What is Supremacy - Dev Blog

[bouncymischa]

Where did you get that from? From what we've heard, purity aims to create perfect humans, immortality and all does not conflict that, quite the contrary.

The difference is HOW they pursue said goal. Purity through genetics, supremacy through brain in a can / consiousness upload.

One of the other discussion threads touched on the topic of immortality, and at one point I believe the concept was brought up with some of the designers, and they were stated as saying the Purity response to the issue of mortality was "Deal with it". So it can be inferred that Purity followers consider mortality to be an inherent part of the human condition -- that someone who became immortal would cease to be "human", and as such, do not desire and will not pursue immortality.

Admittedly, this is all hearsay information, which is one of the problems with these discussions -- we're all working on very sparse information about exactly what all of these philosophies entail. I do have to admit, though, that the Supremacy quote -- "Resistance is futile" -- implies that the designers have fallen into the same trap of fearmongering transhumanism.

I am very interested in this concept, because in my mind it sounds like it would break the suspension of disbelief. What is some good fiction that touches on, justifies, and elaborates on this idea?

KrikkitTwo summarized perfectly a supremacist's viewpoint. Call it "the war to end death" or something catchy like that. And honestly, barring certain religious beliefs, it's hard to say they're not justified.

I'll confess, I haven't delved too deeply into the depths of transhumanist fiction, so my knowledge is undoubtably lacking. However, of the books that I have read that touched on such subjects, The Golden Age trilogy by John C. Wright would probably be the foremost that comes to mind. Aside from having superlative worldbuilding for a far-future posthuman society, it does deal fairly extensively with the issue of rational AIs and their interactions with human society. It's hard to summarize the entire breadth of the arguments that it makes (it touches upon such things as the nature of rational thought, and economic arguments regarding liberal vs. oppressive societies), but much of the plot revolves around the relationship between various human societies and the existence of artificial intelligences which eclipse even posthumans in their capabilities.

Another example that come to mind, although somewhat less in-depth in discussing such issues, would be Iain M. Banks' Culture series, which is probably better known that The Golden Age. It portrays a society in which artificial intelligences live alongside and as part of a posthuman society, and are depicted as being quite libertarian in their outlook. In some ways, they could be seen as a possible example of the "velvet fist" of Supremacy -- while philosophically libertarian and peaceful, their technological superiority is such that angering the Culture tends to end pretty badly for anyone who incurs their wrath. But they are not prone to forcibly going around and uploading individuals who do not share their particular beliefs.

Beyond this, I'll admit that I'm not sure how many works I've read dealt directly with the issue of the rationality of free will and humanism, particularly in posthuman societies. Certainly there are other works out there that touch upon transhumanism in a positive light -- Greg Bear's Eon depicts a posthuman society that's quite free and open, while Aaron Diaz's Dresden Codak makes numerous arguments in favor of posthumanism, and its few depictions of such societies do not seem to be terribly oppressive. (At worst, they are neglectful towards non-posthumans). The Orion's Arm project details a variety of posthuman societies, which depending upon their social philosophy vary from peaceful anarchists to oppressive hive-minds, but this is depicted more as a product of the diversity of individual thought and philosophy, as opposed to be inherent to the posthuman condition.

Which is why I'll be somewhat disappointed if they walk that path of saying "Supremacists are the Borg" as opposed to giving me the option of making my Supremacists more like the Golden Oecumene or the Culture.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

One of the other discussion threads touched on the topic of immortality, and at one point I believe the concept was brought up with some of the designers, and they were stated as saying the Purity response to the issue of mortality was "Deal with it". So it can be inferred that Purity followers consider mortality to be an inherent part of the human condition -- that someone who became immortal would cease to be "human", and as such, do not desire and will not pursue immortality.

Admittedly, this is all hearsay information, which is one of the problems with these discussions -- we're all working on very sparse information about exactly what all of these philosophies entail. I do have to admit, though, that the Supremacy quote -- "Resistance is futile" -- implies that the designers have fallen into the same trap of fearmongering transhumanism.



