PDA

View Full Version : VR Future



elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 01:39 PM
I didn't enjoy too much what they pull out at the end with the VR and stuff. I mean i don't even think they can do that, downloading personalities and writing original vrirtual enviroments is a little outside of our skill set. It was an SG-1 episode though with personalities transfers but no kind of conscience interaction and no VR, just stocking. And in 'Aurora' that vritual enviroment required a working body to cary a personality and as i remember with Aurora destroyed there were no life pods left so from where did they get one?

Then very important is the moral-philosophical aspect of phisicaly disposing of a sencient and peacefull being with a superior moral code and civil behavior than 90% from the black suits from IOA (for example). IOA looks more and more like a nazist organisation and Bates could play any time a Hitler reincarnation (this is a compliment for his acting skills). For the first time in SG series, a being is disposed for what she is made of and not for her behaviour, if i remember corectly, never happened before. I don't like us to look like the ancients, who even not so ovious, they were suffering from a little god complex. When a member of Earth societiy creates a life, we should take responsability for it and treat it as such, especially when there is no clues to indicate that can be a treat to other citizens, by the contrary. There is no wonder that the replicators, even if not programmed as such, usualy became agressive, with this type of treatment. I don't even know if Dr Lee VR trick was sanctioned by the IOA or he gone unofficial.

I just hope that in the future we will not fill that VR with all the personalities inhabiting bodies we don't feel confortable around and if we are so good with transfering personalities we should do it in a clone-organical body. I mean if we create repicator shells from scratches how hard will it be to make a clone. If those dumb life-suckers aliens can do it i think that we can too.

Apart from this issue, i really enjoyed the episode like all Earth based episodes and i think it was the best from this category both SGA and SG-1.

TheGreatLordGeorge
February 2nd, 2008, 01:42 PM
They could have gotten the pod from the orion.

it was the only humane way to solve the problem. as for disposing something for what it is... Replicators. they werent evil the just did what they were supposed to.

Mitchell82
February 2nd, 2008, 02:06 PM
I didn't enjoy too much what they pull out at the end with the VR and stuff. I mean i don't even think they can do that, downloading personalities and writing original vrirtual enviroments is a little outside of our skill set. It was an SG-1 episode though with personalities transfers but no kind of conscience interaction and no VR, just stocking. And in 'Aurora' that vritual enviroment required a working body to cary a personality and as i remember with Aurora destroyed there were no life pods left so from where did they get one?
Actually in "Gamekeeper" it was VR "Avatar" was different. It was modified but still VR. As to the Aurora no it was a VR program that took the users into the environment. And yeah it was destroyed so either A) we built one based off that tech, B) it's from the Orion.


Then very important is the moral-philosophical aspect of phisicaly disposing of a sencient and peacefull being with a superior moral code and civil behavior than 90% from the black suits from IOA (for example). IOA looks more and more like a nazist organisation and Bates could play any time a Hitler reincarnation (this is a compliment for his acting skills).
Whoa whoa whoa. That is a huge exaggeration. The simple fact that she is a sentient AI is a huge problem. It is way too big of a risk to keep her in the real world. I do not see the Nazi comparrison at all.

For the first time in SG series, a being is disposed for what she is made of and not for her behaviour, if i remember corectly, never happened before. I don't like us to look like the ancients, who even not so ovious, they were suffering from a little god complex. When a member of Earth societiy creates a life, we should take responsability for it and treat it as such, especially when there is no clues to indicate that can be a treat to other citizens, by the contrary. There is no wonder that the replicators, even if not programmed as such, usualy became agressive, with this type of treatment. I don't even know if Dr Lee VR trick was sanctioned by the IOA or he gone unofficial.
You are blowing this way out of proportion. FIrst yeah it has. Menace, Unatural Selection are two big examples. Second this was an unsanctioned project hence illegal hence no responsibility. You are trying to find a moral issue where none exits. Also Dr. Lee's project was offical.

I
just hope that in the future we will not fill that VR with all the personalities inhabiting bodies we don't feel confortable around and if we are so good with transfering personalities we should do it in a clone-organical body. I mean if we create repicator shells from scratches how hard will it be to make a clone. If those dumb life-suckers aliens can do it i think that we can too.

Apart from this issue, i really enjoyed the episode like all Earth based episodes and i think it was the best from this category both SGA and SG-1.

It's not about that. She is a replicator and a huge security risk. Nothing immoral was done.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 03:03 PM
Actually in "Gamekeeper" it was VR "Avatar" was different. It was modified but still VR. As to the Aurora no it was a VR program that took the users into the environment. And yeah it was destroyed so either A) we built one based off that tech, B) it's from the Orion.

I was reffering to the episode in which Daniel is inhabited by several personalities or even the one in which the same Daniel switch his personality with Machelo. There is no clue that we made any of these 2 technologies work and neither one require a VR.

Regarding 'Aurora', i really remeber that VR was based on different principles and like we saw when a body was pull out there was no reminent personality in the system.



You are blowing this way out of proportion. FIrst yeah it has. Menace, Unatural Selection are two big examples. Second this was an unsanctioned project hence illegal hence no responsibility. You are trying to find a moral issue where none exits. Also Dr. Lee's project was offical.

First, the girl in 'Menace' was emotional instable giving faults in programming as suggested and all her behavior tended to be agressive and she comitet agressive acts, like violence and destruction of property (remember the toys?) and other. 'Unnatural Selection' and i suppose you are reffering to 'Five', was a war like situation and he was clasified as colateral damage, a requirement for the succes of the mission. Neither Five or Niam meets the requirments of a 'peacfull being' and we had no knowledge of their programming, wasn't made by a Eart's citizen and they only prooved to be 'less agresive' than other.

Like a comparison, Ava Dixon, not only that it was programmed with morality and civic sense, which she proove, even self-sacrifice and concern for general good (even superior to her creator), but was made by a Earth citizen. The fact that her creation was not authorizated is of no consequence. This is the thing about responsability and citizenship for the actions of our citizens, both official and unofficial. This the the second side of the coin, when keeping everything secret for the general population when leting the alien techonlogy slip everywhere and when public funds go in this sort of projects. You cannot clean everything by 'disposing'. I'm sorry but i guess i disagree with you. IOA is acting totally irresponsable, without a valid mandate and many times go against our most sacred princiles.



Whoa whoa whoa. That is a huge exaggeration. The simple fact that she is a sentient AI is a huge problem. It is way too big of a risk to keep her in the real world. I do not see the Nazi comparrison at all.


It's not about that. She is a replicator and a huge security risk. Nothing immoral was done.

She is not a replicator, techically speaking, as she also mention. There are other type of techological beings. Being made from nanites doesn't make you a replicator but the ability to replicate, which was severy limited and without access to neutronium almost impossibe.

But i guess you can call her anyway you want, the problem is that you show the same racial prejudicies as Bates. You cannot judge all races for the actions of few and every individual entity is ressponsable for his action only. I'm sorry but taking this into consideration what happened in this episode regarding her character, yours and Bate's remarks with 'huge security risks' don't fly. And keeping her on Earth was not the only option.

The nazi were considering other races and nations like a 'security treat' to their own safty and purity. Of coure there is a long way to that, but i can say that IOA made first steps (in 'Outcast' and 'Ark of Truth'). The remark 'security risk' based only on races/species aspect is more and more bringed in discussion and it is mostly base on irrelevant assumptions. You cannot look to a rock and say: 'This rock is a huge security risk. Just imagine what damage it can do if... and if... and if...'. There are certatain criteries to clasify something as a security risk and you cannot based that only on one's entity race/specie. Few of the atributes of being sencient supose also individuality, free-will, so choice.

kymeric
February 2nd, 2008, 03:09 PM
I didn't enjoy too much what they pull out at the end with the VR and stuff. I mean i don't even think they can do that, downloading personalities and writing original vrirtual enviroments is a little outside of our skill set. It was an SG-1 episode though with personalities transfers but no kind of conscience interaction and no VR, just stocking. And in 'Aurora' that vritual enviroment required a working body to cary a personality and as i remember with Aurora destroyed there were no life pods left so from where did they get one?

