Artificial Intelligence
- Thread starter dragoner
- Start date
Jak Nazryth
Mongoose
Dragoner...
This thread is of particular interest to me because tomorrow evening, my 6 players (all but 1 relatively new to Traveller) are embarking on "The Kinunir" adventure, using the new Mongoose design as a go-by with some changes I've done.
Did you create this list or get it from a Mongoose book?
Because A.I. is discussed on page 181 of CSC as an Option.
3 million credits per point of Int and Edu, so a 15/15 AI would be 90 million credits. But the rules in that paragraph state that this is assuming that the computer is simulated A.I.
"Real" A.I. is in the billions of credits, or priceless.
Are there any other rules or charts somewhere in the Mongoose game mechanic other than those mentioned in CSC and the core rules?
Thanks.
This thread is of particular interest to me because tomorrow evening, my 6 players (all but 1 relatively new to Traveller) are embarking on "The Kinunir" adventure, using the new Mongoose design as a go-by with some changes I've done.
Did you create this list or get it from a Mongoose book?
Because A.I. is discussed on page 181 of CSC as an Option.
3 million credits per point of Int and Edu, so a 15/15 AI would be 90 million credits. But the rules in that paragraph state that this is assuming that the computer is simulated A.I.
"Real" A.I. is in the billions of credits, or priceless.
Are there any other rules or charts somewhere in the Mongoose game mechanic other than those mentioned in CSC and the core rules?
Thanks.
Jak Nazryth
Mongoose
I'm also assuming the cost of optional A.I. Int/Edu ratings are added to the base cost of the computers listed in the core book.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Not Dragoner but...
It doesn't need to be an AI to replicate the crew in their roles pertaining to the running of the ship. The rules from Robot I believe can contradict the CRB so I am just talking CRB here, in keeping with what Dragoner mentioned.
From the CRB, page 92:
Install one of these for each crew station with the relevant skill (pilot, engineer (jump), engineer (power), astrogation at a TL you wish to afford. Higher the TL greater the skill. All the skills for running the ship are INT or EDU based, personally I don't see piloting as a dexterity based skill, as I mentioned on the forum yesterday, it's mostly an INT based thing where you're managing information.
There's discrepancy here as the ship's computers are running different software ratings from hand helds/desk tops, I can see how some would say that this invalidates the argument for automating the ship thru CRB rules but I will say the alternate interpretation is that the rules need to be consolidated as a computer is a computer, the laptop I am typing this on is way more powerful than any of the computers on the space shuttle (but granted they are specifically geared towards a very small number of tasks which they do very well).
Therefore, whether you choose to do this with a bunch of computers from page 91 of the CRB or one computer from page 108 in the ship design sequence is something to work out.
I think that's the gist of what Dragoner was getting at. I'm sure he'll add to it, confirm it or just tell me how wrong I am...
From TL12, the Core Rules Book will let you automate a starship with a little interpretation. The extra cost of software can easily be clawed back by not paying a crew over the life of the ship.
What you then need is someone to tell the ship where to go. This is where people come in but really, they're the film's directors, they have the vision not the techs doing the real work.
This isn't bringing AI to a ship and that sense of wonder we have.
It doesn't need to be an AI to replicate the crew in their roles pertaining to the running of the ship. The rules from Robot I believe can contradict the CRB so I am just talking CRB here, in keeping with what Dragoner mentioned.
From the CRB, page 92:
Install one of these for each crew station with the relevant skill (pilot, engineer (jump), engineer (power), astrogation at a TL you wish to afford. Higher the TL greater the skill. All the skills for running the ship are INT or EDU based, personally I don't see piloting as a dexterity based skill, as I mentioned on the forum yesterday, it's mostly an INT based thing where you're managing information.
There's discrepancy here as the ship's computers are running different software ratings from hand helds/desk tops, I can see how some would say that this invalidates the argument for automating the ship thru CRB rules but I will say the alternate interpretation is that the rules need to be consolidated as a computer is a computer, the laptop I am typing this on is way more powerful than any of the computers on the space shuttle (but granted they are specifically geared towards a very small number of tasks which they do very well).
Therefore, whether you choose to do this with a bunch of computers from page 91 of the CRB or one computer from page 108 in the ship design sequence is something to work out.
I think that's the gist of what Dragoner was getting at. I'm sure he'll add to it, confirm it or just tell me how wrong I am...
From TL12, the Core Rules Book will let you automate a starship with a little interpretation. The extra cost of software can easily be clawed back by not paying a crew over the life of the ship.
What you then need is someone to tell the ship where to go. This is where people come in but really, they're the film's directors, they have the vision not the techs doing the real work.
