+- Goonstation Forums (https://forum.ss13.co)
+-- Forum: Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics (/showthread.php?tid=534)
Pages:
1
2
Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Nightgunner5 - 02-13-2013
Unanswered questions:
Is the act of "borging" considered "harm"?
Is the amputation of gluteal muscles considered "harm"?
Is injection with an addictive substance, for example, Tricordrazine, considered "harm"?
Is cloning a human after they have committed suicide considered "harm"?
Is cloning a human incorrectly, causing severe defects, considered "harm"?
Is allowing humans to pass through an area with an active plasma fire considered "harm"?
Is denying humans access to an area with an active plasma fire, restricting them to a confined space, like the Medbay proper, considered "harm"?
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - commondragon - 02-13-2013
A good rule of thumb is "If it causes actual damage in game terms, consider it harm". Why? Because otherwise you have cyborgs doing stupid shit for stupid reasons.
But without arguing that, I do see examples that are 100% clear.
Is allowing humans to pass through an area with an active plasma fire considered "harm"?
Yes, it is allowing them access to that area, when that area is harmful to humans (via fire). This is indirect harm to a human.
Is denying humans access to an area with an active plasma fire, restricting them to a confined space, like the Medbay proper, considered "harm"? and Is cloning a human after they have committed suicide considered "harm"?
Annoyance != harm. There are no injuries associated with this, directly or indirectly, as stated.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Cogwerks - 02-13-2013
Is the act of "borging" considered "harm"?
yes
Is the amputation of gluteal muscles considered "harm"?
sure, if you want to see it that way
Is injection with an addictive substance, for example, Tricordrazine, considered "harm"?
not really
Is cloning a human after they have committed suicide considered "harm"?
... no, of course not
Is cloning a human incorrectly, causing severe defects, considered "harm"?
not really your problem
Is allowing humans to pass through an area with an active plasma fire considered "harm"?
if they aren't protected against it, you can tell them to fuck off
Is denying humans access to an area with an active plasma fire, restricting them to a confined space, like the Medbay proper, considered "harm"?
no
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Nightgunner5 - 02-13-2013
commondragon Wrote:Is allowing humans to pass through an area with an active plasma fire considered "harm"?
Yes, it is allowing them access to that area, when that area is harmful to humans (via fire). This is indirect harm to a human.
Is denying humans access to an area with an active plasma fire, restricting them to a confined space, like the Medbay proper, considered "harm"? and Is cloning a human after they have committed suicide considered "harm"?
Annoyance != harm. There are no injuries associated with this, directly or indirectly, as stated.
Allowing the humans to pass through the plasma fire in its infancy could theoretically cause a smaller amount of harm than keeping the humans in a confined space as the fire (or the heat from the fire) spreads. It's a decision between evacuation that needs to pass through danger or hiding from fire. Neither choice is a clear winner.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Cogwerks - 02-13-2013
So do whatever. Figure it out. As long as you're acting in good faith it doesn't really matter.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Klayboxx - 02-13-2013
If they really want in that firey blaze and you've warned them then who are you to stop them?
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - CaptainBravo - 02-13-2013
Nightgunner5 Wrote:Is the act of "borging" considered "harm"?
Is the amputation of gluteal muscles considered "harm"?
the 'delicately severs' and 'begins to' language is there to let you stand by while a volunteer is borged/gets their butt removed.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Dauntasa - 02-13-2013
Nightgunner5 Wrote:Unanswered questions:On a live, unwilling subject, yes. If they're willing it's basically suicide, so no.
Is the act of "borging" considered "harm"?
Is the amputation of gluteal muscles considered "harm"?
Is injection with an addictive substance, for example, Tricordrazine, considered "harm"?
Is cloning a human after they have committed suicide considered "harm"?
Is cloning a human incorrectly, causing severe defects, considered "harm"?
Is allowing humans to pass through an area with an active plasma fire considered "harm"?
Is denying humans access to an area with an active plasma fire, restricting them to a confined space, like the Medbay proper, considered "harm"?
