Dion

Anyone interested in the Northern Crusades? Teutonic Knights, Crusaders, Poland, Novgorod, Lithuania, Mongols, Danes...

@Sarmatian It was Danzig that was contested, but in fact it was most of the land around that that was also contested. The land given to them by the Polish king was never meant to remain theirs, but once they amassed larger power, they refused to give it back. Danzig was among that land, I believe.

Ｈ Ｅ Ｒ Ｅ Ｌ Ｉ Ｅ Ｔ Ｈ Ｅ Ｒ Ｏ Ｂ Ｏ Ｔ Ｓ - 1x1 interest check for specific plot

Ｈ Ｅ Ｒ Ｅ Ｌ Ｉ Ｅ Ｔ Ｈ Ｅ Ｒ Ｏ Ｂ Ｏ Ｔ Ｓ
_{inspired by Stellaris, SOMA}

---

---

As with all things, the advancement of robotics fell under technology, and therefore was subject to the proposed 'curve of technological advancement' which most advances undergo. The primary application was in industries - robotic arms to manufacture weaponry first and foremost, but rapidly applied also in civil sectors. Heavy investment from the private and public sector incentivized this industry, leading to rapid applications of new robotic technology.

The first application was in the military field - rather than using robotics to build weapons for humans, we built robots that could fight themselves. AI-guided tanks that required minimal human interfacing were the first, though many more followed rapidly, to the point where it was hard to track what was improved when. Soon enough there were armies no longer formed by humans, but by robots that could fight without ever feeling the shattering impact of morale - they were fearless, and did not have a mind of their own. And using their hivemind intelligence network, the transfer of data and intelligence was near-instant.

Private implications were also there - soon after, 'robot-servants' taking the place of maids, nannies, drivers, and even shopkeepers were created, although this too changed rapidly until models of robots were created that were much more intelligent than their benign counterparts that possessed no intelligence beyond recognition of user input. These new breed of robots were labeled androids, though they still functioned much the same as robots. These new robots could follow most of any commands, and were capable of combining most tasks into one unit, rather than requiring multiple robot units to fulfill these tasks - no longer was a chauffeur bot required, as well as a nanny bot. Instead, you simply bought an android model and made them do all these things at will.

As a result of this, life on earth flourished - low wage jobs disappeared and people had more time for other things - culture, the arts, music, governance, hobbies, and raising families. With the hands-on guidance of humans, the androids and robots took over many roles formerly held by humans. Efficiency was quadrupled in the first years, and continued to rise with new improvements to the AI. After all, a human needs rest, food, drink, all these things. An android required none.

As with all things, there are moments were some would say 'we went too far' and androids began taking over even parts of the entertainment sector, working the night industry among other things.

But this was perhaps not what we meant when we said 'we went too far'. Perhaps it was when androids began becoming self aware as a result of improving AI powers. We had created robots and androids that were, in all objectivity, in all aspects superior to humans. So when an android asked their master 'what is it to be human? Am I human too?' the world erupted in flames.

Truthfully, what hopes did humanity have at fighting back the very things they had created purely to be superior?

Ｏ Ｏ Ｃ Ｉ Ｎ Ｆ Ｏ

---

---

So the intentions for this plot are not really strict - I have given you the setting, the plot itself will be up for discussion. Truthfully, I am just looking to explore the world of robots/androids/artificial intelligence. As long as we have robotics that take the shape of some humanoid form, I would be satisfied.

The RP can take place in three ways. Firstly, the pre-awareness life. This would circle around most likely a person and their robotic companion. I'm not particularly looking to play either role, as I am fine with playing both. I am hesitant to offer more specific plots for this, as this sounds a lot like a slice-of-life and I have not got much experience with that, and they usually aren't my cup of tea.

Secondly, it can take place during the period briefly before, during, and after the acquiring of awareness. That way, we could reshape the universe a bit, and decide how things go; is the human sympathetic to the androids/robots? Does the robotic companion seek to protect their master? Or does it seek to kill them, or assert itself over them? There are infinite possibilities - we could come to an agreement about which we choose.

Lastly, it can take place after the events. Perhaps a robot finds a human that has somehow survived - perhaps some sort of vault, or someone that lived far away from the rest of the world in seclusion, but has slowly come into reach of the ever expanding new world order of robotics and their hivemind. Otherwise, it might be the case that the human is part of robotic experiments. These would likely be in order for robotics to understand the finer parts of what it means to be human - and their own attempt at ascension towards manhood. Otherwise, it could also be that a human brainscan was uploaded into a robot unit. This could be part of some project to revive human-kind.

