Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AI Law Numbering Precedence, and how it can be unfun
#6
(05-12-2019, 09:26 AM)ZeWaka Wrote:
(05-12-2019, 06:58 AM)Xeram Wrote: As well as the "override" thing frankly because even I didn't know it was treated as "does not exist" rather than "overwritten with X" until recently.

If you go through the logic of it, those two things are basically equivalent. You'll just have 5 copies of law 0 in all the law slots then. (Though the 'replace' definition will get tricky if you refer to specific law numbers, which 'nullify' solves).

In most situations it is. I'm struggling to remember the exact wording/situation, but I remember the jist of it was the law in question overrid ALL laws instead of ALL OTHER laws I believe it was.

In a "nullify" definition it basically meant "no laws at all, effective free will".

In the "overwrite" definition that I had been running on until then it was "Only this law exists now, and it has provisions in it".

The difference between this is of course, doing whatever you want vs doing whatever in the context of your now singular law.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: AI Law Numbering Precedence, and how it can be unfun - by Xeram - 05-12-2019, 03:39 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)