes to take care of Shaun, I think he knows that it's overwhelmingly probable that you will.) Could it be that, before he died he was bitter and angry enough about the PC's betrayal that he programmed Shaun to be some kind of time bomb who, for example, upon reaching a certain age, would unleash some kind of nefarious plan programmed into him by Father? Or was that the plan all along? I.E. that he eventually realized that one day the PC would find him and there would be a good chance you'd eventually destroy the Institute? Iirc, none of the Institute scientists really knew Father's motivation in creating the child synth project so... maybe?

My HYPOTHESIS about Shaun -- and mind you, I don't have definitive proof -- is that Shaun IS Father. It would neatly explain most of Father's behaviour which is really at odds with his being a full tilt psychopath otherwise. I mean, otherwise why would someone who just tries to see how long until his sole surviving parent is killed by the commonwealth, and who sees Synths as not even human, suddenly want you to be the director and makes it his dying wish that you care for a synth?

 

I mean, think about it. Father is dying. They don't have the medical tech to save him. And whatever life-prolonging possibilities there was in Kellogg's cyborg implants, he terminated that program long ago. And it still wouldn't cure his cancer.

 

So he's dying and fast. And many people in that situation would do ANYTHING to survive in any way.

 

Well, there actually IS a way: transfer his brain into a synth and live as a synth.

 

Sure, he disconsiders synths, but when it's his only chance at survival at all, I think many people would take it anyway. Survival is the most primal instinct.

 

But now he'd have a problem. His synth will normally be just another slave in the institute. There's no way anyone will treat it any different just because it has his memories up there in his little gourd.

 

Anyone... except YOU. If he can get you to accept little synth Shaun as your son, he essentially got himself the most powerful person in the whole state as his devoted protector. And if you side with the institute, well, getting you to be the top dog makes sure nobody has authority to tell you, "ok, we're terminating the synth kid project, return him for termination."

 

And for a complete psychopath, it would be trivial to read you and tell you whatever you want to hear from your loving kid.

 

 

Well, that's all good and fine, but you may ask, ok, but is there any EVIDENCE? Well, it's very circumstantial but there is a hint.

 

See, synth Shaun proves later that he can not just build a laser weapon out of toasters and other scrap, but build a legendary modification into it. In vanilla, you can't do that even at level 4 Science. That kid is essentially level 5 in science.

 

Whether it's the real Shaun in his little head or someone else, that's NOT the kind of knowledge a 10 year old would have. I don't care if he's even a super-genius, he's not going to have a Ph.D. in physics by the age of 10. Maybe by 16, but not at 10 years old.

 

I will ask our friend who studied child development to back me on this. By 10 you're not even out the concrete operational stage, which is roughly from 7 to 11 years old. At 10 you just didn't even begin the final stage of mind development, namely formal operational. You CAN'T have a post-grad degree in physics, or equivalent level of knowledge, before you got that formal thinking figured out. It's just too abstract for the CONCRETE operational stage.

 

Whoever's memories they put in that synth, it's not the memories of a 10 year old. That's an adult in a kid body.

 

And if Father decided to upload an adult mind into that kid, well, I don't KNOW if it's his mind or someone else's. But given that he's dying, and his making it his dying wish that you take care of that one specific synth, I'm willing to bet it's his.

[Deleted4363562User]

 

The problem I have is that they still don't function like humans. Like I pointed out in the video, their brains go through a very different type of developmental process, if they even have one at all. Synths can be programmed, whereas humans need a few years from birth to develop language, motor skills and basic personalities. I'm no brain expert but I have a background in human development/childcare/preschool. The whole way synths are able to acquire knowledge and be programmed is not very human. So while, I am tempted to concede to some of your points, there's still ample evidence that they aren't simply humans with minor alterations. The alterations here are significant. It would seem that Synths are more like a bionic-human chassis with a very different brain.

The fact that a human brain can have someone else's memories up- or down-loaded just as well is stated quite unambiguously when you talk to Amari about downloading Curie's memory into a human brain. Apparently that's not only possible, but they do it all the time. (Which is a scary thought in itself.) She only needs the synth extra circuitry for the Mr Handy programming part.

 

So, no, you don't need a different kind of brain to just upload someone else's data into it. It's quite unambiguous in the game world.

 

So in the end that's like the difference between

A) spending some years mapping the streets on my tablet by just walking them and having the GPS track my position, and

B) downloading the map someone else made that way.

In the end, who cares? It's the same map app. That I didn't go through acquiring the data myself doesn't mean it will calculate a different route. And it sure as hell doesn't mean my tablet isn't a tablet in case B.

 

So what's the difference? The synapses still work the same. What's the fundamental difference in the end result? Sure, one spent many years acquiring that data, while the other just learned it in a flash. So?

 

Or let's put it this way: Herodotus spent many years acquiring the information (and a lot of misinformation) to write his history book, while I read it in a couple of days. Caesar acquired his information about the Gaul wars first hand and over many years, while I again read it in a couple of days. Oakeshott spent a lifetime figuring out the classification of swords, and studying archaeological finds to that end, while I "downloaded" all that in my brain via books and websites. I don't have to go study the geometry of a sword in a museum, I can just get the information from someone else.

 

Does that mean that I'm less of a human than Oakeshott? I mean, I'm obviously nowhere near being as good or dedicated a historian. But am I less of a human for learning the same information in a couple of weeks instead of spending decades forming and refining models? I should hope nobody would argue that it makes me not a human.

 

 

Just want to say I really appreciate your well thought out responses. They're great to read. :thumbsup:

 

In terms of how the game spells out memory manipulation, I agree; Amari and others can "implant" memories into a human brain. But that process seems to happen in a way that mirrors real-time human perception and acquisition of data. It's essentially like watching a movie in your head or participating in a VR simulation. Your sensory input is just manipulated. Am I wrong? It's not like "Matrix" technology where you can be programmed how to fly a helicopter in a matter of seconds. I don't think the human brain in its current form can handle that kind of input.

 

What I am questioning is whether or not the human brain is capable of being programmed like a computer. Yes, it can be manipulated, but the process speed is limited by neurons and synapses...organic matter.

 

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't address Curie. Curie is a robot without a human brain, whose data is transferred into a synth brain. So, it's not human data being transferred into a human brain. Amari even says she needs a synth brain to make the transfer. She can't do it with a human brain.