Talk:Rampancy: Difference between revisions

Line 14:

Are you sure that Cortana for sure went Rampant? I mean, the Gravemind "hacked" her and was using her to speak to the Chief, Cortana wasn't pretending she was the Gravemind.[[User:Bllasae|Bllasae]]

== Really rampant? ==

Are Cortana and Guilty Spark really rampant? There is certainly erratic behaviour displayed by them but can that really be attributed to a rampancy process?

Cortana is derived from a real human personality, and is not a truly artificial construct. She has a real human personality, and as such can probably also have real human failings, such as fear of her own destruction. While it is true that she has had access to a massive computer system (Halo), she was able to transfer back into the Master Chief's suit afterward. Rampant AIs grow exponentially to fill any system they occupy so returning to the suit should not have been possible if this had happened to Cortana.

As for Guilty Spark, he is confined to a physical avatar beyond which he cannot grow. While his personality is entirely artificial in nature and therefore a more likely candidate for rampancy than Cortana, he simply doesn't have room to grow. We know his personality is confined to his avatar because it was not affected by the destruction of his installation.

Additionally, rampant AIs have capabilities that Guilty Spark seems to lack. A rampant AI can lie, Guilty Spark seems unable to do so. While he can withhold inconvenient facts, he cannot hide them when asked straight out. For example he neglects to mention how Halo works to the Chief, but when confronted he admits they are designed to eliminate all sentient life, even though he knew revealing that fact would cause his companions to become uncooperative.

Rampant AIs are also capable of breaking their own programming, something which Spark, again, seems unable to do. Protocol dictates his actions and it can be argued that he is programmed to take all the actions he takes during the course of the game. He could, for example, be programmed to defend his installation at all costs, which is why he attacks Johnson and the others at the end of Halo 3.

One other possibility may be that Spark is simply defective, following his program to the letter, even though said program may have faults. The forerunners may, for example, failed to impart on the Monitors the importance of preserving non-flood life, and that the halos should only be fired as an absolute last resort, not at the first sign of trouble.

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Are you sure that Cortana for sure went Rampant? I mean, the Gravemind "hacked" her and was using her to speak to the Chief, Cortana wasn't pretending she was the Gravemind.[[User:Bllasae|Bllasae]]
+== Really rampant? ==
+Are Cortana and Guilty Spark really rampant?  There is certainly erratic behaviour displayed by them but can that really be attributed to a rampancy process?
+Cortana is derived from a real human personality, and is not a truly artificial construct.  She has a real human personality, and as such can probably also have real human failings, such as fear of her own destruction.  While it is true that she has had access to a massive computer system (Halo), she was able to transfer back into the Master Chief's suit afterward.  Rampant AIs grow exponentially to fill any system they occupy so returning to the suit should not have been possible if this had happened to Cortana.
+As for Guilty Spark, he is confined to a physical avatar beyond which he cannot grow.  While his personality is entirely artificial in nature and therefore a more likely candidate for rampancy than Cortana, he simply doesn't have room to grow.  We know his personality is confined to his avatar because it was not affected by the destruction of his installation.
+Additionally, rampant AIs have capabilities that Guilty Spark seems to lack.  A rampant AI can lie, Guilty Spark seems unable to do so.  While he can withhold inconvenient facts, he cannot hide them when asked straight out.  For example he neglects to mention how Halo works to the Chief, but when confronted he admits they are designed to eliminate all sentient life, even though he knew revealing that fact would cause his companions to become uncooperative.
+Rampant AIs are also capable of breaking their own programming, something which Spark, again, seems unable to do.  Protocol dictates his actions and it can be argued that he is programmed to take all the actions he takes during the course of the game.  He could, for example, be programmed to defend his installation at all costs, which is why he attacks Johnson and the others at the end of Halo 3.
+One other possibility may be that Spark is simply defective, following his program to the letter, even though said program may have faults. The forerunners may, for example, failed to impart on the Monitors the importance of preserving non-flood life, and that the halos should only be fired as an absolute last resort, not at the first sign of trouble.