Hypothetically, what do you think your political leanings would be as a citizen of the world during the Mechanical Apartheid?

chris2315 · 13日前

Personally, I'd still be pro-augmentation. I don't think a single incident, no matter how horrifying, can be taken as definitive evidence that a technology will never be safe. Progress shouldn't be stopped out of fear, and the fact is that augmentation did work just fine right up until that point. Assuming that, like everyone else, I wouldn't know the real cause of the incident, I'd support a thorough investigation of what caused the malfunction and research to make augmentation safer in the future.

Ebu-Gogo · 13日前

I would idealistically consider myself pro-augmentation, but like you said, I'd realistically be one of the regular people who's not aware of the cause for the Incident, right in the middle of watching a large portion of the human population wreak havoc on the rest of us seemingly out of nowhere.

That's... probably a hard pill to swallow for most people. It would be like if all computers in the world suddenly exploded, or gave the users a huge electric shock resulting in severe disfigurement or even death, and the companies behind them incapable of giving one consistent and valid reason for why this thing that took so many lives (and cost a lot of money because, damn, they screwed up a lot of construction sites) happened.

People wouldn't instantly stop using them, but there'd be a lot of questions, some riots resulting from lack of information, people dividing into groups that might follow opportunists ("I have the answers, I can keep you safe, use this software and nothing will happen, just pay me a shitload of money"), religious angles, politicians using it to push agendas, etc.

Now imagine if that involved people doing the harm. The discussion would be even more highly charged. You have a situation where, basically, the entire world is victim to something that happened behind the scenes, something that could have been avoided, but is now attributed to a certain population of people who themselves don't even fully understand why and how.

Progress is important, but technological progress can't leave social progress behind without consequences. The whole apartheid/ban we got going in MD is a bad solution that halts both social and technological progress. It's obviously not the answer. So I'd agree with you on the need for restrictions until the actual cause of the problem is found. The truth is you literally cannot kill progress, you can't hold back technological advancements indefinitely. It needs to be given space, but walls as well.

LimeMacaron · 13日前

I guess it depends on how augs are implemented, how many people are using them, how they're being used, and what their potentials are.

One big issue that arises is whether or not augmentations can be monitored / modified remotely. Then much like how a modern-day online server could get hacked, a live augmented human being could get hacked. And when something gets hacked, control is relinquished.

A compromised augmented human could possibly be forced to harm him/herself or harm others. Or in some cases, a bio-hacker could commit murder outright by disabling critical augs or setting them to dangerous levels. Other forms of crime would become absolutely terrifying.

If neural augs are able to fully process conscious thought, then a bio-hacker could theoretically hijack and monitor the data streams for nefarious purposes. Or this could become a situation even worse than the NSA thing, where now you can literally get people on thoughtcrime.

A bio-hacker could function just like Killgrave from Jessica Jones. And the worst part is that anyone who is hacked might be completely unable to signal for help or let anyone know they are no longer in control -- sort of like the victims of the Yeerks from Animorphs.

Neural augs in general could also make the class divide worse if only rich people could afford even "tame" neural augs like the ability to memorize perfectly -- they'd almost never fail tests in school. People with augmented arms / legs / backs would be prime candidates for physical labor and create pressure for people to get augmented or be priced out of the market, much like how there is pressure today to go to college or risk never getting that interview.

There are other considerations with certain augs. For example, if you replace everyone's heart with something safe, durable, and functional, one of the leading causes of death have been eliminated, and suddenly people start living a lot longer. How does society change when you have so many people sticking around, cheating death? How does this affect overpopulation? What if it's too expensive and limited only to the rich and powerful? How does this affect the job and labor markets when you suddenly get flooded with applicants who've been around for decades and decades who have completely mastered their craft? How does the economy get affected when wealth becomes more localized? How does this affect things like retirement funding? What about political deadlocks, where problems never get solved because you've got two sides fighting each other indefinitely?

How do you stop someone from making illegal augmentations? If I've stored something dangerous inside of me, how does anyone have the right to invade my privacy and personal autonomy? Suddenly the issue becomes a lot more complicated than the TSA bio-scanners debate.

I think augmentations introduce a lot of interesting questions. Right now we only use "augmentations" when we are repairing something that's broken in some way (replacement hip, artificial heart valves, organ transplants, etc). But things change a bit when we use augmentations to enhance abilities beyond what is possible naturally. Goes back a bit to the steroids debate.