I'll confess, I haven't delved too deeply into the depths of transhumanist fiction, so my knowledge is undoubtably lacking. However, of the books that I have read that touched on such subjects, The Golden Age trilogy by John C. Wright would probably be the foremost that comes to mind. Aside from having superlative worldbuilding for a far-future posthuman society, it does deal fairly extensively with the issue of rational AIs and their interactions with human society. It's hard to summarize the entire breadth of the arguments that it makes (it touches upon such things as the nature of rational thought, and economic arguments regarding liberal vs. oppressive societies), but much of the plot revolves around the relationship between various human societies and the existence of artificial intelligences which eclipse even posthumans in their capabilities.

Another example that come to mind, although somewhat less in-depth in discussing such issues, would be Iain M. Banks' Culture series, which is probably better known that The Golden Age. It portrays a society in which artificial intelligences live alongside and as part of a posthuman society, and are depicted as being quite libertarian in their outlook. In some ways, they could be seen as a possible example of the "velvet fist" of Supremacy -- while philosophically libertarian and peaceful, their technological superiority is such that angering the Culture tends to end pretty badly for anyone who incurs their wrath. But they are not prone to forcibly going around and uploading individuals who do not share their particular beliefs.

Beyond this, I'll admit that I'm not sure how many works I've read dealt directly with the issue of the rationality of free will and humanism, particularly in posthuman societies. Certainly there are other works out there that touch upon transhumanism in a positive light -- Greg Bear's Eon depicts a posthuman society that's quite free and open, while Aaron Diaz's Dresden Codak makes numerous arguments in favor of posthumanism, and its few depictions of such societies do not seem to be terribly oppressive. (At worst, they are neglectful towards non-posthumans). The Orion's Arm project details a variety of posthuman societies, which depending upon their social philosophy vary from peaceful anarchists to oppressive hive-minds, but this is depicted more as a product of the diversity of individual thought and philosophy, as opposed to be inherent to the posthuman condition.

Which is why I'll be somewhat disappointed if they walk that path of saying "Supremacists are the Borg" as opposed to giving me the option of making my Supremacists more like the Golden Oecumene or the Culture.

I don't think they are limiting you to the Borg. (Any more than Purity will be limited to isolationists-ie keep off my lawn)
However, they were asked for one quote... and while it was used by the Borg
-borg are a Possible transhumanist society (and not necessarily bad)
-the concept seems embeded in transhumanism... this way is Better...we make ourselves better...we are Supreme... Hence resistance is Futile..we will either assimilate you or ignore you, but you can't change Us.

 

[bouncymischa]

I don't think they are limiting you to the Borg. (Any more than Purity will be limited to isolationists-ie keep off my lawn)
However, they were asked for one quote... and while it was used by the Borg
-borg are a Possible transhumanist society (and not necessarily bad)
-the concept seems embeded in transhumanism... this way is Better...we make ourselves better...we are Supreme... Hence resistance is Futile..we will either assimilate you or ignore you, but you can't change Us.

That is at least a more positive take on the quote. I suppose I'm just peeved, because the Borg are often raised as the kind of boogeyman of transhumanism. Thinking about it, though, I suppose societies like the Culture aren't as obviously cybernetic as Supremacy is portrayed (although are more transhuman than Purity would be happy with), although they have no qualms with uplifting willing individuals into obviously non-human forms. Still, they might not have seemed as relevantly quotable -- I'm not even sure what a good quote from the Culture might've been.

Still, if we're talking about pure cyborgs and artificial intelligence, I do wonder if they read any of Ghost in the Shell...

 

[awesome]

I think the quotes are more about being funny and only touching on the surface of the affinities.
"Purity is about the old ways...let's make them sound like old people!"
"Supremacy is about being robot people...quick, first robot people you can think of!"
"Harmony is basically about being hippies and/or environmentalists...say something peaceful and/or environmental-sounding!" (See the harmony thread for some guesses on what this quote will be)

 

[Lord Shadow]

KrikkitTwo summarized perfectly a supremacist's viewpoint. Call it "the war to end death" or something catchy like that. And honestly, barring certain religious beliefs, it's hard to say they're not justified.

