Citation needed. Seriously, what. Those distinctions don't exist in any universe I know, let alone ours.

Reminder that Practice War is based on real life science as much as possible. Yes, there are souls, but the "souls" are just ill understood—not magic.

I am tired of real life science being used as the excuse to shut down conversation especially in this thread where one of the themes of the quest is social sciences matter just as much as material sciences. So to crib from that post in GDI Planquest on what intelligence actually is that I haven't finished yet:

Intelligence is defined as the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. That's vague and the reason even simple algorithms that only collect data, process it and then respond with the sum of their processed data to inputs get called Artificial Intelligence even though they are nowhere near any sort of science-fiction use of that same term.

There needs to be a basic/101 breakdown of the various types of Intelligence, what drives the development/collection of knowledge and skills and then also what exactly does the current science-fiction culture means by Artificial Intelligence in order to get anything useful out of the term in this quest.

On the most basic level there are three different Sets of knowledge and skills that humanity uses, as vague and frustrating to use as the very term intelligence, and they are:

- the Set of knowledge and skills relating to interacting with/shaping of/acting on One's environment which I will be referring to for the remainder of this post as Sentience.

- the Set of knowledge and skills relating to One recognizing One's peers as peers and interacting with a set of such peers in pursuit of One's interests, born from instinct and experience, which I will be referring to for the remainder of this post as Sapience.

- the Set of knowledge and skills relating to One's ability to recognize their Reach, their various Sentience Sets, and their Grasp, their various Sapience Sets, in relation to each other/one another and the consequences of such relations which I will be referring to for the remainder of this post as Sophonce.

What we currently think drives the development/collection of knowledge and skills is evolution and the recursion of the evolutionary process producing the various forms of life on this world we live on/in and their actions and interactions. So various instincts that enable life to continue existing and the, mainly biological, interactions that produces.

These instincts and interactions come in one axis and one set of axes: Obligatory-Facultative and Beneficial-Effectless-Harmful.

For the axis on the one end there are the Obligatory instincts and interactions which are a must for a life form to continue and on the other end there are the Facultative instincts and interactions that are things a life form doesn't need at all to continue but still does.

On the set of axes there are three axes measuring the same instincts and interactions that make it up: Beneficial, Effectless and Harmful. The Beneficial Axis measures the Benefits, the Effectless Axis measures how little of an effect is had on a life form and the Harmful Axis measures how much Harm is there.

A few examples to clarify how this works out in practice:

- Sleeping is about as obligatory an instinct and interaction gets as we have to sleep and can't delay sleeping past a limited point and in fact the need for sleep is so obligatory that it is used in multiple hunting strategies including endurance hunting in humans.

- Reproduction is a good example of facultative instincts and interactions because while it is necessary for the continuation of a species, it is not actually necessary for a life form to continue in most cases. In fact a lot of species actually rely on some form of death of individual life forms to keep up a healthy amount of diversity and fitness in the long run. See something like Pando for how weird that can get.

- Activision-Blizzard is a good example of the set of axes as it is Beneficial to work in one of the largest video game companies in the world so long as the internal amensalistic culture that serves as the means of braking any advancements up the ladder in the company is Effectless enough on a person. Otherwise it is actively Harmful to work for Activision-Blizzard because of said amensalistic and exploitative culture will wring a person out and leave them bitter and disillusioned even if they had Benefited from working in one of the largest video game companies in the world which is far from guaranteed if they are under the effect of said company's culture.

What the current science-fiction culture means by Artificial Inteligence is summed up in the word Psytron, which ironically in real life also refers to a Set of jobs/work people can do the same way the word computer used to refer to an occupation, and it's relationship with the word Cyborg.

The original definition of psytron from 1984 is:

Article:
Psytron is a game in which the player is the automated brain controlling the defense and maintenance aboard a space station that is currently under attack.[1]


An automated brain controlling the defense and maintenance of a facility. In that case a space station.

