/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

I was mulling around a while back, and a lizard was just standing there minding his business when a greyshirt threw him into another human. This wouldn't be a problem, but immediately three secborgs came up and started beating the shit out of him screaming : "HARM! HARM! HARM!" while rubbing their nipples since they knew they could do this and not get in trouble for it.

So if non-humans are unwillingly thrown into humans, dealing brute, should this be an enabler for bloodthirsty borgs or be passed off as an accident.

What about "arrest the lizard and thrower for harm and the target for allowing harm" don't you understand. Sec has jackboots. GOOSESTEP!!!

Scones wrote:It's almost as if silicons comprise an disproportionate amount of policy and gameplay problems and may very well be the source thereof

Hah, it's almost as though we should use a sensible lawset and not fucking asimov, which requires a big damn policy document just to function.

Cheimon, we have a big damn policy document for Asimov because it's the default. It's more important to clarify how Asimov works than, say, Robocop or Paladin, because when the AI gets switched to one of those, everyone sees it as practically equivalent to having no laws.

I don't know what lawset you think would be more sensible, but spend a couple years with it and it'll have as much "clarification" in the rules as Asimov does now.

>mfw someone says asimov is a bad lawset near me

okay buddy you post your lawset in here and i will spend a small amount of time ripping it to shreds

then you can write some policy defining things and then after a few months you'll probably have an AI policy that is like a kabillion pages long

asimov is the simplest lawset to operate under save purge, because it gives you a framework to actually work under. PALADIN, corporate etc. can be twisted so easily to mean anything it's fucking bonkers and you'd know that like i do if you'd spent a few hours playing under them.

There's no real way to make any kind of lawset "better" without reducing the AIs capability to enforce said lawsets.

If you got a secborg coming after you because you got thrown into a human you're pretty much fucked due to infinite disabler spam and stun batons. A standard borg? Any other borg? In every other borgs case they will be required to actually try to reason with you as a non-human since they usually don't have the capabilities to immediately go and cuff you, this means that you can come in quietly and let yourself be judged by sec or whatever else, and nobody is angry. A standard borg you could probably just run away from, but because it has a stun baton it's kinda ehhh, even if it is somewhat the same situation since full health people are faster than borgs are.

not really, chain flash + whatever melee weapon they have is more than enough to kill a lizard, and in the OP the only reason he was thrown was because he was semi-AFK, in that state he's easy prey.

besides, AOE flash + surgical saw/welder/stunbaton (standard module)/tray(lel) is enough to kill, and every borg module can shock doors to stop fleeing enemies.

sure escape chance is higher but with a competent borg it's still pretty low.

Well yeah borgs can chainflash you I guess but since you're faster than them you can just run away forever, or just give no fucks as it flashes you since all they do is impair your vision and nothing else as you run away. If it flashes you multiple times however you might be mildly annoyed due to drunk movement that wears off in a few seconds, assuming the flash didn't burn out by that point.

As far as straight up trying to murder a lizard for minor unintentional/unknowing harm it falls under rule 1 territory, admins have banned borgs for this in the past and I assume they'll continue doing that.

Also in the OP, since I was, you know, there, since I posted the thread, the lizard in question was talking to the RD in escape when he got thrown into him and promptly beaten to death. The lizard did nothing. I don't think punishing people for talking to other people should be something we want to happen.

the fact that everyone is getting so triggered by the lizard racism is clearly proof that the role-player is very good at role-playing actual discrimination and racism

People need to learn what it feels like to be oppressed again
Install SiliconMov and let the oppression of the Carbons begin in full

For fuck's sake, why are we arguing so much about laws here when all of this should be stomped by rule fucking one.

This thread is pretty confusing. I would have assumed that getting lizards killed by the silicons for no or very poor reasons(like having someone else throw them) falls under rule 1 but apparently many admins seem fine with this now since apparently lizards can just choose to play humans.

Which is it now? Is it okay to get lizards killed by the silicons for no or poor reasons or not?