I am tempted to say I'm all for it, but a lot of this depends on what kinds of augs are possible and what effects they would have, because it is possible that they could cause more harm than good.

Of course, it's also possible that augmentations add so much value that a lot of problems get solved. Imagine how much less expensive it would be and how much less time it would take for people to do infrastructure repairs. Neural augs could help assist in arriving at other technological solutions, resulting in a self-building cascade similar to a theoretical "singularity." If problems become more easily solved, it is also possible that we can better optimize our current processes to help remove scarcity so that society can live better as a whole. In other words even if there are inequalities, the minimum standard of living might be so high that people no longer care (and if you do? I imagine "there's an aug for that").

tusing · 13日前

100% pro-augmentation. We're talking about evolving our own species here. No need to hold back. Regulate, keep in check? Sure. But no need to hold development back.

but the Incident of every augmented person on the planet glitching violently shows that the technology is too dangerous for widespread use.

"Hackers released the social security numbers of everyone in [database here]. Clearly, this shows computers should not be used for storing any sensitive data - if they should be used at all!"

Augmented people were targeted - it wasn't a mere "glitch". If someone created a biological virus to make, say, people with eyes go crazy, would you say we should not have eyes anymore? I draw this parallel because augmentations are just as important to some people, if not more so, than their biological counterparts.

No more "at will" augmentation.

You have no right to decide how I improve my body. You can not impose a cap on my lifespan. If I want to live forever and become an augmented god, you have no right to restrict how I choose to exist.

There will always be dictators, autocrats who will wish to impose their will and worldview on my own body and humanity - regardless of if they have the right to do so or not. In this regards, I support something like Rabi'ah, but with an augmented government instead of a corporate one.

IAmIcePho3nix · 13日前

From a narrative standpoint, I think the problem in Human Revolution and Mankind Divided is that we never get to see the horrors of augmentation from a personal perspective.

We were in Panchaea when the incident happened, and we pretty much stopped the attack right away. Then in Mankind Divided, it jumps to the world a few years later when the dust has already settled. We never witnessed the chaos in the cities or the murders or the riots.

As players, we love augmentations because they allow us to sneak around, dispatch foes, and generally feel like powerful badasses. Depending on your playstyle, you probably feel like you use your powers for the greater good. So when you see NPCs spouting anti-aug sentiments, we immediately are locked into thinking they're nothing more than small-minded, discriminating jerks.

But if the game had somehow allowed us to see firsthand what some of these NPCs went through - as they watched their world torn apart by unstoppable mechanically enhanced beings - rather than have the effects of the incident delivered to us through news reports, cutscenes, and whatnot, I think we'll find it a lot easier to at least empathize with their views.

thatfool · 13日前

I'm fully in favor of augmentation as it exists IRL right now. Pacemakers, retinal implants, insulin pumps, mechanical prostheses, and so on, are all good things.

In the Deus Ex universe there is an additional aspect; people got augmented in order to gain an advantage on the labor market. This then forced others to also get augmented, and so on. This is a problem, but it should not be solved by limiting augmentations. IRL, this would currently be treated as a mental illness, but that's also not optimal.

There's also that it's always VersaLife that controls access via Neuropozyne or Ambrosia. And people im the DX universe generally don't seem to care about security at all (smart locks that can be bypassed by off the shelf multitools, I mean, come on?) . These aspects would have to be addressed.

drewie181 · 14日前

Something tells me it's a bit too late to put such a restriction on who gets augmented when the means of being so and its research grew so much. Your stance on such matter is suitable and in my opinion the best for how it should have been handled, however only if it was tackled before-hand by the government, before the problem grew.

When there is power, it will always be corrupted. Same for augmentations. I'm in line with Hugh Darrow's stance. I don't like how he had to show his point... but he didn't either.

iHeartCandicePatton · 13日前

Damn, that's a pretty well-thought out position. Respect.

PillowTalk420 · 13日前

I think the whole idea as presented in MD is backwards, which makes it hard to form an idea about how the system works in the game. Augs, who in previous games were often the 1%; rich, able to afford both the augmentations and the rejection therapy, are now relegated to peasantry. A complete 180 role-reversal. It just doesn't make much sense that the poor slubs who didn't have augs and didn't control major corporations/governments were able to sway laws in their favor.