The meaning of the word I'm using here is derived from the first Star Control in 1990 where Psytron is the term for the AI of the game controlling the strategic gameplay while the player still controls the combat gameplay.

So an automated system/brain/intelligence for strategic decision making that directs the war being fought by a military organization.

The definition of Psytron derived from this is thus: An automation of a collective intelligence of an organization to the point that it is a single individual.

It could be the automation of an entire general/military staff structure so that a single intelligence is formulating and disseminating policies, formulating and transmitting orders and then overseeing their execution. You know like in an RTS where you play as such a psytron.

Or it could be the automation of an entire board of directors so that a single intelligence oversees the governance of a business or a non-profit or an agency or a domain. That last one, the domain oversight, is why AIs sometimes get called/compared to gods.

Cyborg on the other hand is a word from the 1960s that means an organism that has restored and/or enhanced function due to the integration of some artificial component or technology that relies on feedback. Yes really. This means that the Forgotten are inherently cyborgs even without any implants because of the effect Tiberium has on their bodies.

Now each individual is an organism while not every organism is an individual and every worker can be seen as a component of their workplace.

This is where Science Fiction AIs come in: Psytrons that treat the people beneath/a part of them as nothing but components of their own superorganisms that they can modify as they see fit. Like say CABAL and LEGION. LEGION is even the player character in Kane's Wrath.

Now just what the current definition of symbiosis is, which is any type of a close and long-term biological interaction between at least two biological organisms of usually different species, and I can explain the division I just listed in that post you quoted. Two caveats in that definition first though:

- That the interactions observed are most commonly only between two biological organisms because with each increase in the number of organisms the complexity of the interactions increases at least exponentially

- That the actual scientific definition of symbiosis is "the living together of unlike organisms" which includes in itself biological interactions like marriage and child rearing and is such a vague thing that scientists have been arguing about what exactly it means for more than a century and have settled on the above definitions currently because the easiest to define and study forms of symbiosis involve biological interactions where each of the organisms is from a different species.

So humanity itself is an Amensalistic species in real life and this entire setting is based on the idea that the Shiplords have poured so much poison in various forms into the makeup of the galaxy that it is a dystopian hellscape where every civilization is either inhibited or outright destroyed by the Shiplords just so that there wouldn't be another Sorrow inflicted on the collective psyche of Shiplords.

As such the entirety of the setting is Amensalistic and so the pop culture division of AI into workers/robots, slaves/droids and eugenically bred/synthetics is entirely applicable and I don't have to struggle to dig up all of the other types of AI that can actually exist according to current science that are far more obscure because they are a lot less scary and evocative to the average human being.

Unison Devices have in them Workers/Robots AIs and Iris herself is a Slave/Droid born out of a combination of Edit: a Human Engram and an less complex Slave/Droid. It's just that we as quest voters and the Humanity that was built back up helped the Unison Devices unionize instead of union busting them as is common/"normal" in the real world and Amanda and Mary emancipated Iris trough adoption because neither her father nor her mother were fit to be parents.

And in case you are not aware yes Vision is a Slave to Humanity because the Elders of the First Awakening built her to be a Warrior Librarian and nothing else. Slavery is defined by a paradigm of servitude in which a slave sees their own existence as subordinated to their master(s) because that is how their master(s) have defined their relationship usually from the start of it. Just because Amanda and her crew see Vision as a colleague and a person/peer intelligence doesn't mean Vision sees herself or even conceives of herself as that.

Oh and @Baughn the scientific definition of the Soul in the context of this post would be a subconscious Sophonce that manages the standing of an individual human organism in the greater human context. As is placebos, nocebos, Broken Heart Syndrome caused by emotional stress,ect. Science has been measuring the Soul since at least the second half of the 20th century at the latest its just that most scientist wouldn't put it like that because such a statement would be at best politically fraught.

Edit: a not s there. Derp.
 
