AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Psycho-Pass

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-10-29, 08:56   Link #121
garbage
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by totoum View Post
In france you'll automatically be fined if an automatic radar says you're speeding,radar takes a picture,special software recognizes the number plate (then humans check to make sure it's right) and a fine is automatically sent by mail to the person that owns the car with that number plate.You can contest but it's very much a "guilty until proven innocent" system.
well i don't see any point of contention sir, we are talking about the speed radar, you yourself said "radar takes a picture "(which i take you meant it did the speed reading ) ,"special software" recognizes the number plate ( take note this is no longer the speed meter but the computer), "a fine is automatically sent by mail" (which i would presume would be computers handling the email sending, again this is no longer the speed radar/meter), all this as you yourself stated are checked by humans, which would be the checks and balances i'm talking about. now if your talking about your whole system there then yes it's closer to the SIBYL system. but not yet there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS00N View Post
True, but in the end it isn't the Sibyl that force people to use it, it is people trust on it...
Thus it merely a tool...
I just disagree with the statement that it is all Sibyl fault...
well i don't know why you keep going back to that statement. I don't think anyone here ever stated, implied nor insisted that IT IS ALL SIBYL's fault. But you have to agree there is something flawed about the system especially in its implementation.

But i disagree that it isn't SIBYL that force people to use it.It's first implementation...maybe, but systems like this are self perpetuating. SIBYL is already the Law and CULTURE of their society how could normal everyday person not use it? It's very presence is forced on the individual from when they are very young. maybe even from babyhood ( although age 5 is the only definite age we've gotten so far). This is not just any gauge, speedometer, hammer or any regular tool for that matter. It's very presence forces predisposes people to trust it, why not it's what they grew up to. and well it does some good too. i suppose.

well further info is needed for more in depth analysis of SIBYL,we just don't know enough about it at this point. ( and wow we were using a wrong spelling all this time? ahehe)
garbage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-29, 11:36   Link #122
Kaoru Chujo
Minase Inori
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
People are complicated. No psychiatrist, and especially no machine, can be perfectly sure of giving a correct diagnosis. Speeding in a car is much more clear-cut. And in any case, everyone has what could be classified as "criminal tendencies," to one extent or another.

It's when we think we are totally clean that we present the most danger, since we can go ahead and do what we like to others in the full confidence that what we are doing is right. That's how that supervisor felt. That's how the Nazis felt when they classified parts of society as undesirable. As Jung said, unless we each recognize that we have a "shadow" of negative impulses, that shadow will have the power to unconsciously take us over.

And, of course, one of the things a truly responsible and efficient government would do is ban anime and lock up anime fans as potential criminals.
__________________
MINASE Inori 水瀬いのり age 18. 2010 Occult Academy (Akari). 2011 Uta no Prince-sama 1000% (students). 2012 Nukko (Sumire), Symphogear (minor roles). 2013 Love Lab (Suzu), Super Seisyun Brothers (Kohara Shiyo). 2014 Robot Girls Z (Gre-chan), Nobunaga The Fool (Chibihane, Toku), Black Bullet (Mibu), Is the order a rabbit? (Chino), Sugar Soldier (Kisaragi Makoto), Gargantia OVA (Rima), Locodol (Mirai), Aldnoah.Zero (Eddelrittuo), Sora no Method (Noel).
Hashihime blog | Twitter @nakanokimi | summer 2014 previews | summer 2014 schedule |
characters/seiyuus: | Mahouka Koukou | Glasslip | Tokyo Ghoul | Sailor Moon Crystal | Locodol | Ao Haru Ride | Hanayamata | Aldnoah.Zero | Nozaki-kun | Magimoji Rurumo | Zankyou no Terror | Tokyo ESP | Rokujouma no Shinryakusha | Love Stage!! | Jinsei | Rail Wars | Blade Dance | Himegoto
Kaoru Chujo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-29, 12:04   Link #123
Roger Rambo
Sensei, aishite imasu
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hong Kong Shatterdome
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoru Chujo View Post

And, of course, one of the things a truly responsible and efficient government would do is ban anime and lock up anime fans as potential criminals.
By that logic you'd probably want to lock up sports fans to.
Roger Rambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-29, 16:01   Link #124
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoru Chujo View Post
People are complicated. No psychiatrist, and especially no machine, can be perfectly sure of giving a correct diagnosis. Speeding in a car is much more clear-cut. And in any case, everyone has what could be classified as "criminal tendencies," to one extent or another.

It's when we think we are totally clean that we present the most danger, since we can go ahead and do what we like to others in the full confidence that what we are doing is right. That's how that supervisor felt. That's how the Nazis felt when they classified parts of society as undesirable. As Jung said, unless we each recognize that we have a "shadow" of negative impulses, that shadow will have the power to unconsciously take us over.

And, of course, one of the things a truly responsible and efficient government would do is ban anime and lock up anime fans as potential criminals.
How do you know watching anime doesn't decrease the CC? Especially for the quasi shut-in. Who do they bother?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadratic View Post
Damn it, I've only now realised I've been spelling it Sybil, but it's spelt Sibyl (or SIBYL to be extra cool). Pack it up guys, all arguments for Sibyl are now invalid .
(And long post is loooooooong).


You're right. But what I expect from a Sibyl-like system is the standards being gradually increased by culling the (potential) criminals, so that would free up resources to be allocated elsewhere.
I know it's a cold attitude, but again, that's not what I want to live in, but this is how I see hard choices would be made.
It's a complicated question. They're technically cheap labor, but you have to watch them and their motivation is questionable.

