Removing non-asmiov law sets

[Mrs Dobbins]

 

All non-asimov lawsets are too vague about how much a synthetic can do to stop an antag, meaning that they can do pretty much anything.

The robocop lawset is really bad for this: What the hell is the public trust anyway?

The AI would be forced to be more indirect, and sec wouldn't be able to lean on the AI as much.

 

[Fox McCloud]

I must admit I'm not entirely opposed to the AI having crewsimov every single round.

[Earthdivine]

 

I personally like the randomized law sets every round, it means you have to act differently every time.

 

On a more technical note, all law sets are inherently broken and don't work, Asimov in particular. We should make the lawyers easier to understand rather then setting it to a single law set that any AI who thinks hard enough can warp to it's own intentions.

 

[dreadweaver]

+1 for crewsimov at every roundstart.

[davidchan]

 

+1 Crewsimov or NT Default to start, all others can still have their Cards in the upload for use if need be.

 

Can't say I'm fond of Paladin at all, never really considered it the AI's job to enforce space law, just report crew activity that breaks protocol or would cause a law violation.

 

[Mrs Dobbins]

 

I personally like the randomized law sets every round, it means you have to act differently every time.

 

On a more technical note, all law sets are inherently broken and don't work, Asimov in particular. We should make the lawyers easier to understand rather then setting it to a single law set that any AI who thinks hard enough can warp to it's own intentions.

 

To be honest, Robocop and Paladin are too vague to really be lawsets- they basically both say "Hunt antags and do what command tells you"

Asimov has a lot more room for maneuver.

The laws shouldn't be easy to interpret, but they should be able to misinterpreted with ease.

 

[MarkvA]

Until we start properly enforcing AI lawsets it won't matter much. Most AI's and cyborgs act the same (validhunt) regardless of what lawset they're on. The moment they take the security module they'll start acting as security, even on Crewsimov which requires you to listen to crew unless there's a direct threat to the crew.

[Citinited]

 

All non-asimov lawsets are too vague about how much a synthetic can do to stop an antag, meaning that they can do pretty much anything.

 

Being vague allows for lots of different roleplay directions for the AI. Variety is nice.

 

What the hell is the public trust anyway?

 

I usually define it as the entity which governs the station, i.e. command staff. This is, however, subject to interpretation by AI players.

 

The AI would be forced to be more indirect, and sec wouldn't be able to lean on the AI as much.

 

In my opinion, AIs should adopt a hands-off approach and try to not be the station's micromanager, barring situations where they are required to act. Crewsimov actually would be worse at making sec rely on the AI, as the AI would be forced to follow security's orders, as opposed to other lawsets where the AI can be more shrewd with security's commands.

 

As for your original post, I like to have variety in my lawset whenever I play the AI, so I vote no to the premise. That being said, some lawsets just don't function as intended with the way laws have priority on paradise (e.g. NT Default) and could be removed from the rotation or otherwise looked at.

 

[veganzombeh]

 

I think basically all current lawsets are too complicated - it allows AIs to find loopholes in them, which can't really be refuted, because everyone has their own interpretation. IMHO, a really simple lawset would work better, something like :-

 

• Do not allow crew members to die.

• Act in the interest of Nanotrasen.

 

 

[Lars]

 

Do not allow crew members to die.

 

Station too deadly for free willed organics, everybody should be borged and kept working in secured areas.

 

[Garoon]

 

Do not allow crew members to die.

 

Station too deadly for free willed organics, everybody should be borged and kept working in secured areas.

 

The organics are a danger to themselves, they MUST be borged to ensure safety and security! NO EXCEPTIONS

 

[SpaceTimeNow]

 

The crewsimov lawset in it's current form is not the right default lawset for an AI.

 

If players would actually honor their laws, a AI with crewsimov would have to everything it is told unless it would be obvious that it would hurt a crewmember. It would have to open almost every airlock, mess whit every equipment it is told to.

 

A civilian could literally tell the AI to bolt every airlock on the station and the AI would have to obey. Since all rooms have life support there is no reason why this order would harm anyone (law 1) if he would be locked inside a room for an hour. It would be inconvinient, but not dangerous. Crewsimov fails to acknowledge any sort of command structure, which makes it basicly useless for NT.

 

[Lars]

 

Since all rooms have life support there is no reason why this order would harm anyone (law 1) if he would be locked inside a room for an hour.

 

Given how most of the crew are mental cases, I think psychological harm from being locked trumps "lock all doors for lulz".

 

[SpaceTimeNow]

 

Since all rooms have life support there is no reason why this order would harm anyone (law 1) if he would be locked inside a room for an hour.

 

Given how most of the crew are mental cases, I think psychological harm from being locked trumps "lock all doors for lulz".

I think this is too far fetched and a excuse people come up with because they have to somehow be a useful AI while beeing running a ridiculously useless lawset for what they are supposed to do.

 

Edit: NT default is a much better version of crewsimov, and NT default is a believable ruleset that NT would run. Everything else should be purely situational at the discretion of the Head of Staff or the Centcom.

 

Additionally we should get rid of the rule that Laws are to be followed in order, that's not how they were designed in the first place. We just forced that rule onto existing rulesets and messing up their meaning. If one rule is more important than another, then it's stated in the laws already.

 

[Kluys]

 

Additionally we should get rid of the rule that Laws are to be followed in order, that's not how they were designed in the first place. We just forced that rule onto existing rulesets and messing up their meaning. If one rule is more important than another, then it's stated in the laws already.

 

This is and has always been the way laws work, its why traitor AI boards work and its why ion laws work, it will not be changed.

 

secondly you guys are discussing lawsets here which are all purposefully made with their own good and bad sides, none of them are perfect and limiting us to just one would be rather boring if you ask me.

all the basic lawsets require the AI to atleast care for the crews health, so do the rules, so I don't really see any issue with the lawsets being random.

If you hate the laws the AI has, get the command staff to change said laws.

 

[SpaceTimeNow]

 

Additionally we should get rid of the rule that Laws are to be followed in order, that's not how they were designed in the first place. We just forced that rule onto existing rulesets and messing up their meaning. If one rule is more important than another, then it's stated in the laws already.

 

This is and has always been the way laws work, its why traitor AI boards work and its why ion laws work, it will not be changed.

Pretty sure this server started of with laws beeing equally important, and i am sure this was also true at the time most lawsets were created (which was even before this server came to be). Baystation is still running the rule of all laws beein equally important unless otherwise specified within the laws. The fact that certain laws needed to state that law 2 is more important than 1 was because by default all laws were equally important.