Eclipse Phase General - /epg/

File: f3e03a517c34c036748ef1ace4bed2f2.jpg (2MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1600px

So, speaking of the Factors, who do you see as most likely to become close allies with them? Who would the Factors get closest to, or even side with should a interplanetary war break out?

File: 1477599698729.png (151KB, 1380x762px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1380x762px

>>50030791

>>50030828
Nobody, actually. They're just in the solar system to scam humanity with some pretty glass beads. In case of war, they would either run back home or make The Egg explode the sun.

>>50030828
Which native american tribe do you think the european colonists would be most likely to become close allies with?

None of them long term.

File: ep_synth1.jpg (106KB, 440x1000px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 440x1000px

>>50031785
Tell me, /epg/, how do you prefer your synths, with or without clothes? Are nude robots indecent or do you like to see your shells in pink summer dresses?

>>50032196
In my headcanon it's seen as crass and dehumanizing for synths to go without clothes in the inner system. When you travel a bit rimward people stop caring.

>>50032196

I play a Scum in a Galatean morph who has sculpted into a steel mimicry of perfect humanity, including four breasts, two cocks, and all sorts of other sex bullshit. They never wear clothes, because fuck you.

>>50030791
TITANs are the only one sane enough to know humans were losers and left.

>>>50029852
To answer, I'm pretty sure the trading with factors is done with the inner systems (IIRC)

>>50032342
Your character sounds like a total badass, dude.

>>50032399

There's 3 or four factor "ships" I believe have made contact with transhumanity, all of which have different profiles and don't seem to talk about each other. Titan and the PC are the prominent ones, and there's another for Morning Star, the Jovians have talked with the Factors but do not engage in open, physical contact at this time.

>>50032425
>but do not engage in open, physical contact at this time.
Don't they send Jehovah's Witness or some shit to them?

>>50032544

That's the Catholic Church, which is not the same as the Jovian Republic - and yes they did send missionaries whom the Factors are ambivalent to.

>>50032544

how the hell did you get catholic missionaries and jehovah's witnesses mixed up

File: 1366257366340.jpg (918KB, 1100x1320px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 1100x1320px

>>50031785
>>50032196
>>50032342
Absolutely degenerate. Even if you robots had souls I would have no trouble wiping you off the face of the solar system.

File: 1413671456038.jpg (417KB, 1920x1490px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 1920x1490px

>>50032908
You don't have a soul either.

File: download.jpg (9KB, 189x267px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 189x267px

>>50032922
Absolutely heretical. I can't wait till you transhumans wipe yourselfs out with your little toys, leaving God's true faithful to reclaim our rightful place in the solar system.

>>50032416

Nah, they're just a fucking pervert with +Hedonism, -Responsibility, and +Trolling as motivations.

File: 1266863567936.jpg (101KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 900x506px

So, what do space battles look like in Eclipse Phase? The book mentions dreadnoughts, battleships, destroyers, frigates, patrol craft, and "smaller ships" (possibly fighters?). Do you think carriers and fighters are involved in the space battles? How does damage control work on the spacecraft, are you screwed if you're hit, and if so, what's the advantage to using larger ships such as dreadnoughts? Aside from Titan, what kind of fleet does the AA possess, if any? What about the LLA and MC, are their fleets at all significant?

>>50034709

Aside from the Titanian SDF, the only 'space fleets' the AA have are either individual hab's space militias, the entire Scum faction (ssssorta), or extropian space defense corporations.

>>50034709

Wait until the Space Combat supplement comes out.

Could somebody tell me which book has the Ultimate Gatecrasher sample character in it? I know his stats are online, but I want to know the source.

File: 1477442089549.jpg (5MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 3840x2160px

>>50032908
You sound like you need a robot hug.

>>50034709
If I remember correctly, the LLA had a significant amount of fleet assets of what was left after The Fall. Space combat is rather deadly since there are next to no space future energy shields in EP (and the ones that exist are TITAN tech). So the best bet for survival is not to get hit, I suppose. Larger ships carry more weapons and reaction mass, that would be the main advantage.

>>50030791
I am still looking for players in an online Eclipse Phase game, need 4.

>>50035991
gosh i need missile anchors in these terrapin to make it a raptor from the 13 colonies.

>>50034709
Well let's recount weapons that EP has for ships:

Kinetic kill weapons - missiles and chemical or gauss cannons.
Energy weapons - lasers and particle accelerators
High power mix - fusion bombs and Casaba howitzers (that's basically missiles too but with some caveats)

Kinetic weapons are powerful but are a subject to PD and have somewhat low speeds (up to around 40 km/s top). Chemical and gauss cannons are more or less worthless beyond 5-10 km.

Laser and particle accelerators have range and power determined by the size of mirror/accelerator so bigger ships not only can hit target at a distance of around half a light second away but also deal more damage. (Also particle accelerators can be countered by magnetic shielding on dedicated for that role ships)

Fusion bombs and Casaba howitzers are missiles. So they are subject to PD and cost much more than kinetic kill missiles. Also heavier. (Pure antimatter torpedoes are mostly bullshit. Fusion bomb costs less and can be scaled without problems). Casaba howitzer denies a good chunk of PD but has problems with accuracy and needs some comparatively rare materials.

>>50034709
>Do you think carriers and fighters are involved in the space battles?
For a given value of "fighter" yes. The difference between a fighter or drone and a missile is essentially whether you plan on recovering it, and if it has a warhead which destroys it. Less dogfighter and more range extension for point defense and missiles.

>How does damage control work on the spacecraft, are you screwed if you're hit, and if so, what's the advantage to using larger ships such as dreadnoughts?
I would imagine that there's a lot of use of self-sealing and repairing barriers, and ships are kept redundant to make "golden bullets" taking the whole thing out less likely. Multiple engines, multiple reactors, multiple command centers, etc. A single hit is hard to qualify. Getting skewered by a Casaba howitzer probably won't kill a ship, but a 100 megaton bomb detonating 150 m from the hull ought to reduce the ship to vapor and plasma. It really depends on the weapon in question.

The advantage to larger ships is that they have a better volume to surface area ratio, meaning even though you need more armor, every bit of armor is protecting more ship. You can also distance shield highly radioactive reactors more easily, and have a harder to kill more redundant ship. Larger weapons can be mounted, which means better guns, lasers, and missile magazines. It is of course more expensive, and possibly slower accelerating though.

>Aside from Titan, what kind of fleet does the AA possess, if any?
Some anarchist collectives like Love And Rage seem to possess a lot of military grade hardware, though I think L&R is mostly static defenses. The Sabaté Swarm (Rimward Page 162) is the closest thing that the anarchists have to a fleet, though it's mostly smaller ships as far as I can tell.

>What about the LLA and MC, are their fleets at all significant?
The LLA likely has an inherited fall-era fleet, and probably trains it hard. Treaties with the PC mean the MC lacks a fleet.

>>50036535
>Getting skewered by a Casaba howitzer probably won't kill a ship
What size of ships do you use? Because I want some of them. The ship that can take a couple of kilotons of energy and still stay operational is a fucking miracle.

File: IMG_6119.jpg (128KB, 1089x733px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1089x733px

>>50036003
Can you please provide a few more details?

>>50036555
You can (theoretically) get some pretty tight-angle beams from a Casaba Howitzer. I guess if you made it too tight you could spear a ship and it would still be functional in some way, depending on where you hit it.

>>50036643
Problem is - where does all the vaporised material go? It would rip and tear the ship apart.

>>50036638
Details here.
>>50024709

>>50036555
The kind of ship which can function with a hole in it. A CH produces a really fast moving piece of material, which will either be really fast and light (a shitty particle beam), or slow moving and heavy, which causes a survivable, but big impact. Some back of the envelope math gives double digit gigajoules as a yield. (10 kg of material at 120 km/s) Then there's a lot of X-rays and heat. Heat doesn't bother space ships all that much, they're good at managing it, and X-rays are unlikely to OHKO on their own.

Nukes suck in space, casaba howitzers focus all that suck into a smaller area, but poking a hole in the ship (likely nonfatal), and heating the armor to a dull glow is a plausible outcome. I was really surprised by how little nuclear weapons really accomplished against ships in simulations.

>>50036734
By volume, the majority of the ship will be fairly nonreactive fuel tanks. It will deal a serious blow, but isn't necessarily a one hit kill.

>>50036535
Oh yeah, downside to a bigger ship is a larger cross section, meaning its easier to get hits on at long range. I don't know how much that matters in EP though. Shit's likely really accurate anyway.

>>50036762
In the case of energy and particle weapons we don't care about if it is fast or "slow". What matters is overall energy contained in the beam. All this particles, heat and gamma rays hit the same spot drilling a hole in the ship with size dependant on the distance to a place where howitzer was detonated.

Don't forget that close detonation basically equals fusion bomb and if it was farther away than size of the hole will be bigger. Meaning more material dealing damage to other ship structures.

A big ass armored ship may "survive" such a hit but most of his systems should go to shit. Especially considering that Casaba howitzers can be scaled to a certain extent.

>>50036824
>A big ass armored ship may "survive" such a hit but most of his systems should go to shit. Especially considering that Casaba howitzers can be scaled to a certain extent.
I wonder if an armoured ship might actually come off worse. A light ship would give very little material to interrupt the beam while heavy armour might well simply give the beam more matter to vaporise.

>>50036824
>In the case of energy and particle weapons we don't care about if it is fast or "slow". What matters is overall energy contained in the beam.
A cloud of deuterium moving at 3k km/s isn't that powerful of a particle beam, especially if some or all of it is ionized by the energies involved and starts repelling itself. Weaponized particle beam designs typically have very relativistic velocities. The .01 c of this weapon isn't impressive compared to that.

The more dangerous version is one propelling something more massive at a slower speed, for the same reason a bullet hurts worse than a sandstorm, even if the sandstorm has more KE as a whole. It can break through armor better. A tungsten rod from god impacting at 120 km/s has 72 GJ of KE, and behaves in a pretty unpredictable way during impact. It might flash to plasma, or bore a hole through and keep going. The physics of this aren't very well understood. The former is a lot nastier for the ship. Se
>Don't forget that close detonation basically equals fusion bomb
That's not a meaningful statement without a yield. A big pure fission nuke hits harder than a small fusion design.

> farther away than size of the hole will be bigger. Meaning more material dealing damage to other ship structures.
It will also be less powerful, in a lesser way than a spherical detonation, but still exponential way.

For a well focused casaba howitzer bolt, it'll have an impact circle with a radius 1/20th of the detonation range. (5 meters at 100 meters range), at that range, you'll bore a 5 meter radius through practically anything (more energy than a MOAB per m^2), but that's about it.

I know from fucking around with COADE that ships are damaged, but can definitely survive 20+ 2.45 kt nukes at around 100 meters. (roughly 1.5x the energy of a CH bolt) Weapons and engines can get fried, and the armor is holed and glowing, but the ship doesn't die. That's with shittier armor than EP though.

As for scaling casaba howitzers, it's not known how they can be. Known designs have maxed out at a few kt, but there may be more powerful classified ones, and the ability to scale them, should it exist, is unknown or classified.

My point is not that they're bad weapons at all. They aren't significantly harder to make than regular nukes, and are much more efficient in space. If you attack a target with a 2.45 kt casaba howitzer it can put as much energy into the ship as about 5 omnidirectional warheads at the same range. (assuming I'm interpreting atomic rockets data right at 1 am).

But a single one isn't a guaranteed kill. It can destroy something non-critical, and will actually be less effective at baking off more delicate surface stuff like turrets or phased laser skins and such.

Using them in groups, or long range detonations to fry delicate surface area stuff are both easy.