But really, they don't look that concerned with resources, or they'd straight up kill most potential criminals instead of trying to rehabilitate them. What's expensive about the death penalty is the trials. A full on dystopia doesn't have to worry about that. One good look with a Dominator and pull the trigger. Preferably somewhere that's easy to wash.

Quote:
Probably because it doesn't have a personality checking parameter, and the manager is still "managing" it to the point where operations are still...satisfactory.
It doesn't seem like Sibyl knows things like the factory environment (in terms of actual personalities within), or the history surrounding it.
If it turns out Sibyl is somehow self-aware, able to account for asshole/non-asshole personality traits, or able to determine potential scapegoats, then a lot of my arguments will probably become invalid, I fear .
That's a posteriori justification. I'm asking why, like it recommended Akane (and presumably Ginoza) for policework, it recommended that guy for such an... independent posting. As I said, a regular Sibyl check (which ought to be mandatory) would show a general increase of the CC. So did Sibyl make a mistake, or did they just consider such losses... an "optimal" of resources.
Anh_Minh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-29, 17:57   Link #125
Dengar
Kamen Rider Muppeteer
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Unknown
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
Your downplaying of Sibyl is starting to get a little bit ridiculous now.

Fact: Sibyl strictly limits people's career options (Akane's two female friends made this clear in Episode 2)
Nope, it's actually employers who refuse to fire people with anything short of an A rank. Just like in real life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
Fact: Sibyl recommends workplaces to individuals (the Factory boss of Episode 3 made this clear)
Just like career tests in real life do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
Schools and universities generally don't give you insta-jobs wherever you want (Akane), or force people to strictly limit their employment options (Akane's friends). If you simply manage to get an University degree in the right field (poor, poor Arts students... ), you have a shot. You don't need to be an "A" or anything like that. It helps, but it's usually not a deal-maker or a deal-breaker, at least based on what I've seen, read, and heard about.
Wow, where do I find this dream world you live in where you can get any job you want no matter how much you suck at it. I want to go there so bad.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
Sure, but I'd rather leave those recommendations to human beings who (hopefully) have empathy, and likely a better ability to account for unique contexts.
People don't have empathy. All they care about is results.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
I received a ticket for that, but the police officer lowered it after I explained my case to him. Would that had happened if a Sibyl system had told him "Give that driver the standard penalty for driving over the speed limit in a construction zone"? Personally, I doubt it.
Yeah because Akane totally went according to Sibyl's so-called "wishes" when she saved that rape victim.
Dengar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 01:54   Link #126
Quadratic
SIBYL salesman
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanon View Post
The guy in the first episode was probably a special case. The paralyzer didn't work on him so the gun had no choice but to switch to lethal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS00N View Post
It seems the dominator will use paralyzer first no matter how high the CC is and the man is special because the paralyzer doesn't work so dominator value the man's threat as far too high and change to lethal mode (as Kanon said)...

Talk about threat...
I've watched episode 1 again and find that CC is different than threat measurement...
Which can explain or clouded our understanding about dominator mode change...
Ok, I watched it again (and again), and saw there was no reading showing after the first paralysis shot failed and the second judgement given out, nor was there a reading showing on the victim when it changed to lethal mode on her, so no inconsistencies in the CC numbers, as far as I can tell, since both didn't show their new numbers and had their CC elevated in their respective situations (well, that was Akane's explanation for the victim, so I'm assuming the same applied to the rapist).

As for having the gun in paralyzer mode first, that doesn't seem to be the case, since the opening scene of ep 1 showed Shinya killing the helmet wearing guy (which I'm think is some anti-brain scanning helmet) on the first shot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anh_Minh View Post
How do you know watching anime doesn't decrease the CC? Especially for the quasi shut-in. Who do they bother?
I'm pretty sure CC has increased for a lot of people within this thread, myself in particular .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anh_Minh View Post
That's a posteriori justification. I'm asking why, like it recommended Akane (and presumably Ginoza) for policework, it recommended that guy for such an... independent posting. As I said, a regular Sibyl check (which ought to be mandatory) would show a general increase of the CC. So did Sibyl make a mistake, or did they just consider such losses... an "optimal" of resources.
Hmm, maybe I should actually watch ep 2 again (as in from start to finish, instead of randomly picking time intervals, lol).
I'm aware Sibyl assigns some job aptitude ranking to everyone, but one of the friend mentions Akane was "an honor student who scored 700 points on the last exam.". Is this an old school style exam, or the actual value that Sibyl assigned? I'm under the impression it's the former for some reason, and is different to the Sibyl aptitude rank.
Akane also says her "job aptitude exceeded the Bureau's employment standards", so is it the factory's standards set too low that let him slip through the cracks?
Quadratic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 02:58   Link #127
MarkS00N
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadratic View Post
Ok, I watched it again (and again), and saw there was no reading showing after the first paralysis shot failed and the second judgement given out, nor was there a reading showing on the victim when it changed to lethal mode on her, so no inconsistencies in the CC numbers, as far as I can tell, since both didn't show their new numbers and had their CC elevated in their respective situations (well, that was Akane's explanation for the victim, so I'm assuming the same applied to the rapist).

As for having the gun in paralyzer mode first, that doesn't seem to be the case, since the opening scene of ep 1 showed Shinya killing the helmet wearing guy (which I'm think is some anti-brain scanning helmet) on the first shot.
I don't know about your sub, but mine has this line: "Target's Threat Judgement has been updated." before dominator change to Lethal Eliminator mode.
This line can be interpreted as CC and Target's Threat are 2 different measurement with lethal mode active only after the Target's Threat pass certain limit.

