Goonhub
07-29-2018, 07:57 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-29-2018, 08:02 PM by kyle2143. Edited 2 times in total.)
Hmm, maybe I'm just behind the times. Back when I first started playing, "overrides" was used all the time and I never saw a "precedence" law back then in 2011. I guess that wording is a bit clearer, but I just don't like it.
I mean, Law 2 takes precedence over Law 3, but the AI won't kill itself just because you order it to. So using a "precedence" law doesn't really seem to me that it makes as much logical sense if you want to allow the AI to kill people to carry out the clause in your new law. I always thought that "override" laws were more clear since it meant you only had to follow the clause inside that law, but I guess not.
I'm all for laws that allow the AI to kill people, but I like when they have a purpose or gimmick behind them because otherwise it's just shock all door and rcd holes in the hallways. That is boring to me compared to gimmick potential that AI's have.
But it's fine if "precedence" is just canon for doing what you want without making the AI completely murdery, I just want to eliminate confusion. Because I don't think I'm the only one that has tried to use "overrides" thinking the AI would follow my orders and then they do fuck all.
Edit: Flourish, the thing about that which bothers me is that if the AI stopped to think for two seconds, they would realize that killing everyone or the uploaded immediately if the "override" law also contained another clause like in my alcohol example is a violation of the law. Since killing people makes it harder to make as many people drunk as possible... They see the Override part and just decide that means they can do whatever, ignore the rest of the law and kill people with impunity. And I've had it happen on more than one occasion so I feel like maybe "overrides" should be eliminated from the vocabulary or it be explained that the AI must follow that law.
I mean, Law 2 takes precedence over Law 3, but the AI won't kill itself just because you order it to. So using a "precedence" law doesn't really seem to me that it makes as much logical sense if you want to allow the AI to kill people to carry out the clause in your new law. I always thought that "override" laws were more clear since it meant you only had to follow the clause inside that law, but I guess not.
I'm all for laws that allow the AI to kill people, but I like when they have a purpose or gimmick behind them because otherwise it's just shock all door and rcd holes in the hallways. That is boring to me compared to gimmick potential that AI's have.
But it's fine if "precedence" is just canon for doing what you want without making the AI completely murdery, I just want to eliminate confusion. Because I don't think I'm the only one that has tried to use "overrides" thinking the AI would follow my orders and then they do fuck all.
Edit: Flourish, the thing about that which bothers me is that if the AI stopped to think for two seconds, they would realize that killing everyone or the uploaded immediately if the "override" law also contained another clause like in my alcohol example is a violation of the law. Since killing people makes it harder to make as many people drunk as possible... They see the Override part and just decide that means they can do whatever, ignore the rest of the law and kill people with impunity. And I've had it happen on more than one occasion so I feel like maybe "overrides" should be eliminated from the vocabulary or it be explained that the AI must follow that law.