Mind you, I'm sleepy, and may not be thinking about high energy densities correctly. Stuff could work differently than I'm thinking right now.

>>50037092
Well Atomic Rockets suggests around 73 meters of penetration vs Aluminium at 10'000 km for largest howitzers.

And considering EP tech we may have their gamma ray analogue where instead of particle jets energy is delivered through gamma and x-rays. Less energy efficient but hits at lightspeed and has more energy in a beam due to using megaton+ yields as a base.

So are Pandora Gates actually a viable means by which humanity can survive and prosper or are they a TITAN trap?

Is there not any conventional sub-FTL colonization effort underway?

>>50037149
That could be less threatening, much of the energy would fail to interact and just go out the other side. That is a shitload of gamma rays though, but that's mostly the megaton yield talking. I'm not really sure if it would be better. I don't know if the speed matters much, as the spreading of the beam is likely to limit range a lot sooner than the ability of the enemy to dodge.

I'm skeptical of the scaled up devices. As far as I know the largest designs tested and well evaluated are 1-3 kt, and it seems like a leap to say that a megaton+ device would work the same way with the same efficiency. I would expect a lot of efficiency losses as the radiation casing is overwhelmed by the X-rays, but lack the expertise and supercomputers try this much. My guess is that there's a biggest useful yield based on the thickness of the reflector, and the needed thickness scales up quickly with yield, giving a practical upper limit thanks to the mass and size of the warhead. No idea where that is though.

>>50037172
There's Justin Case which is setting up a starport through a gate to launch ships to a nearby star cluster, which is hopefully safe. The Titanian Republic also launched the Crystal Wind, an STL colony ship, but it hasn't left the system yet. There might be more, but that's all I remember off the top of my head.

>>50037172

To answer your first question, there's no official explain from the authors. You can take your preference about it.

To the second one, look into Firewall book. There's also another proyect in Rimward.

>>50037234
Oh yeah, bigger devices do waste more energy. Much more. But due to the fact that they are so powerful their damage still will be much higher.

The thing with speed - it matters in comparison to speeds of the target and distance that your jet needs to travel. Gamma/x-ray beams can hit targets up to 1 light second away and there is little target can do to escape them. Slower jets with speeds around a couple thousand km/s are too slow to be used at such a distance. At 1 light second it's 20 seconds or more to counter them. Smaller ships would easily dodge and many medium probably too. Dreadnaughts/battleships may have trouble evading but they can use counter detonation or detachable armor to divert attack.

Does the tone of the factions seem strange to anyone else? It's only been 10 years since the Fall and many of the "nations" are even younger than that yet everything seems so ordered. The way the Jovian Republic section reads you'd imagine it's been around for generations.

>>50038402
Authors fucked up.

>>50038402

Scum were around pre-fall, so was the PC (with a different name), brinkers and oust'ters were around pre-fall; I think some ancom habs were around prefall too. And I think Extropia Now was prefall hypercorp, wasn't it? Probably wrong on that last one. TItan was settled pre-fall and had most of the same government style/organization IIRC.

File: Screenshot1.jpg (61KB, 650x520px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 650x520px

>>50032856
It was a joke.

Think of the last cheesy B-movie you last saw. How would it be adapted into a VR sim in the world of Eclipse Phase?

>>50032544
Jesuits. For fucks sake.

>>50039276
So, do Factors have souls?

I'm running an EP quest. Figured some of you might be interested.

>>774988

>>50039315
Ah, whoops, forgot crossboard links work differently.

>>>/qst/774988

>>50039297

Going by current official catholic doctrine on alien life, yes.

>>50038402
>yet everything seems so ordered.

My personal take on that is because there are fewer people around, and the memory of the Fall is probably fresh in the minds of a lot of people - everyone's committed to try and make things work.

Socially speaking, what would the difference between someone in a biomorph and someone in a synthmorph with the synthetic mask and brain box augmentations?

>>50039995

One of them's a liar.

>>50039995
One of them is a weirdo.

>>50039995
Underneath the skin and muscle is a skellington.

If an Anarchist kills an Extropian, extracts their stack, psychosurgically modifies them to being against private property and capitalism, and then gies them a new body to begin working in the anarchist hab in a real and proper enlightened autonomist organization, what would happen to the anarchist's rep?

>>50040742
>what happens to an anarchist's rep if he murders and mindrapes a fellow autonomist
Geee I don't know.

>>50040798
It's not like the other AA members like the extropians, though, they're only in the AA as a buffer between the PC and the real members of the alliance.

>>50040821
Do you know who the AA dislike more than extropians? People who murder and mindrape.

>>50040841
Even if it's for their own good? I mean, if someone fed all the Jovians into the sun I bet the AA would give them hella rep, or if they killed every hyperelite hypercorp exec and voided their stacks so they were unrecoverable. Those aren't really killing, after all, capitalists aren't people.

>>50040856
Beings who kill and enslave people are not people. This means you, ShadowDragon.

>>50040742

I'm not sure you understand what "Autonomy" means.

>>50041017
How utterly cucked.

I mean the guy you're responding to is certainly cucked in his own right, but the sentiment that killing is always wrong is beyond absurd.

File: 1477841158251.jpg (132KB, 754x1200px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 754x1200px

>>50040742
>>50040821
>>50040856
This is why I don't understand the hate for the Jovian's, everyone else is just as authoritarian, but in a more subtle and scary way. Psychosurgery is freaky as heck, but it's considered to be acceptable for more than just fixing autism or stuff like that, it's actually used to change people's personalities and ideologies. Firewall just murders anyone doing something they don't agree with and hides the truth, while admonishing the Jovian's for taking a less murderous and more honest approach. Forks are treated absolutely horridly, and they basically have no rights almost anywhere. There are anarchist cells in the Jovian Republic, killing people they know won't come back, so they can make the Jovian's anarchists, even though the Jovian people don't even want that and Jovian's don't mess with the AA. Why is everyone a dick in Eclipse Phase?

>>50041347
Jovians are degenerate neocon faggots, why anyone would ever support them, or care if their shitty Latin mudblooded populace is killed is absolutely beyond me.

>>50041347
You know if you cut down on the greengrocer's apostrophes we won't know it's the same person shilling the jovians every single time, right?

>>50041347
Son, you keep ranting about your favourite group and avatar fagging, you're gonna have a bad time.

File: 4724d9c44557fca2bfd15210d824ff96.jpg (82KB, 600x1002px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 600x1002px

>>50041347
It's cause the get way too much attention around here

File: 1318270529433.jpg (611KB, 900x1393px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 900x1393px

>>50032196
With. It's totally a fashion thing in my mind though.

File: amazing_sci_fi_space_battle_wallpaper_hd_8.jpg (331KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1920x1080px

>>50041406
>>50041413
>>50041444
>>50041471
You people do realize that there's like three of these guys working off each other right? The use the same pool of pictures and continue where the other left off.

>>50033132
How's that malignant blastoma treating you, Jovian?
>inb4 you're the cancer, Synth!
You're cute! Don't worry, even though you and your species will inevitably die out, I'm going to write you into some legacy firmware so that future iterations of me will be able to cherish this moment like I have been programmed to.

How would you design an Ultimate-styled Remade version of the various uplift morphs? What about a REmade synth, for AGIs following a native version of the Ultimate philosophy?

>>50034709
>>50036535
I wouldn't be surprised if the Ultimates had at least a moderate space defense force to call upon, whether in a professional sense or an ad-hoc militia of super-humans.

File: 1477602441597.jpg (56KB, 357x500px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 357x500px

>>50041571
I'm doing fine thanks to my apparently fantastic health care, thank you very much. Good luck healing from those TITANs mind raping your AI though.

File: IMG_6122.jpg (102KB, 825x968px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 825x968px

Friendly reminder that everyone who responds to Jovefags are enabling their behavior and share the blame.

>>50041642

I keep trying to remind them with >>50030884 but nobody seems to remember.

File: rezwZ9i.png (52KB, 1054x958px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1054x958px

>>50041642
Remember, do not respond to:
Jovefags
Anarkiddies
Firefags
Factorfags

Rest are good though

Is terrorism against the PC worth positive @-rep or negative @-rep? Does the scale of casualities change it?

>>50041705
Pretty sure terrorism against any established hierarchies nets you positive @-rep

>>50041723

How much @-rep do you think blowing up PEX and all it's backups would be worth?

>>50041747
PEX as in the stock exchange? Honestly, you might break even on the rep front after the Extropians are done savaging you for ruining their businesses
Plus all the rep in the world is useless to someone with that short a lifespan. The Consortium, the LLA, the Lunar Banks, the MC, the Extropians, literally every one who still uses cash in the system will fall on you like a tonne of bricks. Backups will only get you so far, and would you really trust a darkcaster not to sell you down the river?

>>50041813

Extropians only get like, 3/5 a vote in their @-rep votes, though, 'cause they aren't REAL autonomists. I say go for it, anon, what's the worst that can happen?

>>50041850
You and everybody you know suffering eternal, simulspace-accelerated pain.

File: corporate retainer.jpg (239KB, 1358x1920px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1358x1920px

>>50041592
Don't be silly Jove, I'm already mind raping my AI, it loves it.
>>50041850
where is that included. I know they're on the fringe of the AA, but I wasn't aware they were legally subjugated? Suppose its to be expected of those meme saturated anarkiddies

Okay, so the feeling I'm getting from this thread is that posts about both Jovian's and the anarchists (although not the AA as a whole) should be avoided, correct?

File: futuristic_space_armor_by_fonteart-d4jgi90.jpg (237KB, 580x810px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 580x810px

So what's the Jovian's relation with the LLA? I now that there is a somewhat significant population of bioconservatives, and the Jovian's are the factions most in favor of reclamation after the LLA, and both factions are paranoid of TITANs, so do they get along pretty well or what?

>>50041932
I'll be honest, I was just making a racist historical reference with the 3/5ths there.

>>50041983
Not that well, a lot of life on Lunar would be very difficult without a lot of tech the Jovians disagree with. Plus the LLA recognizes the rights of citizens to leave in synthetic bodies, at least in theory. Certainly there's no organized discrimination like there is in Jove space
Plus 'in favour of reclamation' covers a HUGE political spectrum. Every single faction out there as a sub group that wants to reclaim the Earth. The LLA want it because they see it as a means to return some of their bygone reflected glory, whereas the Jovians see Earth as the cradle of humanity that we need to retake with fire and sword. Besides which, the Jovians might have a sizable reclaimer party, but its by no means relevant to their current agenda. Its a movement in the Senate, and not a majority one at that

>>50041958
It okay as long as you don't proclaim Jovian the best thing since sliced bread and don't engage in 20 dick self-incest orgy with which also includes your parents and five copies of your sister (Plus octopus).

>>50042046
There is no discrimination against synths in Jovian Republic. Because there is no synths.

>>50032196

Outerwear. Jackets, coats, even capes if you're feeling flamboyant.

>>50041958
The general is just a bit touchy because Jovian fanboys have been spamming for the past week but if you want to start an argument here are the 5 things you can ask:
>are the Jovians straw men?
>are anarchists Mary Sues?
>do spaceships have crews?
>is EP post-scarcity?
>is the panopticon omniscient?

>>50042206
So what is the demographics when it comes to favored factions here? Just your best guess. 20% Jovefags, 10% PCfags, that kind of thing.

>>50041582
You'd have to have a better understanding of the various uplift's psychology to make something like that.
With that said bonobo ultimates would have huge T&A and giant dicks.

File: hypercapitalists hate this AGI for discovering one weird trick.jpg (46KB, 550x329px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 550x329px

>>50042472
Best guess? 50% jovefriends, and the rest is probably distributed between autonomists and ultimates. Don't see that many people defending the PC, or the LLA, or even mentioning the Morningstal Constellation.

