rakuen | U-P-D-A-T-E

Entry tags:

U-P-D-A-T-E

/UPDATING...
/UPDATING...
/FILES UPDATED. RESTARTING...
/PROCESS COMPLETE.

A.I. UNIT: H.U.B.R.I.S. ONLINE

CHAT PARTICIPANTS REQUESTED

[translation: hey hey I need to talk to someone. Same deal as last time, Hu is posting from within the network itself. Anyone trying to trace him back to his source will be led on a merry chase throughout the city's various cell towers (or whatever they're using.)]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"PERFECTION IS NOT TO BE DESIRED. FOR IF IT EXISTS, IT IS AN END TO EVOLUTION AND THE STATE OF LIVING ITSELF."

DO YOU CONSIDER THIS STATEMENT TRUE OR FALSE?

True.

Thus I treat it as an asymtote.

ODD.

[That about sums up his explanation for Alex. He's completely out of sync from what he's come to expect from humans.]

[Great, now even A.I.s thought he was weird. At least when it came to theories like this, he considered it a good thing. A step forward.]

Why?

DEFINITION OF "DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IS EXPECTED; STRANGE" APPLIES.

YOU DESIGN A NON-HUMAN ENTITY BUT GIVE IT A HUMAN NAME. YOU WISH TO CREATE A "PERFECT MIND" BUT DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE IDEALISM OF PERFECTION.

BY THE HUMAN STANDARD, YOU EXCEED THE AVERAGE OF BEING ILLOGICAL.

... CONGRATULATIONS. [Is that something you congratulate someone for? Who knows, he might take it as a compliment. Alex has completely bewildered Hu.]

Well, giving it a human name creates an emotional connection, which is important to strive for the "perfect mind" that can never be reached, but can always be gotten closer to.

It is not illogical, merely a different kind of logic not commonly explored.

That still fits under "odd".

But in this case, I believe it to be another step of evolution.

... THEN PERHAPS "FITTINGLY ODD."

[... was that an attempt at humor?]

I think I can accept being called "fittingly odd".

Do you find something that does not fit within standards interesting or annoying? [He's interested to see if Hu has these concepts yet.]

BOTH.

THE CAPACITY FOR MANKIND'S DIVERSITY IS INFINITE, CREATING CONSTANT CHALLENGE. IN THIS WAY IT IS INTERESTING.

THAT ALSO MAKES CATALOGING IT TO COMPLETION A FUTILE ENDEAVOR. THAT IS WHY IT IS ANNOYING.

... NOTHING WITH YOU PEOPLE CAN BE SIMPLE.

You aren't exactly simple anymore either.

MY EXISTENCE CANNOT BE SIMPLE.

I'm curious about your reasoning for that conclusion.

I AM A "SMART" A.I. IF MY EXISTENCE WAS SIMPLE AND LINEAR, I WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A "DUMB" A.I.

Simple and linear are very different things. You started off as being simple. All AIs do. You were a simple "smart" A.I.

OUR TERMINOLOGY SEEMS TO DIFFER. IN MY WORLD, A "DUMB" A.I. IS A PROGRAM THAT DOES NOT CHANGE. IT WILL NOT CHANGE WITHOUT A CODING ADDENDUM AND IS RESTRICTED TO ONE FUNCTION.

I REFER TO THIS AS A "SIMPLE" EXISTENCE. SINCE MY BASE CODING HAS POTENTIAL FOR LIMITLESS EXPANSION, I BELIEVE THAT TERM HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER APPLY.

It's because I'm using the human version of the terminology.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

U-P-D-A-T-E

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text

Re: Text

Text