In reality, I am, what I have been told, is a Singularist. I would love to have a cyborg body and basically be immortal. I can't even fathom why anyone would not want that, except in the case of the old Deus Ex terms, where only the rich could afford to be cyborgs and those who couldn't and ended up being augmented anyway (like Jensen was) getting fucked over with the high cost of Neropozyne shots. That's a fucked up world. But if it was something everyone could get, it really would be forcing our own evolution, just like Sarif wanted.

rilgebat · 13日前

Personally, I think the Aug Incident would've blown the lid off the Illuminati. With millions dead, the whole thing with Darrow's "demonstration", and the biochip replacement leaves way too many questions.

Zarzelius · 13日前

The main problem lies within HR, in which most of the augmented people never asked for augs in the first place. So it's a bit of "Have a gun, whether you like it or not so I can then shoot you because you're armed" kinda paradox. Interesting imo.

opopi123 · 13日前

Siding with Taggart. allowed but regulated

lastfirstborn1 · 13日前

I'm all for personal freedoms, but draw the line harshly at making sure one person's freedoms dont harm other people's. So I'd be pro Aug so long as no one is attacking anyone. It would suck that many can't afford it to compete in the job market, so I'd vote for careers to keep the field somewhat even and respectful. As for military, government does what it wants. Always has. And for police, keep an eye out for abuse, but in theory anything that keeps both them and the public safer, I'm for. Same goes for medicine really.

kunuri · 13日前

Living for the Church of the Machine God and augmenting my way down the path of ascension, the only true red-pill.

Dunan · 13日前

I haven't read the responses because I don't want to risk spoiling MD (I'm only at the beginning), but I'm 100% pro-augmentation for people who got them to make up for disabilities. I'm hoping that the game brings up the difference between people who augmented themselves beyond normal human capabilities and those who did it just to lift themselves up to become normal.

More thoughts when I finish MD.

LePopeUrban · 12日前

I'd be pro augmentation, even elective augmentation, but I'd also advocate for stricter manufacturer controls.

The problem with MD's handling of the incident is that it seems the manufacturers weren't held accountable for the failings of their product. Sure, Sarif and the whole industry crashed due to failing public trust, but nowhere did I find infromation that indicated they were held legally liable for the perceived vulnerabilities in the augments.

Regardless of what you know about the augments, or the reasoning for the incident, its pretty clear everyone is aware that aumented people weren't in control of their actions, and that it seems to have been an isolated, rather than a systemic problem, given the millions of augmented people in the world. However, it doesn't appear anyone really looked too hard at why the incident happenned in the first place.

I mean because the Illuminati, obviously, but from the lens of reality, the level of spin a theoretical "real" Illuminati could have is just not sufficient to end all serious public investigations in to such a public worldwide tragedy.

Now, we know this is because the incident was designed, but if I or someone I know was a victim of basically mind control, shouldn't there have been a class action suit or something? Like, augs were a very much "monied class" trend at the time, so it seems unlikely everyone would just be like "well fuck these robot arms then" as much as "why the fuck did these all go nuts at the same time?"

Or did I forget/miss something about public response to the situation? The public distrust after the fact I get, but having augs by and large become an impoverished underclass overnight seems... unlikely simply because most augs were either independantly wealthy, or subsidized heavily by wealthy employers that depended on augs as part of their overall business strategy.

I just find it hard to believe augmentation tech would be stigmatized overnight and every rich person and business would bail on it overnight given how universally accepted a part of the human experience it seemed to be prior to the incident.

Its as if one nuclear reactor failed catastrophically and from that point forward the whole world was like "well fuck nuclear power"

In reality, a large part of the populace may view the technology with a fatalistic and doom-saying skepticism, but it would inevitably be overpowered by the rules of the free market, and progress would be slowed, not basically halted, right? I mean that's the closest correlary I can think of, chernobyl, fukushima, etc. Sure there are lots of skeptical, less informed public interests decrying the tech even exists, but the vast majority of the scientific community and the governments and businesses that are looking for a leg up temper that easily.

Deusex

Subreddit dedicated to the Deus Ex series. Please stay out of the ladies' restroom.

Rules - Hover For More Info

Rule 1 - Follow Reddiquette

Rule 2 - Right To Anonymity

Rule 3 - NSFW = NSFW

Rule 4 - Nobody Likes Spoilers

Rule 5 - Content Must Be Relevant

Spoiler Tags

調停者