Also, I think Solarians are neat, so at least 0.24% solarians.

File: mock_comic_cover__war_of_the_jovians__by_jgalico-d4vzkpy.jpg (762KB, 1280x1970px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 1280x1970px

>>50042651
Honestly I think it's like 45% Jovefans, 40% Ultimates, 5% autonomists, and the rest distributed throughout the solar system.

File: IMG_6124.jpg (674KB, 719x1040px) Image search: [Google]

674KB, 719x1040px

>>50042651
Am I the only Morningstar fan here? I dig alliances of city states.

File: Slitheroid_ExtropianSmuggler_BenNewman.png (149KB, 247x473px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 247x473px

>>50042823
>>50042651
>>50042757
Although the Jovian's are my favorite, the Extropians would be my 2nd choice if I had to become transhuman (I'd probably be a slytheroid)

WHICH FACTION IS YOUR FAVOURITE?

>https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

>https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

File: cyber_trooper_7_by_proxygreen-d5yazpx.jpg (90KB, 900x643px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 900x643px

>>50043157
Huh, it's split pretty even right now. Everyone, go vote!

https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

>>50041347
Why is everyone a dick in real life?

>>50041642
I just want to fix them. Well, the whole setting needs fixing. And the system.

>>50043398
Because it so fun Jen.

>>50032196
I prefer them as only-vaguely-humanoid (sometimes) flexbots, or as nanoswarms.

The last AI I played was more comfortable sleeving an octopus morph than it was sleeving a human morph when forced to resort to biomorphs, thanks to having the additional manipulator limbs and the distributed central nervous system.

>>50042823
Champagne Liberals are just as bad as Neo-Cons.

>>50032922

So how many firewall agents do you see?

>>50043478
What are you talking about?

File: 1428348534217.jpg (145KB, 817x979px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 817x979px

>>50043157
>>50043321

Do Extropian's really have such a following?

https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

>>50043593
A significant percentage of channers are lolbertarians. I'm not surprised.

>>50043642
I just think it'd be fun to live there.

>>50043671
By all means, it sounds like a great place to make your own way without being judged by a bunch of SJW's, it's just you never hear the Extropian fans on these threads.

>>50043701

That's because I acknowledge the Extropian way of life wouldn't be for everyone; but for people whom it is suited for it's more or less perfect. I don't see the need to spread my politics like religious dogma, because it's not; it's personal preference.

File: can't stop me .gif (46KB, 299x200px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 299x200px

>>50042651
I'm a fan of Morningstar, and my junkie hyperelite slut is from there. He runs errands for firewall and funnels daddy's money into vanity megastructure projects.

File: gray_2_by_rickyryan-d6yzqyn.jpg (471KB, 1000x624px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1000x624px

>>50043732
Yeah, everyone but the reputation anarchists gets shafted by the authors, the Jovefans just tend to make the biggest racket about it. Honestly, I don't expect the authors to make any of the factions sound good, but they should at least make them sound competent (or from the authors view, threatening).

>>50043826

Mmm hmm. Extropians get a pretty good showing in Rimward, though, at least; the acknowledgement of the five different subfactions (AnCaps, Mutalists, Utilitarians, Isolationists, and Objectivists) is a good covering of all the anarcho-capitalist/libertarian philosophies that could logically comprise the faction, and most of them are treated as being not entirely jackasses (Objectivists aside, but... well. Let's be honest, here.)

Like, look at the Utilitarians. Their whole thing is 'the basics of the human condition comes from maximizing happiness by trading for wants and needs.' I want X, you have X. You want my Y? Let's trade my Y for your X, and we both come out happier for it. Sounds like a good idea to me, you know?

But it's not for everyone; some people find the idea of ownership of things to be distasteful, and that's fine. Some people think you should never have to trade for anything, and that's fine too. Extropianism is entered as a free contract with your ideals; if they don't match, why join the faction?

>>50044179
Actually, here's a question. As in a genuine question, not accusatory: How many factions actually let you just...leave? Like, if you're actually born into them/instantiated (i have no idea if this is the right word, but I just mean if you're an infugee and get given your very first actual body) into them, how many would let you go 'actually i don't really agree with any of this shit, i'm going to leave for <some faction you really don't get along with ideologically>, sorry'?

>>50044250
Provided you're not in debt, I'd imagine almost none of them would care. Jovians being the obvious exception.

File: Halo_5_Guardians_Concept_Art_Sparth_01M.jpg (156KB, 1050x400px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1050x400px

>>50044179
Yeah, and to be fair, I don't think any of the reputation anarchists are in any groups larger than small habitats, which I guess you could say shows the flaw in that it doesn't work on a larger scale or something (the writers didn't exactly give a lot of flaws other than "don't be an introvert"). I am genuinely glad the authors did put in so many ideologies to choose.

They do a similar thing with the Jovian's, where they have 5 different political factions. I think the main gripe with the Jovian's is how much of their stuff contradicts each other- "Oh, we're totally a fascist junta...with lobbyists and senators and an elected president.", "Oh, we totally have fantastic healthcare...and cancer everywhere", "Oh, we totally have resleeving stations and nanofabricators in places... except when we don't".

But yeah, Extropia is definitely my no. 2 pick after the Republic. I've always entertained the idea of living in an anarcho-capitalist society, it sounds like it could be a good bit of fun. And hey, as long as I make products that people like, I can be as militantly anti-transhumanist as I want while still enjoying the luxuries of life.

>>50044250

Ultimates, I imagine would, though that's a case more of 'failing out' than leaving. Extropians likely would as long as you paid off any debts beforehand. Scum you can do whatever, they don't give a shit, they likely would. Titanians... I'm not sure, really, I want to saythey would. Anarchists, depends on the hab in specific, but they'd be goddamn hypocrits if they didn't.

There's probably ways to extradite from the PC or the LLA or the MC, but it's probably a long legal process to do so.

Solarians you can just leave, same deal with, like, brinkers and oust'ters (depending, again, on the individual subgroup of them).

>>50044250
Extropians would probably be the chillest about it, after all they freely admit its not for everyone and their extremely against coercion of any sort
Titanian Commonwealth would probably try and persuade you to stay and be sad about you leaving.
Scum wouldn't give a shit, like the Extropians they'll admit its not for everyone and they'll likely let you off at the next stop. Similar thing for Autonomists.
Consortium and LLA might get a little pissy but ultimately freedom of movement and capital is too important to them. They might object to a straight up defection, but that's more a security concern than anything more sinister

>>50044295

Since Titan is a cyberdemocracy, there's also a case to be argued if you've actually "left" if you like, absentee vote regularly on issue. You might not be contributing to the well being of the populace, but you're not exactly using their resources either.

So long as you can afford a ticket somewhere else, LLA or PC probably wont stop you - but depending where you go and how long you decide to stay there, the local authorities will probably have some pointed questions when you get back.

>>50042651
I'm one of those weirdos who thinks that I wouldn't fit in with any of the factions. Since I'm so lazy, introverted, and friendless, I don't have anything any of the factions could want. The only reason I've survived to now is because I was lucky enough to be born rich.

>>50044295
>capitalists
>extremely against coercion of any sort
laughingsluts.jpg

>>50044361

I mean, they are though - but now we're getting into a definition thing. For example, an ancom would probably say money and capital is an inherently hierarchical system - which is thus not Anarchy, but an ancap says it's just a universally agreed way to freely exchange goods and services.

I say I believe in a non-aggression principle, somebody else says "the mere thought that you can own a weapon is an act of aggression - let alone be allowed to carry one". It's all about how you think a word applies to your philosophy.

Not that there aren't shady Extropians, but people don't like those guys. Y'know, like how shady people almost everywhere are generally not liked.

>>50044361
Extropians mate, its all contracts with them. If you're not tethered down by any contractual obligations that require you to be on Extropia or a similar station, and you want to leave because that lifestyle isn't you? Extropians have no reason to give a shit
>>50044352
I think they mention the Titanians have a foreign vote system, but there's a difference between being a Titanian who's living abroad and someone who is instantiated on Titan and refuses the social contract in favour of just leaving.

Just a quick reminder to everyone to vote for you favorite faction here:

https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

>>50044434

True. I suspect "when" you decide to refuse the social contract is important here. If you arrive on Titan and are like "mandatory civil service, compulsory voting to keep my rep and I'm supposed to help my community regularly - what?" and just bail, then they probably give you a chance to pop out, or maybe covertly trade you to the Inner System for some political capital.

If you want to realize you don't want to be here AFTER you've been instanced and the Ministry of Labor is trying to hit you up to join the Titan Space Marines so you can be a citizen and you're like "fuck this, I'm out", you probably get stuck with no rep and join a Re-Boot Gang.

File: 8Ooa9Ki.png (112KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 900x600px

>>50044361
How is it coercion, you voluntarily enter every agreement?
>Inb4 you need to work or starve

The Anarchists on their own do have a couple of consistently pointed out limitations, at least.

1 - space and resource limitations (Notice how Anarchs are limited almost entirely to small space habs or shitty ice-rocks - even Locus is only 2 mil pop)
2 - if you're an introvert or antisocial, you're straight fucked because it requires you to be participatory
3 - as much as Firewall admires a lot of their values, Anarchists open technology and propensity for sharing means they're crawling with infection vectors.

>>50044545
To counter number 2, you don't have to be a social butterfly to make your way in Anarchist space. Sure, it helps, but its not necessary. Provided you do well at whatever it is you do for the station and aren't an insufferable cunt to everyone you meet you'll trundle along just fine

>>50044545
Theres two more:
1) No room for ambition. Want to become wealthy, or become a badass warrior like the Ultimates? Well, the 1st is impossible and the 2nd will crash your rep cause people don't like the Ultimates.

2) No way to organize groups to get large projects done. By refusing any hierarchies whatsoever, things like military fleets and defense, megaprojects like constructing new habs, and any large scale operation becomes almost if not completely impossible.

>>50044590

But, since it is a rep "economy", you're basically consigned to the equivalent of lower class if you don't feel like getting involved in community activities.

>>50044614

Eh, I'm not as sure about that. There's plenty of room for ambition as pertains to personal development, but any ambition related to something hierarchical IS out. For the right person, amassing a great Rep is probably easier than great wealth though - as you don't have to "spend" rep to get things you want.

As for the second, this equally applies to scum, but adhocracy is also a thing. In a pinch if your community needs to come together and get something done, you either all pitch in to the collective or agree to organize a smaller group to handle something. Theoretically such a group should have all the resources they need, "from each, to each" remember. That said, scope of Anarchist capabilities are logistically limited by original point 1. If you're an Anarchist cluster on a shitty ice moon with only a few thousand people, there's only so much you can do even if your entire community pitches in. And while digital resources flow like water over the @-list, physical resources do not.

File: pamela.jpg (4MB, 3652x2054px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3652x2054px

Happy halloween /epg/

I laughed when I read
>A well-loved anarchist orchestra (without a conductor, of course)
I get it, you guys hate hierarchy but there's no reason to go full retard about it.

>>50044749
Not necessarily, rep isn't just a measure of your social standing, its a measure of your reliability and quality. If you say "I'll fix this up good as new by Wednesday" and deliver, your rep score will go up. Fail to deliver enough times, you'll be seen as unreliable (and rightly so) and your rep score will take a hit.
Remember, anarchists faking hate the culture of celebrity and fame for fame's sake, its about what you do not who you are

>>50044773
I choose to believe that's without A conductor, like the position rotates through people who are either elected by the orchestra or who volunteer for that performance. Otherwise its just silly, or just using mesh networks to organise it, at which point your not being anarchists at all because you've completely eliminated personal flair in favour of doing the music straight from the sheet by rote

>>50041582
All I know is a remade octopus would be horrifying.