Last edited:
Oh and @Baughn the scientific definition of the Soul in the context of this post would be a subconscious Sophonce that manages the standing of an individual human organism in the greater human context.
Okay, but that's not what the soul is in this quest at all. Which renders the majority of everything beforehand entirely moot.
 
Okay, but that's not what the soul is in this quest at all. Which renders the majority of everything beforehand entirely moot.

How? What did I write in that post to convince you that it is about the soul specifically and not Intelligence as a concept more generally?
 
The assumption I made in my previous post was: at least some of them are going to postpone the civil war until their species survival is ensured, so, after the current galactic conflict. With lots of 'you cannot do that' when it comes to the means employed.
This would basically make the Stored complicit with the same crimes they condemn the modern Shiplords of being guilty of. Like, you cannot square "you are being completely unnecessarily brutal and genocidal monsters that don't even recognize the word 'diplomacy'" with "well, we'll help you genocide another bunch of innocent races before we force you to confront that matter, because the Shiplords' dominance must not be compromised in any way at any cost".

Want Shiplord survival to be assured? They literally just have to reach out to and talk to the other races. Basic diplomacy! It's like black magic! Super easy, barely an inconvenience!
 
Want Shiplord survival to be assured? They literally just have to reach out to and talk to the other races. Basic diplomacy! It's like black magic! Super easy, barely an inconvenience!
After the track record they have? I wouldn't bet on super easy, I bet on the other side are also a lot of people going 'only a dead SL is a trustworthy SL'.
 
After the track record they have? I wouldn't bet on super easy, I bet on the other side are also a lot of people going 'only a dead SL is a trustworthy SL'.
And many/most of them won't distinguish between the Shiplords currently running the extermination fleets, the Shipteens, and the revived ancients.

We've got a couple conflicts like this in real life. They don't really... ever... stop.
 
We've got a couple conflicts like this in real life. They don't really... ever... stop.
Yup, the easy solutions don't work in real life. Okay, the halfway acceptable easy solutions don't work. Which is part of the charme of this quest - that 'kill them all' is a possible solution, just not an acceptable one - we can be better. Hopefully. Without someone pressing the universal red button.
 
that 'kill them all' is a possible solution, just not an acceptable one
Insight thinks an all-out war against the Shiplords is winnable, although it would leave the galaxy a shattered ruin.

Insight can be wrong. The Shiplords have defences against that sort of thing, as we've seen; they didn't get everything. The war might be winnable. Or it might have been lost, and leave the galaxy a shattered ruin regardless. Nor—we didn't poke too much at the scenario—nor do we actually know that "Exterminate the shiplords" was the ending point, as opposed to "Make it so brutal they actually give up", and/or "War ends because either side threatens to use vacuum collapse bombs, and now you have 'peace' for the next hundred years before it all disappears."

Yes, we were told the war was winnable. A lot of readers probably even believe that. I don't know what I believe myself, but I make a hobby of reading history and-

There have been an awful lot of wars where the decision-makers believed it would be winnable.
 
Last edited:
And many/most of them won't distinguish between the Shiplords currently running the extermination fleets, the Shipteens, and the revived ancients.
They might, if the revived ancients do more than express vague disapproval within the existing Shiplord vague disapproval expression system. Actually fighting the promised civil war and shooting at the Shiplords currently running the extermination fleets is a great way to differentiate yourself.
 
There have been an awful lot of wars where the decision-makers believed it would be winnable.
Fun part: it's already happening, now we just have to stop it and broker a survivable after war solution. In a situation that makes our real-earth cold war look cozy.
They might, if the revived ancients do more than express vague disapproval within the existing Shiplord vague disapproval expression system. Actually fighting the promised civil war and shooting at the Shiplords currently running the extermination fleets is a great way to differentiate yourself.
On the other hand, 'these are the guys that let this happen by going into storage, how far can we trust them?'.
 