Then very important is the moral-philosophical aspect of phisicaly disposing of a sencient and peacefull being with a superior moral code and civil behavior than 90% from the black suits from IOA (for example). IOA looks more and more like a nazist organisation and Bates could play any time a Hitler reincarnation (this is a compliment for his acting skills). For the first time in SG series, a being is disposed for what she is made of and not for her behaviour, if i remember corectly, never happened before. I don't like us to look like the ancients, who even not so ovious, they were suffering from a little god complex. When a member of Earth societiy creates a life, we should take responsability for it and treat it as such, especially when there is no clues to indicate that can be a treat to other citizens, by the contrary. There is no wonder that the replicators, even if not programmed as such, usualy became agressive, with this type of treatment. I don't even know if Dr Lee VR trick was sanctioned by the IOA or he gone unofficial.

I just hope that in the future we will not fill that VR with all the personalities inhabiting bodies we don't feel confortable around and if we are so good with transfering personalities we should do it in a clone-organical body. I mean if we create repicator shells from scratches how hard will it be to make a clone. If those dumb life-suckers aliens can do it i think that we can too.

Apart from this issue, i really enjoyed the episode like all Earth based episodes and i think it was the best from this category both SGA and SG-1.

Hay look someone used the HITLER argument! Thats a sign of a deep debate!

Avenger
February 2nd, 2008, 03:39 PM
Well, if they didn't put her in the VR environment, they would have had to kill her. And let's face it, she was a machine.

P-90_177
February 2nd, 2008, 03:47 PM
Technical issues aside I thought it was a pretty neat way to deal with the situation. It was obvious they couldn't release her. That just wouldn't be believable so they dealt with it a quite an original way.

Detox
February 2nd, 2008, 04:04 PM
Have you ever watched Stargate?

You do realize who the replicators are and what they're fully capable of right?

andromeda_dan
February 2nd, 2008, 04:27 PM
Ava is better off in this version of Dr Lee's VR world, anyways, instead of being a character in his WOW account.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 04:41 PM
Well, if they didn't put her in the VR environment, they would have had to kill her. And let's face it, she was a machine.

This is a very simplistic view of things. She was much more. I was personaly surprised that the writers pictured her that way, but they did.

Look, in SG universe we encouter many races, species who could have been clasified like security risks, giving the damage they coud do to us. We encouter both groups and individual that could be clasified this way.

Asgard probably the most technological evolved one, they could have blown our planet without a sweat. If their survival would have depended on that, maby they would have done it. They weren't very much in the emotions and feelings business.

Tollans, same more evolved than us and their phase-shifting technology would have easily penetrete our Iris which was our only defence for a long time. In the end they proove that they really were a security risk.

Tor'ra, symbiotic race, descendands from the Goa'uld pool always ploting and scheming, usualy didn't showed any concern for the colateral damage in their holy war with the Goa'uld. Also more advantced and ancient than us.

Jaffa, as Goa'uld pets not very bright, but the with the 'toys' Goa'uld gave them they were always a security threat. I mention the Jaffa, because we had the opportunity to neutralise the Goa'uld in few days using symbiot poison but we choose not to and they remained a HUGE security risk until Anubis was finaly defeated.

All those 'security risks' races/species were even allies of Earth, but absolute no one put Eart's interes first even once, before theirs. Asgard, as Thor says had always more pressing matters than Earth's safety; they merely dispached a ship when the events allowed to check on us. Tollan when facing their own survival sell us to the Goa'uld without blinking (just 2 exception, Narim and Olomac, 2 people we previously save their lifes). Tok'ra and Jaffa broke the alliance when it became to costly for them.

And what we do when we finally met an alien entity who put the survival of some earthligs before her own survial and freedom. We scrap her into base materials and we TRAP their conscience in a LIE. This sound very cruel and ungratefull to me. She didn't came to earth to invade us, she was created and educated here and none of her action could lead us to think that she can became a security risk.

The 'machine' is just the shell, but her AI (capability of her own decision and choices) and expecially the one year life experienced on earth and her civic-moral behaviour make her a much more complex entity than a machine. We are a bunch of organic molecules as well, a organic machine, what is important is onty the conscience and the personality which make us distinct individual entities.

Actually the end of 'Outcast' remainded me of a scene from 'Progeny', when after Oberoth finsish scaning the human team he says that the 'most prudent' way to deal with them is to terminate their lifes, because we were just 'organic'.

jonno
February 2nd, 2008, 05:02 PM
Technical issues aside I thought it was a pretty neat way to deal with the situation. It was obvious they couldn't release her. That just wouldn't be believable so they dealt with it a quite an original way.

If they let her go, there'd be bigger complaints that stupid!Atlantis was back - far too great a security risk (she could easily reprogrammed). So, either kill her, lock her away for all time, or let who she is (her 'soul') live on (albeit in VR). She's doing better than FRAN (even if she willingly sacrificed herself)!

I'd say they picked the most moral option. And kudos to the writers for thinking it through for once.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 05:13 PM
If they let her go, there'd be bigger complaints that stupid!Atlantis was back - far too great a security risk (she could easily reprogrammed). So, either kill her, lock her away for all time, or let who she is (her 'soul') live on (albeit in VR). She's doing better than FRAN (even if she willingly sacrificed herself)!

I'd say they picked the most moral option. And kudos to the writers for thinking it through for once.

They let a Wraith go, who didn't prooven even 10% trustworthy than Ave.

They let Teal'c buy an apartment on Earth.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 05:32 PM
How long do you think will pass until she realizes where she is and how would you think she will react to that?

She didn't do anything to deserve dead or phisical/pshihical imprisoment. As risky as you wanna see it, the only 2 corect courses of action are either to exile her on other planet or to keep her on Earth under survilance.

This is the risk IOA and other instiutions should have taken as responsability for leting alien technology and knowledge slip in the unauthorised hands and actually a sencient peacefull life came from this. No one give them the right to play god to cover their mistakes. And if there is a risk here (i don't see it) they should have taken head on.

I guess being organic has its advantages and a serial killer who is released from imprisoment is not a security risk any more, becase you know he is organic. But a untainted conscience who inhabit an technological body and play by the rules is never welcome on our beloved Earth and nowhere else really. Maby in a digital simulation?

Merlin's_Legacy
February 2nd, 2008, 05:38 PM
I have a question... Do we know for sure that she was tricked into going into the VR world? I certainly didn't get that impression. I got the impression she fully agreed to the solution. She thanked Sheppard for sticking up for her. She knew her options.

As for the moral dilemma... Once the consciousness is salvaged, who cares what happens to the body? If she proves herself in the virtual world they can always recreate her body in the future if need be. I'm sure they made a copy of the nanite code before storing the mental parameters in the VR world.

Jill_Ion
February 2nd, 2008, 05:51 PM
If she was already on another planet, then she wouldn't necessarily been as much of a security risk as she was on Earth. No matter how nice Ava was, no matter how much I liked the character, she was a replicator and IMHO couldn't be allowed to roam Earth freely. Even "under surveillance" wouldn't work, because of the $$$ and manpower it would take to watch one being - and what if she decided (we don't know the full extent of her programming) to give her "surveillance" the slip? If she was sentient and had free will, then she could've gone on and done anything.

