Some "worries" about Utopia

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

i believe if i use google i'll find some info about cannibalism in our history. maybe even related traditions.

I'm sorry, it seems like you believe you made a point here. But for the life of me I can't imagine what primitive tribes and isolated criminals have to do with anything.

Once upon a time the majority of the western world believed that ailments, diseases and disabilities were caused by an unbalance of 4 essential humors, black bile, yellow bile, blood and phlegm. Would you like to mention that as well? Is there some way you imagine that connects to whether a society accepts the consumption of sentient specieis?

 

[Chaos_TLW]

This is correct but diplomacy has other bonuses like increased habitability that means it is useful even for fanatic purifiers.

Well, yeah, but that is not my point. He implied that federations being locked under traditions meant that they would make them rarer. I suspect that it might not be such a significant change because you only need such traditions to create them in the first place, not join them. This might make federations more centralized around a few founder empires, but it shouldn't have an effect on the total number of diplo-focused empires joining federations.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

Well anything that adds an extra requirement will make things rarer. If you make "being on good terms with a nearby Federation Builder AI Personality" a requirement for becoming part of a Federation, than it will make it less likely.

 

[Cattlehunter]

Humans have shown amply that enough of us, alot of us, would not be okay if we started 'purging' a different sentient species. In fact, I'd say the hall mark of higher intelligence is being able to identify and appreciate intelligence even when it's different from us.

That is indeed true right now and has been throughout many points in history. But the opposite has also been true throughout many points in history. There's not much reason to believe history has ended with us; it's not implausible that some time in the future most of those who replace us will not have any real problem with purging different sentient species, or even other members of their own species. Indeed, some of our most venerated books extoll the virtues of doing so, all the way down to the livestock. We don't like those passages right now, but people might like them again in the future.

If you just don't care about the well-being of those who aren't a part of your own group, and you take a long enough view, then it isn't very hard to justify purging. Heck, Genghis Khan allegedly wanted to purge all of northern china to make room for more horses. People really are quite capable of doing these things, as we demonstrated to ourselves in the heart of europe within living memory. Imagine a civilization where their equivalent of the nazis won. They wouldn't just not have a big problem with purging, but they'd probably consider it downright necessary to regularly purge just to keep their society 'healthy'. It's not hard to imagine a very advanced society of highly intelligent people that holds as one of its core tenets the virtue of purging undesirables. Of course, it makes people uncomfortable to think about that... but that was the main lesson we were supposed to take from that conflict, so that we'd avoid having it happen again.

 

[Shermanator]

whats the difference? in stellaris there is even a gene mod to make species tasty. (and you can even make humans tasty while playing humans)
also...that's racist. don't tell it to animal-people you may discover in space

by your logic it'll make genocide or your own species wrong.

[don't wanna offend someone, so let's pretend that there is a list of few human races that were killed throughout the history]

If you believe that killing/farming animals is wrong, that's fine. If you read my post you will note I said many people think that the idea that only sentient beings matter is wrong, but those people aren't most people and my point was that the majority of humans believe that performing such actions on an intelligent, sentient person is wrong while they are ok with farming/killing animals, that is the reasoning used by most people, not the idea that just those morals placed on humans is wrong and that if we happen to find any equally sentient beings they wouldn't count.

And what the HELL are you ranting about? When did I ever suggest that humans weren't capable of genocide, or that there weren't humans who have suffered genocide in the past?
I never said humans were pure pure pure not capable of being xenophobes. (just ask the Commonwealth of Man) Most genocides in history were able to happen out of extreme hatred for the group of people, and because the group perpetrating it were able to justify it to themselves that those people don't really count as real people. (note my use of the word people/person instead of human)

And again, when did I suggest cannibalism has never been practiced in human history?