In all scenario's, it's up for debate. Perhaps the robots consider humans their gods, as they are their creators after all. Or perhaps they learn to distrust and hate humans.

Please PM me if you are interested. I'd love to get to work on this.

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

I hate seeing people comment in interest checks saying "I'm interested, PM me."

Like fuck! You're interested, you probably have something to say, you PM them and tell them you're interested so you can get a dialogue started instead of weakly waving a hand and waiting for someone else to make the effort. Honestly, when I see someone tell me to PM me, I wonder why they didn't use that time and effort to PM me instead. That's like someone calling me to tell me they want to talk, then hang up so I have to call them back.

Let's meet each other halfway folks...

@Genkai

I mean, we make 1x1 interest checks to avoid having to PM others (in part) so this is double stupid, innit. And people try to be nice about it by saying 'oh, I don't read my 1x1 interest check! PM me!' but really that just translates to 'fuck you if you tell me to PM you, PM me instead.'

How do you typically deal with Writer's Block?

I don't deal with it.

If it happens, I just take a break from writing until I feel motivated again. Sometimes I can force my way through it, but that's always just shoving the problem forwards to deal with another day (you don't get rid of the block that way, you just move it to the next day).

Sometimes these breaks can take numerous months.

Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｅｒ＇ｓ Ｖａｌｈａｌｌａ － Ｂｕｄｄｈａ＇ｓ Ｉｎｔｅｒｅｓｔ Ｃｈｅｃｋ － Ｏｒｉｇｉｎａｌ ａｎｄ Ｉｎｓｐｉｒｅｄ Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｓ

Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｅｒ＇ｓ Ｖａｌｈａｌｌａ － Ｂｕｄｄｈａ＇ｓ Ｉｎｔｅｒｅｓｔ Ｃｈｅｃｋ － Ｏｒｉｇｉｎａｌ ａｎｄ Ｉｎｓｐｉｒｅｄ Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｓ

If you see this, please send it to your leaders as soon as possible.

See: The Middle East, terrorism, extremism, Russia, VHEMT

@Arawak

It's also anomie/strain theory applied to the already wealthy that induces (actually, really specifically what you said) relative deprivation. It's a proven theory already, lol. It's used to explain why already wealthy individuals would engage in criminal activities despite the fact that they already have everything they might need.

If you see this, please send it to your leaders as soon as possible.

Which part was a strawman argument?

@catchamber

The part where I said the ideas/proposals/technologies are naïve when I did in fact not. They're clearly sensible ideas.

They don't have to do it to benefit all of humanity, do it without expecting a return, or drop millions of dollars to construct vertical farms. They just have to do it to ensure their own socioeconomic security, whether they're faced with a recession or a nuclear war.

@catchamber

As I mentioned before, for example in terms of power generation, if one state refuses to adhere to these new standards and technology (this could be North Korea, for example, and that's when we say it's 'just 1' where as we can be quite certain that there will be numerous states that do not wish to invest in these things because they have more important things to worry about) then we still run the risk of dealing with nuclear fallout from an explosion. That's just an example.

Some dangers are cross-border. Some dangers are not preventable and only can be protected against. For example, rising water levels. No matter how much we invest in this, there will be countries that will not adhere to new standards (China for example) because it's not economically viable or not economically interesting. We're better off investing our money into protecting against the rising water (large dams or dykes or what have you) than in trying to prevent this from occurring. Because it will happen regardless of what we try.

As for your points:

Most first world countries (where most money is) have enough drinking water. So, ensuring proper water is available for everyone becomes a moot point for most of them. Capital cannot be raised in places that need water. There is no incentive (outside of morality, which you said was not involved) to help these countries, thus it won't be required.

Same goes for food. The places that can afford the projects you mentioned will not incentivize them large scale because there is enough food for the most part. Yes there are people that are hungry, but there are also stores that throw away edible food because nobody bought it. So, we do not need large scale reworks of agriculture. The places that do need food could benefit, but again, capital cannot be raised there.

As for energy, the transition from 1 energy type to the other can be quite expensive. I look forward to algae fuels. I doubt it will become mainstream in my time. Lets hope it will.

Shelter.. I might be biased because I live in a country where there is more than enough shelter, even for the homeless, but we do not need ultra-durable housing. If anything we could incentivize this to lower living costs. Now that might be interesting. But I doubt many people are okay with tearing down their old houses to 'prototype' new technologies.