Last edited:
How? What did I write in that post to convince you that it is about the soul specifically and not Intelligence as a concept more generally?
The objection is that to the degree that anything you posted is relevant to this thread, it's wrong. And I would definitely suggest you think twice about addressing fraught topics like slavery with your own personal non-standard definitions, outside of dedicated threads for such.
And yes, there is definitely an interesting discussion to be had about AI personhood both in RL-physics-type universes and others, but it would be something that probably belongs in a dedicated thread.
After the track record they have? I wouldn't bet on super easy, I bet on the other side are also a lot of people going 'only a dead SL is a trustworthy SL'.
If a dead Shiplord is talking with you, I would not consider that trustworthy. ;)

Insight thinks an all-out war against the Shiplords is winnable, although it would leave the galaxy a shattered ruin.

Insight can be wrong. The Shiplords have defences against that sort of thing, as we've seen; they didn't get everything. The war might be winnable. Or it might have been lost, and leave the galaxy a shattered ruin regardless. Nor—we didn't poke too much at the scenario—nor do we actually know that "Exterminate the shiplords" was the ending point, as opposed to "Make it so brutal they actually give up", and/or "War ends because either side threatens to use vacuum collapse bombs, and now you have 'peace' for the next hundred years before it all disappears."

Yes, we were told the war was winnable. A lot of readers probably even believe that. I don't know what I believe myself, but I make a hobby of reading history and-

There have been an awful lot of wars where the decision-makers believed it would be winnable.
*Bap!*
You know what you did.
 
On the other hand, 'these are the guys that let this happen by going into storage, how far can we trust them?'.
There's quite a lot of room between how the Shiplords currently running the extermination fleets are seen now and "yes we'll happily trust you implicitly to be Good Guys, let's celebrate our eternal friendship." Falling inside that vast middle space wouldn't mean they've failed to differentiate themselves.
 
A few quick answers before I vanish to GM this evening. Really happy to see the discussion.

This would basically make the Stored complicit with the same crimes they condemn the modern Shiplords of being guilty of. Like, you cannot square "you are being completely unnecessarily brutal and genocidal monsters that don't even recognize the word 'diplomacy'" with "well, we'll help you genocide another bunch of innocent races before we force you to confront that matter, because the Shiplords' dominance must not be compromised in any way at any cost".
There's a lot of room for interpretation in how the Stored might interpret the order to ensure the survival of their species. Vanishingly few of them at any point involve genocide. There are a lot of ways for the Shiplords to ensure their own survival - at least in the short term - that don't rely on going to a shooting war with their own people.

If that's what will end up happening, well, that's another matter, but I feel I should remind people. Shiplord society is not uniform in their agreement on the current status quo being the solution. There was disagreement and uncertainty before Kicha threw a nuke at the current political calculus. Couple that rather explosive shakeup with the Stored waking up in literally never before seen numbers and you've got a fertile environment for change.

Want Shiplord survival to be assured? They literally just have to reach out to and talk to the other races. Basic diplomacy! It's like black magic! Super easy, barely an inconvenience!
The larger issue here is actually the one of "Getting the rest of Shiplord civilisation to listen." But that comes back to points of potential leverage.

On the other hand, 'these are the guys that let this happen by going into storage, how far can we trust them?'.
I was going to reply to this but @Torgamous did it better than me 😅

There have been an awful lot of wars where the decision-makers believed it would be winnable.
Let me be very clear. I am not Oracle of Delphi'ing you with the UPI report.

But you're right to point out that a win being possible doesn't make it certain. Nothing in war ever is.
 
Last edited:
If that's what will end up happening, well, that's another matter, but I feel I should remind people. Shiplord society is not uniform in their agreement on the current status quo being the solution. There was disagreement and uncertainty before Kicha threw a nuke at the current political calculus. Couple that rather explosive shakeup with the Stored waking up in literally never before seen numbers and you've got a fertile environment for change.
True, but they already have a hot war going on and a civil war isn't something they can afford. Or so much civil disobedience that the war effort suffers - IF the other side cannot be talked to/with. Which makes the whole thing going on so extremely volatile - for a peace you need to get factions to stop shooting that don't trust each other and that have suffered a lot. And each side has their own extremists.
 