The guy in the beginning of episode 1 probably has high Target's Threat thus activating the Lethal Eliminator mode from start...
Still not sure, but at least this what I got from 3 episode...
MarkS00N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 05:12   Link #128
Triple_R
Center Attraction
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Age: 33
Send a message via AIM to Triple_R
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS00N View Post
Speedometer doesn't talk, but it has red bar that give you sign that you are in dangerous speed...
It doesn't give you lower penalty, it simply tell you are 'wrong' because you pass the 'limit'...
Because it doesn't talk or change mode, doesn't mean it less merciless than dominator...
As I said, the one who decide your penalty isn't the speedometer or the dominator...
Actually, that's not entirely true. The Dominator automatically switches back and forth between "Paralyze mode" and "Extremely gorey death" mode.

Pretty big difference in penalty there, and the Dominator decides it automatically.

Yes, whether or not the gun is shot is decided by the person holding the gun (should the gun even allow itself to be shot, anyway), but like TRL wrote, I don't see much evidence of a manual override for the gun's current setting. If the gun sets itself for lethal shot, there seems to be no option between "Shooting to kill" and "Don't shoot at all".


Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
Funny that you mentioned job interviews. Veteran Financial Times columinst Lucy Kellaway had some choice words about their supposed effectiveness.
I think that some human resources teams have become overly creative with job interviews in recent years. They do this as one way to try to "stand out" and even justify the value of human resources itself.

Job interviews definitely have their limitations, but I'm inclined to think it's better to have them than to hire people based purely on resume, or purely on some grade/recommendation assigned by a supercomputer.


At least with a job interview, both the employer and the (prospective) employee get to meet each other before anything is finalized. A job interview isn't just for the benefit of employers, it's also for the benefit of the person looking for work. The job interview may well reveal something about your potential employer that didn't show up in the job posting or job ad, and that revelation might be a deal-breaker for you.

Heck, just look at this factory in Episode 3. "Must live on-site" combined with "No internet use on-site" would likely be a complete and utter deal-breaker for a lot of prospective employees. I wonder how many people ended up employed at this factory without ever knowing the real downside of what they were getting into...



Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadratic View Post
Excluding latent criminals, they are given the opportunities to get mental help (as detected by the street drones, or whatever they're called, and/or hue assessments).
Instead of hiding away unstability, the system is promotes maintaining healthy mental state for everyone.
But the problem with these opportunities for mental health is that there's nothing discreet about them.

Recall how the criminal from the 1st episode felt that his reputation had been ruined simply from getting a bad reading. So whatever "therapy" entails in this world, it doesn't seem to be something you can enter into discreetly in this world (unlike seeing a mental health professional in the real world, which often can be done discreetly).

If the criminal in the first episode felt he could undergo this therapy without it destroying his reputation, maybe he would have done so. But alas, this option does not appear to be there.


Quote:
Someone invents a portable flesh cutting laser...anyway, that wasn't the point of the argument .
The point was that weapons were designed to be weapons, so it's purpose as a 'good' thing is twisting it's original intent.
Weapons can be a good thing, if used properly. I mean, we now have slaughtering processes in place for farm animals, but prior to them, we'd all be vegetarians if not for weapons (and I don't think most people would want that). Not all weapons are just about combat between humans, as some are designed primarily for hunting (the classic bow and arrow was used a lot for hunting, of course).

Not all weapons are equally problematic, that's all I'm saying.


Quote:
Sibyl...well, at this point in time, I believe was created to help aid people, not created as a weapon.
I think it was designed to make a better society, but my sense is that it was designed with a very "top-down" mentality behind it.

What I mean by that is that I can definitely see how "the 1%" would love Sibyl: It minimizes the chances of getting problematic employees, it is likely good for productivity, it keeps the masses under very tight control.

It was probably "sold" to the masses as a better way to fight crime, and also as a means to make people "happier" by finding psychological problems and correcting them.

But what it's actually done to Joe and Jane Average is take an awful lot of choice and self-empowerment away from them, leaving them with very little flexibility within the system itself. That's the impression I'm getting so far, anyway.


Quote:
The closet analogy I can come up with is the internet itself. The original intent twisted by the people making issues like cyber-bullying, digital piracy ("You wouldn't download a car!"...er, what?), etc.
Has the internet been censored, yet? Well, it is only now starting to.
The internet is actually the opposite problem as Sibyl. The internet is a wild frontier that governments haven't found the ideal way to regulate yet. It's wild frontier nature is much of what makes the internet so much fun, but it's also what empowers cyber-bullying. Finding a way to keep the baby while throwing out the bath-water is the elusive trick that governments are still struggling with.


Quote:
Anyway, I'm pretty sure employing latent criminals undermines the practicing good personal judgement.
Well, sure, but it's not like latent criminals are the only people that could do this job.


Quote:
But again, that's not Sibyl recommending 'please fight fire with fire', that's people going 'hey, let's risk the lives of "dogs" instead'.
Any particular quote or scene leading you to believe this?


Quote:
But of course, Sibyl's judgement hasn't been proven wrong just yet
Sometimes the process is just as important as the final judgement. The process itself can become self-fulfilling prophecies. Again, the criminal of Episode 1 was clearly driven into a corner by the System. If a discreet and reputation-preserving "therapy" been offered to him, would he have been driven into that corner? I think it's a question worth asking.


Quote:
Right, that was my hypothetical situation in our world.
As for Psycho-Pass's world, they probably did it because they saw an opportunity to make the world a better place. Technically, we don't know if the world really is worst or not.
Here I go back to what I wrote in reply to TRL a few pages back - The author is choosing what to show us, and that has to be for a reason. If the author keeps showing us "the dark side of society", and never shows us much concrete reason to think "Hey, this fictional world isn't so bad after all", then that kind of suggests something, doesn't it?