Not to bring the discussion from the other topic here, but there's an important obstacle to the Supremacist way of "ending death": there's no such thing as transferring your consciousness to a machine. At best, a copy of it is made and installed in a robotic brain to live on as you. The organic, original you is destroyed. You die. Immortality through death.

At that point there's a descent into philosophical technicalities, depending on the "uploading" method, to try and justify how the entity in the robotic body is you. It'll certainly believe itself to be you, and with your organic body gone completely, there won't be anyone to challenge that identity.

There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy. Either you believe you'll be you after the replacement process, or you don't.

One of the other discussion threads touched on the topic of immortality, and at one point I believe the concept was brought up with some of the designers, and they were stated as saying the Purity response to the issue of mortality was "Deal with it". So it can be inferred that Purity followers consider mortality to be an inherent part of the human condition -- that someone who became immortal would cease to be "human", and as such, do not desire and will not pursue immortality.

It's difficult to tell whether that affinity test in the PC Gamer UK interview was a product of the devs or the interviewer's interpretations. Purity's the only affinity which has a shot at true immortality, making the lifespan of the human body endless through the mastery of medicine and our biology. Genetic enhancement can also boost our capabilities without resorting to invasive, artificial cybernetic implants.

However, we don't know for certain where Purity draws the line between humanity and something else, which flaws are part of our condition and which are not. That's open to interpretation. Medicine has been improving our lifespan and quality of life for the last few centuries, and Purists would likely not see any problem with its continued advancement. As I said, it's hard to know when and where they'll say "okay, that's enough", but their technological development will proceed unimpeded in most areas.


PS: I wouldn't put much stock in the aforementioned quotes. They're just jokes.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Not to bring the discussion from the other topic here, but there's an important obstacle to the Supremacist way of "ending death": there's no such thing as transferring your consciousness to a machine. At best, a copy of it is made and installed in a robotic brain to live on as you. The organic, original you is destroyed. You die. Immortality through death.

At that point there's a descent into philosophical technicalities, depending on the "uploading" method, to try and justify how the entity in the robotic body is you. It'll certainly believe itself to be you, and with your organic body gone completely, there won't be anyone to challenge that identity.

There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy. Either you believe you'll be you after the replacement process, or you don't.

Assumptions.
You die every time you go to sleep. There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy. Either you believe you'll be you after you wake up in the morning, or you don't.

 

[Mustakrakish]

One of the other discussion threads touched on the topic of immortality, and at one point I believe the concept was brought up with some of the designers, and they were stated as saying the Purity response to the issue of mortality was "Deal with it". So it can be inferred that Purity followers consider mortality to be an inherent part of the human condition -- that someone who became immortal would cease to be "human", and as such, do not desire and will not pursue immortality.

Admittedly, this is all hearsay information, which is one of the problems with these discussions --

I'd like to see the sources of that, because it completely contradicts what I know was said (which did make more sense to me).

Not to bring the discussion from the other topic here, but there's an important obstacle to the Supremacist way of "ending death": there's no such thing as transferring your consciousness to a machine. At best, a copy of it is made and installed in a robotic brain to live on as you. The organic, original you is destroyed. You die. Immortality through death.

At that point there's a descent into philosophical technicalities, depending on the "uploading" method, to try and justify how the entity in the robotic body is you. It'll certainly believe itself to be you, and with your organic body gone completely, there won't be anyone to challenge that identity.

There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy. Either you believe you'll be you after the replacement process, or you don't.