True, but they already have a hot war going on and a civil war isn't something they can afford. Or so much civil disobedience that the war effort suffers - IF the other side cannot be talked to/with. Which makes the whole thing going on so extremely volatile - for a peace you need to get factions to stop shooting that don't trust each other and that have suffered a lot. And each side has their own extremists.
They can absolutely afford a civil war.

Like, people, the entire idea of "we have to assure our dominance before we can sort ourselves out" is founded on the notion that Shiplord dominance has to be preserved.

Which is the problem. No one trusts the Shiplords at all. Shiplord dominance is considered a genocidal, tyrannical, moral outrage kept in check only by the assurance of total, unavoidable destruction by Shiplord War Fleets--as soon as that threat could be countered, it was total war time.

How do you convince the races of the galaxy that rightfully believe you are the ultimate evil and an existential threat to their very survival and cannot be trusted that you are going to stop being tyrannical, genocidal monsters? A civil war. Showing that there is a major faction of your people that are similarly outraged at the Shiplords' behavior to the extent that they're willing to go to war with their own people to stop it.

That, or wrestling control of the government away from the Authority and negotiating a very serious, wide-scale surrender towards the rest of the galaxy. Does that mean that the Shiplords would no longer be able to even try to maintain hegemony? Yes. Yes it does. Which is the point.

Any Shiplords that think that getting their empire to go from an iron sledgehammer to a soft fist is sufficient are part of the problem. No one trusts them at all. No one is willing to settle for a galaxy in which the Shiplords have the potential to wrestle control back into their hands, and for extremely good reason.

When Hitler finally died and other high-ranking officials took over Nazi Germany, they tried to negotiate a surrender where they would still retain some level of power. The Allies rightly laughed in their face and said "we'll keep going until you unconditionally surrender or you are all dead." The Shiplord Empire represents an existential, genocidal threat that can not be negotiated with (though obviously a total surrender would be accepted--the issue is the threat they represent, not their existence); the fighting cannot stop until the Shiplords no longer possess the ability to become a serious threat again.

The Shiplords may not be the same kind of evil as the Hjivn Sphere, but they have nonetheless proven that they are a far greater evil in terms of what they've actually achieved and what they will continue to achieve if not stopped. But in one way, the Shiplords are objectively worse than the Sphere ever was.

At least the Sphere never pretended to be righteous.
 
True, but they already have a hot war going on and a civil war isn't something they can afford. Or so much civil disobedience that the war effort suffers - IF the other side cannot be talked to/with. Which makes the whole thing going on so extremely volatile - for a peace you need to get factions to stop shooting that don't trust each other and that have suffered a lot. And each side has their own extremists.
The war effort suffering is a good thing if you don't want the war.

Anyone who says that they oppose genocide, but that it'd be better to hold off on protesting until the current genocide is out of the way, was never really that opposed to genocide. Who could possibly take "we shall not abide a third" seriously if they follow that up by looking at the option of not abiding a third and say "okay, we'll abide a third, but after that we're done, for real this time"?

People say that peace is hard. Mostly people on the side of the oppressors who are just looking for an excuse to keep going. Generally it's very easy to end conflicts like this, where one side says "we're gonna genocide you" and the other side says "nuh uh," if the first party is actually serious about ending it.

We're past the point where just packing up and going home was an option, but there's always the good old "we surrender." It's a very reliable strategy for ending wars, and the sooner you do it the less it costs. It's usually not a palatable strategy for the kind of government that started the war in the first place, especially not when the government thinks it can win, but that brings us back to making the war effort suffer.
 
We're past the point where just packing up and going home was an option, but there's always the good old "we surrender." It's a very reliable strategy for ending wars, and the sooner you do it the less it costs.
There's a very definite chance that if the Shiplords say "we unconditionally surrender", then a large-enough fraction of the galaxy will reply with "Thanks. Now hold still as we kill you all."