Technically harm, but harm with zero chance of causing actual death. Having your ass chopped off in SS13 does less damage then slipping and falling on it.
Depends on the effects of the overdose. Tricordrazine overdose stuns but doesn't do damage, so no. Synaptizine hurts them, so yes.
No, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.
Yes.
If they have no protective gear and aren't in an area that is somehow more dangerous, yes.
No, but if they have the tools required to survive a plasma fire then they should be allowed to leave.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - kyle2143 - 02-13-2013
I think that most of these questions are pretty straightforward, but it is good to have them answered. I've rarely seen a borg that will refuse to allow you into an area with a plasma fire if you ask, but it is understandable that they shouldn't as it violates the first law sort of.
I've sometimes been curious as to when the AI should listen to people suspected of crimes and the station chain of command in general. I remember one time I convinced a cyborg to release me from prison through some sort of reason. I think that the cyborg releasing me violated the 3^rd law, but I wasn't going to say that as a traitor. I was brigged for some petty crime, but a borg should have made me stay in there because it could be inferred that a higher ranking person put me there.
I think that knowing what can be asked of borgs and what they are expected to do is very important because those situations are very specific. But I guess that is what makes them hard to define.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Wydamn - 02-13-2013
As AI, my philosophy on borging live humans has always been that if someone WANTS to be borged, then he would probably know better than I (a soulless computer) whether or not that act causes or prevents harm. Bolting down robotics to prevent a willing borging candidate to get in is just going to cause him to suicide anyway. Then he'll get borged anyway, or will be forgotten and discarded which is arguably more harmful.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Dachshundofdoom - 02-13-2013
As AI, I generally recommend borging human antagonists that I can tell the crew is going to murder no matter what I say, if only because that's less "harmful" and more importantly, it keeps them in the round. But just grabbing some unwilling schmuck and borging him? Not cool.
Removal of butts is harmless. The crew isn't using them anyway.
Injecting somebody unwilling with a ton of the stuff to get them addicted is probably harmful, but just treating their injuries with something addictive isn't.
Why would cloning ever be harm? It's better than being dead.
Fires kind of depend on the situation. Huge-ass fire behind a door and they've got nothing to protect themselves? Wander elsewhere, human. If I can tell that locking them in somewhere will just get them killed by superheated air, and that they can probably make it if they run through it, I tell them that I can either lock them in and risk them being trapped and suffocated, or that they can try to run it. If they want to recover bodies from a blazing Toxins room or something and they brought a ton of Kelotane/a firesuit, they can head on in. I do make sure to warn them about the...unreliability of the firesuit though.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Cogwerks - 02-13-2013
It's probably worth reminding everyone that Asimov's Laws of Robotics are intentionally vague and full of holes. They're plot devices and misinterpretations of them were part of those stories.
Don't intentionally harm people, don't be too much of a jerk, unless your laws are changed to allow either one. That's pretty much what we expect from AIs in game. Beyond that, there's not really much point telling you exactly how you have to treat every single fringe issue. Figure it out. That's what makes the laws interesting. If you make a bad call in good faith, just be chill about it if we ask what's up.
Being too stringent with preventing harm can fall into Being a Jerk. If you're doing something as AI that would infuriate you if an AI did it to you... well, it had better be really funny. If not, you probably shouldn't do it.
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - FrontlineAcrobat4 - 02-13-2013
all ais and borgs should roleplay emotionless beings that follow the laws to the letter and do not let any sort of human feelings cloud their judgement, we need to respect the canon and roleplay accordingly
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Shoddy - 02-13-2013
All the questions posed here are pretty simply answered, i think it's more fun if we just find out on our own what interpretation suits us.
AI can be great fun because it requires a slight bit of mental roleplay; these questions can be answered quite simply, it is all up to you.
For example: Whenever i play AI and someone demands a door open or else they suicide, i simply state that suicide is the right of all human beings and thus is not considered harm.
Good fun!
Re: Borged Borgs: A Debate of Ethics - Cogwerks - 02-14-2013
Does anyone still do that "open door or I suicide" shit? Damn. It's always fun to arrest and straightjacket those people.