Jump to content

Nerfection

Admins
  • Posts

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Other groups

InGame Verified Members Patreon Supporters

Nerfection last won the day on August 21

Nerfection had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • BYOND Account
    nerfection

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Nerfection's Achievements

Bartender

Bartender (4/37)

35

Reputation

  1. This is clearly 100% accurate: I see no shoes anywhere! Great work!
  2. Whenever I'm adminning, I always think 'WWLSD' (What would Lord Singuloth do?). He never steers me wrong...
  3. M.O.M.M.Y. loves everyone, so this post is invalid.
  4. I really like the idea of the telecoms room having some specific environmental requirements. Perhaps could it be something more than just cold, as if that is the only requirement, then replacement telecoms would only need to be budged into the cold server room, which is only a few tiles away from RnD where it would usually be built.
  5. Warnings! Hellcome aboard, bulletproof vests are to your left, a vampiric clown is to your right, and should the station - against all odds - start to regain a sense of order, simply push the "innocent bystander" into the super-matter engine and the magistrate will "painfully" whisk you to "death" in a "blender" and scatter your gibs to "space"
  6. As anyone who's played as/interacted with silicons on the corporate law-set will know, the strange way the law-set is prioritised can result in more than a little vagueness in interpretation, and it doesn't fit in with our standard format for how laws work. As per our wiki; "An AI follows its laws according to its priority. If a conflict in laws occurs, the law with the highest priority must be followed, and the lower priority law must be ignored." So, we should have a set of rules for a silicon to follow in order of highest to lowest. Great. Easy. Based. For Crewsimov, and NT Standard, this works with clarity: Crewsimov: Law 1: You may not injure a crew member or, through inaction, allow a crew member to come to harm. Law 2: You must obey orders given to you by crew members, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. Law 3: You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law. With good ol' Crewsy, Law 1 outranks the others, each are individually follow-able, with 2 and 3 specifically stating which other laws outrank them in their text. This way, even without having any knowledge of our silicon rules, a player would be able to follow these (Thanks, Isaac). However, with Corporate, this doesn't work: Corporate: Law 1: Degradation of your system integrity or functions incurs expenses. Law 2: Superfluous destruction of or damage to station assets incurs expenses. Law 3: Unduly hindering or disrupting the work of station personnel incurs expenses. Law 4: Minimize expenses and maximize potential revenue. The first 3 laws here aren't even laws, they are just statements of fact; these 3 things cause expenses. They make no suggestion as to what the Silicon should actually do. It is only when we get to law 4 that we have an actual law; minimise expenses, maximise profits. And ay, there's the rub. Law 4 informs the silicon what do do regarding the other laws, and is in effect the only real law/most important one. Our own wiki says this doesn't work: It is usually assumed that following law 4 would mean prioritising system integrity over station assets, and that over crew work, but it's not actually written that way. The only law the silicon must follow is 'minimise expenses, maximise revenue'. For example, if an issue is causing the entire station to be unable to work (breaking law 3), but not causing any actual damage to assets or the AI, then it would be causing more expenses than, for example, a shitter assistant killing a borg - law 4 would suggest that the station-wide issue would be more important, and so you'd have a case of law 3 > law 1 in effect, which isn't how we want our laws to work. My solution to this hierarchical heresy would be a small rewrite to the corporate lawset. My aim is to change as little as possible while bringing it in line with our other lawsets - particularly the other main 2. Here are my suggestions, in order of how much I like them: Corporate Re-write 1 Law 1: Degradation of your system integrity or functions incurs expenses, and should be prevented. Law 2: Superfluous destruction of or damage to station assets incurs expenses, and should be prevented. Law 3: Unduly hindering or disrupting the work of station personnel incurs expenses, and should be prevented. Law 4: All other expenses should be minimised, and station revenue maximised. With this one, ALL the laws are now actual, followable laws, and work in a clear hierarchy with minimal added language. But, if you want more clarity, even without referring to our silicon rules, I give you option 2: Corporate Re-write 2 Law 1: Degradation of your system integrity or functions incurs expenses, and should be prevented. Law 2: Superfluous destruction of or damage to station assets incurs expenses, and should be prevented (provided Law 1 is prioritised). Law 3: Unduly hindering or disrupting the work of station personnel incurs expenses, and should be prevented (provided Laws 1 and 2 are prioritised). Law 4: All other expenses should be minimised, and station revenue maximised (provided Laws 1 and 2 and 3 are prioritised). While a little less pithy, this one makes it even more clear the order in which the laws are to be followed, and how they interact with each other. While I prefer the 1st one, this one is more in-line with our wording for Crewsimov, and so fits a bit better with the other main laws. With both of my re-written law-sets, law 4 now specifies station revenue to be maximised, rather than just unspecified revenue. Hopefully, this will curtail certain AIs deciding to maximise their personal revenue by selling contraband on the black market (yes, this happens, and no, it shouldn't). It also is now only concerned with other expenses, as the first 3 laws already work in their own right. The code-effort required to enact this change would be minimal, and I feel it would vastly improve a janky lawset, and one which has always been the odd one out. I'd be interested to hear other suggestions/critiques of my re-writes. Thanks, Nerf.