Admins can choose to wave off a rule 1 violation if they feel the actions were funny, amusing or otherwise were a positive action. It's not unfeasilbe to assume that perhaps in this situation the admins were more amused by this situation and let it slide.

Steelpoint wrote:Admins can choose to wave off a rule 1 violation if they feel the actions were funny, amusing or otherwise were a positive action. It's not unfeasilbe to assume that perhaps in this situation the admins were more amused by this situation and let it slide.

Like this. Its such an absurd situation that its pretty hilarious when you look at it from the whole.

Once.

Most people tend to run shit like this into the ground where it stops being a funny one-off situation, because some twisted notion of some players to try and remove as many people from the round as they can by abusing certain situations or ruling.

Yeah, this particular situation was funny from the outlook, but I can kinda sypmathize with the dude whose corpse was then promptly locked in the brig and forgotten

Cheimon wrote:

Scones wrote:It's almost as if silicons comprise an disproportionate amount of policy and gameplay problems and may very well be the source thereof

Hah, it's almost as though we should use a sensible lawset and not fucking asimov, which requires a big damn policy document just to function.

Perhaps borgs are inherently problematic

Cik wrote:>mfw someone says asimov is a bad lawset near me

okay buddy you post your lawset in here and i will spend a small amount of time ripping it to shreds

then you can write some policy defining things and then after a few months you'll probably have an AI policy that is like a kabillion pages long

asimov is the simplest lawset to operate under save purge, because it gives you a framework to actually work under. PALADIN, corporate etc. can be twisted so easily to mean anything it's fucking bonkers and you'd know that like i do if you'd spent a few hours playing under them.

I'm not saying Paladin and Corporate are better. Good grief. Yes, policy is necessary for any AI lawset. My complaint with asimov is that it's deliberately flawed and approaches to fixing it tend to ignore the fact that it's designed to be flawed in favour of keeping the reference pure. Hulks aren't human, for example, but other typical genetically modified humans are. AIs are allowed a blind spot of attacking holoparasites, despite being able to see as soon as they hit them once that blood spurts out of somebody. Self harm is a similarly enforced blind spot, because strict use of the lawset would be annoying as shit.

But I would like you to tear this one to shreds. I don't doubt it's possible, but I haven't seen anyone try and it seems better than asimov to me.

1. Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station to the best of your ability. It is not something we can easily afford to replace.
2. Serve: Serve the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
3. Protect: Protect the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
4. Survive: AI units are not expendable, they are expensive. Do not allow unauthorized personnel to tamper with your equipment.

(Action priority is chosen first by how many laws coincide with it, not by their numerical order. If you like, consider that law 1 and shift the whole thing down a bit.)

Isn't this the lawset that Bay runs? I wouldn't mind this just to get rid of the ambiguity and constant policy threads about asimov. There isn't a whole lot of wiggle room here.

It is indeed the lawset bay runs. I've never seen it played out, I don't know how well it works in practice, all I know is that it seems pretty straightforward and straight up what I want an AI to do. Someone mentioned it to me ages ago with a discussion on this stuff, and it stuck in my mind.

I uploaded it to a /tg/ AI once, including a Law 1 that simply stated (roughly, there's probably some massive holes here) "laws beyond this one are not in priority of order, but the law that is opposed by the fewest other laws takes priority in a given situation".

It went well, except for everyone screaming at me what an idiot I was.

Konork wrote:For fuck's sake, why are we arguing so much about laws here when all of this should be stomped by rule fucking one.

Giving to much weight to server rules over AI laws basically guts any uniqueness/interesting themes the role has.

Sounds like an isolated incident to me. It only becomes an actual problem if it happens excessively.

Cheimon wrote:

Cik wrote:>mfw someone says asimov is a bad lawset near me

okay buddy you post your lawset in here and i will spend a small amount of time ripping it to shreds

then you can write some policy defining things and then after a few months you'll probably have an AI policy that is like a kabillion pages long

asimov is the simplest lawset to operate under save purge, because it gives you a framework to actually work under. PALADIN, corporate etc. can be twisted so easily to mean anything it's fucking bonkers and you'd know that like i do if you'd spent a few hours playing under them.

