SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Story beginning: What would you do?

Started by Varaj, March 09, 2006, 09:15:07 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

Varaj

#30
March 10, 2006, 12:07:29 PM
Quote from: LimperIf everyone is healthier there could be a crash in the medical industry.

Only about 1% is healthier so I doubt it would be a large impact.  In the US I think the insurance industries can afford a 1% cut. :p
  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Limper

#31
March 10, 2006, 12:11:19 PM
Quote from: VarajOnly about 1% is healthier so I doubt it would be a large impact.  In the US I think the insurance industries can afford a 1% cut. :p

Then does it make any procedures more difficult?
 

Varaj

#32
March 10, 2006, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: LimperThen does it make any procedures more difficult?

Not that anybody is able to determine.  Even the few people that have needed brain surgery seem to have no problems.


How do people think the world population would react.  I imagine reports would leak out well before official government responses hit.  I would not be surprised to see panic and rioting on the streets with greatly increased rates of religious violence and suicides.
  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

BillyBeanbag

#33
March 10, 2006, 12:29:37 PM
It would probably be as you say... but it would be interesting that there are more isolated populations that might be oblivious to the whole thing.

Me personally, my reaction? I'd get real blitzed and wait for the end of the world.  I figure even if it doesn't come, when something like this hits, work would probably not hold it against me for not coming in. :)
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."
– Dr. Seuss

Gunhilda

#34
March 10, 2006, 12:30:12 PM
Quote from: VarajThe objects are phone booth in size with a sliding door type mechanism.  Best anaylsis gives a we have no idea for the end functionality.

Interesting.  We will watch them carefully to see if any former coma victims come near them.

So only 60 million people fall in to comas?  And only they seem to gain the benefits of the nanites?  Are they found all over the world, or are they only in the US?

We would focus on the coma victims and study their behaviour.  With Homeland Security around, violating their privacy in this way should not be difficult.
 

Xavier Lang

#35
March 10, 2006, 12:32:32 PM
Quote from: VarajComa victims show slight changes in psych profiles.  To a one they report show signs of better mood and increased energy.  Almost borderline manic.
They also show a remarkable resistance to disease.  From all appearance severe nanite infection is beneficial.

Study of the small areas of the structure appear to show nanites configuring themselves into some sort of solid state device.  Gates and pathways are apparent.  Some of the large enough to handle large amounts of power.
Was anybody suggestion let the structures grow?

I would let it grow.  I don't know of a way to fight a nanite infection and its a hell of a resource input from earth's point of view to seed the damn things here.  
I want to see what it is building.  If its nefarious, were screwed anyway, its already a nanite pandemic.  Burning the building will only work until one forms under water, or in a cave or some other place we don't notice or can't get to quickly enough due to political reasons.
 

Xavier Lang

#36
March 10, 2006, 12:34:00 PM
Quote from: VarajNot that anybody is able to determine.  Even the few people that have needed brain surgery seem to have no problems.


How do people think the world population would react.  I imagine reports would leak out well before official government responses hit.  I would not be surprised to see panic and rioting on the streets with greatly increased rates of religious violence and suicides.

I agree people would go batshit about this, its why preventing/reducing panic would always be my number one priority.
 

Varaj

#37
March 10, 2006, 12:35:17 PM
Quote from: RedcapInteresting.  We will watch them carefully to see if any former coma victims come near them.

So only 60 million people fall in to comas?  And only they seem to gain the benefits of the nanites?  Are they found all over the world, or are they only in the US?

We would focus on the coma victims and study their behavior.  With Homeland Security around, violating their privacy in this way should not be difficult.


Only about 1% of the population hits coma stage.  It appears to be random and is world wide.  The only two objects built are both in the US.
No noticeable change in observed victims behavior.
A few nearby victims will attempt to visit the objects from what appears to be curiosity.
Several religious cults world wide have formed around the concept of alien nanites being how God is working through his chosen people.  The cultists claim Divine rights as the chosen ones.  At this time no real indication of what those rights are.