I also don't think we should've dumped her on some uninhabited planet. Exiled to be alone forever? Didja ever see the Star Trek : TOS ep with the Librarian who "punished" the cave-living woman by making her live alone for the rest of her life? Is that a fate you would want Ava to have?

I think also a major reason they would put Ava in this VR, which isn't the best of situations, but is better than 99% of the alternatives, is that she was "bigger, stronger, faster" than humans. The IOA and SGC weren't threatened by Martin Lloyd.

I dunno. Maybe tomorrow I'll go argue the opposite, but for tonight, I'm thinking they gave her a chance to exist better than deleting her consciousness or locking her in a cell for the next several hundred years - or whatever her lifespan is.

Finally, could we puh-leeeeeze leave Hitler and Nazi *******s out of this conversation? Thanks in advance.

gopher65
February 2nd, 2008, 05:51 PM
Remember Niam? He was a good replicator too. Then he was wiped and reprogrammed.

I liked Ava's character too, and I'd like to see her again, but the risk of someone like the Trust finding her and reprogramming her was just too great. I mean, it was clear from the episode that someone was trying to weaponize the replicators. It was also clear that they had a *lot* of access to classified material (they were able to make the replicators resistant to ARWs for one thing).

So given that, would you want to just release Ava on either Earth or another planet, knowing full well that som. Whoever those people are, and we never find out, their existence was the whole point of the episode. I have the feeling we haven't seen the last of them.

There were two opinions.

1) Take her back to Atlantis where the Trust (or whoever) couldn't get to her, cause no where in the MW galaxy would be safe, or

2) Deactivate her.

Thankfully they were able to think of a third, less repulsive option.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 05:56 PM
I have a question... Do we know for sure that she was tricked into going into the VR world? I certainly didn't get that impression. I got the impression she fully agreed to the solution. She thanked Sheppard for sticking up for her. She knew her options.

As for the moral dilemma... Once the consciousness is salvaged, who cares what happens to the body? If she proves herself in the virtual world they can always recreate her body in the future if need be. I'm sure they made a copy of the nanite code before storing the mental parameters in the VR world.

She has no ideea that she is trapped. She was misslead to belive that IOA agree to release her under the condition to not apply for a scientific job or to do scientific reserch. If she would have been aware such a lie would have been usless.

Her consciousness was not salvaged, come on. It was trapped in a bunch of simulations and smart programs which make a virtual enviroment. Remember 'Matrix' or Freud. It is only a matter a time before she realizes that this is not real life. This is worst than death. She may have started as a program as well, but the time spent on Earth made her a totat different entity comparing to the other simulation. She will want that again, i mean she should.

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 06:08 PM
Remember Niam? He was a good replicator too. Then he was wiped and reprogrammed.

I liked Ava's character too, and I'd like to see her again, but the risk of someone like the Trust finding her and reprogramming her was just too great. I mean, it was clear from the episode that someone was trying to weaponize the replicators. It was also clear that they had a *lot* of access to classified material (they were able to make the replicators resistant to ARWs for one thing).

There is hole in that theory. If the Trust or someonelse has the knowlege of reprogramming nanites, which is not a knowlege very easy to achive, they will create their own repicator; the creation of a replicator is a matter of knowledge not materials, as we saw nutronium is not very hard to find.

So i don't see how she may be a security risk from this perspectime, more that even an organic who is injected with programmed nanites which take ultimatively control of the body ... or a goa'uld symbiot for that matter, who doesn't require programming and he can infiltrate to the highest levels of decision.

Detox
February 2nd, 2008, 06:22 PM
It's simple. She is a part of a race of beings who, at least 99% of which, have no other desire than to wipe out all of humankind. This has been proven many MANY times.

If you're going to use the Nazi example, then how about this? Would you let a Nazi, who's armed with a machine gun and infinite ammo, roam free around the world doing whatever he pleases? Even if he says and he won't hurt anyone?

Hell no, you'd lock that son of a ***** up tight.

This is the same thing.

We've seen what happens when the IOA or the SGC tries to keep a potentially dangerous being under guard and survellience. People get killed.

You definitely can't let her go out free in the real world, because too many things could happen. A criminal might shoot her and reveal her alien nature, there might be a malfunction with her coding and she goes bezerk. Don't think of her as a sentient being, but as a sentient weapon. No matter how peaceful it might be, there's ALWAYS the risk of someone getting hurt.

It's the same reason why you can't let her roam free about the SGC, there is just so much technology, including alien, that could affect her and cause her to go crazy and attack everyone. She is an untested piece of technology, that's been derived from technology KNOWN to hate humans.

The VR is the perfect solution, she still gets to live a full complete life, just as if she were let free into the public. Without the risk of her accidently hurting or killing people.

Avenger
February 2nd, 2008, 06:30 PM
They let a Wraith go, who didn't prooven even 10% trustworthy than Ave.

They let Teal'c buy an apartment on Earth.

Todd? He proved to be trustworthy. Plus, he had Wraith who could have potentially made it an issue if they didn't let him go.

Teal'c also proved that he was trustworthy. He didn't show up on Earth and just get to leave the SGC.

gopher65
February 2nd, 2008, 06:32 PM
There is hole in that theory. If the Trust or someonelse has the knowlege of reprogramming nanites, which is not a knowlege very easy to achive, they will create their own repicator; the creation of a replicator is a matter of knowledge not materials, as we saw nutronium is not very hard to find.

So i don't see how she may be a security risk from this perspectime, more that even an organic who is injected with programmed nanites which take ultimatively control of the body ... or a goa'uld symbiot for that matter, who doesn't require programming and he can infiltrate to the highest levels of decision.
They can't reprogram her now... but six months from now? We know wallance's people were working on nanite programming, and we know the people in question have at least some access to classified stargate technology (ARWs). How long would it be before they tried to reprogram it? Would you want to take that risk given that the whole point of the episode was that some unknown group was trying to create military replicators?

elbo
February 2nd, 2008, 07:18 PM
They can't reprogram her now... but six months from now? We know wallance's people were working on nanite programming, and we know the people in question have at least some access to classified stargate technology (ARWs). How long would it be before they tried to reprogram it? Would you want to take that risk given that the whole point of the episode was that some unknown group was trying to create military replicators?

gopher65, like i said, if they have the knowledge, they have the replicator. Is not hard for the Trust or someonelse with his kind of insight in nanite programming to get their hands on some nutronium and to manufacter their own. We saw how easy it is. It could be more tricky to identify and reprogram a potential replicator (Ave), because they don't have acces to her original code.

Of course if Ave is a risk or how much risk, is a long discussion, a subjective one. In my opinion and base on what i saw in this episode, i belive that people like Richard Pool are far greater risk than his creation, for Earth's security. Not to mention IOA's constant leak of potential dangerous information to bussines groups. I have my opinion that the greatest enemy of Earth race in SG univers was Earth, some of our people, like bureaucrats, politicians and colonels, who put Earth in greater danger than any other race/species. They are also responsable for creating the Trust.

I guess that what bothers me, is WHY shouldn't we take that 'risk'? And is not about taking risk as it is about accepting our own mistakes if we want to call it that. Giving a reset and a choice i agree that we SHOULD NOT create replicators and let them roam free on Earth. But if we don't have that choice anymore we should accept the situation as it is. It is not our risk to take anymore but to accept it and to deal with it mature not by presing the delete button. And we shouldn't judge beings by theri specie's CV or what is possible to do but regarding to what they have done.

