Describing Traveller Tech level

[dragoner]

The caveat is that humans are as good as they are going to get while robots are only going to get better and better. Part is in the way they operate, humans are emotional operators and robots are rational; no fear, no fatigue, all intellect, humans can't compete. Which brings it to a point that any competition between the two sides, such as having humans in the loop, the human side loses.

However, that is more realistic than the game presupposes a universe where humans still matter.

 

[F33D]

Wasn't Classic Trav Book 8 ALL about Robots?

The way Traveller keeps robots from taking all the interesting jobs away from people is the Imperial law that places responsibility for the actions of robots with the sentient beings who are in charge of them. Because the law has a lot of latitude in interpreting who is "in charge" of a robot, there's a lot of risk involved in using robots in situations where something could go wrong.

Oh, never saw that 3I law. What supplement is that in?

 

[Condottiere]

I'll speculate that automated piloted cars/air rafts will be the norm in the future, with personally taking the controls either voids the insurance or requires extra.

 

[simonh]

The caveat is that humans are as good as they are going to get while robots are only going to get better and better. Part is in the way they operate, humans are emotional operators and robots are rational; no fear, no fatigue, all intellect, humans can't compete. Which brings it to a point that any competition between the two sides, such as having humans in the loop, the human side loses.

However, that is more realistic than the game presupposes a universe where humans still matter.

In a short term, narrow, local sense that's true. The problem with computers and robots is that they have no reason for doing anything that we don't give them. To put it another way, in the absence of specific instructions or conditional statements of what to do, a computer or robot does nothing. They have no motivations, no desires, no aspirations or priorities. They don't even have any innate tendency towards self preservation unless we choose to give them one.

In fact robots are not in any way rational, except to the extent that they are given specific, relevant and comprehensive instructions to exhibit apparently rational behavior. It is far easier to program a robot or computer to behave completely irrationally or even randomly than it is to program one to behave in an even minimally rational manner.

Simon Hibbs

edit: I suppose what I'm saying is that if you have a very well specified, narrow problem domain with little scope for serious mistakes then robots are a good solution. However if your problem domain has any significant scope for ambiguity, subtly competing priorities or requires any level of creativity then nothing less than pretty much full AI will do the job. I don't think this is really a Tech Level issue either, at the typical Traveller setting TL scale. The incredible complexity of even mundane every day human tasks isn't going to be waved away by a technological wand any less powerful than strong AI.

In my current campaign the players recently got hold of a combat robot, basically an updated ED 209. They are terrified of using it because they worry that their instructions might be even slightly ambiguous or have unforeseen consequences. As a GM I'm really not interested in trying to exploit loopholes like that or punish the players for using something I freely allowed them to have, so I'm hand-waving it so it's fairly safe to use, but it's a legitimate concern.

 

[dragoner]

The incredible complexity of even mundane every day human tasks isn't going to be waved away by a technological wand any less powerful than strong AI.

Most humans aren't high functioning; their tasks often only remain because at this point, people are still cheap. Even weak AI is usually a good replacement. However, the conversation has always been about the controllers, as the advancement in the mechanics was always limited by the controllers. Athletics even, it's all body mechanics and there a genius is almost never seen.

 

[simonh]

The incredible complexity of even mundane every day human tasks isn't going to be waved away by a technological wand any less powerful than strong AI.

Most humans aren't high functioning; their tasks often only remain because at this point, people are still cheap. Even weak AI is usually a good replacement. However, the conversation has always been about the controllers, as the advancement in the mechanics was always limited by the controllers.

So perhaps an optimum combination would be advanced robots doing the mundane tasks, with humans making the top level decisions and ordering them about. Maybe. For a merchant ship or vessel with a very well defined set of tasks to be done perhaps. I like the way Mongoose (well, Dar Hanrahan really) has repair drones being an assumed thing.

Those drones are going to be great at replacing modular components as they wear out, but if the ship takes battle damage and requires non-routine repairs, creative reallocation and re-use of materials and rapid prioritization of multiple unique damage conditions, then they're going to be pretty much useless. In that kind of situation a few trained technicians are going to be worth an army of plug-and-play maintenance drones.

Athletics even, it's all body mechanics and there a genius is almost never seen.

'Almost never seen' is an awe inspiringly broad statement. A lot of athletic events pretty much only exist in the west due to intensive funding by prestigious education establishments. Sure your average Ethiopian long distance runner may have had pretty limited access to education, but the kind of dedicated training, facilities and sports science support required for say international gymnastics, or pretty much any winter sport, sailing, etc, tends to select for people with access to much better than average resources and educational facilities. It's no accident that the first four minute mile was run at Oxford University.

Real human beings aren't built from a limited pool of points, or have to choose between rolling on this table of skills or that table. Why not work harder and roll on both? There's no real tradeoff to be made between academic and sporting capacity.

Obligatory I-just-found-this-on-google evidence:

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/feed/2010-09/smart-athletes/story/sporting-news-names-the-20-smartest-athletes-in-sports

Hmm... quarterback or brain surgeon. Interesting choice. Most of them apparently in American Football, which makes sense given it's prominence as a college sport.

Simon Hibbs

 

[spirochete]

there seems to be a disconnect from how I picture traveller technology and it's capabilities, and how they picture it. Can any one give me some good example references of cannon traveller technology (Movies and TV shows preferably) that I can use to sort of bridge the gap between my vision and the players.

I have an Excel worksheet that is an expanded Tech Level table that would give you an idea of the capabilities at different levels. It's a semi-comprehensive catalog of invention and innovation by category and tech level up to TL 23.

The problem is, I have no idea of where to upload it to.

 

[steve98052]

The way Traveller keeps robots from taking all the interesting jobs away from people is the Imperial law that places responsibility for the actions of robots with the sentient beings who are in charge of them. Because the law has a lot of latitude in interpreting who is "in charge" of a robot, there's a lot of risk involved in using robots in situations where something could go wrong.

Oh, never saw that 3I law. What supplement is that in?

It seems I mis-stated the law somewhat. It's not a Third Imperium law; it was a Sylean Federation convention, the Shudusham Concords that did not remain formally in force after Cleon became emperor. However, the old laws' influence continues because many worlds use the Shudusham Concords set of laws as models for their planetary laws.

Besides Shudusham, there's also the old Vilani hostility toward robots that came from their ancient experiences with the Ancients' left-over war robots, but that's less influential outside areas that are culturally Vilani.

--

In game terms, the game designers wanted to make sure humans had interesting things to do, and puzzled out a reason that robots would not be put to use on any job for which they were economically useful. Since primitive robots were already doing some kinds of factor jobs when Traveller was written, they knew they couldn't rule them out on grounds of technology. Dune had forbidden robots on religious grounds, but assuming a sufficiently-universal religion would have limited Traveller to a cultural setting like that of Dune.

They came up with a good answer, which more or less amounted to product liability.

As it turns out, their game rationale about robots anticipated some things that have happened:

• - Some airliner auto-pilots were capable enough that pilots became complacent, trusting the auto-pilot to the point where they weren't really paying attention to the aircraft. As long as the plane doesn't get into a situation beyond the auto-pilot's capabilities, that's fine. But occasionally planes encountered emergencies that required a pilot's intervention, but the pilot wasn't paying attention because the auto-pilot seemed to be taking care of things. As a result, some features of those auto-pilots were disabled, to make sure that the pilot remained attentive enough to respond to emergencies.

• - More recently, there have been debates about military drones. They can mostly fly themselves, which is fine for getting to and from combat zones. They have the technological ability, to some extent, to identify targets. The ability to automatically fire upon an identified target already existed. (For example, some cruise missiles can re-target themselves if they determine that their primary target has already been hit.) So to a limited extent drones already have the capability to attack with minimal human oversight. But military doctrine requires a specific, real-time order to fire -- and the order is generally given much higher up the chain of command than with other types of weapons.

• - There are a lot of places where Roomba robots could clean floors as well as human janitors, for less money, but most maintenance is still done by people.

 

[F33D]

It seems I mis-stated the law somewhat. It's not a Third Imperium law; it was a Sylean Federation convention, the Shudusham Concords that did not remain formally in force after Cleon became emperor. However, the old laws' influence continues because many worlds use the Shudusham Concords set of laws as models for their planetary laws.

Not NEARLY enough to cause a problem 3I wide at this point. So, not a factor to consider.

 

[steve98052]

It seems I mis-stated the law somewhat. It's not a Third Imperium law; it was a Sylean Federation convention, the Shudusham Concords that did not remain formally in force after Cleon became emperor. However, the old laws' influence continues because many worlds use the Shudusham Concords set of laws as models for their planetary laws.

Not NEARLY enough to cause a problem 3I wide at this point. So, not a factor to consider.

If almost all culturally Vilani worlds disapprove of robots, pretty much all of them would have local laws based on Shudusham.

Although non-Vilani worlds would not have the Vilani cultural distaste for robots, many would still agree with the practical reasoning of Shudusham.

That would mean that if you wanted robots, you'd have to find a high-tech, non-Vilani world that didn't have anti-robot laws for other reasons. You'd only be able to use them on planets that allow them, or on a ship where you set the rules, and in the latter case it might still be bad business to let paying passengers see some kinds of robots.

The Imperium might be able to do pretty much anything it wants, anywhere it wants. But when it comes to ordinary people, it's risky to violate local laws.

 

[F33D]

The Imperium might be able to do pretty much anything it wants, anywhere it wants. But when it comes to ordinary people, it's risky to violate local laws.

You haven't made a case for a 3I wide policy (which is what this is about) sorry. You ARE free to house rule in your game of course. But, it it isn't part of the OTU during the latter part of the 3I.

 

[steve98052]

The Imperium might be able to do pretty much anything it wants, anywhere it wants. But when it comes to ordinary people, it's risky to violate local laws.

You haven't made a case for a 3I wide policy (which is what this is about) sorry. You ARE free to house rule in your game of course. But, it it isn't part of the OTU during the latter part of the 3I.

I wasn't trying to make a case that it's policy throughout the Imperium. My point is that it's policy throughout most of the Imperium.

The Vilani had a strong cultural prejudice against combat robots, which ruled out their use throughout the 15000 worlds of the Ziru Sirka (which covered about 80% of the Third Imperium, plus several additional sectors).

The Shudusham Concord was in force for the century preceding the Third Imperium, throughout its immediate predecessor, the Sylean Federation. They agreed with Vilani cultural prejudices, and were adopted as local laws even after the Sylean Federation became the Third Imperium. They have practical value (similar to our product liability laws) that is persuasive even in a lot of places where Vilani culture isn't dominant.

There are a lot of worlds where technology prevents local manufacture of robots, even if law would allow them.

That leaves very few Imperial worlds where one might find robots available for legal purchase and use -- mostly in the rimward fringe of the Imperium, plus a handful Behind the Claw.

 

[simonh]

You haven't made a case for a 3I wide policy (which is what this is about) sorry. You ARE free to house rule in your game of course. But, it it isn't part of the OTU during the latter part of the 3I.

That makes no sense whatsoever. If many, perhaps even most worlds and regions of the Empire have based their legal systems on restrictive robot laws, of course that's part of the OTU, how could it not be? The fact that many worlds base their laws on the Shudusham Concords is one of the very few specific details we _do_ know about laws in the Imperium.

The practical upshot is that in practice it's up to individual GMs. If you want very low-key robotics in your game you can quite legitimately cite the Shudusham Concords as being highly influential on laws and public opinions, and decide that in practical terms this makes robot use difficult and rare.

Alternatively you could rule that yes technically the Shudusham Concords were influential, but by now, and in practice, such laws are considered archaic and are generally superseded by later statutes and precedents. As a result nowadays robots see wide use.

If anything the former interpretation is probably the stronger because the sources cite the broad influence of the Concords without significant qualification, but both interpretations are perfectly reasonable given the limited official information we have. Unless someone can cite more specific information from other sources.

Simon Hibbs