ARK questionnaire [SPOILERS]

[76561198292631324]

Regarding the questionnaire addressed towards Pathos II crew, are the results artificiated or the answers at least partially come from players answering them? Probably it is artificated, but it would actually provide a lot if it was based on actual peoples answers, updated real time.

[76561198292631324]

These are my answers:


http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=820765636

I voted against pain for gain because any unrealistic dreamn could be a good excuse for torture. Similar to the obtaining of cipher code. This game is really deep.

[76561198292631324]

If the reality is a simulation itself, what is it worth to save anything? If it is merely a dream, an illusion, all this passion causing pain on oneself and others, is madness. On the other hand, there is just unspeakable emptiness, indifference, craving for extinction.

[76561198292631324]

Which, in turn, makes up for madness itself.

[76561198292631324]

The notion is, in the game we deal with a really real world trying to save the artificial, virtual paradise - saying after having completed half the go. But the thing is, how does one distinguish what is real? Perhaps it is a loop, a fractal one - worlds creating worlds, all equally real, all equally fake, without a starting or an end point. What is beyond it, is beyond human concern or ability to be grasped. The existence prolongs itself through self-imposed mechanisms, like nature, always prevailing. Which means if to let it go to allow what should happen, we would be reiterated some place, some time, just like with the ARK. But the struggle is what makes the story.

[76561198292631324]

Eternity among the stars - there is a saying that goes in paraphrase: better to have little in own hand rather than much on a neighbours roof. It was actually about birds. Anyway, if the ARK is to be so good, it is very unlikely to last that long. Philosophical principle or superstition.

Inferior companions - sweet innocent nazism, master race - the true people - and the rest.

Artificial evolution - can hardly recall what this one was about. But I guess it was a concern about loosing humanity due to void of experiencing any physical burdening processes that in noteworthy degree shaped known human stance. My though on this one is that humanity is flexible and it will form itself on the basis of what is available, accordingly with the predispositions and environmental factors, just like human body evolves from a fetus, basing on the instructions recorded in genes and evolutionary impacts. It should work only as efficiently as the the machines or cybernetics trying to stubbornly mimic the work of human brain would allow. Which especially on the longer run is doubtful.

In ARK, the people are gods - they are well, but their ability to change and adapt is by all means handicapped. In the "really real" world they fell unto the laws imposed by another source, deeper one, superior by definition. But now they are bound to what they made themselves, meaning the foundation of their existence carries its creators misdoings, next to technological faults restricting its further efficiency. Someone would eventually have to break away from the ARK to improve or at least maintain the outerior technology supporting it.

[76561198292631324]

Just like art is a mimicry, a reflection of nature or higher order, the ARK is mimicry or reflecton of human life. If we are lucky, perhaps we will find genius spirit in there, redefining what a human is and how it can expand creatively. Otherwise, it is futile, nothing more than a limited program, out of which one would need to break free to find own, personal meaning. If there is anything left that would still be able to undertake the task of breaking away.

[76561198292631324]

Taking scans operate entirely basing on machines, I say this method is compromised unless by that time science had claimed to have fully understood the human brain and the myth behind it, the question of identity. That should also be the world of quantum computers. Until then, the only way is to take the entire brains along with the central nervous systems and plug them directly into the machine. Hard to tell how long would such a system be able to physically survive or what the response of a plugged person should be, but ultimately to include the mystery factor seems more holistic resolution than trying to fabricate it with other means.

[76561198292631324]

Artificial evolution question - opinion of agent Smith:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb6yOklzHMI

[76561198292631324]

What turned my attention is how many things and possibilities Catherine saw in her environment - to which she had possibly an instant wide access - only with the arrival of Simon, who made certain points. Like part of her creativity, that enabled her to start the ARK project, faded away since the digitalization, affecting the thought process at least in certain aspects. In life such things happen as well, new qualities allow us to see more, but I believe there were things she ought to notice or take concern about if her perception was correct. But this is just a theory.