If we talk possibilities, any human can do a lot of damage (as history tells) and any human can became a security risk, every free-will in fact. We never rationalised this way untill now, why start now? And if we don't want to keep her on Earth, very well we let her on other habited planet with people who accept her for what she is.

Detox
February 2nd, 2008, 07:23 PM
gopher65, like i said, if they have the knowledge, they have the replicator. Is not hard for the Trust or someonelse with his kind of insight in nanite programming to get their hands on some nutronium and to manufacter their own. We saw how easy it is. It could be more tricky to identify and reprogram a potential replicator (Ave), because they don't have acces to her original code.

Of course if Ave is a risk or how much risk, is a long discussion, a subjective one. In my opinion and base on what i saw in this episode, i belive that people like Richard Pool are far greater risk than his creation, for Earth's security. Not to mention IOA's constant leak of potential dangerous information to bussines groups. I have my opinion that the greatest enemy of Earth race in SG univers was Earth, some of our people, like bureaucrats, politicians and colonels, who put Earth in greater danger than any other race/species. They are also responsable for creating the Trust.

I guess that what bothers me, is WHY shouldn't we take that 'risk'? And is not about taking risk as it is about accepting our own mistakes if we want to call it that. Giving a reset and a choice i agree that we SHOULD NOT create replicators and let them roam free on Earth. But if we don't have that choice anymore we should accept the situation as it is. It is not our risk to take anymore but to accept it and to deal with it mature not by presing the delete button. And we shouldn't judge beings by theri specie's CV or what is possible to do but regarding to what they have done.

If we talk possibilities, any human can do a lot of damage (as history tells) and any human can became a security risk, every free-will in fact. We never rationalised this way untill now, why start now? And if we don't want to keep her on Earth, very well we let her on other habited planet with people who accept her for what she is.

What if a Goul'd finds her and reprograms her for their evil deeds? Again, what's wrong with putting her in VR? She's essentially living a free life, minus the dangers of actually letting her loose.

And please, don't EVER compare this to the Nazis and Hitler. That is just downright insulting to everyone.

1138
February 2nd, 2008, 10:15 PM
I don't see how Ava was any more of a security risk than Teal'c was in the first season of SG-1. They both helped when they didn't have to. Jack fought for Teal'c's rights and for him to be assigned to SG-1 on the basis that Teal'c saved his life. Guess what? Ava came back and saved Sheppard, knowing full well that Earth has a policy to terminate replicators.

I think a more palatable solution would have been to send Ava offworld, to some out of the place settlement. Maybe like Harlan's planet where she can help him out. It's not like she can stir up any trouble on Earth while over there.

PG15
February 2nd, 2008, 10:23 PM
I guess that what bothers me, is WHY shouldn't we take that 'risk'? And is not about taking risk as it is about accepting our own mistakes if we want to call it that. Giving a reset and a choice i agree that we SHOULD NOT create replicators and let them roam free on Earth. But if we don't have that choice anymore we should accept the situation as it is. It is not our risk to take anymore but to accept it and to deal with it mature not by presing the delete button. And we shouldn't judge beings by theri specie's CV or what is possible to do but regarding to what they have done.

While that's all good in theory, that we should treat these beings with respect when they have done so in return...we CANNOT take that risk for the simple reason that, if something goes wrong, people will die. Your comparisons with Todd and Teal'c are false, since neither are as dangerous as a replicator on the loose. At the end of the day, both Todd and Teal'c are but 2 beings that can be killed with the right amount of ammo. A full-fledged replicator, which Ava can become with the right programming, is unstoppable by comparison.

Was it moral, was it right? Probably not, but it was necessary.

2ndgenerationalteran
February 3rd, 2008, 01:12 AM
Tealc and Todd all had something to offer in military and technical data, she may have been able to compute increadibly but she didnt have any definate and immediate knowlege that could help us. But she did seem to have changed the view on replicators for shep and ronon as they were against killing her. Too bad she could have been an AI for a 304 after they clean out her data stuff.

kymeric
February 3rd, 2008, 09:09 AM
The virtual environment isnt real.... but neither is she.

And really how is this any different than when picard did it to holodeck moriarty in TNG. And THAT sentient ai was a beneign accident, not a hidden illegal weapon. The replichick got off light, stop complaining. lol

Jill_Ion
February 3rd, 2008, 09:30 AM
I don't see how Ava was any more of a security risk than Teal'c was in the first season of SG-1. They both helped when they didn't have to. Jack fought for Teal'c's rights and for him to be assigned to SG-1 on the basis that Teal'c saved his life. Guess what? Ava came back and saved Sheppard, knowing full well that Earth has a policy to terminate replicators.

I think a more palatable solution would have been to send Ava offworld, to some out of the place settlement. Maybe like Harlan's planet where she can help him out. It's not like she can stir up any trouble on Earth while over there.

I really like the idea of sending her to Harlan's planet. I wonder if she would've wanted to go? The only problem may have been that she could leave if she could discover any gate coordinates, and if she went all darkside, then we'd probably have to help clean up that mess. I dunno - guess they wanted to keep it in SGA canon and not dip their toes too far back into SG-1's storylines.

Mitchell82
February 3rd, 2008, 11:47 AM
I was reffering to the episode in which Daniel is inhabited by several personalities or even the one in which the same Daniel switch his personality with Machelo. There is no clue that we made any of these 2 technologies work and neither one require a VR.
but what does that have to do with this situation?


Regarding 'Aurora', i really remeber that VR was based on different principles and like we saw when a body was pull out there was no reminent personality in the system.
Yes but the environment was still there. An VR doesn't shut down when it's inhabitants are removed.




First, the girl in 'Menace' was emotional instable giving faults in programming as suggested and all her behavior tended to be agressive and she comitet agressive acts, like violence and destruction of property (remember the toys?) and other.
Not on purpose though, she was a child through and through but yeah it had to end that way.


'Unnatural Selection' and i suppose you are reffering to 'Five', was a war like situation and he was clasified as colateral damage, a requirement for the succes of the mission. Neither Five or Niam meets the requirments of a 'peacfull being' and we had no knowledge of their programming, wasn't made by a Eart's citizen and they only prooved to be 'less agresive' than other.
While I understood Jack's action and I would have likely done the same it still makes my point. Fifth could have been an ally, same with Niam.


Like a comparison, Ava Dixon, not only that it was programmed with morality and civic sense, which she proove, even self-sacrifice and concern for general good (even superior to her creator), but was made by a Earth citizen.
Wrong. She was no different than Fifth or Niam. She was a "good guy" however first and foremost she was a replicator and was by all intensive circumstances dead. She was not made an Earth citizen she was already one just a dead one.

The fact that her creation was not authorizated is of no consequence. This is the thing about responsability and citizenship for the actions of our citizens, both official and unofficial. This the the second side of the coin, when keeping everything secret for the general population when leting the alien techonlogy slip everywhere and when public funds go in this sort of projects. You cannot clean everything by 'disposing'. I'm sorry but i guess i disagree with you. IOA is acting totally irresponsable, without a valid mandate and many times go against our most sacred princiles.
I take it you have no idea how our military and government works. This is not about citizenship. She was a robot that was created illegally and has no expectation of being a citizen. This was an illegal operation and the risk was huge this was the only option save destroying her. There is no morality issue.






She is not a replicator, techically speaking, as she also mention. There are other type of techological beings. Being made from nanites doesn't make you a replicator but the ability to replicate, which was severy limited and without access to neutronium almost impossibe.
Maybey so but she was still built from a replicator nanite. I'm sorry but your argument is flawed.