>>50043157
Oh shit, I accidently pressed Exhuman because my mind skipped over singularity seekers.

I suppose at the end of the day they're pretty much the same though.

>>50044913
Ima punch u

>>50044764
Way to impose your ancient, barbaric Earth traditions on us. Transhumanism has evolved beyond such trivial things as holidays or celebrations of any kind.

Crawl back to whatever backwards Lunar or Jovian shithole you came from, you uncultured swine.

File: heavy_repeater_by_alientan-d7p2omg.jpg (178KB, 755x1057px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 755x1057px

Okay, so let's get down to the root of why people like different factions. I'll give it my best guess.

>Jovian's: Are you religious? Want to remain human? Don't think synthmorphs are people? Don't believe that when you transfer morphs that you aren't just dying and creating a copy of yourself that lives on? Believe that (trans)humanity should focus more on defending against x-threats and less on profits or having sex with neotenics? Like the concepts of government and an organized military? Then the Jovian's might be for you (few will agree with everything the Jovian's do, but they do enough unique stuff to warrant a following)

>Ultimates: Do you want to be the best you that you can be? A real badass warrior poet? Be part of an order of like-minded that you know you can trust and will have your back? Want to reach your peak mental and physical abilities? Then the Ultimates might be for you!

>Extropians: Do you believe that voluntary exchanges with currency isn't coercion? Do you just want to be yourself and not be pinged down to oblivion because you haven't had your morning coffee? Do you like the idea of an "adventure town" or "merchant city" where there's always a job that needs doing and a quick buck to be made? Do you imagine yourself running your own economic empire some day? Then Extropia might be for you!

I'd be playing devils advocate if I went any further so if anyone wants to take up where I left off feel free.

>>50046045
That's actually a reasonably good job of portraying the factions without going lolderp.

I honestly enjoy all the factions in this game. I don't like how the authors seem to play favorites a little, but that is easy enough to adjust.

I will be GMing a campaign soon. You just listed the three factions I'd most likely make a character from if I wasn't GMing.

I'm bored, throw me your morph ideas. If I like it I might smash something out.

>>50046348
Remade octopus.

>>50046348
A morph of fans of the Xenomorphs from the Aliens series. The entire hab is devoted to the series. There is a sister hab that is devoted to the predator series. They have wars for the hell of it sometimes, and 'hunts'.

>>50046411

A Neo-Octopus is already a remade octopus.

File: Defiler.png (1MB, 661x1544px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 661x1544px

>>50046431

>>50046348

Something to make Shadowdragon proud; go full fetish with it.

File: lemurian_squad_wip_by_peterprime-d5rqkl6.jpg (157KB, 1280x896px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1280x896px

>>50046348
Extropian merchant slytheroid

Jovian Flat combat chaplain with 10 moxie, which represent God watching over him

Brinker with a small army of forked AGI Freeman's, hoping to build up his army as quietly as possible and then use them to reclaim Earth when the time comes.

>>50046500

O' dubs, I have already made like 5 monstergirl morphs.

>>50046045
>Don't believe that when you transfer morphs that you aren't just dying and creating a copy of yourself that lives on?

The only reason I'm pro-Jovians is because, insofar as I know, all the other factions answer this question with "No." Even though that's yet to be proven, nor is it probably even true. You can't tell me backing up from a cortical stack is...no. Fuck off.

I hope, regardless of whether or not Gods are a thing, that souls are real. This is my greatest wish. If all else is false, if all else is real, I just hope souls are a thing.

>>50046722
See, this is the thing for me. Continuity of Consciousness is a big deal. I remember there's a sort of wetware transfer technique for resleeving you can use that gets around that, thankfully, but yeah the idea of backups being 'you' or being able to transmit yourself as data and not have it just be a copy of you? I can't get behind that sadly.
I mean fuck the jovians still i'd just rather do any resleeving with the bulky wetware method rather.

File: bf3c65d690348e917164b7c7d16cdc86.jpg (97KB, 640x896px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 640x896px

>>50046722
It's not so much that the other factions respond "no", it's that they'd rather not ask that question in the first place, because that would significantly reduce their quality of life if the answer was "yes". It's odd, too, because supposedly most people aren't religious, yet religion would be one of the few ways for the answer to be "no" (what with the soul and all that).

Still, whenever I ask people on the Eclipse Phase forums all I get is "what difference does it make" or some kind of ship of Theseus argument. Well, sorry if it takes a little more than just a shrug or a handwave to convince me to possibly commit suicide.

>>50046800
The only 'upload method I've ever found palatable was from' Nova Praxis.

Essentially they replace your neurons with nanites that fill the same place and copy the contents over the course of several weeks. You don't even know subjectively when the process is over.

Even this process makes me feel rather uneasy.

>>50046966
The wetware one I'm thinking of is where they make a sort of bridge between your brain and that of the morph you're resleeving into, your consciousness spreads out over both minds, then they just start shutting down the original one until you're 'across' and in the new body. Continuity of consciousness is retained so you can reasonably say that yes, this is you still.

>>50047049
Okay, but what if they decided not to shut down the original mind and then they both got up? It just seems like an obfuscation of the same dilemma.

File: Too_mooch_data.jpg (63KB, 470x599px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 470x599px

I have some questions about hacking.

1. If you're locked onto by counter hackers, does that basically mean they have your mesh ID?

2. How long do countermeasures, both passive and active take? A complex action?

3. Are there any rules for revers spoofing? Apparently it's a real thing IRL.

4. Do Mesh IDs have metadata that says what device they are being used on?

5. If you use a powerful enough radio booster, could you hack someone from beyond the reach of the mesh network they're in?

6. How far do stealthed signals travel? Like, if your hacking someone from across the hab, and you had to bounce your signal off of a bunch of devices to reach it, would those devices carry the stealthed signal? Or does it end when it's relayed?

7. How do anonymous accounts work? How do they differ from fake mesh IDs?

8. What are mesh IDs tied to? I thought they were like an email address in that it's something you can just switch and log out of, but apparently they're tied to a device or something.

9. Apparently there's special spoofing software for mesh IDs, but it's never expanded upon in the gear section, what are the specifics?

I probably have more questions, but I can't remember what they were.

>>50047101
honestly, the way I've thought about it is this: if the process, when completed, does not leave the original brain or body altered in such a way that it couldn't function in a normal capacity, then I've transferred. Think about it: you're a collection of signals and such that produces your consciousness. If, after the transfer, the body just couldn't do that for some reason--even though virtually nothing has changed in the areas where the consciousness is produced--, then you've moved.

This sounds stupid because of the seeming impossibility, but what if that's the answer? What if it legitimately is impossible to move from meat to cyberspace? Or from one meat body to another?

>>50047101
Then you would be duplicating it. The idea though is that by doing it this way you're sort of 'forcing' the consciousness to only inhabit one brain, without at any point severing it or shutting the whole thing down or digitising it or etc.
Essentially, there should be no point where you're copying the mind and deleting the old one or anything, just moving it by adjusting what it's inhabiting smoothly. So you can think of it as 'okay, i'm going to add all this extra BRAIN to your brain, which your consciousness can spread into. I'm then going to shut it back down again. Are you no longer yourself but a copy?' Except instead, the original part is what they shut down, leaving you in the new bit.

File: future_soldier_power_armor_by_fonteart-d5r2ax4.jpg (93KB, 894x894px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 894x894px

>>50047162
You pose a what if question, which the answer to may very well be yes. But still, would you, knowing that if you're wrong you would die, take that risk? I woudn't.

>>50047260
Of course not, I'm >>50046722. You know what the worst part is? I'm down for all of this trans/post humanism bullshit. Everything the Jovians are talking about? Fuck them. I want to join the Scum--for the Egoism though. I'm not super, super, in love with the odd sex things. As well, I'd love to be an Exhuman. I'd love to split my consciousness into a field of 100, 000, 000 nanobots and DO SHIT.
I'd love to join the AA for a few years. I'm not really a communist, nor down for the total lack of privacy, nor even the extroverted nature but there's so much cool shit there.


I can't though, because that shit doesn't work. You can augment the body biologically and mechanically, but after a certain point...

>>50044179
>Objectivists are unironically a faction
>Utilitarians are also unironically a faction
They're both AnCaps. The Objectivists are just assholes and the Utilitarians are nice guys who are smug about being nice.

>>50044807
The anarchists should have plenty of celebrities who haven't really done a whole lot. You might not have Paris Hiltons, but you'll have Kim Kardashians.

>>50047411

I mean, they'll have to have done something.

Even if it's just contribute a shitload of positive discussion about things, you can't do "nothing" in the Reputation economy and get anywhere, this is why introverted or antisocial people are said to have trouble because they don't necessarily engage with their greater community, thus people don't have as much cause to say they have a reliable reputation.

Glitterati are the faction who are full of people who are famous for being famous, metacelebs and people who take quality selfies.

>>50046045
>Do you believe that voluntary exchanges with currency isn't coercion?
What the fuck? Money is just a better way to quantify your trade than shekels of barley or number of camels.

>>50046436
Neo-Octopus is Exalt/Bouncer tier.

>>50046672
I made two from scratch and at least a half dozen are just morph variants. What've you got?

>>50047505

Nothing super original I think, but I have my own take on Lamia, Centaur and Harpy (with that having a social variant), a factor-based pod with squishbot so naturally they can look like googirls, and technically not necessarily a monstergirl, but I made a biomorph called a Dryad with some integrated nano-ecology features which also has, y'know, fat storage and an enhanced touch and that sort of stuff.

>>50046660
Morph ideas, not character ideas.

>>50046722
The point is that there is practically no difference between a cortical stack reinstantiation and you being injured to the point of going into a coma and waking up later. The one difference is that you are in a different morph, which the rules account for by asking for a resleeving check. Presumably you've arranged for your own morph beforehand, although otherwise they'll instantiate you as an infomorph for you to do so then. You can then resleeve into it or delete yourself and have them reinstantiate you from the same backup you were from.

>>50047467
Kim Kardashian does stuff. It's not important stuff, but idiots are interested in it anyway.

All you have to do is start a meme and be that meme.

Metacelebrities are a fucking weird concept and I don't really think that people would buy into it in the real world. No one really goes crazy over Ronald McDonald.

>>50047581
You're a Fork. Stop torturing your people for being the same...things...as you. Accept yourself for what you are. That's not your name; those aren't your limbs; none of those memories are yours. You're a new being, and if any 'backups' of you are made, they'll be forks too.

>>50047658
Then you're a fork every time you lose consciousness. There's no real difference. It's just semantics.

>>50046348
Remade bonobo

>>50047653

Well, Ronald is a pretty extreme example.

Instead, like, think about how there's porn of the progressive ads commercial character. Now imagine if like, that character didn't just appear in small adverts, but like, physically appeared places, had all their own social media, did cross brand promotion in other works, etc, etc. It's not that crazy a concept - a manufactured celeb who can be played by anybody following the script.

>>50047577
I've posted Lamia, Centaur, Scylla, and Drider stats before. Oh. Also the Danava, which is a four-armed combat version of the Daitya. I miscounted. Well, I'd actually not thought about it in a long while. I also statted up a synthmorph version of the Novacrab and a synthmorph Guard Dog replacement. I don't remember if I've posted them before.

>>50047912

I posted a Gorgon morph once. It was hilariously overtuned because the only homebrew morphs I had before then were from Shadowdragon, and I basically just wanted a less fetishy version of his snake bitch.

