Questionable ethics - Living Memory

[Turtledeluxe]

So you basically admit that the prior knowledge of them being copies is the main difference. That fact does matter to the question "is it the same person", but does it matters when it come to the question "is it a living being"? I mean, I guess clones are not living being then? And if they are, how is it different from a copy in an artificial body? Is it the fact it's in artificial body? then what about Robot Otis? Is he not a living being?

Well it also says simulation. Since it's a copy of a person who is dead, that doesn't change from that state and doesn't have any internal processes to speak of, yeah they're more akin to being lifelike than alive. Ultimately they are not the original person and not a continuation of the same existence. They're defined as living memories. If you want to call that alive that's up to you, I don't think that's what we use that term for in reality. I don't think we would use it if Endless really existed. They'd be considered very bizarre.

Regarding Otis, Otis is a better comparison to a real life situation where someone's consciousness is directly placed into a vessel. All of that consciousness and its subjective experience are continuing onward.

The Endless Otis is his lifelike Endless counterpart who is simulating any version of him up to the point of the upload.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

Well it also says simulation. Since it's a copy of a person who is dead, that doesn't change from that state and doesn't have any internal processes to speak of, yeah they're more akin to being lifelike than alive. Ultimately they are not the original person and not a continuation of the same existence. They're defined as living memories. If you want to call that alive that's up to you, I don't think that's what we use that term for in reality. I don't think we would use it if Endless really existed. They'd be considered very bizarre.

Regarding Otis, Otis is a better comparison to a real life situation where someone's consciousness is directly placed into a vessel. All of that consciousness and its subjective experience are continuing onward.

The Endless Otis is his lifelike Endless counterpart who is simulating any version of him up to the point of the upload.

If the Endless don't have internal processes, how do we see a flash of what Otis is thinking of? The game literally shows us one of their thoughts so we KNOW they have internal processes. They may be copies, but Cahcuia never asserted they weren't feeling thinking beings, she just downplayed their humanity by pointing out they aren't the originals. She never said they weren't sentient. After all, if you had a park full of beings that didn't have consciousness, who are they doing all this for? Why would anyone build a program that simulates living beings with no one there to experience the simulation? It'd be like running an empty holodeck for centuries, to what end? Why?

[Turtledeluxe]

If the Endless don't have internal processes, how do we see a flash of what Otis is thinking of? The game literally shows us one of their thoughts so we KNOW they have internal processes. They may be copies, but Cahcuia never asserted they weren't feeling thinking beings, she just downplayed their humanity by pointing out they aren't the originals. She never said they weren't sentient. After all, if you had a park full of beings that didn't have consciousness, who are they doing all this for? Why would anyone build a program that simulates living beings with no one there to experience the simulation? It'd be like running an empty holodeck for centuries, to what end? Why?

I don't see how seeing Otis thinking about something proves that he has a physical nervous system or brain. He's a fascimile of someone who had those things-- why wouldn't he be able to think? You know what he can't do? He can't tell you the flavor of ice cream you're eating if you ask him to guess because he can't taste it. He can't grow. He can't reproduce. You can turn him on and off and he will be in the same state. Life is not defined by having thoughts. You can call it something, it's not life.

Endless are lifelike, as I keep saying. Perceivably alive. Their consciousness is functional, it's just not actually real.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

I don't see how seeing Otis thinking about something proves that he has a physical nervous system or brain. He's a fascimile of someone who had those things-- why wouldn't he be able to think? You know what he can't do? He can't tell you the flavor of ice cream you're eating if you ask him to guess because he can't taste it. He can't grow. He can't reproduce. You can turn him on and off and he will be in the same state. Life is not defined by having thoughts. You can call it something, it's not life.

Endless are lifelike, as I keep saying. Perceivably alive. Their consciousness is functional, it's just not actually real.

Have I once said the Endless are alive? No. I said they are sentient. I said they are people. My breakfast had a nervous system, that's obviously not the metric we use to determine what is and isn't okay to kill. Roaches are alive. Flowers are alive. Our moral exemption isn't for all life, else we'd starve and die. The exemption is for people. It's wrong to wipe out people. It's wrong to enslave people. What makes something a person isn't a nervous system. Pigs have nervous systems, I still had bacon.

If something has a functional consciousness, it has a real consciousness. Are you conflating "real" with biological? While we haven't extended human rights to artificial lifeforms because we haven't met or created any where we'll have to decide their personhood. I'm really hoping that when we do get there that we do better than your average Black Mirror episode. What's the point of imagining all these dystopias if we're just gonna do e-slavery anyway when we get to that point?

[Turtledeluxe]

Have I once said the Endless are alive? No. I said they are sentient. I said they are people. My breakfast had a nervous system, that's obviously not the metric we use to determine what is and isn't okay to kill. Roaches are alive. Flowers are alive. Our moral exemption isn't for all life, else we'd starve and die. The exemption is for people. It's wrong to wipe out people. It's wrong to enslave people. What makes something a person isn't a nervous system. Pigs have nervous systems, I still had bacon.

If something has a functional consciousness, it has a real consciousness. Are you conflating "real" with biological? While we haven't extended human rights to artificial lifeforms because we haven't met or created any where we'll have to decide their personhood. I'm really hoping that when we do get there that we do better than your average Black Mirror episode. What's the point of imagining all these dystopias if we're just gonna do e-slavery anyway when we get to that point?

Roaches and flowers meet the criteria for life that I listed. I wasn't aware you were arguing sentience because the ongoing discussion was about them being alive. As far as sentience, it's the same as with everything. They're sentient like.