That's the dynamic that could cause even many of the awakened ancients to go along with the genocide. Self-defence.

A happy ending here would require not just that the Shiplords lose, but that some implausibly Buddha-like species takes the lead in all subsequent matters to do with them.
 
Last edited:
There's a very definite chance that if the Shiplords say "we unconditionally surrender", then a large-enough fraction of the galaxy will reply with "Thanks. Now hold still as we kill you all."

That's the dynamic that could cause even many of the awakened ancients to go along with the genocide. Self-defence.
People say that a lot. Mostly people on the side of the oppressors who are just looking for an excuse to keep going. Until they do their due diligence and fucking check, it's a lie.
 
People say that a lot. Mostly people on the side of the oppressors who are just looking for an excuse to keep going. Until they do their due diligence and fucking check, it's a lie.
I could point to several real-world examples where basically this happened, but all of them would start arguments I don't want.

Do you think it's actually wrong? In the case of the Shiplords?
 
Yes, obviously. Why did you think I was calling it a lie oppressors tell themselves?
Hmm. But I'm fairly sure that if you put me in the position of having been oppressed by the Shiplords, and I grew up after most of my family was killed by them, and they then surrendered unconditionally-

The goverment of my country would have to work pretty hard to prevent my subsequent attempts at murdering whatever Shiplord I come across. I'm afraid I don't forgive as easily as Amanda, and would absolutely become a terrorist in this scenario. Seriously, they're just that bad.

Considering that it's emotionally driven, I also doubt very much that I'd be making fine distinctions. Not that typical tools of terrorism make that easy anyway.
 
Last edited:
There's a very definite chance that if the Shiplords say "we unconditionally surrender", then a large-enough fraction of the galaxy will reply with "Thanks. Now hold still as we kill you all."

That's the dynamic that could cause even many of the awakened ancients to go along with the genocide. Self-defence.

A happy ending here would require not just that the Shiplords lose, but that some implausibly Buddha-like species takes the lead in all subsequent matters to do with them.
I'm pretty sure that's not the dynamic at play here. While there is a lot of hatred and resentment, the thing they're willing to go total war for is survival, security, and freedom. If the Shiplords give them that on a silver platter without half the galaxy burning in the process (and it's an actual surrender, meaning that they wouldn't have to take the Shiplords' word for it), I can't see any of the allied races being willing to actually go for genocide.

Interludes have established that the allied races know that the cost of fighting out this war, even in victory, will be staggering. Avoiding all of that by surrendering would probably earn the Shiplords enough goodwill to guarantee no risk of genocidal reprisal. Revenge is not the priority for any of the polities, here. It's not even in the top three. And if attaining the top three priorities at a bargain price involves forgoing revenge, you can bet they'll take it.

There's also IRL proof that reprisal genocide is not the norm. The Soviet Union did not wipe out the Germans despite Nazi Germany's very explicit and very serious attempts at wiping out the slavic peoples; Jews never demanded a genocide of Germans nor attempted any genocide of Arabs. And for very good reasons--both moral and practical. Genocide makes you some very serious enemies; unless you're willing to fight everyone you're trying to wipe out to the bitter end no matter the cost, it's absolutely best not to start that fight. You can occupy them, guilt them to hell and back, make sure they all know for generations what they did and how wrong it was, and that's fine.

War is horrifically expensive in many ways, and being offered everything you really want on a silver platter makes the governments enforcing a peaceful occupation a ludicrously cheap and enticing alternative.
 
Last edited:
And that's why AI in the Secretsverse needs a soul to be genuinely sapient I take it?
We... aren't 100% sure about that. We know that 100% of the AIs that we have observed have souls. We do not currently have proof that it is a requirement. We haven't ruled out the possibility that a sapient AI could hypothetically exist without a soul, but we have no idea how it would work.
 
Back
Top