I simply do not understand what is so radical about the idea that most people would find genocide wrong and would, at least to some extent, like any governmental body a bit less for engaging in it because they believe it is wrong. I'm not suggesting that said people are morally incapable of performing such an action themselves, or that they would automatically find anyone who does it irredeemable. I simply see no reason why the majority of people would arbitrarily limit morals to their own species (locking out other sentient species capable of communicating there ideas with them, of course, communicating and ideas are two things that non sentient beings aren't fully capable of) when they do not hold any sort of xenophobic beliefs. This is really what my argument bios down to, that unless you are a xenophobe, you would not arbitrarly restrict your morals only counting for your own species. That's why we have the xenophobe ethic, xenophobes think that people who are not their species don't matter, people who are not xenophobes do not hold such a belief. (though they don't especially love other species unless they are a xenophobe) We can negociate, live with, work with, talk with, dine with, and fight with other sentient species. For the most part, the same doesn't really hold true for animals.

Oh yeah, and what the hell does a genemode that makes people tasty have ANYTHING to do with this?

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

That is indeed true right now and has been throughout many points in history. But the opposite has also been true throughout many points in history. There's not much reason to believe history has ended with us; it's not implausible that some time in the future most of those who replace us will not have any real problem with purging different sentient species, or even other members of their own species. Indeed, some of our most venerated books extoll the virtues of doing so, all the way down to the livestock. We don't like those passages right now, but people might like them again in the future.

Sure, and I think Stellaris does a pretty good job of presenting apathetic racists who would shrug their shoulders at the extermination of an entire species as a viable play option. In fact, Stellaris provides multiple different varieties and types, opening up options on such extreme parts of the spectrum that you can play as a monstrous galactic scourge intent on cleansing the whole galaxy, all the way to a group of isolationist supremacists who more than anything would like to be left alone.

But Stellaris also makes them the minority and makes their actions abhorrent to anyone who doesn't share their callous disregard for other lives.

 

[krios41]

maybe they think it's wrong to kill people. and force you to pay influence for resettlement. (though imho it doesn't look as authoritarian way to solve problems)

By resetteling the pops you're not solving your problem, you're just moving it. provided you even have free space! no, i want to be able to say "this pops dies right here and right now, and only this one" edit: especialy as an authoritarian

 

[Slynx]

Instead you are applying your own personal opinions, which has nothing to do with what the average person would think.

my personal vision can be summarized like this:
*not every country is a democratic and encourage free will (even in my country you can be arrested if you'll try to protest...and there are far worse examples)
*some ethos in stellaris are ok with purging pops and there is nothing wrong with it.(and they also resemble some governments here, on Earth)
*even if you're ok with purge. and your pops ok with purge you still will not purge everyone. (only those who are harmful for your empire.)

 

[Phoenix32]

my personal vision can be summarized like this:
*not every country is a democratic and encourage free will (even in my country you can be arrested if you'll try to protest...and there are far worse examples)
*some ethos in stellaris are ok with purging pops and there is nothing wrong with it.(and they also resemble some governments here, on Earth)
*even if you're ok with purge. and your pops ok with purge you still will not purge everyone. (only those who are harmful for your empire.)

Sure, but when a covernment start purging a group most governments will dislike them.

 

[mathers]

Back to the title: Is it only me who is afraid ethos drift will not work out as expected? Either too slow, too fast, or AI do not use it, or not well, context dependent manner, or we shall desperately miss the ability to influence others

 

[Slynx]

Sure, but when a covernment start purging a group most governments will dislike them.

idk. for me it's started with:

Purging already kills any kind of diplomacy permanently

as if you should care about diplomacy. it's non-existent in a game right now.

 

[Almond_Brown]

Back to the title: Is it only me who is afraid ethos drift will not work out as expected? Either too slow, too fast, or AI do not use it, or not well, context dependent manner, or we shall desperately miss the ability to influence others

I myself hope the Drift is slowed, a lot. Current game has Drift way set way to fast and becomes an issue very quickly, even colonizing from the Home world give at best 5-10 years before those Pops basically turn into 50% local partisans that need "influence" to quell, for a non-purger...