But i guess you can call her anyway you want, the problem is that you show the same racial prejudicies as Bates. You cannot judge all races for the actions of few and every individual entity is ressponsable for his action only. I'm sorry but taking this into consideration what happened in this episode regarding her character, yours and Bate's remarks with 'huge security risks' don't fly. And keeping her on Earth was not the only option.
Wait one damn minute. I am not racist I am military so I am more than qualified to know what a security risk is and she was one of them.


The nazi were considering other races and nations like a 'security treat' to their own safty and purity. Of coure there is a long way to that, but i can say that IOA made first steps (in 'Outcast' and 'Ark of Truth'). The remark 'security risk' based only on races/species aspect is more and more bringed in discussion and it is mostly base on irrelevant assumptions. You cannot look to a rock and say: 'This rock is a huge security risk. Just imagine what damage it can do if... and if... and if...'. There are certatain criteries to clasify something as a security risk and you cannot based that only on one's entity race/specie. Few of the atributes of being sencient supose also individuality, free-will, so choice.
Incorrect.

elbo
February 3rd, 2008, 12:03 PM
The virtual environment isnt real.... but neither is she.


And really how is this any different than when picard did it to holodeck moriarty in TNG. And THAT sentient ai was a beneign accident, not a hidden illegal weapon. The replichick got off light, stop complaining. lol

She was real enough to save Sheppard's and Ronon's lifes and to prevent a potential catastrophe on Earth and even the reveal of SGC program. Don't forget that Richard Pool had a buyer for the male replicator and we don't know who he/she is or that he/she will not try again. Maby is even someone from the Trust and i doubt that he/she want a replicator for planting flowers.

I really can remember that specific. But if you want to get TNG as refference, maby you should specify that they had an AI part of the Enterprise crew with a positive contribution to the mission, even if lt. Data was always a security risk giving his nature but so was anyone else. A human for example can be braiwashed, how saw even in SG1. I really preffer the 'Andromeda' refference.

If we want a 100% risk free era, we should seriosly consider droping any off-world campaign. We have the most powerfull ships in the known universe and we should focus in building more and a planetary satelite defence system. Case closed. Any minute off-world increases our chances to make new enemies and the reward is minimal now when we are fairly technological developed.

I also want to remaind you that there are people in SG universe not so short-minded like earthlings and i remember a specific episode from SG-1, when a race INVITE an AI to live with them. How do you comment this?

On a personal note, i have wished to see Ave on Atlantis even in Sheppard's team (no offence but Teyla is fading more and more), of course with her consent. I belive that she could have bring a huge contribution to the expedition, both in the city or in the field; we still have Wraith to defeat and imagine what beneficial could be someone who is imune to stun weapons when the team is ambushed and not only.

In this way we don't take the 'risk' of having her on Earth or becaming a Trust 'victim'. There are cases when the potential benefits overwhelm the potential risk and this is one of them, same as it was with Teal'c. From this reason and her positive behavior, i don't think that we can call her a security risk.

Plus, having an AI in the show, in Atlantis, as main or recurring character, could offer a new dimention to SGA, which SGA lacked and most sci-fi shows had. I deffinatively wanted to see that!

elbo
February 3rd, 2008, 12:31 PM
but what does that have to do with this situation?

Yes but the environment was still there. An VR doesn't shut down when it's inhabitants are removed.

For that matter the VR from 'Aurora' was destroyed once with the ship and the life pods. It remains a mistery how Dr Lee was able to recreate both.

And to create a VR where people can connect to and interact is one thing, but to download a conscousness is something else. I don't think we can do that with everything that we aquire in SG-1/SGA.

....

Sorry, but our current knowlege of 'robots' do not include the AI concept, which suppose sencience. We don't have laws for that or for any rights not-human related. If you imagine that the laws will remain the same in case we discover other forms of sencient lifes and we interact with them you are kiddin' yourself.



Maybey so but she was still built from a replicator nanite. I'm sorry but your argument is flawed.

Rather she was a flawed replicator, lacking many of their atributes, like changing apparence or self-repair or the agressive directive. If you don't want to akwoledge the difference, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. We are made same from organic cells like the Wraith, but we don't have their regenrative abilities or food requiments. So, we are Wraith or the Wraith are humans?



Wait one damn minute. I am not racist I am military so I am more than qualified to know what a security risk is and she was one of them.


Good to know. And how many replicators did you have met? And please offer the criteries to define a security risk. And i'm also curious how you can quantify this risk.

elbo
February 3rd, 2008, 12:45 PM
And Mitchell82, apparently you missed my point about responsability for every Earth's citizens. It doesn't matter if what a citizen do is legal or not, if he produce damage to an alien civilization, the Earth instiutions are called to compensate or suffer the consequences for his actions. Remember what happen when Tollans/Asgard threaten to broke the relations with Earth and SGC for the actions of few rogue Earth's agents? Is not like Hammond and SGC had a direct foul or have been responsable directly for some unauthorizated actions, but were the ones suffering the consequences giving their representative mandate.

This is how it works and this is the responsability when the alien civilasation don't have its own means of investigation on Earth or the legal cover to bring personaly the individual into justice.

This incident was similar in the way it involved a sencient alien life and the rogue actions of an Earth's citizen.

kymeric
February 3rd, 2008, 04:05 PM
She was real enough to save Sheppard's and Ronon's lifes and to prevent a potential catastrophe on Earth and even the reveal of SGC program. Don't forget that Richard Pool had a buyer for the male replicator and we don't know who he/she is or that he/she will not try again. Maby is even someone from the Trust and i doubt that he/she want a replicator for planting flowers.

I really can remember that specific. But if you want to get TNG as refference, maby you should specify that they had an AI part of the Enterprise crew with a positive contribution to the mission, even if lt. Data was always a security risk giving his nature but so was anyone else. A human for example can be braiwashed, how saw even in SG1. I really preffer the 'Andromeda' refference.

If we want a 100% risk free era, we should seriosly consider droping any off-world campaign. We have the most powerfull ships in the known universe and we should focus in building more and a planetary satelite defence system. Case closed. Any minute off-world increases our chances to make new enemies and the reward is minimal now when we are fairly technological developed.

I also want to remaind you that there are people in SG universe not so short-minded like earthlings and i remember a specific episode from SG-1, when a race INVITE an AI to live with them. How do you comment this?

On a personal note, i have wished to see Ave on Atlantis even in Sheppard's team (no offence but Teyla is fading more and more), of course with her consent. I belive that she could have bring a huge contribution to the expedition, both in the city or in the field; we still have Wraith to defeat and imagine what beneficial could be someone who is imune to stun weapons when the team is ambushed and not only.

In this way we don't take the 'risk' of having her on Earth or becaming a Trust 'victim'. There are cases when the potential benefits overwhelm the potential risk and this is one of them, same as it was with Teal'c. From this reason and her positive behavior, i don't think that we can call her a security risk.

Plus, having an AI in the show, in Atlantis, as main or recurring character, could offer a new dimention to SGA, which SGA lacked and most sci-fi shows had. I deffinatively wanted to see that!

Google the TNG episode elementary dear data, they accidently create an AI that can destroy the ship while datas playing sherlock holmes. The name of the sequal episode escapes me right now, but faced with an AI threat they eventually trap in in a virtual reality.

Im just saying i Picard did it its gotta be ok ethically.... :-p

Avenger
February 3rd, 2008, 06:29 PM
For that matter the VR from 'Aurora' was destroyed once with the ship and the life pods. It remains a mistery how Dr Lee was able to recreate both.

He's a brilliant scientist who's had lots of time to work on this kind of thing.


And to create a VR where people can connect to and interact is one thing, but to download a conscousness is something else. I don't think we can do that with everything that we aquire in SG-1/SGA.