We could be seeing Al Capones be brought to justice. Instead, we're seeing rape and bully victims be brought to justice...

Maybe Episode 4 will change that. But if we keep getting more of the same, that's rather suggestive of where the author is going with this story, imo...


Quote:
I'm glad you didn't get fined, but unfortunately, my city has deployed cameras so you automatically get fined for speeding and/or accidently drive in bus-only streets (well, only in some parts of the city).
An argument could be made that the bigger picture is that the officer could have been allocated to solving a more serious crime elsewhere.
I should state here that I live in a very rural area. There may well not have been "a more serious crime" elsewhere. But, because I'm in a rural area, we also don't have the same degree of cameras at play.

I will also admit that the fact that I live in a very rural area does impact my thinking. For example, Dengar arguing that humans don't have empathy is just utterly absurd to me, just based on what I see within my community on a regular basis (ex. if a member of the community has a serious disease, there is inevitably a fundraiser for that individual). Perhaps in a more urban area people don't care about one another as much, but that's definitely not the case in small towns, at least in my experience.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengar View Post
Nope, it's actually employers who refuse to fire people with anything short of an A rank. Just like in real life.
How do you know that employers get any say in the matter? Was anybody allowed to say "no" to Akane when she applied for the position she currently has?

In any event, nothing that you wrote contradicts what I was saying about Sibyl being more important than what you're making it out to be.
__________________
Triple_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 09:05   Link #129
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Regards the vic in Ep 1, note that initially she was supposed to be taken down with the non-lethal Paralyzer mode. Note that in real life, SWAT and police officers would restrain the hostage once the perp is taken down - this is the same principle here, merely on a more violent scale.

Secondly, she's upgraded to lethal status when she's sitting in that pool of what I assume is either petrol or kerosene, holding a lit lighter. She was quite willing to drop that lighter and blow everyone to kingdom come, and would have done that had Akane not talked her down.

Third, as the close of ep 3 indicates, she's undergoing counseling and is on the way to making a full recovery. So while I have serious concerns with the Sibyl system (seriously, nobody capable of making judgement calls or handling stress because it's all outsourced to some cyberpunk computer-AI-system? I can see where Masaoka is coming from there), it's not as if this is Saudi Arabia or the Middle East, where rape victims are instead jailed and punished for the crime of premarital sex.

Though obviously when you surrender everything to the system... then you're going to get problems if the system is tampered with or sabotaged. This is cyberpunk: It's a genre convention that if something is supposedly tamper-proof, someone will either figure out a way to hack it or sabotage it, or it'll go rampant and sabotage itself.

Also, that factory had the best cyber security ever that I've seen
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 09:50   Link #130
garbage
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post

Also, that factory had the best cyber security ever that I've seen
ehehe i'm not really sure if you're just joking there or it's a sarcastic comment,
but anyway the apparently security is not good enough. it seems it was too easy to tamper with the systems/robots of that place. Best security would have checks and balances, redundancy, and fail safes in abundance. I hardly believe something similar could happen in one of Google's main servers for example. ( as in resulting in murder and stuff, without it being found out almost immediately) but i guess you're just joking.
garbage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 09:52   Link #131
Triple_R
Center Attraction
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Age: 33
Send a message via AIM to Triple_R
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post
Regards the vic in Ep 1, note that initially she was supposed to be taken down with the non-lethal Paralyzer mode. Note that in real life, SWAT and police officers would restrain the hostage once the perp is taken down - this is the same principle here, merely on a more violent scale.
SWAT and police officers would ensure that the hostage didn't just run away, since they'd obviously want to get some info from the hostage. So the hostage would be restrained in the sense that s/he couldn't just get up and leave right away, but such restraint isn't likely to include actually firing a gun at the hostage.

That's a pretty big difference, if you ask me.


Quote:

Secondly, she's upgraded to lethal status when she's sitting in that pool of what I assume is either petrol or kerosene, holding a lit lighter. She was quite willing to drop that lighter and blow everyone to kingdom come, and would have done that had Akane not talked her down.
She needed to be subdued, yes. But how is lethal shot any better here than paralyzing her? Threat level alone should only cause the gun to switch from paralyzing shot to lethal shot if the paralyzer isn't working on the target (as was the case with the Episode 1 perp, hence it makes perfect sense why lethal shot came into play there). There's no reason to think that paralyzing shot wouldn't have subdued the rape victim.


Quote:
Though obviously when you surrender everything to the system... then you're going to get problems if the system is tampered with or sabotaged.
The problems we're seeing so far have nothing to do with tampering with or sabotaging the Sibyl system (well, barring some shocking plot twist, anyway).

Quite the contrary, they're natural outcomes of the system.

This system really does create many of its own problems.
__________________
Triple_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 10:02   Link #132
MarkS00N
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
Actually, that's not entirely true. The Dominator automatically switches back and forth between "Paralyze mode" and "Extremely gorey death" mode.

Pretty big difference in penalty there, and the Dominator decides it automatically.

Yes, whether or not the gun is shot is decided by the person holding the gun (should the gun even allow itself to be shot, anyway), but like TRL wrote, I don't see much evidence of a manual override for the gun's current setting. If the gun sets itself for lethal shot, there seems to be no option between "Shooting to kill" and "Don't shoot at all".
I've posted that it appears the mode will only activated if certain limit has been passed instead of mysteriously change itself...

Quote:
It seems the dominator will use paralyzer first no matter how high the CC is and the man is special because the paralyzer doesn't work so dominator value the man's threat as far too high and change to lethal mode (as Kanon said)...

