Central Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 BYOND Key: CentralSmith Total Ban Length: Unknown Banning staff member's Key: Tainavaa Reason of Ban: Attempting to kill crew as AI Reason for Appeal: Quite simply, it would seem to be it would be common sense for an AI to defend the crew. The 'crew' in question mentioned by Tainavaa were Cultists, spawning more cultists and attacking officers. They'd killed several, and were at risk of killing the rest of the crew. I, as one could logically assume, took affront to this as the station AI, and began measures to cull the threat, as we only had two security officers left. Thus, I siphoned air, electrified doors, bolted, did whatever I could to protect the crew from the threat of the attacking individuals. Nowhere in my lawset does it say 'do not kill crewmembers', it says specifically PROTECT the crew, in accordance to rank and role. I would think once you began hostile attempts to take over the station and kill its crew, you are no longer part of that crew, or at the very least registered as enough of a threat that if Security can no longer contain you, that an AI should step in to try and eliminate the threat before it overtakes the station. I disagree heavily with Tainavaa's interpretation that an AI should be that one-dimensional, that I should not be able to protect the station and its crew. I am also disappointed that she would so happily respond to this incident, but ignore the message I sent to CentCom about the threat, and requesting help. Furthermore, one of the cult leaders was the Research Director. By Tainavaa's interpretation, he is still part of the crew and thus has command authority. If he had killed the Head of Personnel, he would then be the acting Captain at the time, and as I do not have the capacity to raise the alert level, could demand entry to the core and change my laws. There has to be some level of nuance and understanding of the interpretation of laws, otherwise an incident like that could occur, and an AI would be forced to side with a clearly hostile threat to the station because 'It is a machine', as Tainavaa put it. All in all, the job ban appears to be a misinterpretation on the part of AI lore - are we just meant to be robotic door-openers with no nuance and capacity to make judgement calls to protect the station, or are we Artificial Intelligence, with the capacity to understand what the station needs, and the ability to interpret our lawset to best protect the station and its crew?
Central Posted September 14, 2015 Author Posted September 14, 2015 BYOND Key: CentralSmith Total Ban Length: Unknown Banning staff member's Key: Tainavaa Reason of Ban: Attempting to kill crew as AI Reason for Appeal: Quite simply, it would seem to be it would be common sense for an AI to defend the crew. The 'crew' in question mentioned by Tainavaa were Cultists, spawning more cultists and attacking officers. They'd killed several, and were at risk of killing the rest of the crew. I, as one could logically assume, took affront to this as the station AI, and began measures to cull the threat, as we only had two security officers left. Thus, I siphoned air, electrified doors, bolted, did whatever I could to protect the crew from the threat of the attacking individuals. Nowhere in my lawset does it say 'do not kill crewmembers', it says specifically PROTECT the crew, in accordance to rank and role. I would think once you began hostile attempts to take over the station and kill its crew, you are no longer part of that crew, or at the very least registered as enough of a threat that if Security can no longer contain you, that an AI should step in to try and eliminate the threat before it overtakes the station. I disagree heavily with Tainavaa's interpretation that an AI should be that one-dimensional, that I should not be able to protect the station and its crew. I am also disappointed that she would so happily respond to this incident, but ignore the message I sent to CentCom about the threat, and requesting help. Furthermore, one of the cult leaders was the Research Director. By Tainavaa's interpretation, he is still part of the crew and thus has command authority. If he had killed the Head of Personnel, he would then be the acting Captain at the time, and as I do not have the capacity to raise the alert level, could demand entry to the core and change my laws. There has to be some level of nuance and understanding of the interpretation of laws, otherwise an incident like that could occur, and an AI would be forced to side with a clearly hostile threat to the station because 'It is a machine', as Tainavaa put it. All in all, the job ban appears to be a misinterpretation on the part of AI lore - are we just meant to be robotic door-openers with no nuance and capacity to make judgement calls to protect the station, or are we Artificial Intelligence, with the capacity to understand what the station needs, and the ability to interpret our lawset to best protect the station and its crew?
Tainavaa Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Hello. I've spoken to a neutral third about this, and got their opinion because I realized that you do raise a very strong argument. After a short discussion I found that I was in the wrong, and I had a lapse in judgment. So I support your unban.
Tainavaa Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Hello. I've spoken to a neutral third about this, and got their opinion because I realized that you do raise a very strong argument. After a short discussion I found that I was in the wrong, and I had a lapse in judgment. So I support your unban.
Doomberg Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Lifted. Also, a note: Tainavaa is a moderator. Moderators cannot respond when you fax or otherwise message Central Command.
Doomberg Posted September 14, 2015 Posted September 14, 2015 Lifted. Also, a note: Tainavaa is a moderator. Moderators cannot respond when you fax or otherwise message Central Command.
Recommended Posts