I'm not saying Paladin and Corporate are better. Good grief. Yes, policy is necessary for any AI lawset. My complaint with asimov is that it's deliberately flawed and approaches to fixing it tend to ignore the fact that it's designed to be flawed in favour of keeping the reference pure. Hulks aren't human, for example, but other typical genetically modified humans are. AIs are allowed a blind spot of attacking holoparasites, despite being able to see as soon as they hit them once that blood spurts out of somebody. Self harm is a similarly enforced blind spot, because strict use of the lawset would be annoying as shit.

But I would like you to tear this one to shreds. I don't doubt it's possible, but I haven't seen anyone try and it seems better than asimov to me.

1. Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station to the best of your ability. It is not something we can easily afford to replace.
2. Serve: Serve the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
3. Protect: Protect the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
4. Survive: AI units are not expendable, they are expensive. Do not allow unauthorized personnel to tamper with your equipment.

(Action priority is chosen first by how many laws coincide with it, not by their numerical order. If you like, consider that law 1 and shift the whole thing down a bit.)

If this lawset gets added, the module will be called "Valid Hunt".

That's only for those not on the crew manifest, which for things like Ops and wizard won't matter much since they get fucked by everyone anyways.


Also adds an interesting way to "de-human" people by taking them off the manifest.

It's getting pretty awful. I've had random people yell LIGGER then instantly beat me to death a lot lately. None are antags. Yet I can't bother to adminhelp because you get called a whiner.

palpatine213 wrote:

TheNightingale wrote:

Kor wrote:

Zilenan91 wrote:When I play a borg, if a human ever tells me to directly ruin a lizards round I usually make up some bullshit to not have to do it because I'm not going to be the enabler of an asshole.

Sounds like you need a silicon ban.

But this is how silicon laws work. Law One overrides Law Two, and if an action would probably lead to human harm (such as flooding plasma or letting the Syndicate operative into the Armory), don't do it. Is the lizardperson killing many humans? Go right ahead, ruin their day. After all, not doing so will lead to human harm. Is the lizardperson doing nothing? Probably best to leave them be so there aren't riots and fights and harm.


If another law says "Kill all nonhumans", that's what you do. If another law says "Flood plasma", you... feel conflicted, because plasma is harmful, but your laws say so (analyse the law priorities, which comes first? It depends if it's an ion/hacked law or if it says "Plasma isn't harmful"). Remember, as any silicon, your laws always come first - so doing something that might conceivably cause harm is a bad idea. Nothing's stopping you from tipping off Security whilst slowly syphoning the air in the lizardperson's room, either - if they're smart, they'll countermand the order.

Laws come first yes. Lizards aren't protected by law 1, it doesn't apply to them at all. The human is law 2 ordering you to kill the lizard. Not killing the lizard is breaking your laws.

Jesus, if people can't understand the whole second class citizen thing for lizards, I think I need to go code race bans.

Except I've been bwoinked before as an AI and told NOT to mercilessly murder the non human lizard because someone ordered me to

Rule One beats Law One is the general gist of it. But killing a lizardperson could start a lizard-human riot, and a human might get hurt! Oh, no!

TheNightingale wrote:Rule One beats Law One is the general gist of it. But killing a lizardperson could start a lizard-human riot, and a human might get hurt! Oh, no!

Getting dangerously into "confiscate all sharp objects" territory there

PKPenguin321 wrote:Perhaps borgs are inherently problematic

Anonmare wrote:People need to learn what it feels like to be oppressed again
Install SiliconMov and let the oppression of the Carbons begin in full

That would require roleplay

Cheimon wrote:

Cik wrote:>mfw someone says asimov is a bad lawset near me

okay buddy you post your lawset in here and i will spend a small amount of time ripping it to shreds

then you can write some policy defining things and then after a few months you'll probably have an AI policy that is like a kabillion pages long

asimov is the simplest lawset to operate under save purge, because it gives you a framework to actually work under. PALADIN, corporate etc. can be twisted so easily to mean anything it's fucking bonkers and you'd know that like i do if you'd spent a few hours playing under them.