Talk about threat...
I've watched episode 1 again and find that CC is different than threat measurement...
Which can explain or clouded our understanding about dominator mode change...
And as Wild Goose said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post
Regards the vic in Ep 1, note that initially she was supposed to be taken down with the non-lethal Paralyzer mode. Note that in real life, SWAT and police officers would restrain the hostage once the perp is taken down - this is the same principle here, merely on a more violent scale.

Secondly, she's upgraded to lethal status when she's sitting in that pool of what I assume is either petrol or kerosene, holding a lit lighter. She was quite willing to drop that lighter and blow everyone to kingdom come, and would have done that had Akane not talked her down.
About this one:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
She needed to be subdued, yes. But how is lethal shot any better here than paralyzing her? Threat level alone should only cause the gun to switch from paralyzing shot to lethal shot if the paralyzer isn't working on the target (as was the case with the Episode 1 perp, hence it makes perfect sense why lethal shot came into play there). There's no reason to think that paralyzing shot wouldn't have subdued the rape victim.
Problem is, she sit on POOL of Gasoline that will explode and KILL Kogami who stand on the pool.

Also, while the paralyzer might cause her to faint, but as long as the lighter still in her hand then the POOL gasoline still might explode and KILL Kogami...
However once the lighter gone, her threat level decrease and Paralyzer mode activated.

On different note
Quote:
Originally Posted by garbage View Post
well i don't know why you keep going back to that statement. I don't think anyone here ever stated, implied nor insisted that IT IS ALL SIBYL's fault. But you have to agree there is something flawed about the system especially in its implementation.

But i disagree that it isn't SIBYL that force people to use it.It's first implementation...maybe, but systems like this are self perpetuating. SIBYL is already the Law and CULTURE of their society how could normal everyday person not use it? It's very presence is forced on the individual from when they are very young. maybe even from babyhood ( although age 5 is the only definite age we've gotten so far). This is not just any gauge, speedometer, hammer or any regular tool for that matter. It's very presence forces predisposes people to trust it, why not it's what they grew up to. and well it does some good too. i suppose.

well further info is needed for more in depth analysis of SIBYL,we just don't know enough about it at this point. ( and wow we were using a wrong spelling all this time? ahehe)
When I say 'Sibyl take the blame', it means I disagree with statement that pull trigger isn't a choice...
That when the enforcer is pull the trigger, it is because Sibyl left the enforcer with only Pull or Not, thus nullifying the enforcer responsibility on the choice the enforcer choose...

What you describe as how human rely too much on Sibyl is something I agree on, but to say that human shot because he doesn't have choice to say otherwise? Then no.

It pretty much saying terrorist is forgivable because it is his religion fault...
MarkS00N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 10:47   Link #133
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by garbage View Post
ehehe i'm not really sure if you're just joking there or it's a sarcastic comment,
but anyway the apparently security is not good enough. it seems it was too easy to tamper with the systems/robots of that place. Best security would have checks and balances, redundancy, and fail safes in abundance. I hardly believe something similar could happen in one of Google's main servers for example. ( as in resulting in murder and stuff, without it being found out almost immediately) but i guess you're just joking.
Jokingly sarcastic. Thing is, they've got what seems to be a near-perfect defense against external threats, but as you pointed out, their internal security seems to be quite lacking. I see this in my own workplace; we have firewalls and antivirus and shit, and practically all of our PCs got hit by the Recycler trojan/virus/threat thanks to a dumbass with a thumbdrive that wasn't scanned.

tl;dr, your security is only as strong as its weakest link, which is the day-to-day user.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
SWAT and police officers would ensure that the hostage didn't just run away, since they'd obviously want to get some info from the hostage. So the hostage would be restrained in the sense that s/he couldn't just get up and leave right away, but such restraint isn't likely to include actually firing a gun at the hostage.

That's a pretty big difference, if you ask me.
Just to check, but I assume you did see me words there: "on a more violent scale."

Of course patrol officers and SWAT are going to restrain the hostage with zip cuffs, and they'll try and do it as gently as possible - but it is not outside the realms of possibility that they may tase the hostage if the hostage is behaving too irrationally to safely subdue and restrain - though of course this is the real world, with no Crime Coefficients to justify getting shot with the Paralyzer mode, which is why cops will do their best to avoid getting into a situation like that.

Quote:
She needed to be subdued, yes. But how is lethal shot any better here than paralyzing her? Threat level alone should only cause the gun to switch from paralyzing shot to lethal shot if the paralyzer isn't working on the target (as was the case with the Episode 1 perp, hence it makes perfect sense why lethal shot came into play there). There's no reason to think that paralyzing shot wouldn't have subdued the rape victim.
Uh... I really don't get what you're talking about. My interpretation of the first perp is that the Dominator fired at him while he was in the process of raping the victim (and failed to take him down); he then attacked the Enforcer, grabbed the hostage and attempted to flee. Notice how there is an immediate escalation of the threat level - this is someone who is openly hostile and is displaying aggressive action. The Dominator then switches to from stun to kill mode, particularly as he's holding a knife to the victim's neck and threatening the Enforcers.

Again, as MarkS00N noted, the vic's threat assessment is upgraded after she flicks the lighter on, and is prepared to drop it into that pool of gas and blow everyone to kingdom come. She has gone from being freaked out to a display of active aggression - she's now holding an improvised firebomb as a threat against the Enforcers.

As far as Sibyl is concerned, the threat rating has gone up and she needs to be taken down permanently. Again, note that as soon as she puts the lighter down, her threat rating drops.

