By what measure is a (hu)man?: On mutants and vampires...

[mozi]

That post convinced me that vampires should be taken in alive at all costs and have a trial to judge their mortality with chaplain as prosecutor and space lawyer as devil's advocate

[BlackPhoenix]

That post convinced me that vampires should be taken in alive at all costs and have a trial to judge their mortality with chaplain as prosecutor and space lawyer as devil's advocate

I would kill to see that, mostly because the last time I tried to run a court case, the jury was firebombed by a rogue borg, and we had to adjourn. It was weird.

[Coolguye]

words

How does all this relate to zombies then? Almost all of this is also true for zombies in game.

[Winterous]

words

How does all this relate to zombies then? Almost all of this is also true for zombies in game.

If you actually read my post you'll find that, in the second-last block of text, I talk about zombies.
Also your second sentence does not give enough information to interpret: What is it you're referring to? What do you mean by it being true?

[Coolguye]

If you actually read my post you'll find that, in the second-last block of text, I talk about zombies.

They're sorta hand-waved away as 'obviously not alive', but drugs affect them (pulse), and their temp isn't off-kilter (if my handful of experiences as a player zombie are accurate). The only way they're 'obviously not alive' is their coloration and their groaning, and the same arguments could be applied to vampires with their starlight vulnerability (pigmentation and unearthly screeching).

[Winterous]

If you actually read my post you'll find that, in the second-last block of text, I talk about zombies.

They're sorta hand-waved away as 'obviously not alive', but drugs affect them (pulse), and their temp isn't off-kilter (if my handful of experiences as a player zombie are accurate). The only way they're 'obviously not alive' is their coloration and their groaning, and the same arguments could be applied to vampires with their starlight vulnerability (pigmentation and unearthly screeching).

Oh, I wasn't talking about player zombies, since they effectively aren't in the game anymore.
I was talking about the kind teleported in by Telesci, created by a wizard, or those made when a player is killed by a Void Shambler.

Those ones, I don't think they work in the same way as 'human' characters, similar to animals / monsters.

[Winterous]

However since player zombies have been brought up, they'd fall under the same category as Vampires which are considered dead, they're still thinking beings, although possibly not capable of feeling any sensation, and a thinking being is capable of being 'harmed'.

One time I got turned into a zombie, presumably by an admin, and continued to do my chemistry experimentation right next a non-zombie, communicating with him through use of a hand labeller; still sentient, just disabled in some ways.

[WalrusJones]

However since player zombies have been brought up, they'd fall under the same category as Vampires which are considered dead, they're still thinking beings, although possibly not capable of feeling any sensation, and a thinking being is capable of being 'harmed'.

One time I got turned into a zombie, presumably by an admin, and continued to do my chemistry experimentation right next a non-zombie, communicating with him through use of a hand labeller; still sentient, just disabled in some ways.

This raises an important point: Just because you CAN harm it does not make it good.

[Winterous]

This raises an important point: Just because you CAN harm it does not make it good.

I... Don't really understand what you mean.
What isn't necessarily good? The thing being harmed, or the action of harming it?

The point I was making is that a player-controlled human character can, by very definition, be subjected to harm, and as such a standard AI may not cause or allow harm to one.

[CrowdControl]

It seems to depend on how you define harm in the context of this game. If harm is human getting closer to death then undead beings are already as harmed as they can be.

If you define it else-wise then what stops the AI from having to stop people from incinerating corpses? Corpses are just dead humans, and the corpse can be damaged.Hell borgs would have a duty to drag all corpses they see to the closest morgue.

[Winterous]

Most of the definition of harm and its related terms are along the lines of pain, comfort, psychological wellbeing, and capacity to DO things.
So by those, most of the meaning of 'harm' is removed for a dead, non-thinking human body.

But it is still questionable for sure, and you'd think it's simplest by far for that clause to be voided for dead humans... However, with the easily available ability to bring a corpse back to life, it complicates things; a corpse still has the potential to live, so would preventing that revival not constitute harm in some way?

[WalrusJones]

I... Don't really understand what you mean.
What isn't necessarily good? The thing being harmed, or the action of harming it?

The point I was making is that a player-controlled human character can, by very definition, be subjected to harm, and as such a standard AI may not cause or allow harm to one.

If a zombie isn't truly considered human, it can be harmed.

However, Being allowed to harm a zombie does not make it GOOD to harm a zombie thats doing nothing wrong.

[Ronnyfire]

Consider it this way.
Anything that once was human still is human (barring being completely genetically rewritten / borged)
That is to say, a humans corpse is still human, a human vampire (as opposed to a changeling vampire, or whatever else)
Same applies to zombies or whatever else.

Harm is causing physical injury or debilitation.

Causing damage to a vampire(or zombie) or otherwise crippling them is harming a human (unless there is some admin silliness with changeling vampires, or monkey vampires)

[Winterous]

Consider it this way.
Anything that once was human still is human (barring being completely genetically rewritten / borged)
That is to say, a humans corpse is still human, a human vampire (as opposed to a changeling vampire, or whatever else)
Same applies to zombies or whatever else.

Harm is causing physical injury or debilitation.

Causing damage to a vampire(or zombie) or otherwise crippling them is harming a human (unless there is some admin silliness with changeling vampires, or monkey vampires)

Exactly, you get it

[kantrol]

Consider it this way.
Anything that once was human still is human (barring being completely genetically rewritten / borged)
That is to say, a humans corpse is still human, a human vampire (as opposed to a changeling vampire, or whatever else)
Same applies to zombies or whatever else.

Harm is causing physical injury or debilitation.

Causing damage to a vampire(or zombie) or otherwise crippling them is harming a human (unless there is some admin silliness with changeling vampires, or monkey vampires)

Yeah, this is incorrect. If it were correct, the AI would have to worry about harm caused to corpses via decomposition, gibbing or fire and so forth. Since robots do not have to worry about harm caused to corpses, we can conclude that, for for the purposes of the 3 laws of robotics, an innate quality of human beings is life. Because vampires and zombies are created from the bodies of deceased human beings(i.e. a corpse)*, the 3 laws of robotics do not apply to the reanimated dead or else the AI/borgs would have to give a shit about damage to all corpses.

*In every literary interpretation of either zombies or vampires that I'm familiar with, they are created from the corpse of a deceased human.


In either case, admins have already said that the 3 laws of robotics do not apply to confirmed vampires.

I've always stood by vampires and zombies being human, but dead humans. Nothing you can do can harm somebody who's already dead.

Yeah, that's my take on it. Nothin' wrong with borgs or the AI harming a zombie or vampire, but they'd better be goddamn sure it's a vampire.