Why not? Her consciousness is just code. If it's code, there's no reason it couldn't be loaded into a computer generated environment.


And Mitchell82, apparently you missed my point about responsability for every Earth's citizens. It doesn't matter if what a citizen do is legal or not, if he produce damage to an alien civilization, the Earth instiutions are called to compensate or suffer the consequences for his actions.

Kind of like if a human made replicator were to be captured and reprogrammed to go on a rampage, killing people and causing lots of other damage. You can't have it both ways, bud.

....


Sorry, but our current knowlege of 'robots' do not include the AI concept, which suppose sencience. We don't have laws for that or for any rights not-human related. If you imagine that the laws will remain the same in case we discover other forms of sencient lifes and we interact with them you are kiddin' yourself.

Our "current" knowledge is irrelevant. The technology in the SG program is far more advanced that what we actually have in the real world.




Rather she was a flawed replicator, lacking many of their atributes, like changing apparence or self-repair or the agressive directive. If you don't want to akwoledge the difference, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. We are made same from organic cells like the Wraith, but we don't have their regenrative abilities or food requiments. So, we are Wraith or the Wraith are humans?

She didn't have those attributes because she as not programmed to have them. However, if the wrong person with the right technology were to gain access to her and start tampering with that programming, they could potentially reprogram her with those directives you mentioned. She would be damn near unstoppable, especially if she was reprogrammed to replicate.





Good to know. And how many replicators did you have met? And please offer the criteries to define a security risk. And i'm also curious how you can quantify this risk.

You haven't met any replicators either, so that argument fails. However, we have seen what they are capable of on the show. She's a security risk because it she were to be captured and reprogrammed by the wrong people, she would be nearly unstoppable. And, if she were able to replicate, well, that would pretty much be the end of Earth as we know it.

kymeric
February 4th, 2008, 06:47 AM
Actually.... I have a thought. That pod tech was on the Aurora which was kablooied. But if one aurora had it i bet others do too. Could we have just found some some hint as to the fate of the Tria?

garhkal
February 4th, 2008, 10:46 AM
I really like the idea of sending her to Harlan's planet. I wonder if she would've wanted to go? The only problem may have been that she could leave if she could discover any gate coordinates, and if she went all darkside, then we'd probably have to help clean up that mess. I dunno - guess they wanted to keep it in SGA canon and not dip their toes too far back into SG-1's storylines.

That could have worked, though i would hope they remove the gate first.


For that matter the VR from 'Aurora' was destroyed once with the ship and the life pods. It remains a mistery how Dr Lee was able to recreate both.

plus i seriously doubt we had the Orion long enough to get them off. Hay. maybe they came from the Tria..

Jill_Ion
February 4th, 2008, 10:53 AM
OK, here's a problem with letting Ava run around free on Earth. She was based upon a dead woman. Even though allegedly her parents were dead (were they really or was Ava programmed with this "memory" to keep her from going home?), she obviously had other family and friends who cared about her.

Would you want a dead friend or relative "replaced" by a robot, AI, replicator, whatever?

I think the head scientist guy who created the replicator was very selfish in recreating his dead assistant - he missed her and probably more important, needed help, so he made a "copy." RepliAva could never have all of the memories or experiences the real Ava had.

What if you ran into this "replacement" and they didn't even know you, because RepliFriend wasn't programmed with "memories" of you?

I'm not anti-AI rights (unless it's SkyNet ;) ), but in this case, I think they did the right thing with giving her at least some kind of life. Maybe they should've just turned her off?

Jill_Ion
February 4th, 2008, 10:55 AM
That could have worked, though i would hope they remove the gate first.



plus i seriously doubt we had the Orion long enough to get them off. Hay. maybe they came from the Tria..

Yeah, they could've removed the Gate, if Harlan would allow it.

Mitchell82
February 4th, 2008, 12:07 PM
For that matter the VR from 'Aurora' was destroyed once with the ship and the life pods. It remains a mistery how Dr Lee was able to recreate both.

And to create a VR where people can connect to and interact is one thing, but to download a conscousness is something else. I don't think we can do that with everything that we aquire in SG-1/SGA.
I admit how we got the tech is confusing. That is a mystery. However she was a program so not to hard to download a program.


....

Sorry, but our current knowlege of 'robots' do not include the AI concept, which suppose sencience. We don't have laws for that or for any rights not-human related. If you imagine that the laws will remain the same in case we discover other forms of sencient lifes and we interact with them you are kiddin' yourself.
Um you do realize there is a difference with the real world and the world of SGA right? In SGA and even real life our government would not consider her a lifeform. In real life she would have been destroyed.




Rather she was a flawed replicator, lacking many of their atributes, like changing apparence or self-repair or the agressive directive. If you don't want to akwoledge the difference, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. We are made same from organic cells like the Wraith, but we don't have their regenrative abilities or food requiments. So, we are Wraith or the Wraith are humans?
There is a difference however the fact remains she was a replicator which means a threat did exist no matter how remote it was too risky.





Good to know. And how many replicators did you have met? And please offer the criteries to define a security risk. And i'm also curious how you can quantify this risk.
This is fiction not real life!

Mitchell82
February 4th, 2008, 12:09 PM
And Mitchell82, apparently you missed my point about responsability for every Earth's citizens. It doesn't matter if what a citizen do is legal or not, if he produce damage to an alien civilization, the Earth instiutions are called to compensate or suffer the consequences for his actions. Remember what happen when Tollans/Asgard threaten to broke the relations with Earth and SGC for the actions of few rogue Earth's agents? Is not like Hammond and SGC had a direct foul or have been responsable directly for some unauthorizated actions, but were the ones suffering the consequences giving their representative mandate.

This is how it works and this is the responsability when the alien civilasation don't have its own means of investigation on Earth or the legal cover to bring personaly the individual into justice.

This incident was similar in the way it involved a sencient alien life and the rogue actions of an Earth's citizen.

No it's not. Those situations involved actual organic civilizations and not a risky relationship. Those examples don't compare.

Esquin
February 5th, 2008, 02:32 AM
2 points taht have already been brought up.

Todd and Teal'c. Both where far bigger security threats then Ava ever was.

Todd breaks his bindings and sudden;y we have a creature that is amazingly cunning and can, with the right amount of skill, be almost unkillable.

Teal'c was even worse, at any moment his larva could of jumped into a host. We saw it happen in the pilot to Kawalski. And yet they let him roam free like that for years.

Yes Ava was dangerous but she couldn't replicate, she couldn't alter her own base-code to allow herself to replicate, and when it comes right down to it, we could kill her if we had too.

Now lets put aside that what they did to her was inhumane. It was a downright waste. She could of been a valuable asset to the SGC. Even if you don't keep her anywhere near the SGC itself. They took one of the greatest achievments the Stargate program has ever produced (A weapon and computer that proved it was loyal to humanity and had morals.) And scrapped it. It was down right dumb.

Jill_Ion
February 5th, 2008, 04:39 AM
I respectfully disagree, Esquin, for the following reasons.

Her treatment was not inhumane. She's not in a deep dark cell, being beaten. She's "living" in a VR.

Waste? She's in a VR. She still exists. They can pop in there any time they want, and possibly they can take her "consciousness" out and put it in another AI, if that is what they want to do. I would agree with you if they had destroyed her programming, but they didn't.

She wasn't a product of the SG program. They didn't program her and had no idea what surprises may have lain hidden in her coding.