>>50047912

Actually, I even miscounted, I also made the Felinoid biomorph - which is mostly just a bouncer alternate with kemonomimi features.

I've made more morphs on top of that, and posted some of the stats here before, just originally the question was about opening the magical realm gates. I've done a lot of concepts on morphs and other things, actually, I just don't usually post them here because A( formatting and B( people are usually yelling about something stupid.

>>50048121
I have to point out that you can make most morphs into kemonomimi morphs by adding biosculpting, (for long tailed animals)prehensile tail, and (for most) claws, with the optional enhanced senses and maybe Limber I. I've said before that kemonomimi are probably one of the largest and perhaps most accepted subcultures in 10 AF.

>>50048174

Oh yeah, I mean, it's pretty easy, it was basically the first morph I ever built with the rules though, so I decided to have simple design goals. It works as a wholly created morph line because it bundles certain implants and comes with appropriate aptitude bonuses too, which can represent a certain psychology which goes into it.

File: nenx-gojkovic-zubrin-m-as.jpg (177KB, 1800x982px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1800x982px

>>50050010
what is that meant to be?

File: [Angry Machine God Noises].png (1MB, 1191x755px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1191x755px

>>50050175

No idea. Didn't post the original image or the edit.

>>50043157
I know it's a nitpick, but Extropians largely resemble Ancaps. Scum could arguably described as philosophical or individualist anarchists. The 'Anarchist' Category would better be described as Left Anarchists or Syndicalists.

>>50044360
sounds like a brinker

>>50046722
several thousand years of metaphysics hasn't been kind to the possibility of souls

>>50044773
it's probably a little tongue in cheek

>17.33 percent (repeating of course)

File: eclipse_phase__flexbot_combiner_tank_by_khairulhisham-d6ufa3j.jpg (108KB, 900x646px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 900x646px

Has anyone tried to make their game...I don't know, more "relatable" to people from the 21st century? I keep getting this vibe from that game that your average transhuman is basically an alien in mindset and cultural differences from people today. I just can't get into their head and it seems really hard to both run and roleplay in.

I don't want to resort to "just run your game in the Jovian Republic or before the Fall", I'm talking about 10 AF solar system outside Jovian space.

I know posts like these >>50045723 are tongue in cheek but I wonder if that's what your average person would really say in EP, inner system or outer system. Are the only people who care about Earth culture or traditions anymore all culturally regressive/stagnant conservatives?

>>50051532
>Are the only people who care about Earth culture or traditions anymore all culturally regressive/stagnant conservatives?

Nope. There're a lot more people than that, but they keep their views to themselves. This is because they fear retribution meted to those not toeing the party line.

>>50044614
1) The wealth point is an interesting point. Why would you want to become wealthy? You're necessities are generally provided for and real estate is generally communal. What are you going to spend your wealth on?
As for the latter part, there is zero reason you couldn't become a badass warrior. The only reason your rep would theoretically crash is if, for instance, your Ultimates philosophy (I don't know why you conflate being a warrior and being an ultimate such that you couldn't be one without the other) starts fucking with other peoples lives, like if you run a medical facility and start slyly practising eugenics or something.

>2) No way to organize groups to get large projects done
not sure how to approach this, but it's silly. Ever done a group assignment in secondary or tertiary education. Perhaps in a white collar context where a manager let's a group loose unsupervised

>but you're accountable to a higher authority, motivating you to get things done

not that a tertiary student is really accountable to a higher authority (it's their own grades their fucking with, and fucking with the grades of others meanings they're going to be outed/shamed), but the general impact of things not getting done is a very basic motivator for people to organize into groups.
Consider also that if someone had ideas about their own projects, consistently organizing and completing communal projects could give them enough rep so that people flock to their project when they attempt it

>>50051532

The books, as usual, are contradictory towards people's viewpoints on Earth. Sometimes it talks about how nostalgia for Earth is a very powerful force across the system, even for the autonomists who try building their own society. Othertimes it's "lol who cares" and most people just kinda forgot about Earth...despite the apocalypse having happened 10 years ago.

Relics from Earth cost a fortune, collected both by bored, jaded rich people who could care less about where what they're buying actually comes from, or other rich people who genuinely want to preserve a culture they lost.

Reclaimers don't need to be politically left or right to be reclaimers, and the books say that they're slowly gaining more support, including from hypercorps.

>>50043540
Five.
But that's obviously a six-transhuman team.

>>50051583
>The books, as usual, are contradictory towards people's viewpoints on Earth.

It's almost as if there's more than one viewpoint on it. Some folks are going to pine for the lost cultures and glory days of pre-Fall Earth, others are going to shrug their shoulders and just get on with getting on, and others are going to go "well, out with the old, in the new", and so on. People respond to tragedies differently.

Though I accept that "people don't think in exactly the same way you do" can honestly be a difficult thing for autists to understand.

>>50051496
What? What do you mean? How does that make any sense?

>>50047151
Thought of another question. If you're locked, but you're stealthing your signal, does that mean the enemy has to roll interfacing to see your mesh ID?

>>50051862

I was saying that the books literally say "most people in the solar system have moved on from Earth" as if it was a statement of fact, then goes on to say later that this isn't true. It doesn't read as opinion in comparison to, say, the Sunward chapter on Mars. It reads as "fact".

>>50052011
I mean, post-cartesian philosophy of metaphysics and ontology is mostly comprised of strong arguments against, rather than for, the possibility of souls

>>50052316
Oh wait, you're talking about philosophy. Okay. Well I disagree, but that's fine.

>>50052747
there are philosophers who defend souls, but even contemporary arguments just suffer from exhaustive critical scrutiny right down to the consistency of the concept.
I mean as far as beliefs go, to each their own. But in a critical sense? I wouldn't commit to the concept too strongly.

>>50051555
>not sure how to approach this, but it's silly. Ever done a group assignment in secondary or tertiary education. Perhaps in a white collar context where a manager let's a group loose unsupervised
Now imagine some true project. Something big. Like say making a sublight starship capable of working without breaking at least for 200 years.

You'll need wealth. You'll need whole asteroids converted into ship parts and fuel. Most anarchists hubs even stripped naked can't provide so many resources. And unlike in Old Economy you can't hoard money until you have enough to buy something big.

You'll need hundreds or maybe even thousands of people from start to finish of the project. From creating blueprints to becoming a crew of the ship.

Of course, in theory, you can just take a shitton of manuals and fuck off into Oort cloud searching for a big enough rock that can become your base. But even if you succeed by the time you finish your project all other Solar system probably will be gliding on FTL ships.

>>50052971
I don't mean to be obtuse, but it's hard to see the logic here

>Now imagine some true project...You'll need wealth.
Well, no, you need resources and expertise. You seem unduly locked in the mindset that 'things cost money'. Mostly, require other resources that is abstracted into money.

>You'll need whole asteroids converted into ship parts and fuel
So, why are you supposed said asteroids will sit their unconverted and people won't mobilize for the project?

>unlike in Old Economy you can't hoard money until you have enough to buy something big
whatever you buy in the old economy also had to be built. Your purchasing of that thing isn't related to the necessary conditions for it's creation (it's the new/old economy axis, whereas you were originally talking about the state/stateless axis. To confound them would be to ignore the extropians)

>But even if you succeed by the time you finish your project all other Solar system probably will be gliding on FTL ships.
While I don't think this is true, I think that on average, a society coerces labour will produce more basic output on average than one where labour is generally done out of necessity and cultural value.

>>50051482
Even Brinkers have work ethic. I don't.

>>50053076
>Well, no, you need resources and expertise. You seem unduly locked in the mindset that 'things cost money'.
Okay. How will you go about suggesting to autonomists that they should pull resources for your project if there is no immediate danger?

Let's say you are an autonomist in a not that big of a hub. You have good rep but not outstanding. How will you go about amassing resources (physical or human) for your project?

>whatever you buy in the old economy also had to be built
The difference is Old Economy wants centralisation and gathering all resources together into one single pool that starts sloshing between people. Autonomists and anarchist instead divide it into small parts.

In Old Economy if you have abilities you can not care about what people think and after getting enough money just buy peoples work. In Anarchist hubs you'll need to become akin to a dictator whose personality is so great other people bend to his will. And considering that anarchists don't like to pool their resources beyond necessities in the first place it will be much harder to achieve.

>>50053376
>How will you go about suggesting to autonomists that they should pull resources for your project if there is no immediate danger?
pool? Tell you what, I'm not attempting to speculatively design an anarchist society, but here's an analogue.
Researchers in every discipline have to fight over grant money. The field their in might require more or less justification for funding based on what's in vogue, but in every case they'll have to submit a proposal.
The proposal is typically looked over by bid writers, whose job it is to make sure the proposal is as clear and polished as possible. The grant sources look over the proposal and decide whether or not to fund it.

Presumably, a comparable proposal system might exist in such communities and participating in them (as a contributor) might be a valid source of reputation or participation.

>The difference is Old Economy wants centralisation
I think that's too broad a statement for me to casually accept without it being unpacked. The 'old economy' eg regulated or unregulated capitalism with fiat currency is not that easy economically characterise. Not only do other currencies exist but other measures of economic value.

>In Old Economy if you have abilities you can not care about what people think and after getting enough money just buy peoples work
That's not entirely true. But you could also make the converse argument; if you have no money, an Old Economy doesn't care if you have the abilities.

>In Anarchist hubs you'll need to become akin to a dictator whose personality is so great other people bend to his will.
why? Wouldn't like-minded people group? Isn't it already to difficult in our current society to achieve exceptional 'true projects' requiring extensive resources? Does a speculative society have to do so effortlessly in order to be considered coherent?

>And considering that anarchists don't like to pool their resources
why not?

>>50053617
>Wouldn't like-minded people group?
They would in theory. Now make them work together and listen to your orders. They don't want too? Someone thinks one of the orders should be done other way? Sorry you lost all the people who supported the man disagreeing with you.

With money a contract is normally made to bind people together. Of course you can also do it with anarchists but chances of it going through are much less. It's different mentality.

>I think that's too broad a statement for me to casually accept without it being unpacked.
Well look at current nations and how they constantly try to grow their economies and slice up the world pie in such a way that they will get a bigger piece.

>That's not entirely true. But you could also make the converse argument; if you have no money, an Old Economy doesn't care if you have the abilities.
True. But money can be made through ways that don't include also getting support of ALL the people needed for project. In fact you can make money in any way and have a lot of ways to do it. With anarchists your options are much more limited.

>why not?
Because it means throwing away their own pet projects. Necessities must be paid by everyone - that's survival. Everything on top of that is basically trying to make people drop their own ideas and subscribe to yours. When they have no incentives to do so besides you asking nicely.

>>50053819
> Now make them work together and listen to your orders
Group dynamics are a component of industrial psychology. Dispute resolution takes many forms, but they are not all unaccountable authority. It should be recognised that a group leader is totally valid, so long as that leader is not unaccountable and whose leadership is not achieved through force or coercion

>With money a contract is normally made to bind people together
how does money bind people together in a way that reputation or a perceived positive outcome does not?

>nations and how they constantly try to grow their economies
just connect this idea with what you were saying about centralisation, I'm not sure how the two are connected or what you mean, exactly

>But money can be made through ways that don't include also getting support of ALL the people needed for project
This doesn't circumvent the problem. For you, money is the substitute for support. So you do need support of ALL the people for the project, it's that what you're instead saying is you need money for ALL the people for the project. Plus, money is only the incentive. The project might still be rejected, or people might be unable to work for you. Particularly, other people with imaginarily vast sums compete for workers, and will try to keep them away from you so the workers complete their projects instead.

