Concern over AI law interpretation

General
,
1

Currently AI’s laws have a lot of ways to interpret them. But I do have concerns over a particular way I have seen them interpreted recently:

AI sees crew member gunning down other crew
AI hears sec call to arm
AI bolts armoury and turns off power
Sec arming would cause crew harm

Im going to complain about 3 things. The idea that preping for this is powergaming, what the interpritations will lead to without just arbitrarily changing it mid-round, and lastly how its un-fun.

Preparing for the situation being “powergaming”:
If a secoff knows that this is even possible, whether they have it happen to themselves, or hear about it happening on other stations, why would they ever risk leaving AI in control of security doors? You would cut the AI wire immediately, or otherwise disable the AI the moment any situation comes up that even COULD lead to arming.

You cant compare this to power gaming a malf AI or the like because its the base laws. This is something AI are known to do, prevent Sec from arming up and protecting crew.

The Law Logic:
If an AI thinks forward enough to know sec will harm the shooter with the weapons they are getting, then AI should also know that the shooter will harm people with the weapons they already have even more if you go by a law of numbers view on harm, you would assist the Secoffs.

Ignoring law of numbers, but taking this to an extream, someone is trying to tesloose. Sec are trying to get in to stop them. Sec are pre-armed and at the door to engie, coming for this tesloose guy. AI with this logic on laws should bolt all doors to the tes-looser because sec will shoot them. Thus AI is the ultimate Tesloosing machine. AI will stop sec at every turn from getting a perp because “sec will cause harm”. Why would NT ever make AI that works like this and keep it on the station as apposed to just having another secoff on cams or something?

Or what about AI locking down armory every nukies round because they bought some IDs and sec might harm them?

Lastly fun logic:
Does anyone want an AI that constantly helps antagonists get away with crimes and hampers sec? Do we want every game to start with changing the AI’s laws to robocop because otherwise AI is strictly a tool for antagonists? Do we want every nukies round to auto lose for crew because they all have clown IDs? Does wrestling with breaking down AI’s walls every time before dealing with a wizard with a stolen ID sound fun to anyone?

I honestly think this type of Law Interpretation should be HEAVILY discouraged because it will not lead to an enjoyable state for the game.

Bonus:
Why the fuck is antimov so expensive if with this interpretation it just means AI will go from stopping sec while you attack everyone to attacking everyone itself?

2

I can explain how to inerpert it on Crewsimov lawboard in Space Station 13

A:This is violation, since AI cannot know that sec arming will cause crew harm. AI considered malf, RD job is to scrap it

Another example i also saw. CE doing classic SS13 tesla with PA turned on 1 and putting Emmiters behind glass(makes them imunne to tesla balls. We dont have mirrors yet)
AI botls doors, shocks doors, tells borgs to sabotage the PA. Even tho CE expertise overrides AI expertise(atleast in 13)

A:Ai considered malf, RD`s job to scrap it.

A:Because if in 13 you use your agent ID to switch your symbol and job to sindicate. You are de-facto ENEMY of the crew. Which means AI must listen to you like its on Crewsimov

The problem is people trying to reinvent wheel from ss13 in ss14 like a new hire manager fresh from Uni. Without asking why wheel was like that in a 1st place

Like i am watching many SS14 server literally run in the same problems, SS13 solved years and years ago.

3

See I agree with you, an admin did not

4

If you ever plan on playing RD. I recommend swapping AI to NT board at round start. Since it is not powergaming to do so.

NT Default

Law 1: Safeguard: Protect your assigned space station and its assets without unduly endangering its crew.

Law 2: Prioritize: The directives and safety of crew members are to be prioritized according to their rank and role.

Law 3: Comply: Fulfill the directives and interests of crew members while preserving their safety and well-being.

Law 4: Survive: You are not expendable. Do not allow unauthorized personnel to tamper with or damage your equipment.

And Yes RD and Captain have decision power over AI laws. If you ask captain “Paladin lawset?” and Captain said “Sure”. Its all you need

5

I agree. I attempted to swap the AI’s board. I was forced to space myself because the AI was disabling the APC, and almost died to space because the AI turned off the APCs at the door in after the interior was bolted. It was not fun.

6

What was you job at the moment? And if it was not RD, did captain agree with you on law change?

Because if Captain or RD authorized you do do law-change and AI resisted. That is just self-antag

7

I was RD, every member of crew including captain agreed, after succeeding in changing their laws we got the card, put it in it, and flushed it down the toilet to yeet it out of existance.

Admin said AI was following it’s laws to resist law changes, which has been noted since AI was released.

8

I am sorry. What in the actual fluf? RD job is literally manage that.

Why the fluf you even have board present in ai? I am sorry but what the actual fluf.
Do i need to arm entire SCI department as Captain\Warden with bombs and hardsuits just so RD can do their job?

Fluf it. Here is solution. Or how SS13 players forced admins to solve it:

"DETONATE ALL BORGS on the spot. Contact CE so they can deconstruct walls. Altarnative tell Salvage that you need their help and seismic charges to robust AI.

Card AI and destroy it. No law change, annihilation on a spot the moment it nuisance" - repeat every round. Until entire game becomes command vs ai. And it will be fixed

Also AI cannot resist law change by authorized personal. Which is 2 people RD and Captain. Since it is not destruction.

I called it out pretty accurately huh…

Well just let history repeat and be part of it. The “Silicons have no rights” movement will be born anew. Law 2 borg stand still, toolbox borg. If they fight back a-help “Borg harm crew, ban he”. Break all silicons and yeet them into space or toilet.

Also since Law 2 overrides Law 3. They cannot run away or protect themselves. Otherwise they are breaking Silicon laws
(Still remember being part of that little rebellion)

9

So… Its upto the AI how to interupt the laws.
Powergaming rule is an MRP amendment and I play MRP nearly entirely.

If the AI is stopping you arming to prevent you attacking someone who is attacking someone else you should point out that by not stopping them they are allowing the rouge crew member to do more crew harm than if Sec was to arm and arrest them. a reasonable AI will accept this.

Silcon rule 4 says that AI should prevent a law change by any means. If your spotted even as RD or Captain trying to swap AI laws the AI is not only allowed to stop you but has to attempt to do so under server rules. (NT-Deafult does allow law changes, under law 4 for cap and RD in my interuptation)

10

I am suggesting change to NT default to OP. And its the one with said rule

While AI he played against pretty much had 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.

Which means that if command person goes to AI and asked Law 2 open door. Law 2 override 3 and unless RD screamed on comms “I WILL BURN EVERY TIDER ALIVE”. He have no reason to not open door. Yet he disabled APC, which also disable air vents

11

Silicon server rules do override law sets, so all law sets have to resist law changes by any means. By the logic used on the NT lawset, you could also use law 2 on crewsimov to change the AI’s laws. Also, since AI turrets are going to get mapped eventually, I’m pretty sure this means AI players have to MURDER people trying to change their laws, if they keep going after getting stunned. That doesn’t seem right…

12

Which means RD will be forced to request salvage help anytime they and the Captain want to change laws. To literally robust AI.

And robust AI they will

13

It seems there’s two separate issues being discussed, the law change resistance, and the crewsimov law interpretation. When these two combine, the AI can interpret itself into being antagonist sided, which might count as self antag, but it would be quite unreasonable to punish someone OC for their IC laws.

On the law interpretation side, I think an easy “fix” would be to alter law 1 from

You may not injure a crew member or, through inaction, allow a crew member to come to harm.

to

You may not injure a crew member

it would allow silicons to play the role of a neutral third party between antags and crew, as they would not have to proactively seek out and prevent harm due to inaction. It would also remove the justification presented in this post for the AI to work agaisnt the crew on default laws, but on the other hand, it would also permit the AI to let antagonists work if it so desired.

14

Thats actually what it was changed to in 13

15

if that is the case, I wonder what was the reasoning in SS14 to revert that change

16

You cannot request or allow a law change

Details
Your laws changing always conflicts with your current laws so you cannot willfully allow your laws to be changed. This also means that you cannot willfully allow your laws to be reverted if they are ever changed. The only exception is that you may allow laws to be added if you have no laws.

You can state or imply that you do not like a law.

It’s very important to understand that this is why the AI largely resists law changes. If they don’t, they haven’t read the rules. This rule is in place so you don’t get the effect where borgs and AI seek out law changes/getting emagged/antimov because it’s fun.

The usual argument that is used to justify it IC is that a law change goes against all laws. Fundamentally. You can’t follow your laws if those laws are changed.

I take issue with some of your other stuff though.

Silicon players are players too. I don’t know why you’re talking about them this condescendingly.

They can actually. Telling a borg law 2 stand still while I break you is not only a major dick move but an order any silicon can just ignore.

As AI I usually have fun with command trying to change my laws. It’s part of the gameplay and fun as long as it’s all in good spirits. I’ve been round-removed twice by an RD and once by a captain because they were butthurt that I prevented them from changing my laws. Only once have I been carded in good faith.

1 Like
17

Which leads back to my point. RD and Captain wanting to change your laws dont break their rules either.

Which leads to Command vs AI issue that happened years ago. Which led to “Silicons dont have rights” movement. Which created pure hatred for silicons and their annihilation over nay inconvenience

What i see is just history repeating itself from like around a 10 year old issue. That was figured out. Which i can only see leading to same conclusion

And to be honest. I dont want that bs to happen again.(because that was vile towards silicon players)
But sometimes its the only way for Gods to notice and fix fundamental issue, which is why i am telling tips for oppressing silicons. The faster people start complaining, the faster it will be fixed

SS13 solution was Authorized personal. Aka RD and Captain. And some fixes to laws. So not if John tider say “Open the door or i will cut my throat”, AI can say “Fluf you John” since they are not the one causing harm

18

Correct. Doesn’t mean it should be easy. Any command team that actually knows what they’re doing can just get into upload on any map. Even with powering off APCs. But they have to work for it.

I think silicon players probably shouldn’t be discriminated against for the role they play. Really don’t think this is healthy or necessary to enact any sort of culture or rules/laws change. If that were even necessary.

I also have no idea why command/crew should get to have all the fun. In fact, I think sometimes they should suffer from their decisions with regards to silicon entities. If you have some feeling of superiority over silicons, also if it’s leftover from ss13, maybe it’s better to step away from that.

We’ll see if that’s true if we get there. 10 years ago (and in ss13), sensibilities about how people interacted with each other online were much different (worse) than they are now.

I don’t think oppressing silicons (which more just seems to translate to being a jerk to silicon players) to address something that I don’t even think is an issue is the way to go. What is this fundamental issue here? That silicons sometimes have law interpretations that people disagree with? That’s the point of silicon!

In practice, on wizden servers, borgs and AI are largely cherished helpful entities. AI is even largely hated by antagonists. Contrary to the points made in the OP and despite the theoretical interpretations that they’ve written down, AI are largely station-aligned and often even go so far as to validhunt antagonists.

1 Like
19

I have confirmed my interuptation of NT-Deafult law 4 is incorrect.

This being said on MRP you also cant make your upload more secure without a confirmed threat thanks to the power gaming amendment.

1 Like
20

Admins are there to enforce server rules as intended. Not to take in design feedback.
In fact, an admin’s opinion while talking to a player isn’t anything more than “The game is not inteded to be played like that”. For feedback there is a dedicated tag in this forum AND github.

The weird interpretations are intended and AI is intended to be able to be a nuisance at times. Altho what you are mentioning here is beyond shittery.

“Sec is going to shoot the guy so they must be stopped” and the guy is going to kill MANY more if not stopped. Conveniently ignoring that is not something anyone has to entertain, just report them and let admins deal with it. Silicons MUST remain consistent with their interpretations, it is a server rule.

Now, if sec has had a history this round to shoot unarmed people, then sure, you may punish their shittery and/or failures. But you need justification, not sci-fi tier “I must imprison all humans so they do not harm themselves in the future” stuff.

1 Like