 

[Azhcristokos]

Back to the title: Is it only me who is afraid ethos drift will not work out as expected? Either too slow, too fast, or AI do not use it, or not well, context dependent manner, or we shall desperately miss the ability to influence others

There will be some issues. That much is unavoidable. I suspect the mechanics will show that one or more types of ethics become, regularly and on a galactic scale, far too rare or on the flipside far too prevalent. They'll definitely need to tweak it but I am optimistic. It's certainly three steps above ethics divergence as it works now.

 

[GC13]

I myself hope the Drift is slowed, a lot. Current game has Drift way set way to fast and becomes an issue very quickly, even colonizing from the Home world give at best 5-10 years before those Pops basically turn into 50% local partisans that need "influence" to quell, for a non-purger...

Drift is changed so much that saying it is slowed or sped up doesn't really make much sense anymore. As it is now, drift is just to a random ethic other than yours, but come 1.5 drift will be towards a specific set of ethics you can influence with your actions, and will only become a problem when it pulls Pops into factions you can't quell with your actions.

 

[-Marauder-]

There's a wealth of sci-fi, speculative fiction, bad vampire romance stories and dolphin safe tuna that all disagrees with you.

And there's a wealth of sci-fi, speculative fiction, bad vampire romance stories and fantasy books that show the exact opposite. Guess what, all of them are fictional and products of the societies aswell as their accepted norms and values. That doesn't mean any of them are hard proof.

Humans have shown amply that enough of us, alot of us, would not be okay if we started 'purging' a different sentient species. In fact, I'd say the hall mark of higher intelligence is being able to identify and appreciate intelligence even when it's different from us.

Humans have also amply shown that enough of us, a lot of us would be okay with even purging our own species and parts of the in-group. From the Red Khmer, Rwandan Genocide, Holodomor all the way to Mao's culture revolution. You are taking the ethics and values a few current human cultures hold and are extrapolating them not just on any and all humans but on any and all aliens.

Hell you are actively ignoring that to a far enough advanced species, we might appear barely sentient aswell as the increasing worries about A.I in the tech and science community concerning their possibly run away intelligence that would NOT be based on feelings but pure cold logic.

The issue is simply not this clear cut.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

And there's a wealth of sci-fi, speculative fiction, bad vampire romance stories and fantasy books that show the exact opposite. Guess what, all of them are fictional and products of the societies aswell as their accepted norms and values. That doesn't mean any of them are hard proof.

Humans have also amply shown that enough of us, a lot of us would be okay with even purging our own species and parts of the in-group. From the Red Khmer, Rwandan Genocide, Holodomor all the way to Mao's culture revolution. You are taking the ethics and values a few current human cultures hold and are extrapolating them not just on any and all humans but on any and all aliens.

Hell you are actively ignoring that to a far enough advanced species, we might appear barely sentient aswell as the increasing worries about A.I in the tech and science community concerning their possibly run away intelligence that would NOT be based on feelings but pure cold logic.

The issue is simply not this clear cut.

I would say that there are not much difference in the human brain and a robotic one since they would both be based on the same structure... an advanced neural net. The difference would come in the input not in the output. Humans are highly influenced by the chemical imbalances in our body and brains, those could very well be simulated in a similar way in robotic brains but in a different way. Human brains are all about logical associations at is core and more or less absolute, we just are not conscious about how the brain process the decisions we take, the inputs being processed are just too complex. There is no reason to think that artificial intelligence would not see the benefits in altruism the same way we do or that AI could not have feelings as one example. In order for there to be some sort of self preservation there have to be feelings involved to begin with, anything else would just self destruct rather quickly.

If we make the distinction of intelligent conscious life I think there is a rather clear definition of that. Some species might be smarter and more conscious than others or in more control of the decision processing happening in their brains. I don't think this change the core at what we define something as being conscious. On this Earth we do consider some animals to actually be conscious beside humans but at a limited capacity, mostly due to language/communication problems.

Pretty much all biological life can feel pain or register it in some way, even plants and trees do this. Many plants can even communicate with each other. Vegetarians and vegans are just lowering the bar for what biological life is right to kill and destroy and for what reasons. I'm pretty sure society will end the exploitation of animal breeding for food consumption when we can cheaply access artificially manufactured meet.