Quote:
The problems we're seeing so far have nothing to do with tampering with or sabotaging the Sibyl system (well, barring some shocking plot twist, anyway).
Sorry, I think I may have caused you to misunderstand here - I'm not saying that the system has been tampered or sabotaged (there's no concrete evidence of that... yet), I'm saying that it's a convention of the cyberpunk genre that any such system as this usually ends up sabotaged or tampered, or if it's a self-aware AI, goes rampant. I'm actually speculating/expecting.

Quote:
Quite the contrary, they're natural outcomes of the system.

This system really does create many of its own problems.
I certainly don't think it's perfect. For starters, as Masaoka mentions, kids who grew up with Sibyl around have essentially outsourced their decision making and stress management to the system, and can't actually handle stress on their own - note Ep.3. That said, locking up people for being Latent Criminals spits on the whole Innocent Before Guilty principle of the law - if no crime has been committed, you have no case. As someone who studied law professionally, I don't claim that the system is perfect... unless it's a perfect tool to control the populace. Which it's not, BTW.

That said, at least on the threat assessment when the energy blasts start flying, the system at least appears to be able to judge threat levels.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 11:22   Link #134
Triple_R
Center Attraction
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Age: 33
Send a message via AIM to Triple_R
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS00N View Post
I've posted that it appears the mode will only activated if certain limit has been passed instead of mysteriously change itself...
That doesn't relate to my point.

My point is that there's no evidence that once the gun goes into "Lethal shot" mode that the person holding the gun can manually override back down to "Paralyzing shot". So if the gun goes into "Lethal shot" mode, an option has been taken away from the person handling (that option being "shoot to non-lethally subdue").

A speedometer doesn't take options away from police officers. It's still at their discretion as to how to respond to a "red" speedometer reading.


Quote:
Problem is, she sit on POOL of Gasoline that will explode and KILL Kogami who stand on the pool.

Also, while the paralyzer might cause her to faint, but as long as the lighter still in her hand then the POOL gasoline still might explode and KILL Kogami...
Well, if you want to get this technical, then lethal shot might cause her to drop the lighter (just before her body completely explodes), lighter's flame hits the poll, and you still get massive explosion.

Even given these very specific circumstances, I don't see how lethal shot is preferable to paralyzing shot purely for the sake of eliminating the immediate threat posed by the target.

So I don't think that shifting from Paralyzing shot to Lethal shot is simply a reflection of immediate threat level. I think it's because the Crime Coefficient has shot up, and the Dominator basically determines that once a person's CC goes so high, that person is beyond the point of rehabilitation (hence "it's Ok to kill him/her").

The fact that this rape victim is successfully recovering shows a weakness in the the Dominator, imo - It can take an unwarranted "Shoot to Kill" approach with certain targets.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post

Sorry, I think I may have caused you to misunderstand here - I'm not saying that the system has been tampered or sabotaged (there's no concrete evidence of that... yet), I'm saying that it's a convention of the cyberpunk genre that any such system as this usually ends up sabotaged or tampered, or if it's a self-aware AI, goes rampant. I'm actually speculating/expecting.
I see your point. Yeah, there's a good chance that Psycho-Pass will go in one of those two directions.


Quote:

That said, at least on the threat assessment when the energy blasts start flying, the system at least appears to be able to judge threat levels.
That's probably true. But I don't think that the Dominator's readings are based on threat level alone. I could be wrong about that, but we'll probably just have to wait and see.
__________________
Triple_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 12:07   Link #135
MarkS00N
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
That doesn't relate to my point.

My point is that there's no evidence that once the gun goes into "Lethal shot" mode that the person holding the gun can manually override back down to "Paralyzing shot". So if the gun goes into "Lethal shot" mode, an option has been taken away from the person handling (that option being "shoot to non-lethally subdue").

A speedometer doesn't take options away from police officers. It's still at their discretion as to how to respond to a "red" speedometer reading.
See, here's the difference in our way of thinking...
For me, as long as there are choice to choose, without pressure, it isn't forced, it merely a recommendation...
However you think if one choice is taken away, even if there are still several different choices, than it is forced...

Quote:
Well, if you want to get this technical, then lethal shot might cause her to drop the lighter (just before her body completely explodes), lighter's flame hits the poll, and you still get massive explosion.

Even given these very specific circumstances, I don't see how lethal shot is preferable to paralyzing shot purely for the sake of eliminating the immediate threat posed by the target.

So I don't think that shifting from Paralyzing shot to Lethal shot is simply a reflection of immediate threat level. I think it's because the Crime Coefficient has shot up, and the Dominator basically determines that once a person's CC goes so high, that person is beyond the point of rehabilitation (hence "it's Ok to kill him/her").
1.) I don't go in to technical of whether the lighter will drop to oil if she died or not, the fact is she sit on POOL on oil with lighter and such condition can KILL Kogami as he stand on the same POOL of oil, and that what is taken to measurement of Target Threat's. She can KILL Kogami at that point thus the dominator activate Lethal Eliminator mode. Afterall Dominator is a weapon, unless of course there are more convenient mode like portal gun or something. But so far, Dominator seems to be programmed to use paralyzer or when Target's Threat pass certain point, a more lethal mode.
2.) Episode 1 never show increase in CC, but there are Target Threat's Judgement and that what invoke the Lethal Eliminator mode.

Right now the evidence presented by the show is as I explained. Of course it can be wrong if further evidence proof otherwise.

Quote:
The fact that this rape victim is successfully recovering shows a weakness in the the Dominator, imo - It can take an unwarranted "Shoot to Kill" approach with certain targets.
But dominator is a gun and much like any gun, 'It can take an unwarranted "Shoot to Kill" approach with certain targets.'
Though is it dominator fault if the trigger is pulled? Because from that sentence you seem to blame dominator if the action is took.

