I notice a distinct lack of Bots and Droids

[GypsyComet]

It would no more drive consumer trends in home appliances than the US Army drives trends. Looking at interstellar passage costs, the vast, VAST majority of 3I citizens don't interact directly with Imperial forces or even facilities. Not to mention the fact that if the #I Gov did NOT take advantage of that type of hi-tech, they'd get over taken by more efficient empire that DID. ANOTHER huge oversight of insane proportions.

First, calm down. It's a game.

Every world *will* be different, but the culture of the astropolitans is more uniform. That is the cultural baseline seen in the larger ports, on local and regional capitals, and on nearly every world near Capital itself.

The bias against cybernetics started through that dirtiest of policy determiners: Inference. The whole thing comes from the Warrant of Restoration in Year Zero regarding the rights of all living sentients. The statement was followed less officially by a blanket negation of any possible rights for, and I quote, "robots", since they aren't living. The cybernetics thing is a cultural interpretation in some areas of the Imperium, including at least one corner of the Marches, that holds that cybernetic replacement makes one "less than 100% living" and therefore less than 100% worthy of sophont's rights.

One of the more prolific fanzines during the MT run posited that one of the central cultural regions, the Lancian Cultural Region, is quite liberal on the subject of cybernetics and couldn't care less what "Imperial" attitudes are on the matter. I suspect there are others at that end of the spectrum as well.

Simple solution for localized variations: use the same table in CT that determines local reactions to psionics, adjusted to reflect the subject matter. Done.

 

[Carlobrand]

... T5 p121 mentions ...

Dagnabit, stop that! Christmas is still two and a half months away! ( whimper )

 

[HG_B]

First, calm down. It's a game.

Every world *will* be different, but the culture of the astropolitans is more uniform. That is the cultural baseline seen in the larger ports, on local and regional capitals, and on nearly every world near Capital itself.

Please supply convincing, logical data to support that the politicians will set the popular opinion and buying habits. Except in totalitarian regimes on Earth that is not the case. Also, YOU calm down. Capiche? I was just making a logical point.

 

[rancke]

...part of it will come down to the 3I's attitude to robots. That's what'd drive their ownership and use at starports and Imperial facilities (the services), which will in turn exert some influence on the worlds themselves.

I'm fine with anti-robot and anti-cybernectics prejudice being a feature of Imperial culture, with local cultures running the gamut from robophilia to robophobia. That keeps the default environment of the Third Imperium setting (especially the starships) relatively free from robots and conform to what we've seen of the Third Imperium setting so far, while at the same time opening the door for radically different environments on some of the 99.99% of worlds that we haven't seen written up yet.


Hans

 

[GypsyComet]

Please supply convincing, logical data to support that the politicians will set the popular opinion and buying habits. Except in totalitarian regimes on Earth that is not the case. Also, YOU calm down. Capiche? I was just making a logical point.

In all caps. Sure.

Setting popular opinion as a politician is easy. It's currently called "Shock Doctrine".

In the years before the Third Imperium was declared, an exploding robot killed multiple diplomats and other important persons and led directly to the Shudusham Concords (which set standards for robots), all while the culture that would become the Third Imperium was fairly compact. While the legal force of the Concords ended when Cleon declared the Third Imperium, he proceeded to entrench the negative aspects into Imperial Law. There aren't many Imperial Laws, but a lack of rights for Robots is one of them.

Logical data? You do know this is a setting full of *people* right? Logic has very little to do with it. Give some people any excuse to feel superior to others, such as that veteran who came home with an artificial leg, and they'll take it. Especially if the conflict he lost the leg in was far away and they can point to "tradition" to look down on the subhuman cyborg. It doesn't get much farther away psychologically than six months by liner. Will it matter that the soldier is one of those who can't be fast-cloned for obscure genetic reasons? Of course it will; it'll make it *worse*. Will those same people get all contrite when slow-cloning finally restores his leg? Maybe. People are mean.

 

[HG_B]

In all caps. Sure.

Setting popular opinion as a politician is easy. It's currently called "Shock Doctrine".

Um nope. If it were it would be super easy manipulate buying habits with a snap of the fingers. Also, you gave no real examples of setting broad opinion and buying habits. Because, they don't really exist. Especially for politicians that are externally imposed by non-democratic means. Throwing out a concept without empirical evidence is just, well, a waste of time.