Maybe real isn't the best word to use, my point is that it's consciousness-like.

As far as AI, the public very underestimates imo how challenging it's going to be to create something that would merit rights. That said, yes there could come a point where manage to create such organisms but that's not comparable to Endless, like, at all imo.

[Hyperia]

As far as AI, the public very underestimates imo how challenging it's going to be to create something that would merit rights. That said, yes there could come a point where manage to create such organisms but that's not comparable to Endless, like, at all imo.

I believe that the endless are a quantum memory copy and for all due intents and purposes they are the person, just in a different form.

What if we took that memory and uploaded it into a genetic copy of the original body? It’s still the same data but in an organic body.

What would we do then if we were asked to deactivate them?

In order for the endless to work, they have to be a full functioning copy of that person.

[Turtledeluxe]

I believe that the endless are a quantum memory copy and for all due intents and purposes they are the person, just in a different form.

What if we took that memory and uploaded it into a genetic copy of the original body? It’s still the same data but in an organic body.

What would we do then if we were asked to deactivate them?

In order for the endless to work, they have to be a full functioning copy of that person.

I'd be fine with throwing them in the garbage. No matter what, if it not in continuity with the original consciousness, it's not the same person.

And any person who really loves someone, would do the same. Sphene's love is not real. It's a warped and misguided version of the original Queen's sentiments.

Don't get me wrong. Certain people ITT would absolutely regard them as the same and be happy. Not me though.

To expound-- human beings are way more than their memories. What adds up to your behavior and your personality is infinitely more complex. The way XIV handles it is totally unrealistic. Theoretically, Endless should be unique acting people who happen to have those memories.

[Lady_Silvermoon]

I'd be fine with throwing them in the garbage. No matter what, if it not in continuity with the original consciousness, it's not the same person.

And any person who really loves someone, would do the same. Sphene's love is not real. It's a warped and misguided version of the original Queen's sentiments.

Don't get me wrong. Certain people ITT would absolutely regard them as the same and be happy. Not me though.

To expound-- human beings are way more than their memories. What adds up to your behavior and your personality is infinitely more complex. The way XIV handles it is totally unrealistic. Theoretically, Endless should be unique acting people who happen to have those memories.

It doesn't have to be the same person in order to not murder them. I don't believe current G'raha is Crystal Tower G'raha OR Shadowbringer G'raha. I view him as a new, unique individual, but because of that I wouldn't think it's okay to "throw him in the bin."

What about Emet-Selch and the other Ascians? They moved from body to body for thousands of years. Are they not people because of this discontinuity? Would it be acceptable to do anything to them for being "less than?"

You are viewing this from the perspective of yourself. What use an Endless would be to you. But we're talking about their own perspectives, which they do have, regardless of how people try to deny that in order to justify the narrative's treatment of them. That's another thing, when the tour guide approaches, he assures them that they should feel the exact way they felt in life. Why would an AI be giving itself assurances about how each instance of it feels internally if it doesn't feel anything? Nothing that happens in Living Memory makes sense if they aren't sentient. It doesn't even make sense to have Living Memory if they aren't sentient.

But hey, at least we can hold hands in unity on the agreed point that the way this is written is a mess.

[Jojoya]

The story choose to tackle a deeply philosophical question while not wanting to talk about it at all. Hence the very divisive reception of that part.

It's a philosophical that has been getting discussed by the game story all along.

Should the dead be given precedence over the living?

The Endless are not alive. They are dead that have been recreated. To sustain their existence, the living must die.

Do you allow yourself to be killed so an Endless can be activated by a computer to wander around a facade reliving the happiest moments of its life?

It doesn't even make sense to have Living Memory if they aren't sentient.

Living Memory was the Alexandria solution to making sure the dead were not forgotten. The original intent was that the living would go there to visit an accurate recreation of their dead loved ones so that they would not be forgotten. To ensure that accuracy, the memories of the dead were stripped from their souls and fed into the computer as data to be used in making the recreation.

"Remember us. Remember that we once lived."

But the number of dead increased while the number of living decreased. Eventually Living Memory was closed to the living and only randomly selected dead were being recreated to conserve the aether used to power the system. They worked on interdimensional fusion to gain access to more life to strip of aether to power the system.

Again, the entire situation has Ascian written all over it. It would explain why YoshiP said that players should remember what they know about the Ascian when starting Dawntrail.

Question: if the Endless are truly supposed to be alive, why have they not made changes to their environment? Why are they not seeking a solution to their situation? Why are they walking around content with just revisiting their memories, knowing that they will disappear at some point when the computer decides its time to create someone else?

It's because they are not alive. They're programmed to be a certain way and accept that as the entirety of their existence.

What explains Cahciua being the sole Endless trying to create change while the others wander around content with their situation?

We aren't given information about her death. We only know that she is dead. Clearly she would have been part of Oblivion before her death or the rest of the organization wouldn't trust her let alone follow her. Did she manipulate her own death with the goal of gaining access to Living Memory to get more information that could stop Preservation's system? If so, all she had to do was have the strong belief at the time of her death that nothing in her life made her happier than trying to stop what Preservation put in motion. At whatever point the computer chose to recreate her within Living Memory, it would recreate her with that same drive because it was what made her happy.

[KageTokage]

People aren't trying to argue that the "right" thing to do would be to allow the Endless to persist by allowing Sphene's plan to succeed.

They're more annoyed by how utterly hands-off the whole matter is and how basically all discussion on the morality/necessity of deleting them is exhausted within the opening moments of the zone.