Let AI laws stack

[Superlagg]

Currently, any law uploaded with one board overwrites the previous law uploaded with that board, which means the AI can have just one freeform law, just one every monkey is not human law, just one burn down the station this law overrides all other laws is the captain regardless of position or rank law, and so on.

Maybe raise the number of laws each player can upload per board to two or three. I like the idea of AI laws stacking up into an uninterpretable mess of conflicting commands, though the AI would more than likely need a bit more leeway in how they understand and carry out that tangle of bullshit.

[medsal15]

No. Make 'Freeform v2.0' etc. boards. Only found in more or less dangerous places.

[Roomba]

A convoluted tangle of laws is no fun for anyone except an uninvolved audience member. It's no fun for the AI, who has to solve an ever-changing logic puzzle every time they do anything or get banned, it's no fun for the crew, who end up with a useless AI because it's paralyzed with laws, and it's no fun for admins, who have to solve said logic puzzle and determine whether the AI is or isn't following their laws when the adminhelps start flying.

[Mordent]

I'm all for one-law per board (the details of which can only be set once), but allow multiple boards to stack. Makes forensics much easier, for one thing, and still keeps the amount of laws in check (you'd have to bother the mechanic to get more).

Alternatively, have different serial numbers of board able to be found (so that mechanic copies of a specific board produce exact copies of that board) that allow stacking of that particular law type. Keeps mechanics in check, keeps the number of laws relatively low, and makes for interesting crate-loot.

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

[Ed Venture]

This would make no one play AI. It would be a unfun mess.

[Noah Buttes]

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

I'm gonna have to say no on that.

Say someone uploaded a poorly worded law like "Stop all the bad guys."

What would happen then?

[Mordent]

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

I'm gonna have to say no on that.

Say someone uploaded a poorly worded law like "Stop all the bad guys."

What would happen then?

Firstly, that law is subjective as anything. Garbage in, garbage out.

Secondly, that law wouldn't override Law 1 explicitly, both can be carried out without conflict ("stop" doesn't mean harm). You could use your cyborgs to pen them into a corner. You could bolt them in rooms. You could incessantly undress them of their gear. You could incessantly slip them.

Thirdly, it also doesn't override Law 2 explicitly, and both can be carried out without conflict - if they asked to be let out you still have to obey it (pursuant to Law 1) then find another way to stop them.

I'm not sure how this particular law would be a problem.

[Noah Buttes]

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

I'm gonna have to say no on that.

Say someone uploaded a poorly worded law like "Stop all the bad guys."

What would happen then?

Firstly, that law is subjective as anything. Garbage in, garbage out.

Secondly, that law wouldn't override Law 1 explicitly, both can be carried out without conflict ("stop" doesn't mean harm). You could use your cyborgs to pen them into a corner. You could bolt them in rooms. You could incessantly undress them of their gear. You could incessantly slip them.

Thirdly, it also doesn't override Law 2 explicitly, and both can be carried out without conflict - if they asked to be let out you still have to obey it (pursuant to Law 1) then find another way to stop them.

I'm not sure how this particularly law would be a problem.

My argument sounded a lot better in my head.

[Roomba]

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

Also going to have to say no to this, largely because it's been station policy that law order means nothing on Goon and I still have to argue the point with people once every other round. Suddenly reversing the policy on this would just confuse people, especially sporadic players who don't keep up with everything. You lose nothing with the current system - people can still follow the laws in numerical order if there's no explicit override order.

[Mordent]

On the topic of laws, I'd suggest adding a "high numbered laws take precedence in the case of conflict" base law (not even a law, just a state), which makes some things a touch easier on the AI with the inevitable conflicting laws. The reason for "higher" rather than "lower" is that it makes it possible to overwrite-by-adding if necessary.

Also going to have to say no to this, largely because it's been station policy that law order means nothing on Goon and I still have to argue the point with people once every other round. Suddenly reversing the policy on this would just confuse people, especially sporadic players who don't keep up with everything. You lose nothing with the current system - people can still follow the laws in numerical order if there's no explicit override order.

Totally valid point. If there's conflicts or ambiguity in it generally it's up to the AI to resolve them itself, so it teaches you to upload "good" laws when the AI finds all sorts of loopholes. As long as it's consistent then I see no problem with not having an inherent system in place.

The rest of my stuff regarding differently numbered boards stands, though.

[misto]

ppl already manage to pack sufficient mischief into 1 freeform

[Arborinus]

How would freeform laws get removed if this were put in place? Resetting the AI completely instead of just needing to make a new freeform law? What if the reset board is gone?

[Zafhset]

Hell no. This would skyrocket the amount of headaches ai/borgs already have to deal with. who wants to have a wall of text dominate the text space each time the laws are brought up?

[Superlagg]

How would freeform laws get removed if this were put in place? Resetting the AI completely instead of just needing to make a new freeform law? What if the reset board is gone?

This law overrides all other laws except 1, 2, and 3, and overrides any other laws that override other laws before they can override any laws.

If that doesn't work, just add more boards!

[medsal15]

Add a reset board in mechanic lockers. Adds 3 new resets, and scanned fast if there are any mechanics.