My point stands as originally stated based on logic and evidence.

 

[rancke]

In the years before the Third Imperium was declared, an exploding robot killed multiple diplomats and other important persons and led directly to the Shudusham Concords (which set standards for robots), all while the culture that would become the Third Imperium was fairly compact. While the legal force of the Concords ended when Cleon declared the Third Imperium, he proceeded to entrench the negative aspects into Imperial Law. There aren't many Imperial Laws, but a lack of rights for Robots is one of them.

Umm... the Shudusham Concords and Cleon's decision that robots weren't protected beings under Imperial law are two very different things. One is about arming autonomous machines. The other is about treating artificial intelligences as sapients beings.

And treating a lifeform as having lost the rights of a lifeform because some parts have been replaced is a third, and highly bogus, notion. I like to think that the Imperium didn't allow that before it was shattered. IIRC that was something that emerged in Margaret's successor state, and she also allowed slavery.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

Umm... the Shudusham Concords and Cleon's decision that robots weren't protected beings under Imperial law are two very different things. One is about arming autonomous machines. The other is about treating artificial intelligences as sapients beings.

And treating a lifeform as having lost the rights of a lifeform because some parts have been replaced is a third, and highly bogus, notion. I like to think that the Imperium didn't allow that before it was shattered. IIRC that was something that emerged in Margaret's successor state, and she also allowed slavery.


Hans

Margaret was not a nice person. Second place on my "Leaders of the Civil War I Would Most Like to See Die," list, which is saying something given that she's competing with a traitorous kingslayer and a fratricidal lunatic. I don't recall any mention of that cybernetic loss-of-rights notion outside of her domain, though I may have missed something. In my opinion, she was just looking for excuses to make chattel of the riffraff.

 

[rancke]

Margaret was not a nice person. Second place on my "Leaders of the Civil War I Would Most Like to See Die," list, which is saying something given that she's competing with a traitorous kingslayer and a fratricidal lunatic. I don't recall any mention of that cybernetic loss-of-rights notion outside of her domain, though I may have missed something. In my opinion, she was just looking for excuses to make chattel of the riffraff.

My memory is a bit hazy on that bit, so I could be wrong, but I think that the article that mentioned the 'cyborgs are not really human' notion linked it to Margaret's region.


Hans

 

[infojunky]

The whole anti-cybernetic thing has always struck me as a anti-munchkin device built into the setting. Something akin to the Cyberpsychosis built into other settings to limit the amount of machinery the characters have...

But with further thinking I really think the prevalence of Bots is going to be on smaller population high tech worlds where grunt labor is at a premium (this also could go a long ways towards explaining those miserable worlds with huge populations, in that people and life support were cheaper than bots).

 

[GypsyComet]

Especially for politicians that are externally imposed by non-democratic means.

You do realize that most of the populace of the Imperium has no access to or expectation of Democracy, right? "Non-Democratic means" is the norm, and quite a lot of the nobility is home or locally sourced. The megacorps also tend to have a lot of nobles, so yes, selling power and nobility are going to be tied together. The source for that is The Traveller Adventure.

Umm... the Shudusham Concords and Cleon's decision that robots weren't protected beings under Imperial law are two very different things. One is about arming autonomous machines. The other is about treating artificial intelligences as sapients beings.

They emerged from the same set of events. Popular opinion in the (then MUCH smaller) proto-Imperium was shaped by a widely publicized and terrible event. That attitude manifested in both the Concords and Cleon's later statements of Law.

And treating a lifeform as having lost the rights of a lifeform because some parts have been replaced is a third, and highly bogus, notion. I like to think that the Imperium didn't allow that before it was shattered. IIRC that was something that emerged in Margaret's successor state, and she also allowed slavery.

I have no problem with it being that localized, but I suspect Margaret, and by extension Tukera, held the attitude before. It could be as simple as Tukera fomenting a bit of negativity toward something their competitors sell and they don't. Remember, Tukera and the Vemene go back to TTA, and they play *mean*.

As for "bogus", I'm guessing you haven't been exposed to very much good old-fashioned bigotry. ANY excuse is enough to hate and ostracize.

 

[Carlobrand]

The whole anti-cybernetic thing has always struck me as a anti-munchkin device built into the setting. Something akin to the Cyberpsychosis built into other settings to limit the amount of machinery the characters have...