Teal'c didn't get his own apartment until S8, about 1.5 yrs after he started on tritonin. The SGC medical team, as well as Teal'c, kept track of his symbiote's growth progress. Most, if not all, of his travels off-base were with other SGC personnel (not counting the play in Family Ties). Plus, Teal'c proved himself to be an ally of the Tau'ri over and over and over and over and...well, you get the idea. :)

Todd never left the SGC, was always in shackles when being transported, and was always under heavy guard and behind locked doors.

Avenger
February 5th, 2008, 09:28 AM
Todd and Teal'c. Both where far bigger security threats then Ava ever was.

Todd breaks his bindings and sudden;y we have a creature that is amazingly cunning and can, with the right amount of skill, be almost unkillable.

Teal'c was even worse, at any moment his larva could of jumped into a host. We saw it happen in the pilot to Kawalski. And yet they let him roam free like that for years.

Teal'C didn't leave the SGC for years.

And with Todd, the enemy of my enemy is my friend applied in that situation and that changed the "rules". Furthermore, even if he did manage to break loose, they could easily track him and eliminate him on Atlantis if needed.

Eva, while not a threat as she was, could potentially have been reprogrammed to replicate or to become violent. She would have cause far more damage if this were to be the case that Teal'C or Todd ever could have.

elbo
February 5th, 2008, 09:41 AM
Few things about Todd, first his case can hardly compare with Ave. He cannot be trusted even for a moment and he always has a hidden agenda; he has plans to create his own army and is well connected in the Wraith colectivity, which make many ressources available to him; he was ready to sacrifice Sheppard and the team to save his life without blinking; he has current knowledge of Atlantis and SGC, there is no way of knowing what informations could have pick up in the time spend there; we cannot speak of honor or keeping his word in his case, because everything he did to help us was first benefiting him or the Wraith; and when we reach the bottom of things, he will be always be an enemy for us and there is no way of taking off his feeding features. The existence of a technological being for comparison is not conditionate of a human death. Everything they did to provoke humans deaths was a result of conscious decision and with Ave was not the case.

And we did more than that with Todd, we sacrifice a human to him even if a scenario was pull out to make confusion, either we sacrifice Henry Wallace or he give himself wilingly, yes right! All this for some information. Well Ave could offered much more to us and she didn't require any type of food.

I said this before, but i belive that the best solution is having her on Atlantis, where is far from Earth or the Trust or Goa'uld and she can be a huge asset overwhelming any of the potential and minimal risks left. And is not like we cannot program a off-switch in her code and deactivate her in case problems appear.

I read a lot of funny comments about her becoming invincible. No one can beat the phisics and no one is invincible, at least not mater maby energy. If somenting, she is even more vulnerable to outside threats than a human, as also have been pointed out and don't think only to how many holes can we put in someone's body with the projectile weapons.

And for those fearing a reprogramming, maby you should fear the knowledge itself, because people having it will create their own replicators and program and train them as they like not hyjack a model build for social interaction, simulation of feelings and empathy.

Avenger
February 5th, 2008, 12:47 PM
I said this before, but i belive that the best solution is having her on Atlantis, where is far from Earth or the Trust or Goa'uld and she can be a huge asset overwhelming any of the potential and minimal risks left. And is not like we cannot program a off-switch in her code and deactivate her in case problems appear.

What if the remaining replicators discover that there is a replicator on Atlantis and decide to reprogram her remotely to destroy the city? Yes, it could happen. We've seen replicators reprogrammed remotely before.


I read a lot of funny comments about her becoming invincible. No one can beat the phisics and no one is invincible, at least not mater maby energy. If somenting, she is even more vulnerable to outside threats than a human, as also have been pointed out and don't think only to how many holes can we put in someone's body with the projectile weapons.

As is, she could be stopped, however, she was built to be ARG resistant. That's an immediate red flag. If she were reprogrammed so that she was capable of phasing, bullets would pass right through her. While someone would eventually figure out a way to stop her, she'd be capable of doing a lot of damage first.


And for those fearing a reprogramming, maby you should fear the knowledge itself, because people having it will create their own replicators and program and train them as they like not hyjack a model build for social interaction, simulation of feelings and empathy.

Replicators are capable of being reprogrammed remotely. They don't need to be plugged into anything. If the wrong person with the right skills were to find out about her and rewrite her programming, she could do a lot of bad things.

And just because I happen to think that the potential for her being reprogrammed is a threat doesn't mean I'm dismissing the knowledge is dangerous as well. Of course it's dangerous.

Mitchell82
February 5th, 2008, 01:22 PM
I respectfully disagree, Esquin, for the following reasons.

Her treatment was not inhumane. She's not in a deep dark cell, being beaten. She's "living" in a VR.

Waste? She's in a VR. She still exists. They can pop in there any time they want, and possibly they can take her "consciousness" out and put it in another AI, if that is what they want to do. I would agree with you if they had destroyed her programming, but they didn't.
Exactly.


She wasn't a product of the SG program. They didn't program her and had no idea what surprises may have lain hidden in her coding.
Bingo.


Teal'c didn't get his own apartment until S8, about 1.5 yrs after he started on tritonin. The SGC medical team, as well as Teal'c, kept track of his symbiote's growth progress. Most, if not all, of his travels off-base were with other SGC personnel (not counting the play in Family Ties). Plus, Teal'c proved himself to be an ally of the Tau'ri over and over and over and over and...well, you get the idea. :)
Agreed.


Todd never left the SGC, was always in shackles when being transported, and was always under heavy guard and behind locked doors.
Again good point.

YutheGreat
February 5th, 2008, 06:42 PM
My problem with the VR thing is that do you think Ava knows she was transfered into a VR world. We know the replicators may be tricked to be in a VR world Weir did it to Oberoth, leader of the replicators. I mean Ava said one of the conditions of her release is that she isn't allowed to look for work in the scientific field. To me it means she doesn't know.

So what happens if/when she finds out? I mean fifth went nuts when she thought Carter betrayed him. What is Ava gona do to Shepard? I had a picture in my head that Ava is gona escaped through Bill's World of Warcraft character.

Jill_Ion
February 6th, 2008, 08:09 AM
My problem with the VR thing is that do you think Ava knows she was transfered into a VR world. We know the replicators may be tricked to be in a VR world Weir did it to Oberoth, leader of the replicators. I mean Ava said one of the conditions of her release is that she isn't allowed to look for work in the scientific field. To me it means she doesn't know.

So what happens if/when she finds out? I mean fifth went nuts when she thought Carter betrayed him. What is Ava gona do to Shepard? I had a picture in my head that Ava is gona escaped through Bill's World of Warcraft character.

They didn't state it, so I *think* she doesn't know. Which may, as you say, lead to probs in the future. It depends upon whether she can feel emotions like betrayal or desire or ambition. Maybe they left it open just so it can be explored in the future, should they want to?

LOL! Love the idea of Ava escaping through WoW!

Mitchell82
February 6th, 2008, 09:33 AM
My problem with the VR thing is that do you think Ava knows she was transfered into a VR world. We know the replicators may be tricked to be in a VR world Weir did it to Oberoth, leader of the replicators. I mean Ava said one of the conditions of her release is that she isn't allowed to look for work in the scientific field. To me it means she doesn't know.

So what happens if/when she finds out? I mean fifth went nuts when she thought Carter betrayed him. What is Ava gona do to Shepard? I had a picture in my head that Ava is gona escaped through Bill's World of Warcraft character.

She doesnt know but I like the idea of escaping through WoW.

Area 51-and-a-Half
February 9th, 2008, 03:33 AM
The ending was completely stupid. In Stargate-land the only AI's capable of interacting with a replicator in a way that passes the Turing Test is another replicator. By implication the only civ capable of creating an AI are the Ancients.