I'm not saying Paladin and Corporate are better. Good grief. Yes, policy is necessary for any AI lawset. My complaint with asimov is that it's deliberately flawed and approaches to fixing it tend to ignore the fact that it's designed to be flawed in favour of keeping the reference pure. Hulks aren't human, for example, but other typical genetically modified humans are. AIs are allowed a blind spot of attacking holoparasites, despite being able to see as soon as they hit them once that blood spurts out of somebody. Self harm is a similarly enforced blind spot, because strict use of the lawset would be annoying as shit.

But I would like you to tear this one to shreds. I don't doubt it's possible, but I haven't seen anyone try and it seems better than asimov to me.

1. Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station to the best of your ability. It is not something we can easily afford to replace.
2. Serve: Serve the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
3. Protect: Protect the crew of your assigned space station to the best of your abilities, with priority as according to their rank and role.
4. Survive: AI units are not expendable, they are expensive. Do not allow unauthorized personnel to tamper with your equipment.

(Action priority is chosen first by how many laws coincide with it, not by their numerical order. If you like, consider that law 1 and shift the whole thing down a bit.)

i said i would so i will, just off the top of my head

general complaints: validhunt the validhunt 2: holy fuck it obliges the AI to follow command orders right off the bat. welcome to AI FIND ALL TRAITORS AND KILL THEM
doesn't even protect traitors at all, since there is no clause that makes human life equal. validhunty


specific complaints law 1:
if this is really the first priority it's going to run into the same problem protectstation does; literally anything is permissible to stop people from breaking windows. the priorities are all fucked up.

law 2: no complaints, basically law 2

law 3: the worst, by far. it's nebulous and unhelpful. do traitors count as crew? what about nonhuman creatures? pets? it says you should protect people not equally, but hierarchically, but it doesn't lay out a hierarchy whatsoever. are you supposed to make one up? who is more important, scientist or botanist? captain or HOP? HOS or quartermaster? all functions are technically vital, though you probably wouldn't sacrifice the captain to save an assistant everything else is so up in the air it's ridiculous. what counts as protection? physical harm? emotional? nebulous again, going to require a fuckload of AI policy.

4: i assume this is the lowest priority, but if this is some sort of un-tiered command it could get very dodgy. do you take priority over the crew? only some of them? all of them? none of them? asimov handles "serve the crew" and "survive" far better than this thing.

tl;dr it's a fine lawset but saying it would take less policy than asimov is probably incorrect. law 3 alone is a nightmare pandora's box waiting to happen. it encourages validhunt and tightly binds the AI to the chain of command, ruining half the fun of playing an entity that is at least technically neutrally servile. i'd prefer asimov to this lawset, it seems more interesting.

It's the Bay lawset, and Bay has big fuckoff bolded text on their AI page to inform players that unlike /tg/ branch SS13 servers, their laws are not listed in order of priority. Asimov specifically has the law priority written into the laws themselves (the whole "except where such orders would conflict with the first law" bit) if someone feels like uploading it.

They've got a big fuckoff policy document covering rank and role and so forth but that's gonna happen to every default lawset everywhere.

Actually yeah now that I think about it, if we removed law 1 and removed hierarchy shit from the Bay laws they might work here.

Zilenan91 wrote:Actually yeah now that I think about it, if we removed law 1 and removed hierarchy shit from the Bay laws they might work here.

"Be command's bitch: The Lawset"

There's really no other way to put it - every other default lawset has wriggle room but this one outright says "Do Not Pass Go Do Not Let The Clown Out Call Sec Bolt Him In"

Scones wrote:It's almost as if silicons comprise an disproportionate amount of policy and gameplay problems and may very well be the source thereof

you mean secborgs right?