Materials, I suppose there is some use in that, but again, most first world countries are doing fine and don't need to recycle anything yet. Why would we use this already then? There's no incentive.

Also, 3D printers are not that mainstream yet. We cannot, say, print tools that are ready for use. We still need a portion of the work to be done manually with non-printed parts.

Internet is fine with me but wireless internet is not as advanced as you seem to think. Really.. it's kinda shitty. There's a reason that most people that want fast internet still use cables to their modem.

The education thing is fine, it's also fine if it doesn't happen. Who will pay for the libraries, though? Taxes? I think we have other things we need to spend money on too. Law enforcement is shrinking in Europe, military is shrinking in Europe, healthcares are shrinking in Europe, we are budgetting everything away because social policies are non-sustainable. Do you have proposed solutions to those problems too? To failing healthcare systems?

And you mention 'global problems' but like mentioned above, I do not believe any of these problems to be so major in first world countries that they require immediate attention.

And what's wrong with nanotech and AI, by the way?

Starvation exists in every country, even if it's just one person. They don't have to give it for free to African countries. They could just tap groups like the International Monetary Fund, and tell them to properly invest all that sweet cash in more sensible ways. You keep assuming this is for morality's sake, when I've already said this is for practicality's sake. By accelerating this proposal's realization, financial crises, geopolitical conflicts, government negligence, and international hostilities are mitigated.

@catchamber

Yeeeeeeeeee, no, I don't see that happening. Starvation is not a cause of death in the Netherlands simply by people not being able to buy food. And even then I doubt we will have to rework everything with super high-tech farmbots and vertical farms purely for the 'one person' or 'thousand persons' that are supposedly starving when we are throwing away large amounts of food as is.

The goal of IMF is not to invest into these types of technologies, and I don't think that will ever change.

I do not see how any of this will end financial crises, geopolitical conflicts, government negligence or international hostilities.

"When goods don't cross borders, soldiers will." ~Frederic Bastiat, 19th Century

"If everyone has goods, war becomes pointless." ~catchamber, 21st Century

"War is the continuation of politics by other means."

Carl von Clausewitz

No, war will not become pointless, because people will find other things to be mad about (we already have found those things: religion, culture, political rivalries, greed for more (which will always exist, even if everyone has goods, because you cannot ensure that everyone has the same amount) or even political insults.

Quoting something doesn't make you right, either.

Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｅｒ＇ｓ Ｖａｌｈａｌｌａ － Ｂｕｄｄｈａ＇ｓ Ｉｎｔｅｒｅｓｔ Ｃｈｅｃｋ － Ｏｒｉｇｉｎａｌ ａｎｄ Ｉｎｓｐｉｒｅｄ Ｒｏｌｅｐｌａｙｓ

If you see this, please send it to your leaders as soon as possible.

<Snipped quote by Buddha>
I never said you are responsible, just that mentalities like yours are responsible. You're not the first person to throw around the "I don't care about the future, because I'll be dead" argument.

<Snipped quote by Buddha>
If you're so concerned about the ineffectiveness or naïvety of my ideas, feel free to contact Australia, the Blest Company, Delft University of Technology, Facebook, Google, the Li-Fi Consortium, Maastricht University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the People's Republic of China, Qatar, Rice University, Samsung, the University of Southampton, and many other companies, countries, and universities that are currently working on the pieces of this proposal as we speak.

I'm sure they'll appreciate your profound insights into how the world works, and immediately drop all of their plans once you explain why their goals are infeasible.

@catchamber

Nice strawman, I did not say the technologies are naïve. Let's assume for a moment that the companies working on these technologies are not doing so in order to have a parade horse.

What I said was - sending this to our governments is useless, because not a government in the world will drop millions of (insert currency) on projects that are to benefit the whole of mankind without expecting some sort of return for it. You are asking them to drop millions onto constructing vertical farms?

What's the benefit of that for them if they can already supply enough food for their populace without them? You want them to go and give it to Africa for free? That's the part that's naïve. That you are expecting all of this to happen 'for the betterment of mankind' just because your moral compass tells you it's the right thing. It might be the right thing, that doesn't mean that there will be an incentive to do any of this in the middle of world-wide crises like the financial crises, geo-political situations like ISIS and other terrorist organizations as well as governments that are unwilling to take care of their own citizens or are unwilling to cooperate with other states.