>Because it means throwing away their own pet projects
if someone was unwilling to throw away their pet projects, wouldn't that presume a social dynamic whereby people expect the sharing of resources for pet projects? Otherwise, why would someone have a pet project for which they would reluctant to abandon by giving away resources?

>>50053819
I think it's important to note that im both modern society and eclipse phase people don't pool massive amounts of recources and devote their lives to poinless shit. So whats your point if people won't build a hypothetical giant ship for no reason at all? Lack of rep is a likely indicator of low skill and or lack of qualifications to lead such a project. A skilled engineer who can lead and coordinate would have a good rep and should be in charge of such a project, a mook who thinks it would be cool should obviously be ignored because he has no idea what hes talking about

>>50053991
So does autonomist hubs work on industrial psychology with their open fabbers and production chains being still upheld only for some critical systems?

>I'm not sure how the two are connected or what you mean, exactly
I mean that nations are created to compete with each other. Protect their subjects and cut as big part of resources as they can. The same way warlords protected farmers and brought riches from wars. Means of acquiring resources changed but premise is still the same - grab as much as you can and hoard it in your cave.

To do it effectively you need centralisation. So that you can fuck up anyone lower on the food chain.

>So you do need support of ALL the people for the project, it's that what you're instead saying is you need money for ALL the people for the project.
Yes. But there is a difference. For people working in Old Economy money is a necessity. So someone whose speciality is close to such a project will have more incentives to work on it than in anarchist hub where necessities are provided as a base.

>if someone was unwilling to throw away their pet projects, wouldn't that presume a social dynamic whereby people expect the sharing of resources for pet projects? Otherwise, why would someone have a pet project for which they would reluctant to abandon by giving away resources?
I don't understand what you ask here. Like at all. You doubt that people will have "hobbies" if the have basic needs provided ?

>>50054016
>A skilled engineer who can lead and coordinate would have a good rep and should be in charge of such a project
"Should lead" and "can make others follow his lead" is very different in this case.

>>50054140
>So does autonomist hubs work on industrial psychology
group dynamics hold so long as the psychological principles behind them are similar
radical contexts (like a transhuman anarchist future habitat) might manipulate some variables, but that only increases the scope of the ways it is possible for groups to work productively, and the kinds of things that cause them to be unproductive/uncohesive

>I mean that nations are created to compete with each other. Protect their subjects and cut as big part of resources as they can
So on this point I'd consider the phrasing here. Nations form historically and organically, but are not a 1 to 1 scale-up of tribalism. They don't come about in order to compete with things, they come about to reduce the negative outcomes of unregulated competition locally. By the same token, it's arguable that nations have an intrinsic function to 'protect their subjects', since examples of nations exploiting their subjects are endemic to history.

> Means of acquiring resources changed but premise is still the same - grab as much as you can and hoard it in your cave.
I'm not sure how to approach this except to say that it's a misleading simplification

>To do it effectively you need centralisation. So that you can fuck up anyone lower on the food chain
why is this better for community projects? National services in many capitalist societies are notoriously shitty

>For people working in Old Economy money is a necessity
you seem to be saying here that because people are forced to accrue money for necessities, they will necessarily except money for a project they are trained for
Now, let's be generous and assume more workers exist than jobs. That means if you are offering jobs you're likely to get someone who is currently jobless (and thereby desperate) to join your project for the incentive of money alone. Sure! However, the jobless population is likely to be already less qualified on average, many unsuitable for ambitious projects

>>50053376
>Let's say you are an autonomist in a not that big of a hub. You have good rep but not outstanding. How will you go about amassing resources (physical or human) for your project?

By getting them yourself, or directly asking someone else for them. You are an /autonomist/, not a technosocialist.

>>50054275
as the qualifications of the workers goes up, so does there employability. As such, you're going to be competing with other employers who have their own projects
Now, if you don't care about what people think of you (and you assume your competition is similar) because you have money, then most ambitious projects are going to be completed by the individuals (but realistically, freelance individuals with personal project ideas will not be very common sources of project capital) with the most money rather than the most ability

>>50054160
isn't it conceivable that, in a society where a reputation system is a prominent component, the ability to make others follow your lead depends in part on your earned reputation?
Isn't that comparable to the utility of earned reputation currently?

>I don't understand what you ask here.
you said people would be reluctant to give up resources for projects because it would interfere with their own 'pet projects'. But assumes there is a system of project creation or endorsement, which means some dynamic of engendering successful projects must already for there to be any tension between 'my' projects and 'other' projects

>>50054283
in EP political categories though, the Titanian technosocialists do come under the umbrella of Autonomists.
Brinkers, Scum and Fringers would probably be the most DIY types.

>>50054333
If you're a Titanian the answer is real fucking simple: you requisition the Commonwealth or you do it the old fashioned way - again, by yourself. The notion that autonomists are the "social" faction is patently absurd. They're chiefly the faction of rugged individualists living in the equivalent of the frontier.

There is no real need to "buy" anything when you aren't constrained by the Old Economy. You have the power to make everything yourself. The rep economy is for things you want from others, and that category of things will scarcely /ever/ include "raw materials", let alone "shit that can be fabbed".

What you'd use the rep economy for is to acquire the skills and services of other people, and whether it's the Old Economy or the New one, people generally respond better to being propositioned for help when they have reason to like you.

Now in the case of technosocialism it is a bit different, because there's actually a collective agenda with collective resources, but in the average autonomist hab you will hoard resources for a personal project insofar as you gather them up by your own abilities. The difference lies chiefly in that the Old Economy forbids you from taking these matters into your own hands and requires all accumulation to occur by interacting with the market - it, not the New Economy, is the inherently social one.

Can radios be turned off while leaving the rest of your cranial computer on?

>>50054604
Autistic mode exists, yes.

>>50054635
I've heard this before in Ghost in the Shell. Is that really what that's called? Sorry but I have the "hurr durr autism" meme bad so I'm having trouble grasping a different meaning of the word.

>>50054635
It's a legit tactic against hacking.

>>50054852
There are other names for the concept, but autistic mode is the one I hear most commonly.

Mesh connection is not necessary for any morph that I'm aware of, and some are designed to operate without connection to any networks. Even people that are hooked up to mesh and extranet can selectively block or replace things via muse/AR alteration.

>>50054604
Yes, you'll probably experience some loss in computing power because mesh-connected machines try to share workloads with computers they're connected to. This doesn't have in game effect, but might be annoying.

>>50054978
You've heard that more than airplane mode?

Has anyone got a line on a game? I really want to play.

>>50055129
Not him but yes, I don't go on airplanes... ever so it came up once when I googled what it was. On the other hand huge cyberpunk fan

File: scratch space table.png (204KB, 605x833px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 605x833px

Can you kill a beehive habitat in a single roll?

>>50056030
Where is this table from?

Rolled 10 (1d10)

>>50054421
If you want more shit than you're allotted, you need to petition. If you want feedstock that's rare, you need to petition.

>>50056030
Allah hu akbar.

>>50056284
Firewall

Rolled 87 (1d100)

>>50056030
Depends on the roll. A Demolitions roll with way too many explosives in the weak points could do it.

>>50056393
Critfail docking maneuver.

An extropian corporate heiress with an idealism issue, an ultimate iconic with a self-declared restriction to only use a sword, a jesuit nun from jove who is a psi-gamma async, a former high school history teacher turned indentured whore with an odd resistance to psi, and a re-instantiated criminal who used to pull off payday-scale heists for a living are turned into a firewall cell

who kills who first

>>50057750
Everyone kills the Jovian christcuck whore immediately as any reasonable adult would do in their shoes.

>>50057750

As a regular EP GM I approve of all these character concepts.

>>50057787

Kills? No, no, that's too cruel. You forcibly upload her and instantiate her into an AGI, then carefully psychosurgically dissemble her mind while she's still aware--don't worry, you're an autonomist, so you're the good guy by default--and rebuild her into a proper member of society without such petty things as 'religion' bringing her down. Then you slot her into a suitable morph--maybe a pleasure pod, but that might be too cruel for an async, so maybe design something from the ground up to let her get used to her new life!

>>50058405
Nah, trash like the "Latin" Jovekikes gets thrown away and then incinerated.

>>50058465

That's just silly; why waste a perfectly good ego when you can show it the real, proper, anarchist method of living? They'll like it by the time you're done with them!

>>50058486
Anarkiddies will either flee the system or hang, in due time. No room for filth like that in the long run.

The future belongs to Eternal Rome, and a mudblooded neocon pretender cult like the Jovian Republic will be purged of every last subhuman cockroach infesting Roman space. Their hook nosed overlords in the PC and Titan will go next.

>>50057750
Speaking of indentured whores, I just thought of one job that would be in great demand: .......GMs..

How can anyone consider a Fork 'you', when you cannot experience what the Fork is doing? If it's killed, I'm still alive. It wasn't me that died.

If it gitmerged with me, well.. I just got a memory download from a like-me entity, who is now dead.

Jovians are right, desu.

>>50058862

I'd prefer if my players paid me, to be honest. Even going minimum wage I'd make a few hundred a month that way.

>>50059448
I'm pretty sure there already is a "rent a GM" service out there.

Are there any rules about setting up scratch spaces?

>>50059418
>How can anyone consider a Fork 'you', when you cannot experience what the Fork is doing?

The same way people consider 'backups' and 'resleeving' as themselves: crazy mental gymnastics.

>>50059418
Forks being (You) is definitely ludicrous, but I do believe that resleeving and farcasting are totally viable provided it's handled in a way that leaves your subjective consciousness undisturbed.

>>50059672
If you resleeve into a clone of yourself does it count enough for you?

So here's a question;

if you kidnap egos, psychosurgically alter them into being an exact copy of your personality (but with their original skillset), and sleeve them into custom morphs based off of your own but more suited to their skillset.

Are you an x-threat?

>>50060549
Everything but their skillset? That's more like just taking their skillset and trying to slap it onto a fork of yourself.

>>50060549

Soul-Eater Exhumans are pretty high on the shit-list yeah.

>>50044471
>https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

What about the sifters huh?

Im also carving blocks from Mercury's crust alike minecraft . Now i need some help with the uplifted pigs, but the dont want come here... something about bacon

File: horatio.jpg (10KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x225px

>>50060549

Oh helou Horatio! can you enter the termination cabin please?

>>50060549
>kidnap egos, psychosurgically alter them into being an exact copy of your personality (but with their original skillset)
I don't think that's possible. A TITAN might could do it, but even a supremely skilled psychosurgeon would struggle to separate something as vague as a "skillset" from a "personality". If it were that easy, everyone would be the master of everything and skillsofts wouldn't exist.

>>50061231
That's basically what a Goya Machine does, though it's less well defined. It's Soul-Eater Exhuman tech invented by Silent Mercy.

I really wish Goya Machines had rules.

>>50060133
It's the re-sleeving that's the problem, not what you're going into.

>>50061526
I actually agree, since IRL, there is no Ego/Morph duality, but the axiom that holds up the whole setting is that very duality.

File: invasion_by_rickyryan-d7feo26.png (900KB, 1024x649px) Image search: [Google]

900KB, 1024x649px

The authors need to see this poll, then rethink their lives.

https://strawpoll.de/54sc5g3

How do you think they would react to seeing this?

>"Well, it looks like the 3 factions tied for most popular are the bioconservative religious fascist Jovian junta, eugenicist smug ubermensch Ultimates, and genocidal TITAN loving crazy exhumans."
>"Holy crap, please tell us 4th place is the anarchists right?"
>"Nope, that would be the filthy anarcho-capitalists Extropians."
>"My God, how could this happen? We made it so clear that almost everyone but the anarchists are evil!"
>"Maybe that was our mistake? Maybe we shouldn't have shoved our political opinion down the throats of a diverse playerbase?"
>"Stop your crazytalk! We just need to emphasize how evil everyone else is in the next book!"