Oh yes. That often bothers me! Same with all kinds of body disintegrations (such as Star Trek's beaming out etc.)
I actually thought of a movie scenario in my teens where a big bad corporation invents (or "friendly" aliens introducing) a way for everyone to get the body they want if they want it (more attractive healthier body or man > woman, woman > man etc.). Which becomes a hit (not the movie ) and many people go with it, while there are some skeptical, who eventually find out that they don't actually "transplant" people to new bodies, but simply copy the consciousness and dispose of original.

It's difficult to tell whether that affinity test in the PC Gamer UK interview was a product of the devs or the interviewer's interpretations. Purity's the only affinity which has a shot at true immortality, making the lifespan of the human body endless through the mastery of medicine and our biology. Genetic enhancement can also boost our capabilities without resorting to invasive, artificial cybernetic implants.

Yes, agreed. It wouldn't make sense for their main goal to be creation of perfect human, as they said, yet shun away such medical advancements. So it was PC Gamer UK then?

 

[bouncymischa]

There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy.

Philosophical debates are the worst kind of debates, particularly if one considers that discussions about "politics" and "religion" fall into the same category. As you say, it comes down to what one believes... and humans are pretty notorious about being unable to accept contradictory beliefs.

PS: I wouldn't put much stock in the aforementioned quotes. They're just jokes.

That is true. It also just goes to show just how little we actually know about the game, since even the most meagre quote gets vivisected a hundred different ways. Jumping to any conclusions about elements of the game, including the actual philosophies espoused by the affinities, is probably a foolish thing to do...

 

[Lord Shadow]

Assumptions.
You die every time you go to sleep. There's not much to argue about this either way, since it ultimately comes down to philosophy. Either you believe you'll be you after you wake up in the morning, or you don't.

I misspoke. I meant the mind. We lose consciousness every time we fall asleep, but there's more to the mind than that. You can't equate unconsciousness to death, or else anyone not fully awake is dead.

 

[AriochIV]

The brain is still very active when you are sleeping. You don't die, literally or figuratively, when you sleep.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

There's more to the mind than what we lose when it is put into a machine.

I just can't accept your assumption that "at best, you'd be copying your mind and putting it in a machine to live on as you." You don't know what the science might turn out to be. You don't know what the science fiction on this will turn out to be. Consciousness is a mystery right now, in the technical sense of mystery. Doesn't that leave room to think, that maybe, being convinced this is "only" a matter of copying something, is jumping the gun? All I need to believe that a machine me can really be me is a belief that everything real has a physical cause, and that it isn't physical identity but some kind of structural identity that gives me my mental properties. The latter we can throw a lot of doubt on, sure. But for the sake of the science fiction here? Can we just imagine a possible universe?

 

[AriochIV]

But for the sake of the science fiction here? Can we just imagine a possible universe?

Sure. There's plenty in Star Trek and other entertaining science fiction that's almost totally impossible; the trick is in how the story is told. In this case we haven't seen any of the story that explains the Supremacy machine mind thingy, and so none of us are in any real position to critique it. If technology gets high enough that you start to parse the physical nature of consciousness... then who can say what is possible? But we're talking about superscience levels of technology here. I guess if the game lasts for two or three thousand years, we could be looking at some pretty freaky technologies.

My criticism is not really of the concept's use in Beyond Earth (because I know next to nothing about exactly how it's used), but of the concept in general (which is often used in science fiction but rarely in any realistic fashion), and specifically of the people who believe it's possible in real life, in the near future.

 

[sendos]

As for the concept of supremacy death, I consider Futurama as an example. In that cartoon series, you got robots that are somewhat sentient. Like computers, they become obsolete after a certain amount of decades unless they undergo upgrades. If there is a new series of robot designs that are more efficient, then the old generation has to be terminated to make way for the new. I presume, besides technical glitches, that their society would have no problems with death by natural causes, which I also assume is the current definition of immortal in this topic. Otherwise, we'd have a logical inconsistency: where supremacy soldiers die, yet they're considered immortal in the backstory.

 

[Matthew.]