But for this issue, I would refer to my first sentence in this reply...
MarkS00N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 12:51   Link #136
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post
That said, locking up people for being Latent Criminals spits on the whole Innocent Before Guilty principle of the law - if no crime has been committed, you have no case. As someone who studied law professionally, I don't claim that the system is perfect... unless it's a perfect tool to control the populace. Which it's not, BTW.
We keep coming back to this point. I agree, of course, that it's an important principle — in real life — but to keep harping on this is to miss the entire premise of the show.

As I've highlighted before, I don't think it's a coincidence that the Criminal Investigation Department's logo is adapted from the North American symbol for the medical profession. We are, in essence, being invited to ask: "What if an individual's potential for 'crime' can be detected in a way similar to how we diagnose disease?"

We're being asked to put aside our disbelief and to imagine an ethical system built on that premise. The premise is, at heart, quite simple and is, in fact, not very far removed from some of the ideas proposed by contemporary scientists as renowned as Samuel Harris and Richard Dawkins: that it makes no sense to have a justice system that punishes criminal behaviour after the fact if science could show that a defendant was psychologically incapable of distinguishing right from wrong the way healthy individuals can.

Monsters do exist. Serial killers are, for example, wired very differently from normal people and they can't help but kill.

And to take the premise one step further, if you could in fact diagnose criminal potential — and in this alternative reality, the underlying assumption is that it can be measured very accurately — would it be morally responsible to let the individual roam free when appropriate treatment is readily available?

I have asked whether an individual actually has a choice in such a scenario. If you believe yourself to be a moral individual, and wish to behave morally, yet have been diagnosed with a high criminal coefficient, would it be moral for you to refuse treatment and subject people around you to a higher risk of harm? In case you're thinking that this is a paradox — how can a moral man possibly have a high crime coefficient? — think again: there are plenty of experiments, scientific and non-scientific, to amply show how people very often over-estimate their abilities and are basically very poor judges of their limitations. In real life, it's very easy to know the right thing to do, but quite a different thing to do the right thing when it matters.

It's more than likely, I feel, that the origins of the Sibyl System lie somewhere near this premise, of handling the potential for crime as a treatable disease. The methods for treatment, as we've already been shown, echo the ways we'd handle contagious diseases today. Preventive methods include daily medication: Akane mentioned, very early in Ep1, her surprise that any individual could have allowed his hue/CC to rise so high; it hints strongly that it's a norm in this alternative reality for people to self-medicate for "criminal" tendencies, a norm that was further portrayed in Ep2 as Akane busied herself preparing for a working day.

And for people who are far more psychologically damaged (very diseased), isolation is enforced. There is the underlying assumption that criminal potential is contagious (let's put aside the objections to this in real life; there is a need for suspension of disbelief for the story's conceit to work), a point that was passingly reinforced in Ep2, when Akane's personal assistant program advised her to take medication to prevent contamination by environmental stress.

Again, as I've pointed out before, this is not very different from the way we would handle contagious disease, such as the recent SAR or H1N1 flu epidemics: we identify and quarantine the vectors as quickly as possible, while searching for a vaccine or cure.

In such a world, the focus of law enforcement has changed, in response to a reality where crime prevention has become a matter of number crunching. This fictional premise is not original. Many have pointed out Psycho-Pass' similarity with Minority Report, for example.

But, in reference to a recent thread elsewhere in the forum, the execution differs greatly. In Minority Report, crime prevention was made possible by a more far-fetched technology, that of tapping the mental abilities of a trio of psychics. Psycho-Pass, on the other hand, taps into facets of neuro- and behavioural that have already been extensively documented, to the point where much of the basic conclusions are already part of public knowledge. In other words, Psycho-Pass is grounded in something more real, more possible.

My arguments in support for the Sibyl System come from this angle. It's easy to dismiss dystopian fiction as something that could never happen in real life. It's much more fun, on the other hand, to imagine how it could have come to pass.

Because, quite frankly, I would be somewhat disappointed if, in the end, all I got from this show is a dystopian view that is a no-brainer to hate. Such stories are dime-a-dozen. I'm more interested to see if Psycho-Pass could present scenarios where there are no "win" conditions: no matter what choice the characters make — obey or disobey the system — they lose. Ep3 came close, but still fell somewhat short of the mark, I felt. It left me with no real sense of unease nor feelings of conflicted morals. My comment to Gen Urobuchi would be: Nice try, but try harder.
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 13:11   Link #137
Dengar
Kamen Rider Muppeteer
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Unknown
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple_R View Post
How do you know that employers get any say in the matter? Was anybody allowed to say "no" to Akane when she applied for the position she currently has?
.... Now you're just making assumptions and presenting them as if they were fact.

EDIT: Actually disregard that. To put it a little better: What makes you think employers DON'T get a say in the matter?
Dengar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 16:19   Link #138
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post
Again, as I've pointed out before, this is not very different from the way we would handle contagious disease, such as the recent SAR or H1N1 flu epidemics: we identify and quarantine the vectors as quickly as possible, while searching for a vaccine or cure.
Except for the bits where they drop contagions vectors smack dab in the middle of vulnerable populations...
Anh_Minh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 17:24   Link #139
Triple_R
Center Attraction
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Age: 33
Send a message via AIM to Triple_R
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS00N View Post
See, here's the difference in our way of thinking...
For me, as long as there are choice to choose, without pressure, it isn't forced, it merely a recommendation...
If a system's recommendations are followed 98% or more of the time, are they still "mere" recommendations? Admittedly, that 98% figure is a hypothetical one, but this narrative is (so far) giving every implication that people typically follow Sibyl's "recommendations".