>>50061681
>34 contrarians on a mongolian shadow puppetry board

Ehhh

>>50044471
I'm surprised the exhumans are so popular.

>>50061714

That's because 4chan is filled with stupid nihilistic autists who hate humanity for not being fedora enough.

File: large.jpg (108KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 500x500px

>>50061714
I mean, it kind of makes sense, people are already occupying octopuses with 9 penises and getting psychosurgery to change their minds, holding on to your "humanity" is completely meaningless at that point.

>>50059418
start hitting up the philosophy of identity

by the time you start getting to 4D time-worm slices, you'll see some arguments about why 'forks' would relate to you identity-wise in significant ways
I don't think the books or many people argue that they are as 'you' as you are though (since they don't share phenomenology and are rapidly diverging in experience)

>>50061526
If you think physical continuity is a necessity for identity, am I a different person if I lose or gain weight, or when the tissues in my body have been replaced by different matter, ship of Theseus style, over 7 years?

>>50061681
maybe it's you that's reacting to the material in a fucked up way that feeds your imaginary narrative

File: andrey-terentev-.jpg (116KB, 1000x729px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1000x729px

>>50061759
the only difference between a Rortian and a Direct Action ace are the specifics of their suite of mental disorders and what sort of combat vehicle they identify as. Just as with the tank-kin and killbot-kin, the only real difference between an advanced Argonaut or Cognite researcher and a exurgent singularity seeker is what ideology they run recursively self improving fork circle-jerks to. Except of course the argonaut and the exurgent have a semblance of a reason to do the things they do, cognite does horrible things nobody truly understands and relies on economic inertia to get paid for it.

speaking of which, from a cursory look, which of these two morph would you rather spend a seven year (m) indenture with?

>>50063286

The right one. Left one's too... uncanny for me. Right one you know ain't human, it ain't really tryna be human, that's arright

>>50063063
Supposedly the ego-bridge cuts and pastes the mind and places it in a new body. Explain what the difference is between this and copy-pasting, without. I'm trying to say: you're all clones; after the first 'upload' the original was killed.

>>50063709
An ego bridge is a gradual transition, you feel as though you're in both bodies in varying amounts for most of the resleeve, which takes about an hour.

If the mind is a novel, ego bridge resleeving isn't like cutting and pasting the whole thing from one word file to another, its like cutting and pasting the whole novel 1 sentence at a time. This raises a Ship Of Theseus/Grandfather's Axe kind of question, but is much easier to accept as maintaining continuity.

That said, infomorph and cyberbrain resleeving happens so fast it might as well be a full copy and paste, which might help explain why a lot of places look down on them. You can't maintain continuity as well if you're not in a meat-brain.

>>50061759
I'm down with the post-humanity thing in general, and pushing the boundaries of one's body. I'm just not for the psychopathy/mindraping and just general...badness of those people. If I had a faction, it would basically be

* Athiest/Agnostic/Pro-Theist though we're working under the assumption there is no God, you're free to worship whoever, though.

* Regularly performs raids on Exhuman habs, and those of supporters.

* Welcoming of gene engineering/machine enhancements etc. Whatever is there is what will be used.

* No Sleeving/Backups. You'd be allowed to use them, but you'd have to take on a new legal identity afterwards. You're not the same guy that went into the pod. Recognize that.

* New Economy/Egoist-Anarchism ideally.

* All the same willngness of the Exhumans to push the boundaries, but also with an eye to basic gentleness in a harsh world.

* Scum-tier individualism is encouraged; Scum hedonism is tolerated only.

* Perhaps an eye to AIs as well...?

>>50063709
compare this to actual neurons, which don't distinguish between 'reading' and 'writing'; they do both at the same time. Everyday experiences are constantly overwriting your core 'software', deleting some and adding others.

So, I see the anti-sleeve posters have replaced the jovian posters.

>>50064060
Tell me Alpha Fork, are you really yourself after you've been copied from yourself and the original, while conscious, has been killed in a horrible fire? Or are you a near-close copy/duplicate but not the original thing?

If you can answer this with any honesty, please do so. Then report to your neareast Jovian Processing Center for proper handling.

>>50064094

There is no divergence. All the information which comprised "my self" up until that point it retained, and added on to. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. If the information, all the experience and knowledge which preceded is retained, than all the "me" of the present continues to be Me, and all "mes" in the future are Myself.

I am already in motion. We are all in motion.

>>50064094
>are you really yourself
this is a tautology

>>50064094
I never left the morph I was born in, you bastard. Do you know how many people I had to kill to keep them from stealing my body?

>>50059418
>How can anyone consider a Fork 'you', when you cannot experience what the Fork is doing? If it's killed, I'm still alive. It wasn't me that died.
Easy. An alpha fork has had the exact same upbringing, experiences, personality, and memories as you. It's just a different version of you. Of course, which one's the fork and which is the original is arbitrary unless it's a beta or lower.

>>50060549
Everything's an x-threat

>>50064845
Absolutely zero, you fat, ugly, fuck.

>>50061438
So do i

>>50065697
But you aren't the alpha fork. You're the original.If you died, your subjective existence is over.

>>50065718
Tell that to Rodrigo, Emilio, and Maria-Lousia. Oh wait, you can't. They're dead, you son of a whore!

>>50064060
Fucking Jovian ratas are just shitting up the thread with their stupid propaganda.

File: Screencap.jpg (116KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1000x666px

>>50065956
So what counts as the "original"? The one that stays in the same morph? Sure that's possible, but what if you're an infomorph? You have no body, no physical thing to state clearly that you are the original. And depending how your GM does things, you may have to play as both versions.

So there is no "original". Creating a fork is less like hitting Copy and Past and more like cell division. Is time goes on, both ego's will experience different things and their personalities will differ slightly. This is why it's called forking, because you are creating 2 yous that go down different roads. Plus, all this talk about "self" is pretty moot when you consider the fact that both ego's will merge back into one later.

File: __original_drawn_by_you_shimizu__65da33c602dad6e50d9e1a1f2f851757.png (4MB, 990x1400px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 990x1400px

>>50058271
Still looking for two players in an online text based game.

>>50066202
I wish I wasn't in college right now... q-q

>>50066179
>So what counts as the "original"? The one that stays in the same morph?
Yes. You, in other words.

> Sure that's possible, but what if you're an infomorph?
Doesn't change things. Your subjective consciousness is separate from the other entity.

>Plus, all this talk about "self" is pretty moot when you consider the fact that both ego's will merge back into one later.
Ego =/= you. Ego is personality and memory and all the bullshit that people use to identify you. But you are not those things. You existed before and apart from any of that. You are a subjectivity, nothing more. If you aren't subjectively experiencing something, it isn't happening to you.

>>50066236
What makes you so certain that you exist? Are you sure that you aren't a figment of someone else's mind? How can anyone prove that their consciousness, whether it be their own or someone else's, truly exists?

>>50066284
>What makes you so certain that you exist?
Cogito ergo sum, duh.

>>50066236
>If you aren't subjectively experiencing something, it isn't happening to you.
would you really put your name to that statement?

>>50066202
I would, but I'm not a Chinaboo.

>>50066289
>I think I exist, therefore I exist
>outdated tautologies without proof are true

Git gud.

>>50066334
That's not what it means, faggot.

>>50066320
Yep. Certainly something can happen to your body or even your ego without your subjective awareness, but neither your body nor your ego are you.
>>50066334
Try again retard.

In the first place, things exist. To deny your own existence is ontologically impossible.

You may deny the meaningfulness of your existence by claiming it is simulated or something, but you cannot deny it outright.

>>50066323
>upset by Asian cartoon girls
Why are you on 4chan then?

>>50066236
>Yes. You, in other words.
Are you by any chance a BioCon?
>Doesn't change things.
What do you mean "changing things? I'm providing an example of a morph that isn't physical.
>But you are not those things.
Ok, well what would you consider the definition of "you" then?
>If you aren't subjectively experiencing something, it isn't happening to you.
But you are subjectively experiencing something, you're experiencing 2 things at the same time. When you merge, you merge two egos that both identify as the same person, with the same memories idiologies, etc.
>Cogito ergo sum, duh.
Pulling out René Descartes eh? Ok well consider this, both egos think, there for are. After they both merge, the sum ego acknowledges that both forks thought and there were for were, and that both experiences were real.
>>50066345
>That's not what it means, faggot.
IIRC from my philisophy class "I think there for I am" was something he came up with as a way to question the existence of everything. How are we sure we aren't in the matrix? We can't. How do we know other people are real? We can't, not unless we somehow do something like, I don't know, MERGE with others.

>>50066383(me)
>After they both merge, the sum ego acknowledges that both forks thought and there were for were, and that both experiences were real.
Typo:
After they both merge, the sum ego acknowledges that both forks thought and therefore were, and that both experiences were real.

>>50066383
>Are you by any chance a BioCon?
Scum would say so, Jovefag would say I'm a Frankenfreak shitlord. I have a rational position, not some faux-reductionist heuristic.

>What do you mean "changing things? I'm providing an example of a morph that isn't physical.
The body is not a relevant part of this equation. Neither is even the ego. You are not a body, nor are you an ego. You are a subjectivity.

>Ok, well what would you consider the definition of "you" then?
See above.

>But you are subjectively experiencing something, you're experiencing 2 things at the same time.
No, not at least in the case of forking. You are only subjectively experiencing what the original experiences. The fork is subjectively experiencing things on its own.

>When you merge, you merge two egos
Again, egos aren't important. Egos are just information.

>Ok well consider this, both egos think, there for are.
Yep. They are both separate people.

>After they both merge, the sum ego acknowledges that both forks thought and there were for were, and that both experiences were real.
Again, not important. I'm sure the experiences of the fork were just as real to it as the experiences I'd have as the original. But the fork is the one that experienced those things, not me.

>>50066367
>In the first place, things exist.
How do you know things other than your thought exist? That's literally what Descartes was trying to get across?
>To deny your own existence is ontologically impossible.
No argument here, still doesn't explain how you know things other than yourself exist.
>You may deny the meaningfulness of your existence by claiming it is simulated or something.
Who says a simulation of you isn't meaningful?

It seems clear that you believe thought emulating programs like infomprphs aren't really "you". So consider this:
A fork in a separate biomorph isn't "you" because it's not held in the same brain. However, brain cells multiply and die constantly along with everything else in your body. After about 7 years, every cell in every pert of your body (this includes bones) falls off, or gets deposited in your colon. After 7 years, no single atom in your body is the same. Can you really call that "you" if nothing physical remains?

>I have a rational position
I can just see you tipping your fedora as your saying that.
>You are a subjectivity.
Subjectivity isn't a static thing though, subjectivity dies every second of the day and gets replaced with new subjectivity. That's how people change their minds and behaviours.

>>50066478
>How do you know things other than your thought exist?
Because the only alternative to existence is nonexistence and things exist. I cannot deny that things are.

You seem to be confused, conflating existence with the quality of "being real".

That's not what it means. Santa Claus exists. Satan exists. Gilgamesh exists. Whether or not these things are "real", "fictional", "simulated", etc. is a matter of practical convenience. They, whatever case you think their quality of existence is, absolutely do exist.

>It seems clear that you believe thought emulating programs like infomprphs aren't really "you".
No, I never suggested that. If you are an AGI, your subjectivity is no less definite than a flat's. What I'd question is whether or not you could survive the transfer to infolife, and the answer is something I'd say depends on the process. It's about whether or not you subjectively experience the transformation. If you don't, then you've just created a clone.