But with further thinking I really think the prevalence of Bots is going to be on smaller population high tech worlds where grunt labor is at a premium (this also could go a long ways towards explaining those miserable worlds with huge populations, in that people and life support were cheaper than bots).

Well, no. One of the ongoing debates concerns robots as portrayed by CT Book-8 being cheaper than human labor beyond a certain tech level, and how - or whether - we should address that to maintain a more humanocentric setting.

 

[GypsyComet]

"Anti-mechanical paranoia" is given as one possibility for limiting import of robots in JTAS#1, the other two being job protection and a "obscure sociological or religious reason". The seeds were planted early...

 

[Carlobrand]

...They emerged from the same set of events. Popular opinion in the (then MUCH smaller) proto-Imperium was shaped by a widely publicized and terrible event. That attitude manifested in both the Concords and Cleon's later statements of Law. ...

Is there some canon source that explicitly draws this connection? If not, it is speculative. The incident in question occurred over a century before Cleon was declared emperor. It is as likely that he made his declaration with economic aims in mind, attempting to ensure that robots remained useful property. Else, why not ban sapient robots altogether?

...As for "bogus", I'm guessing you haven't been exposed to very much good old-fashioned bigotry. ANY excuse is enough to hate and ostracize.

Ad hom, and off target. He finds bogus the idea that the Imperium that outlaws slavery would use the pretext of a cybernetic liver to turn a person into a slave. There is a huge gulf between a culture showing bigotry toward a person and a government implementing laws to turn that person into a possession, and we have not established that the level of bigotry is extreme enough to bridge that gulf.

 

[Ulsyus]

But with further thinking I really think the prevalence of Bots is going to be on smaller population high tech worlds where grunt labor is at a premium (this also could go a long ways towards explaining those miserable worlds with huge populations, in that people and life support were cheaper than bots).

That's an excellent point. The same trend can be seen in bot development in Japan now, versus their neighbour that has more labourers than it knows what to do with and who have been, all things considered, far cheaper than automation.

 

[GypsyComet]

Else, why not ban sapient robots altogether?

Because they weren't even close to sentient at the time?

He finds bogus the idea that the Imperium that outlaws slavery would use the pretext of a cybernetic liver to turn a person into a slave.

If that is really what he meant, I agree. This conversation has grown several separate threads and keeping proper context is becoming challenging.

 

[Ulsyus]

I was talking with my players about this the other night when we had our game, and we were in agreement about the idea that in a lot of high tech societies, the 3I among them, bots would be ubiquitous but invisible, being in the background making things work.

What's the issue with having them there just doing their jobs? Is it because they're sci fi to us right now that it seems we have to have them highlighted whenever they appear? Modern electrical systems in homes would've seemed like sci fi one hundred years ago, but now it's just everywhere and most people take it for granted unless they've spent an extended time in a third world nation not living out of a hotel.

 

[infojunky]

Really in a truly High Tech society Bots are wallpaper, kinda like NanoTech is going to be just another tool in the kit that keeps society running. If you read some period SF the idea of the omnipresent portable phone was the gee-wizz idea, now it is hardly even worth mentioning.

Case in point, I assume that every character has a comm, and have done so for near 20 years, even if it isn't listed on their character sheet. It's only when they start adding capability to I worry about the specifics. Heck right now I am considering that every character's comm has an integral computer (i.e. a Smart Phone) to an be assumed possession.

So be it with bots. Recently I have been considering what the stats are for bots that come as part of your standard Starship. Alongside a number of Engineering/Repair bots one that acts as the Crews Steward makes sense as well, whose price is included in the basic Life support of the ship as the Repair bots cost is subsumed in the cost of the Hull and Drives.

 

[rancke]

The problem isn't appliances with electronic operating systems. The problem is autonomous mechanical entities -- i.e. the kind of robots created by the robot design rules. 'Bots' to use the Star Wars terminology.


Hans

 

[rancke]

[Hans] finds bogus the idea that the Imperium that outlaws slavery would use the pretext of a cybernetic liver to turn a person into a slave. There is a huge gulf between a culture showing bigotry toward a person and a government implementing laws to turn that person into a possession, and we have not established that the level of bigotry is extreme enough to bridge that gulf.

Spot on, Carlo. That's just what I meant.


Hans