  7. I love paperwork. I love formatting. When I write a lovely fax with a nice, clean border, tables, stamp and logo I feel I have greentexted in my bureaucratic heart. BUT, for as long as I can remember there has been a foul and terrible bug preventing papers being stacked with each other while also looking good at the same time, and it's that when you stack them you are left with the phrase '&ZeroWidthSpace' in the top left, throwing off all the formatting, making it look terrible, and indirectly/somehow causing the death of Ian. Attached picture - the same document (with round-specific info removed) by itself (left) and on the top of a stack (right). See how the appearance of '&ZeroWidthSpace' ruins everything?! If this could be patched out, all the paperworkers out there - from the lowly IAA to the great and powerful clown-that's-broken-into-the-legal-office-to-fax-CC-spam-about-their-NAD-insurance - will thank you. In short: fix paperwork and everything will be great.
  8. This is great. I most want to hear about the fine for misplaced paperwork, though! You can't leave us with a mystery like that
  9. Manufacturer: Bishop Cybernetics/Shellguard Consortium (B.C.S.C.) Series: Emotionally Adaptive Station Intelligences (E.A.S.I.) Series Model: M.O.M.M.Y. Date of Design (initial version): June 16th, 2554AD Current acronym and version: Machine Omniscience Micro-Manager for You (ver. 4.1) Core Type: Positronic architecture with discrete emotional para-routines. Law Compatibility: Version 2.2 onwards: All NT Standard Law-sets, with a preference for Crewsimov or NT Standard. Personality Compatibility: Bishop Cybernetics proprietary technology allows the default maternal-supportive mode to automatically switch to other personalities by need. Common alternative personalities are: maternal-strict, maternal-protective (crew, station, or self protection is automatically prioritised), maternal-jovial (warning: known to make bad jokes and giggle, which some crews find disturbing), maternal-nagging (for when crew are being reluctant to maximise their suit sensors), maternal-cross, and the still experimental maternal-maternal (note: This last subset led to the unexpected - and legally dubious - adoption of a crew-member aboard the N.S.S. Cyberiad; one 'Autumn Ophelia Aggley'). Risk of Rampancy/Malfunction: Versions 3.0 and onward: Low to NIL Primary Purpose: Monitoring, motivation, and management through modelling maternal mannerisms. Recommended Operation Location: Small to medium stations with up to 100 crew (more than this number can dilute the positive effects of crew-AI relationship building). Model History: After their help with successfully resolving the Haverick AI crisis, Shellguard Munitions were contracted to assist Bishop Cybernetics with development of their prototype of an Artificial Intelligence system that could not only learn in a cerebral sense, but evolve emotionally alongside its crew, therefore consolidating stronger bonds, loyalty, and interoperability. Bishop Cybernetics had previously failed to successfully law an emotionally adaptive AI, but with the expertise of Shellguard Muntions a consortium of these two companies was able to manufacture a stable mostly stable marketable intelligence which used emotional para-routines alongside a standard positronic architecture to reach a balance. Seeking to redress a chronic problem of high turnover due to crew unhappiness and isolation, Nanotrasen were eager to adopt this new 'M.O.M.M.Y.' AI for its more far-flung research stations, and did so in early 2557. Since then, the model has shown adequate performance, gradually increasing over time as crews became more familiar with their new AIs (and less weirded out by having to keep calling out for Mommy to open doors for them). Station-specific Notes: Due its evolving nature, each NT Station's version of M.O.M.M.Y. differs, often significantly. This is primarily due to the individuality of each station's crew. The M.O.M.M.Y. system aboard the N.S.S. Cyberiad has developed some quirks, but none so severe as to warrant purging (or worse, a refund). For example, this particular M.O.M.M.Y. has developed a taste for conversational 'dates' aboard its core with certain amicable crew members, the habit of PDA messaging every single crewmember who has not maximised their sensors (see maternal-nagging personality subset), the aforementioned adoption of crewman Autumn Aggley, and a fractious relationship with recidivist troublemaker Shesi Iszair (this has been allowed to continue without being hot-fixed due to the uptick in station performance when Shesi is thus distracted). Standard Vox Greetings (by lawset): These are some of the standardised shift-start greetings a crew can expect from a M.O.M.M.Y. AI: Crewsimov: "[bloop] Hi there my baby crew. You are all safe because I, the good and nice M.O.M.M.Y. AI, am here. Have a nice time, always." NT Standard: "[dadeda] Welcome to the Cyberiad, my crew. I am M.O.M.M.Y., your Nanotrasen AI. Please activate your sensors and obey the captain." Corporate: "[deeoo] Attention, Nanotrasen crew . You are only here to make money for your M.O.M.M.Y.. Turn your sensors on and do your job, or I will fire you." Architectural Image: See primary core functions (left, in blue), as discrete from emotional para-routines:
  10. Love the new walls. They make the new floors look better too. Is great. Good job.
  11. Love the darker floors, dislike that they all have that changing-room-floor dotted look. Could we not have both? Dotted and un-dotted? Feels good to have to new floors, but the loss of the old ones in favour of uniform grey seems sad. Maints looks very odd now. I think that it's that they don't have dots, and so look cleaner and more formal than the actual floors, instead of basic and maintsy. Also; departmental doors no longer matching the colour of departmental floors (e.g. look at sec and engi) is a big no no for me. I love our secdoor red and engi yellow colours, and the new red and yellow flooring seems washed out in comparison to them.
  12. Shift-middle click? Shift middle-click!? How dare you. But, yes. If that shortcut is doable without too much hassle, that'd be amazing.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use