Would you let a victim step into the devices?
  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Xavier Lang

#38
March 10, 2006, 12:50:47 PM
Yes, I would let one of the infected step into the device.  I would probably set it up like a science experiment first, so we could gather as much data as possible.  The person stepping in would also be one of the more expendable.
 

willpax

#39
March 10, 2006, 01:21:44 PM
As rumors grew, there would probably be a good deal of prejudice and paranoia toward those who had gone into comas, although the details might vary greatly. At the very least, the 99% who didn't get this particular manifestation might feel more suspicious. You should probably make up several slang terms that aren't so nice--botbrain? tinhead?

With 250,000 spread over just the United States, the infection is not staying a secret for any appreciable length of time (although the real cause might stay unknown longer). Someone in the government would need to think of a way to stay ahead of the story--what cover story might be just believeable enough to buy some time to figure out what is going on?
Cherish those who seek the truth, but beware of those who find it. (Voltaire)

Varaj

#40
March 10, 2006, 04:31:46 PM
Quote from: willpaxAs rumors grew, there would probably be a good deal of prejudice and paranoia toward those who had gone into comas, although the details might vary greatly. At the very least, the 99% who didn't get this particular manifestation might feel more suspicious. You should probably make up several slang terms that aren't so nice--botbrain? tinhead?

With 250,000 spread over just the United States, the infection is not staying a secret for any appreciable length of time (although the real cause might stay unknown longer). Someone in the government would need to think of a way to stay ahead of the story--what cover story might be just believeable enough to buy some time to figure out what is going on?

I think the nanites would be large enough that any descent medical field could identify them.  I don't believe it would stay secret very long at all.
  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Varaj

#41
March 10, 2006, 04:36:16 PM
When a coma victim (nat head?) enter one of the objects the door closes for about 15 minutes.  Upon coming out the victim describes being pressed to one wall and feeling a strange crawling sensation in their head.
Over the next few days they start having dreams of schematics, flashes of designs.  Nothing complete and slightly different for each person that enters.  Scans of their brain show that a larger nanite structure is forming in the base of the skull.
  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Gunhilda

#42
March 11, 2006, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: VarajWhen a coma victim (nat head?) enter one of the objects the door closes for about 15 minutes.  Upon coming out the victim describes being pressed to one wall and feeling a strange crawling sensation in their head.
Over the next few days they start having dreams of schematics, flashes of designs.  Nothing complete and slightly different for each person that enters.  Scans of their brain show that a larger nanite structure is forming in the base of the skull.

We would continue to experiment.  We would find engineers who had been coma victims and try them in the objects.  We would trust that the quest for knowledge is a good thing and hope that we have landed in a sci-fi movie and not a horror movie.

We would also start up extensive studies to try to determine if the coma victims were actually chosen at random, or if there is some characteristic that unites them all.
 

Xavier Lang

#43
March 13, 2006, 01:29:10 PM
Quote from: RedcapWe would continue to experiment.  We would find engineers who had been coma victims and try them in the objects.  We would trust that the quest for knowledge is a good thing and hope that we have landed in a sci-fi movie and not a horror movie.

We would also start up extensive studies to try to determine if the coma victims were actually chosen at random, or if there is some characteristic that unites them all.

I'm with Redcap on this.  Work with the new situation instead of fighting it to try and bring back the status quo.

I would try and get people to start building/drawing/conceputalzing that which they get flahes of.
 

Gunhilda

#44
March 13, 2006, 02:08:17 PM
Quote from: Xavier LangI'm with Redcap on this.  Work with the new situation instead of fighting it to try and bring back the status quo.

I would try and get people to start building/drawing/conceputalzing that which they get flahes of.

Yes -- we are certianly not against fighting, but we see little point in trying to fight nanites.  It would be exactly like trying to declare war on a disease: stupid.

Until we have more facts, we cannot intelligently seek to fight the nanites -- if we even need to do so.
 
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions