Tucci78 on November 01, 2012, 05:25:43 am
Those bad boys do not know what they are doing, more used to rolling drunks. Next they will unzip and wave their toys around. That will buy them time while Nichole points and giggles. Then she's really going to hurt them.

The advantage of one-against-three is a species of "interior lines of communication" in which the individual is better able to marshal and coordinate available resources while the (assumedly unpracticed) trio of assailants are susceptible to getting in each others' way.

The disadvantage is demonstrated in Nicole's need to keep her mental and physical faculties unimpaired, else she loses whatever advantage her training and proven moral toughness might confer. 

As anybody who's dealt with head trauma of any kind will readily confirm, a solid whack to the chops will reliably leave the recipient dazed for a moment at the very least, and unless Ms. Oresme's martial arts discipline had included measures aimed at quick recovery from sustaining such a blow (as it damned well ought to have done), she's in trouble.

Meanwhile, Nicole has an implant capable of rapid broadband communication with friendly parties, doesn't she?  Could it be that she has not already announced her plight to both the local affiliates of S&H Resolutions as well as the municipal officers of the public peace?
"I is a great believer in peaceful settlements," Jik-jik assured him. "Ain't nobody as peaceful as a dead trouble-maker."
-- Keith Laumer, Retief's War (1966)

Scott on November 01, 2012, 10:23:30 am
After what happened on Luna, NO WAY is Nichole going to call the cops, even the Huoxingian equivalent.

But ... stay tuned.

customdesigned on November 01, 2012, 12:54:19 pm
My guess: with Nicoles holo hat gone, the thugs see was a prisoner, and having already seen she can fight, revise their opinion and take her side when Curly Que arrives to kidnap her.  Or I could be completely wrong.

gene on November 02, 2012, 12:17:35 am
CHARGE!!! How about "We need chopper backup, now!" "I'm coming Beanie boy." "Form blazing sword!"

My childhood was normal, for certain values of 'normal'.   ;D

I guess it's only fair Buford gets a chance to look good in some action poses.
Come back to the trees; all is forgibben. Mom

ConditionOne on November 02, 2012, 07:00:00 am
I take it Ventura is programmed---or compromised by her former owners to be helpless and submissive. Or is "The Three Laws of Robotics" hard-wired into all robots and androids as a default setting?

Redwood Elf on November 02, 2012, 09:47:05 am
I take it Ventura is programmed---or compromised by her former owners to be helpless and submissive. Or is "The Three Laws of Robotics" hard-wired into all robots and androids as a default setting?

Could be a quirk of the Elder Po to have her be three-laws compliant, or may be a standard setting, we just don't know yet.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2012, 09:51:02 am by Redwood Elf »

Tucci78 on November 02, 2012, 10:07:20 am
I take it Ventura is programmed---or compromised by her former owners to be helpless and submissive. Or is "The Three Laws of Robotics" hard-wired into all robots and androids as a default setting?

Could be a quirk of the Elder Po to have her be three-laws compliant, or may be a standard setting, we just don't know yet.

Given that on Huoxing, "artifolk" are property unless accorded manumission by act of law, it's more reasonable to infer that by statute (or by custom with even greater strength than statute) all autonomous but "property"-status artificial persons would be by default hard-programmed to fulfill the "Liberal" fascist's beau ideal of passive victimhood, to be worked like a Morlock while helpless as an Eloi. 
"I is a great believer in peaceful settlements," Jik-jik assured him. "Ain't nobody as peaceful as a dead trouble-maker."
-- Keith Laumer, Retief's War (1966)

Redwood Elf on November 02, 2012, 10:34:37 am
Actually, she's not fully compliant with the first law.

"A Robot can not harm, or through inaction allow to be harmed, a human being."

If she were 3 laws compliant, she would be forced to act to protect Nicole by stopping the bullies (without hurting them) to the best of her ability.

So if there is an equivalent of the three laws in play, the first law doesn't include the inaction clause.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2012, 10:53:21 am by Redwood Elf »

myrkul999 on November 02, 2012, 11:02:20 am
So if there is an equivalent of the three laws in play, the first law doesn't include the inaction clause.

Yeah, it's much more likely some variation of "I'm just property, and property doesn't smack people around."

Redwood Elf on November 02, 2012, 11:24:12 am
So if there is an equivalent of the three laws in play, the first law doesn't include the inaction clause.

Yeah, it's much more likely some variation of "I'm just property, and property doesn't smack people around."

Who would need to smack anyone around...Robots are STRONG...all she'd need to do is grab some wrists and hang on.

Tucci78 on November 02, 2012, 11:26:12 am
So if there is an equivalent of the three laws in play, the first law doesn't include the inaction clause.

Yeah, it's much more likely some variation of "I'm just property, and property doesn't smack people around."

It looks as if it goes way beyond that level.  Consider that such ambulatory "property" is a physically powerful and technologically sophisticated system of machinery capable of self-directed tasking, and a costly piece of capital goods with significant market value.

What sort of theft prevention measures would be incorporated in such a piece of "property," hm? 

Moreover,  how the hell can this trio of street toughs manage to simply grab an expensive android off the sidewalk?  Were that possible, there would be no surety of any kind for the possessors of such machines, and it's hard as hell to conceive that the very wealthy android owners on corporate-dominated Huoxing would suffer such transgressions without instituting systematic and reliable (read "lethal") measures to abate the nuisance. 

And then, of course, I'd imagine that when Ventura hits the time tick at which Dr. O'Murchadha's paid rental period has ended, she starts flinging meatfolk bodies all to hellangone over the place while making her implacable way back to the business establishment of her ostensible owner.

No, there's something else at work in Ventura's "psyche."
"I is a great believer in peaceful settlements," Jik-jik assured him. "Ain't nobody as peaceful as a dead trouble-maker."
-- Keith Laumer, Retief's War (1966)

Scott on November 02, 2012, 11:50:43 am
Actually, she's not fully compliant with the first law.

"A Robot can not harm, or through inaction allow to be harmed, a human being."

If she were 3 laws compliant, she would be forced to act to protect Nicole by stopping the bullies (without hurting them) to the best of her ability.

So if there is an equivalent of the three laws in play, the first law doesn't include the inaction clause.

The "I, Robot" movie, I think, pretty adroitly illustrated the problem with the "inaction" law. In fact, there were a few Asimov short stories that touched on that same problem.

The reason for Ventura's helplessness will be explained.

myrkul999 on November 02, 2012, 12:12:50 pm
The reason for Ventura's helplessness will be explained.

Tease.

Arondell on November 02, 2012, 12:13:47 pm

The "I, Robot" movie, I think, pretty adroitly illustrated the problem with the "inaction" law. In fact, there were a few Asimov short stories that touched on that same problem.

The reason for Ventura's helplessness will be explained.


I can't recall the details but I believe one of Asimov's later works has a society that removed the "inaction" part of the first law.  Also a number of other modifications to the laws such as the introduction of a "Zeroth" law that required robots to not harm humanity as a whole.

Tucci78 on November 02, 2012, 12:18:23 pm
The reason for Ventura's helplessness will be explained.

Yeah, sure.

And while you're at it, you'll be explaining how the three "Tough" guys could so much as attempt grand theft android without even the equivalent of a car alarm going off. 
"I is a great believer in peaceful settlements," Jik-jik assured him. "Ain't nobody as peaceful as a dead trouble-maker."
-- Keith Laumer, Retief's War (1966)

 

anything