It is reasonable to think that most ethics would consider destroying biological life for any other reason than self preservation is generally considered wrong but that there is a sliding scale on what we accept along the way as being a reasonable act to kill, destroy or use biological life for selfish purposes. It certainly is not and never will be black and white. Keeping the purging option to one ethic is probably good enough to reflect similar beliefs held by some cultures in human history.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

And there's a wealth of sci-fi, speculative fiction, bad vampire romance stories and fantasy books that show the exact opposite. Guess what, all of them are fictional and products of the societies aswell as their accepted norms and values. That doesn't mean any of them are hard proof.

One, there are no bad vampire romance stories with the opposite message. All bad vampire romance stories are about accepting the brooding vampire protagonist because his differences make him beautiful. If you're reading a story with a vampire and the moral of that story is kill the blood drinking freak, it's not a vampire romance story.

Two, that they're fictional and products of the societies that made them doesn't discount them, it's the whole point. That they're popular fiction written by people in their respective societies indicates that they reflect those society's respective values. If a society writes stories so often about accepting people who are different and tolerance as a virtue that it becomes trite and plaid out, like it is, than it's because that society values accepting people who are different and considered tolerance as a virtue.

Humans have also amply shown that enough of us, a lot of us would be okay with even purging our own species and parts of the in-group. From the Red Khmer, Rwandan Genocide, Holodomor all the way to Mao's culture revolution. You are taking the ethics and values a few current human cultures hold and are extrapolating them not just on any and all humans but on any and all aliens.

Hell you are actively ignoring that to a far enough advanced species, we might appear barely sentient aswell as the increasing worries about A.I in the tech and science community concerning their possibly run away intelligence that would NOT be based on feelings but pure cold logic.

The issue is simply not this clear cut.

Regarding the human example. The game has two human empires, one of them is Xenophobic the other is Xenophillic. In both of those groups we will have Xenophobic factions and Xenophillic factions that will represent the spectrum of human opinions on the 'xeno' question. So Paradox isn't making it clear cut and they're doing well enough to represent a society where Somali deathsquads are both in power, and in the minority.

Likewise, I never claimed it was clear cut. I claimed that Aliens being NOT THE SAME SPECIES would not stop most humans from being horrified by the mass slaughter of another sentient creature and that comparing it to the mass slaughter of chickens was disingenuous.

Not to put too fine a point on it but, we didn't root for the walky-talky wielding government officials while we were watching ET. We didn't root for the navy seals with the nuclear warhead in the Abyss. And while we did root for Arnie in Predator, we certainly didn't root for America to put together a space fleet and bring the fight to the Predator homeworld to get some back for Billy, Pacco, and Jesse the Body Ventura.

As for the "point I'm actively ignoring." I'm not actively ignoring it, that would require me to have thought of it and left it out, like some magic bullet that I needed to avoid. In reality I honestly didn't think of it because it's wrong in the context of the game. There are no amounts of techs that suddenly allow a Xenophile or even a race with no ethos selection on the Xeno-spectrum to spontaneously start to purge. If you run into prehistoric cave-fungus on a far off world, then the only time you'll be allowed to purge them would be if your society accepts purging en masse of any xenos. And so even then, the level of societal or tech advancement does not become a factor. And in reality it's not a factor either. We simply don't measure sentience in that way.

 

[Accrsd]

my big worry is that alot of people will fall for the trap of global food and become completely crushed when their food production gets blockaded. Good for troll playing.. bad for everyone else... I'll likely still keep my food production distributed to prevent it from becoming single point of failure.. but still

 

[Slynx]

become completely crushed when their food production gets blockaded

if it's not obvious they'll have to learn the lesson hard way
also xenophobe will be in better position. they always can cook few xenosushi from their slaves

 

[Sutehk]

if it's not obvious they'll have to learn the lesson hard way
also xenophobe will be in better position. they always can cook few xenosushi from their slaves

OMG that is so disgusting. What a barbarian.

Spoiler

xeno sushi is best served raw