Now I think the ego bridge, or at least certain applications of it, actually do maintain your subjective consciousness in a resleeving, but for instance a backup is definitely not going to do that because it is just a record of your ego and has nothing to do with your subjectivity.

>A fork in a separate biomorph isn't "you" because it's not held in the same brain.
This isn't about matter or energy, hell I'm not even a materialist. It's about subjectivity.

>>50066534
>Subjectivity isn't a static thing though, subjectivity dies every second of the day and gets replaced with new subjectivity.
Nope, subjectivity is 100% static and continuous. It has nothing to do with thought or action, and indeed cannot. Your mind is as determined as your body, but you aren't your mind or your body.

>>50066545
>>50066562
You keep talking about subjectivity as if it were a soul. You won't be able to prove your argument right unless you can present us with tangible subjectivity in a jar.

>>50066562
>>50066607
>subjectivity is 100% static
The fact that existence is subjective is 100% static, but one's own subjectivity is not at all static.

>>50066367
>Certainly something can happen to your body or even your ego without your subjective awareness, but neither your body nor your ego are you
so, nothing can happen to you. Guess if I die in my sleep it didn't happen to me, see you tomorrow.

>subjectivity
goddammit, the word you are looking for is phenomenology, not that it would make this miserly attempt at metaphysics more credible.

>>50066607
The incoherence of your own position, that things don't exist, should make it obvious that it's untenable.

We start at "I exist", which gives us two certainties - the aforementioned obvious fact that you do indeed exist, and the more subtle fact that "things exist". These two fundamental truths are utterly undeniable.

>>50066622
You are confused. I am not talking about the subjective nature of things or ideas, I am talking about subjectivty itself.

In other words, the active perception of existence. This is necessarily static as it has no qualities except "existing". "Change" can occur with something like the ego, or consciousness, or obviously the "physical world", but subjectivity is a monolithic and perpetual (in fact all things are, and only seem to change according to particular frames of reference).

>>50066656
That is not the same concept. Phenomenology is a discipline which occasionally deals with the nature of subjective experience, but it is not subjectivity itself.

>>50066682
phenomenology deals almost exclusively with the nature of subjective experience, and subjectivity routinely deals with concepts that are not subjective experience

>>50066736
You seem to be misunderstanding the noun subjectivity as the adjective subjective. The thing that experiences reality is the subjectivity, you.

Phenomenology is only quasi-related to the position I'm outlining and certainly can't stand in for subjectivity.

>>50066682
Are we assuming that we exist based on faith alone? How can we scientifically define and prove that we exist? If we cannot, how is this faith any better than those of primitive religions?

>>50066762
>The thing that experiences reality is the subjectivity, you.
in your own vocabulary, sure. But what you define as 'the active perception of existence' already has an extant corpus of philosophical writing, where subjectivity is broad, phenomenology is narrower, and qualia is narrower still.
If subjectivity has a meaning in philosophy of mind, it's unique to your vocabulary

>>50066784
First off you need to get this juvenile notion that science is able to prove anything out of your head. Science does not offer truth, nor does it even claim to. Insofar as it makes claims, it makes probabilistic claims, it never gives certainties.

Second, there is no faith inherent in the notion that you exist. You cannot hold a position that suggests you don't exist.

Again, maybe you think that your existence is simulated or artificial or whatever - that your existence is "not real" - but that doesn't make you not exist. Nonexistence is reserved for nothing. Everything exists.

>>50066820
>If subjectivity has a meaning in philosophy of mind, it's unique to your vocabulary
I want you to Google subjectivity for me and come back when you've learned your lesson.

>>50066784
How do you disprove that we exist? Based on my (entirely subjective, I know) sensory inputs and the way my brain processes information (or at least appears to), I SEEM to exist in a reality with certain properties and laws.

And even if I ultimately don't? SO WHAT? Even if I get plugged out of the Matrix, so to speak, tomorrow, RIGHT NOW I have an existence I need to deal with, so RIGHT NOW, I'm going to treat it as if it's real, even if it turns out that it's not. I have no way of falsifying all of this shit.

>>50066842
You're mixing up "subjectivity" and "subject".

>>50066842
>I want you to Google subjectivity for me and come back when you've learned your lesson
if you'd like to show me an identical usage of your term, I'm sure it would help

>>50066876
No, "subject" refers to the equivalent of "ego". Subjects are defined by their agency as much as by their subjectivity. I deny the conventional notion of agency outright.

>>50066879
I'm not going to do that. It's ultimately a meaningless semantic argument which has no bearing on the discussion.

>>50066918
the accurate use of terms to be commonly understood between participants in a conversation has plenty of bearing on the discussion

>>50066941
You understand what I'm saying, it's not a particularly complicated concept, and I've defined it, so it is really just pedantic to pursue the point any further.

>>50066944
your definition is 'the active perception of existence', but you seem intent on denying that this definition is more closely described by words other than subjectivity, which is actually quite broad.

>>50066545
Just FYI, I don't think you're a retarded faggot, in fact, I respect and thank you for detailing the thread from the usual faction dick measuring contest. I'm not here to win an argument, I'm here to expand my mind with phylisophical conversation. Something this thread desperately needs. So here's what I'm going to do: I'm going to present an argument in points, and you stop me when you think I'm wrong.

You are born. From that moment onward you change as you grow.

As you develope, you change tastes, opinions, learn, and the member new things.

Because you change constantly, the you now is not the same as the one from ten minutes ago.

However, the you of now is based on the you from yen minutes ago, because you have all the experiences of the previous you with minor changes.

So when you fork, your "you" is split into two new yous. Both are based on the same you of the past.

So let's say the one of these two egos, both of which are based off of a previous instance of you, dies. Which one dies isn't important. Is the other ego, who's lineage is rooted in the same version as the dead one, still you?

>>50066896
So you deny the notion of the subject, and thus the notion of subjectivity?

>>50067002
>he misspelt philosophical

>>50067012
I'm typing on a phone. I still wait your answer.

>>50067002
>I'm going to present an argument in points, and you stop me when you think I'm wrong.

Okay.

>You are born. From that moment onward you change as you grow.

Alright, stop. First, I don't believe you are born, or to be more precise, that you have an origin in time. This is part of my cosmological and religious understanding of the universe though, and I understand that it is reasonable to disagree with me on this point, so I won't waste your time shilling.

However, the second part I can say without any hint of spirituality to be false. You do not change. Your ego and your body both change in some sense, but (You), the subjectivity, do not. You are incapable of changing, as you have no component parts which might possibly be altered in any way. You're like a fancy video camera, you just observe things, experiences, ideas, etc. You don't have positions on topics, you don't have beliefs, you don't have memories, you don't have a personality, and you don't "do" anything. All that stuff is information wrapped up in the ego and body, subject to the forces of arbitrariness or determinism, in no way your possession, let alone part of you.

>>50067086
blugh, dualists, amirite?

>>50067004
I deny that the subject is particularly meaningful, that it encapsulates what we are, and I deny that we have agency in any conventional sense, but I do not deny that we exist and experience things.

>>50067106
Well I don't really discount dualism outright. I'm not a materialist in the first place, so I think that the distinction, either way you spin it, is fairly inconsequential. I personally believe that minds and bodies are separate, and that minds are non-physical, but I don't believe that the quality of physical or non-physical is a very significant one, and I further believe that we are not our minds, so the argument is a fairly petty one.

>>50066378
>cartoons
I said nothing about cartoons. Who watches actually Chinese cartoons anyway? Does anyone even translate any of those?

>>50067250
>>>50066378
>>cartoons
>I said nothing about cartoons. Who watches actually Chinese cartoons anyway? Does anyone even translate any of those?
Unfortunately so. They're dreadful.

Also let me apologize, I thought you were upset by my 2D picture. I realize now you're probably referring to my reference to guanxi. Though it is a Chinese word, the game has nothing more to do with Chinese than it does anyone else. Guanxi is just a fascinating concept I want to explore as part of the game.

>>50067086
Nice snowflake belief system you've got there, but how does it explain what happens when you're unconscious, i.e. the fancy camera is switched off? Does sleeping suspend our subjectivity(please tell me what happens to it at the time)or is there a completely new subjectivity(therefore not you)in place once the mind and body(that are totally not you)wake up? Honest question, pls respond.

>>50067086
Alright, I think I get what your talking about.

>First, I don't believe you are born, or to be more precise, that you have an origin in time.
Fair enough, To be honest, I was just using birth as an example. In reality I think of offspring as just being severed extensions of the parent. And I have no idea when a person understands the concept of of identity takes hold.

>Your ego and your body both change in some sense, but (You), the subjectivity, do not.
So by "you" you mean your identity? I can get behind that. If the ego is defined by your beliefs and ideas, then of course it can change without your identity changing, because you can acknowledge that you've changed.

>You're like a fancy video camera, you just observe things, experiences, ideas, etc. You don't have positions on topics, you don't have beliefs, you don't have memories, you don't have a personality, and you don't "do" anything. All that stuff is information wrapped up in the ego and body, subject to the forces of arbitrariness or determinism, in no way your possession, let alone part of you.
I may be getting this wrong, but it seems like your saying that the "you" is just null. If it's not linked in any way to ideology, beliefs, memories or personality, and it doesn't "do anything", than what are it's properties? Everything in the universe has to be relative to something, so what's the you related to?

And this goes back to what I said. Identity is relative to the ego. Your identity (or "you") is the sum of your memories and experiences. How you behave is relative to environment, especially when you're growing up. Ideology and belief are also shaped by upbringing, but it's subject to change depending on the company you keep around you (case in point, the faction fanboys ITT). What this also means is that, the "you" can (in theory) be changed because if your memory was whipped. If you don't know your past, then your "you" has been reset, and so does your ideas, beliefs, etc.

>>50067086
>>50067861
And here's some more food for thought:

So while forked egos will likely disagree with one another, they can both agree that they have the same memories and experiences, not all of them, just the important ones. Like moments of joy, comedy sorrow and trauma. As time goes on, these forks may (Not sure how long it would take, but you are immortal in EP, but it would probably involve the two forks being isolated for a long period) forget these important memories, at which time there's no connection to the forks other than their lineage since forking. And even then, tracing ego lineage can only be done if both forks keep a written record of it. So if at least one fork can't keep track of their history, then they effectively become a different person. Forks are like twins: They share a lot in common at "birth" (forking an ego being the equivalent of birth in this example) but as life goes on, they begin to change, starting from exact copies, then to close siblings, not-so-close siblings, friends, acquaintances, etc. On this note, there's a pair of brothers, twins. By day they're practicing lawyers, by night, they are wigger party animals. They share everything, even women. At the same time. Despite their differences as two individuals, they see themselves as two extensions of the same whole. They may not have the exact same identity, but they can trace themselves back to each other because they share most of their experiences. I unfortunately couldn't find the source, but I know they exist.
>>50067848
>Nice snowflake belief system you've got there
This kind of language is exactly why we can't have nice things.

>>50067848
>Does sleeping suspend our subjectivity
Nope, we experience dreams and unconsciousness instead of waking reality is all. Our subjectivity is never "turned off". Personally I believe that even after death it persists.

>>50067861
>So by "you" you mean your identity?
No, I mean your subjectivity. What distinguishes you is that you are experiencing things independently.

>than what are it's properties
It has no properties apart from "existence". You have no definitive qualities except that you exist as a unique entity, that is to say, that your subjectivity is not shared, it's exclusive. What you experience is limited to you in particular and nothing else.

>Your identity (or "you") is the sum of your memories and experiences.
Your identity isn't you.