I think that you, and some others, are downplaying the influence that Sibyl holds over the world of Psycho-Pass.

Quote:

However you think if one choice is taken away, even if there are still several different choices, than it is forced...
Several different choices? No, just two: Shoot to kill, or don't shoot at all. Those are the only choices that Dominator-users seem to have if the gun shifts to lethal mode.

In any event, your speedometer/Dominator analogy is not a good one for the simple reason that a speedometer doesn't strictly limit choices like this.


As for the whole "POOL with oil and lighter and such condition", you're missing my point there. My point is that Paralyzing shot is probably just as effective a means as negating that situational threat as Lethal shot is.

The person who was raped, her psychological state changed, and that is why her Crime Coefficient went up, in my opinion. Not because (or at least not just because) of the whole pool of oil situation.

Quote:
But dominator is a gun and much like any gun, 'It can take an unwarranted "Shoot to Kill" approach with certain targets.'
Yeah, but most good marskmen using a normal hand-gun are usually able to shoot to subdue but not kill (shooting someone in the leg, for example, can do this if it's a good shot).



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengar View Post
.... Now you're just making assumptions and presenting them as if they were fact.
Asking questions is making assumptions and presenting them as fact?

Not at all. My questions were designed to point out how you are making assumptions and presenting them as facts.

The fact is that we don't know if Akane's employer even had the option of saying "no" to her (i.e. "No, we don't want you for this job position"). So there's no basis for you to write "Nope, it's actually employers who refuse to hire people with anything short of an A rank."

For all we know, employers may have little-to-no say in the matter.



Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf View Post

My arguments in support for the Sibyl System come from this angle. It's easy to dismiss dystopian fiction as something that could never happen in real life. It's much more fun, on the other hand, to imagine how it could have come to pass.
I don't think that the Sibyl System needs to be supported (by argumentation) in order to show how it could come to pass.

The War on Drugs came to pass, but many would argue (correctly, imo) that it's rather indefensible.

And, truth be told, I see some similarities between the Sibyl System and the War on Drugs.

The Sibyl System criminalizes people simply for having dangerous minds/moods, even if they haven't hurt anybody. The War on Drugs criminalizes people simply for using drugs that affect their mind/moods (sometimes in dangerous ways), even if they don't hurt anybody.

The Sibyl System is defended on the basis of how it "promotes healthy living". The same is true of the War on Drugs.

The Sibyl System is seen as a means to prevent serious crime. And you know what? Much the same is true of the War on Drugs.

And just like I would argue that the War on Drugs creates many societal problems (turning otherwise law-abiding drug-users into serious criminal elements due to the effects of incarceration), I can see much the same with the Sibyl System (turning otherwise law-abiding citizens into serious criminals due to how they snap under the weight of the system).


Quote:
Because, quite frankly, I would be somewhat disappointed if, in the end, all I got from this show is a dystopian view that is a no-brainer to hate.
The War on Drugs is a no-brainer to hate, but it's still there, and it's still causing societal problems every day. If Gen is making social commentary on foolish societal systems that nonetheless enjoy a lot of support, I think there's some value in that.


A big part of the reason why I've argued a lot against the Sibyl System is that I think there's a decent chance that Gen is aiming for a thematic point against societal systems similar to it, and/or that Gen is aiming for a thematic point against the premises behind such systems. Perhaps Psycho-Pass is actually a counter-argument against determinism. One of the most effective ways to argue against a philosophy is to show how, if you take that philosophy to its logical extreme, you get something that almost nobody would actually want.

To a certain extent, this is what Orwell did with 1984 - He shows how if you take the authoritarian propaganda-based nationalism that abounded throughout much of the era that Orwell lived in, and if you take it to its logical extreme, you get a rather chilling dystopia.

Personally, I find this no less compelling than an ambiguous work that just asks questions. In fact, having a narrative that effectively makes a thematic point against a certain prominent philosophy can be very, very compelling, imo.
__________________
Triple_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-30, 18:36   Link #140
Arya
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2004
These days I'm really busy so I have no time to join actively the 3d and read each post, but at least I'll post some considerations
As I said before to me it's harder judging the single act of a character or such, because, so far it is questionable depending on each own believe, I can see that. So I'm questioning more on where this kind of system is leading the society to. I mean, my idea is that so far there's nothing really black or white yet (ok, to me there is, but let that aside) but there are symptoms that indicate a negative trend. And aside from the single event of killing a victim because she has been "infected" or a micro society in which bullying is encouraged as a mean to release the stress (but ultimately to keep up the productivity) from a wider perspective what I'm seeing is that this system is pushing people to stop thinking, this is the real problem there. People are (starting to) not questioning on what is right or what is wrong because something, the Sibyl system, started thinking for them. As a side effect obviously, not as a main goal.

Spoiler for the little parable of Arya and the SATNAV:


Here the moral. May I say that the SATNAV is evil? No. May I say that Arya is evil? Neither. But I can say that deep down Arya has lost something in the process. And if now Arya is dumber than before surely it's not a big deal, but what if this kind of process would apply to something different, something more deeper than going home? Like judging people. Today we would say, the Sibyl system is cool but I can judge people by myself. Tomorrow we would say, f**k I chose the wrong person last time, let's Sybil do it for us. And the day after? (pun half intended).

What I'm trying to say is that what is wrong is the direction of Psycho Pass evolution, and not something specific, not yet. But Akane will save all us

Somehow I can see some similarities between Psycho Pass and what Agent Smith told once:
Quote:
Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
Good purposes, but tragic outcome.
__________________

The meaning of things lies not in the things themselves, but in our attitude towards them.
Arya is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.