This isn't bringing AI to a ship and that sense of wonder we have.
hiro said:
You have the gist of it, for automating a ship, one could set other conditions if they want. Personally, when I make extra rules, I try to keep them simple; and for as a GM, price, etc. are mostly irrelevant, where the most important consideration is "will this be entertaining for me and the players?" TL is the biggest limiter, and I know the Kinunir was TL15+, as it not only had the experimental AI, but a black globe generator. I like the Kinunir, and used it in a campaign that spanned almost two years. But I'll also say that something telling you that something is "billions or priceless" I won't listen to, as it sounds like it is telling me no, or to say no. AI's in fact act as excellent NPC's, I know this from using them in game. The players at one point had an old Zhodani trader, "The Dust Witch", who's AI was Pam Grier from Something Wicked This Way Comes. Why do Zho ships develop AI? Because the Vilani and Imperials wipe ship's Operating Systems so they specifically don't start developing their own personality (or emotional responses as is said in Blade Runner) Zho's and Terrans aren't saddled with these inhibitions.
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
Had to look this up. Thought there was something weird. First, CSC, under the Heavy Equipment section, states that Artificial Intelligence is 'outlawed and illegal in most advanced societies.' and 'such programs are only available at Technology level 15 or higher'. Worst yet for wanting an A.I. robot or starship is the fact True A.I. become available at TL 18+. Moot point about your thinking ship unless Grandpa built it. Any ship below TL 15-17 (False A.I.) are still merely very sophisticated tools not independent personalities.
A
Anonymous
Guest
It was pointed out to me not too long ago that the yellow and black cover denotes a traveller book that is setting independent. If we're talking third imperium here and you go along with Mongoose's intention then personally I'd disregard any comments about legality.
I'd also read the CRB as expert systems not AI
I'd also read the CRB as expert systems not AI
hiro said:
I have also qualified Vilani/Imperial prejudices above up thread, if people can quote mine it enough, then they can see that.
Edit: You do realize I made that table ...
Something to think about in the ideas about AI, just so we are all on the same page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
I myself have to agree with the statement (caveat: I'm more an applied type being an ME) -
... most AI researchers "don't care about the strong AI hypothesis—as long as the program works, they don't care whether you call it a simulation of intelligence or real intelligence."
A
Anonymous
Guest
Yeah, I realized way back in post 1!
I might have posted in a rush (at work) without reading Simon's post as carefully as I could have.
I might have posted in a rush (at work) without reading Simon's post as carefully as I could have.
dragoner said:
I'm not quite sure what the disagreement is about. There exist billionaires and companies or governments that can afford things that cost billions, therefore they can afford these things. There exist things that are priceless, therefore saying that a thing is priceless is in no way saying it can't exist.
Also something being outlawed or illegal has never been all that much of an obstacle to some people doing it anyway.
Or am I missing something?
dragoner said:
The Chinese room argument is stupid. The 'room' and the symbol storage an processing system inside it would have to be the size of a planet. it's an attempt to trivialise the difficulty of engineering an AI and present it as a simple process that can't be intelligent when obviously it's highly complex and sophisticated.
I think the quote about AI researchers is misleading. Most AI researchers aren't reasearching anything remotely related to real strong general purpose AI. They're working on highly specialised, limited function expert systems and single-problem optimisers. Strong AI just isn't something that's on their radar nowadays.
To get to grips with the issue needs a good understanding or agreement about the distinction between simulated AI and strong AI.
Simon Hibbs
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
"I'm not quite sure what the disagreement is about. There exist billionaires and companies or governments that can afford things that cost billions, therefore they can afford these things. There exist things that are priceless, therefore saying that a thing is priceless is in no way saying it can't exist.
Also something being outlawed or illegal has never been all that much of an obstacle to some people doing it anyway.
Or am I missing something?"
Nope. What it all amounts to in Traveller for both false and true A.I.s and adventures are Plot Devices. TL 15-17 militaries, governments and corporations have false A.I.s where the sun don't shine while Grandfather interacts with his A.I.s as long as they don't piss him off. So far, player meet the Kinunir A.I., the sophont robotic race, some of Grandfathers non-organic intermediaries and someday their ship becomes the host of a living chip while the universe will collapse under its offspring. They're always part of scifi and they're part of Traveller just not on the open market or in the light of day.
Also something being outlawed or illegal has never been all that much of an obstacle to some people doing it anyway.
Or am I missing something?"
Nope. What it all amounts to in Traveller for both false and true A.I.s and adventures are Plot Devices. TL 15-17 militaries, governments and corporations have false A.I.s where the sun don't shine while Grandfather interacts with his A.I.s as long as they don't piss him off. So far, player meet the Kinunir A.I., the sophont robotic race, some of Grandfathers non-organic intermediaries and someday their ship becomes the host of a living chip while the universe will collapse under its offspring. They're always part of scifi and they're part of Traveller just not on the open market or in the light of day.
simonh said:
You just don't understand it, it looks like. It's actually about pattern recognition, and whether if consciousness is part of intelligence or not. Having some planet sized something or not, is hyperbole. The ability to entertain concepts without necessarily agreeing with them is also a hallmark of intelligence. :wink:
Machines are already more intelligent than humans in that they are capable of operations taking focus and precision that would be impossible for a human. Nor is intelligence itself that special, NOVA just had a program on bird intelligence where New Caledonian crows are using three stage tool making, and complex problem solving.
Making a machine like a human really makes no sense in itself, what purpose would it serve? Someday sure, what seems insurmountable today will be trivial tomorrow. If anything, Traveller's tables on computers are conservative.
Similar threads