It is interesting to think about. If it is possible to dissect the human brain and figure out how it works well enough to rebuild it as a machine, would you not be able to then artificially modify the amount of knowledge as well? Ya know, like Matrix-style downloading operation manuals and such. But then, if that were possible, what if you uploaded another persons "mind"? At which point does individuality stop. If society becomes one global conscious, is the individual then dead?

I've never been big on philosophy, but seems like there is some interesting stuff there for folk into such things.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

As for the concept of supremacy death, I consider Futurama as an example. In that cartoon series, you got robots that are somewhat sentient. Like computers, they become obsolete after a certain amount of decades unless they undergo upgrades. If there is a new series of robot designs that are more efficient, then the old generation has to be terminated to make way for the new. I presume, besides technical glitches, that their society would have no problems with death by natural causes, which I also assume is the current definition of immortal in this topic. Otherwise, we'd have a logical inconsistency: where supremacy soldiers die, yet they're considered immortal in the backstory.

Actually, supremacy (under certain philosophical assumptions) offers true immortality in the form of backups... ie the solidiers die, but their backup is loaded into a new body. (Just remember to save often and don't get your file corrupted)

 

[Mustakrakish]

Initial vibe from supremacy was quite unattractive to me with brain in a can and odd consciousness in a can whatnot, BUT...

I just thought that maybe I could see supremacist in another light, that being... Cylons! Cylons man! Like they got their consciousness uploaded back into giant server every time they died and then were reloaded into a new body? For soldiers that means effectively "respawning" and learning from their deaths, becoming much more experienced (double experience?).

They got soldiers (robots, or tin cans), and they got "master piece" cylons, who were of human shape! In other words they got classes, or hierarchy. Obviously for supremacist the progress wouldn't be tin cans > human bodies, but rather humans > cybernetics etc. > perfect "human" cylons and tin cans for physical jobs, war etc.

They also were quite fanatical in their religious pursues. So that emancipation kinda sounds good too, when I look at it that way.

It would be awesome if their perfect (final form) were something like that. Cylons man!

Brain in a can, borg borg borg, assimilate? No thank you.
Cylon kind perfect form human bodies and designated tin can with consciousness reloading etc.? YES YES YES!

Cylons man!

 

[Lord Shadow]

Actually, supremacy (under certain philosophical assumptions) offers true immortality in the form of backups... ie the solidiers die, but their backup is loaded into a new body. (Just remember to save often and don't get your file corrupted)

While useful, that falls in the same trap.

The only way anyone can achieve true immortality is by making the body (or at least the brain) they were born with ageless.

All the alternatives, be them accelerated cloning, mind uploads or backups, involve the illusion of a transition which just doesn't happen. Is there a possibility that some hitherto unknown process exists to somehow carry out an actual transfer? Who knows. It hasn't even been theorized (and a lot has been theorized about mind uploads), and as far as science fiction goes, at present it'd amount to handwaving.

Found an interesting article on the subject.

For soldiers that means effectively "respawning" and learning from their deaths, becoming much more experienced (double experience?).

That assumes they can update their backups very frequently, no matter where they are and the conditions they find themselves in.

And that they don't become progressively unstable after every death, which is bound to be a traumatic experience.

 

[Civ'ed]

And that they don't become progressively unstable after every death, which is bound to be a traumatic experience.

This is actually pretty interesting. If you know how badly affected living people are by trauma, what happens if you've died and they just reupload you so you can keep fighting forever, dying forever, rebirthing forever.

 

[SamBC]

Actually the cylons had their own mind re-uploaded via (presumably) FTL communication (that didn't work in any other situation, so a bit handwavy) to a resurrection ship, if one is in range (otherwise they die) - they don't make backups.

 

[SamBC]

This is actually pretty interesting. If you know how badly affected living people are by trauma, what happens if you've died and they just reupload you so you can keep fighting forever, dying forever, rebirthing forever.

It is shown to affect cylons that way somewhat in BG - though it affects different cylons in different ways, and they disagree as to how unpleasant the process of dying (and being resurrected) is.