There's also a brain-to-computer duplicating machine, but to populate a virtual world with believable AI's that way would require massive numbers of civilians be sent to the robot world to have their brains copied.

Where did millions -- or at least thousands -- of distinct AI's sophisticated enough to fool the prisoner come from? Hidden Asgard AI stash? Ancients playing Third Life on a lark? Was she simply tossed into an existing virtual internment camp already populated by wayward replicators whose identities had been erased and replaced with Earth-human ones?

Never mind that this idea was ripped off in its entirety from a Star Trek episode. It insults our intelligence to have something this unbelievable thrown at us with no indication of where the technology came from or how it might be humanly possible.

It smacks of a cop-out: the writers didn't have the guts to kill her and didn't want to have to be obligated by a loose end. I can imagine the conversation:
"Hey, there's a writer's strike on anyway, thinking for ourselves would be like crossing the picket line. Let's just upload her like they did on Star Trek and break for lunch."
"But what about the people watching the show? Won't they wonder where all those other AI's came from, or why we ripped off another show for no reason necessary to the continuity of ours?"
"Nah. They just want to see Wraith guns and space babes. They'd never notice stuff like that. Anyway if anyone complains we can always flash 'em with the neuralyzer."
"Isn't that from Men in Black?"
"Yeah, so? Your point?"

PG15
February 9th, 2008, 10:52 AM
The technology came from the Aurora class Ancient ships. You'd recognize those pods from "Aurora".

ciannwn
February 9th, 2008, 02:11 PM
Here are my personal views.

1: Was Ava tricked into entering a virtual reality world? We have no idea because we didn't see this part of the procedure. Maybe she had a choice as to whether or not she'd be aware that her world was virtual and she opted not to know. She could even have suggested the bit about not finding a job in any scientific field herself for two reasons. It would cut out the risk of her discovering that she was in a virtual world and she'd already had the experience of working in science. As she was programmed for social interaction she could take a different route which would give her the maximum opportunity to explore another aspect of herself.

2: She was a security risk because, no matter where she was, some unscrupulous being could have tracked her down and reprogrammed her. There'd be no way of hiding this fact from her because she was an A.I. who had worked in A.I. development. Would she have enjoyed every minute of having to be kept under surveillance in case somebody kidnapped her and changed her nature? Would such a possibility have been worrying for her because, as Michael said, "And if I remember nothing of what or who I am -- if this consciousness is erased -- what is the difference between that and death?"

3: Lee, Sheppard and Ronon were regarding her as a person. They knew that the I.O.A. would destroy her so they were trying to save her in a way which would also give her some kind of 'good life' even if it was in a virtual world. Lee's statement - "I'm just glad we were able to download her consciousness intact" says a lot about his views of her because 'consciousness' is something that humans and other organic beings have.

4: Was the virtual world really a cruel and inhumane punishment? Transhumanists have thought up all kinds of possibilities for future human existence. One of them is living in virtual reality.

What Is Transhumanism? (http://www.nickbostrom.com/old/transhumanism.html)

If we could scan the synaptic matrix of a human brain and simulate it on a computer then it would be possible for us to migrate from our biological embodiments to a purely digital substrate (given certain philosophical assumptions about the nature of consciousness and personal identity). By making sure we always had back-up copies, we might then enjoy effectively unlimited life-spans. By directing the activation flow in the simulated neural networks, we could engineer totally new types of experience.

Frank J. Tipler goes even further with his 'Omega Point Theory' where there's a cosmic computer at the end of the universe. Having read his book and the articles on his website I'm going to quote from the wikepedia article because it really does present the basic idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29

The implication of this theory for present-day humans is that this ultimate cosmic computer will be able to run computer simulations of all intelligent life that has ever lived, by recreating simulations of all possible quantum brain states within the master simulation. This would manifest as a simulated reality. From the perspective of the recreated inhabitant, the states near the Omega Point would represent their resurrection in an infinite-duration afterlife, which could take any imaginable form due to its virtual nature.

Living in virtual reality is a human dream (although it's unlikely to be every individual human's dream). Many Stargate universe transhumanists would envy Ava if they knew about her 'virtual life' and there'd be transhumanist campaigns for access to the technology which would enable them to live in virtual reality as well.

5: The most important part of Ava - her consciousness - still exists. Maybe in the future the Tau'ri will have a different attitude towards A.I.s so she'll be able to leave her virtual world by being downloaded into a new body.

YutheGreat
February 9th, 2008, 04:34 PM
[QUOTE=Esquin;7676093]2 points taht have already been brought up.

Todd and Teal'c. Both where far bigger security threats then Ava ever was.

Todd breaks his bindings and sudden;y we have a creature that is amazingly cunning and can, with the right amount of skill, be almost unkillable.

Teal'c was even worse, at any moment his larva could of jumped into a host. We saw it happen in the pilot to Kawalski. And yet they let him roam free like that for years.[QUOTE]

I do not believe that either was as big a threat as Ava.

Teal'c's symbiote could have jumped yes but Teal'c would die in less than 2 days and SGC will know pretty quickly. Even if this happened we would have had an Adrian Conrad.

Todd was gaurded by SG personel round the clock and he hasn't been able to feed for a long time as evidenced in Miller's crossing. Not much chance of escape. He escaped the Genii prison cause he got some from shepard.

The threat they posed was weighed against the advantages they provided. The Intel that gave earth its greatest advantages against the Gaould and Wraith respectively.

Some of Teal'c's contibutions
Teal'c gave the address for Cimeria which led to the first meeting with the Asgard: Thor's Hammer Thors Chariot.
Gave us intel about the System Lord's
Zat Guns
His ties with the different Jaffa rebellion factions: The Haktil, The Sodan, Ratac.

Todd
Intel on the Wraith
Deactivation code for the Asuran Replicators
Asuran war tactics

Ava yes could have been an asset but the replicators are too big of a threat. The replicators are the biggest threat in the Galaxy. They had the Asgards beat. Yes, Ava had morality and loyalty to humans but so did Reese, the first replicator, She created the Spider class replicators as toys. Reese was child-like They were not meant to be evil but they wiped out their creators and several planets and Gaould system lords. I doubt even the armies of the Ori could win in an all out war with them. Further Ava was immune to present anti replicator weapons. If SGC thought her about Asgard beaming technology, for those who have seen Outcast you know what I mean, there are no more weapons on Earth or even the Galaxy that could stop her.

This threat compared to the fact that she could provide no intel. The VR solution might not be right I do not know. It could lead to abuse yes and if Ava finds out its a betrayal we get another fifth but what can we do?

Area 51-and-a-Half
February 9th, 2008, 04:40 PM
My concern isn't with the world but its inhabitants. Who exactly is interacting with Ava in the virtual world?

Numerous "virtual world" technologies exist, both created by the Ancients and otherwise. The problem is the software, not the hardware.

The problem are the AI's the prisoner will interact with: they would obviously have to think they're human, have memories consistent with life on Earth, et cetera, and their AI would have to be sophisticated enough to pass a replicator's version of the Turing Test.

There would have to be at least thousands in a virtual Earth operating at a level making them capable of interacting with Ava. Where did they come from? Where did their memories come from? Who wrote the AI code? What were the AI's before they entered the simulation?

Orion25
December 21st, 2008, 05:35 PM
It's possible that maybe through the succeeding years, the SGC had helped from the makers seen from episodes "The Gamekeeper" and "Revisions" and have made some developments. The VR populated with other AIs could be one of the developments. Then when SGA team found Orion, I'm sure, they've taken one VR pod back to Earth for study. Then this opportunity came and Lee thought this would be a suitable for Ava till the time where an AI can work along side humans.