Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

Implications of non-perfect backups

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
Gee4orce Gee4orce's picture
Implications of non-perfect backups
For me, perfect brain backups are the least believable part of EP - even moreso than the Pandora gates. I just don't think it'd be possible to account for all the quantum goings-on that are probably vital to brain function, never mind compress that into a storage medium 'about the size of a grape'. So what if backups are 'Beta fork quality' (or maybe slightly better) ? Backups are just that - backups, incase of emergency. If backups are imperfect, then that means that Alpha forks are impossible (which is a better reason for then not to exist instead of the rather weak 'social reasons' given in the rulebook). Of course, there's always the rumor of secret black projects to create the perfect Alpha fork… It would mean that egocasting is at best something you do to send a Beta fork somewhere remote, rather than a regular form of transport. Space transport would be far more common. If you needed to travel to a remote world quickly you'd egocast a beta fork temporarily, but if you needed to be there in person, you'd have to travel there. Resleeving is not something you do lightly - unless you like taking a drop in your stats. This could be a real setting-changer for many people. I'd say that you could recover lost stats over time, but that would require Rez points as normal. If you die and are re-instantiated from your backup you are at a bit of a disadvantage for a while as you rebuild and to some extent re-learn your skills. Infomorphs are already fully digital, so they should be able to alpha fork and re-sleeve without penalty - the process of becoming an infomorph is where you take the hit. I quite like this twist on the EP setting - does it break too much though ?
Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Well, changing bodies, questions of identity, cheap immortality, etc. are all core elements of the EP setting, so it does impact it fairly greatly if you are crippling such a large element of it...
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Yes, this is very interesting. It'd also be a totally different game (which is neutral on the good/bad scale). :) I'd be interested in seeing this developed, because I like spaceships and less-perfect transhumanism, etc.
Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Gee4orce wrote:
For me, perfect brain backups are the least believable part of EP - even moreso than the Pandora gates. I just don't think it'd be possible to account for all the quantum goings-on that are probably vital to brain function, never mind compress that into a storage medium 'about the size of a grape'. So what if backups are 'Beta fork quality' (or maybe slightly better) ? Backups are just that - backups, incase of emergency. If backups are imperfect, then that means that Alpha forks are impossible (which is a better reason for then not to exist instead of the rather weak 'social reasons' given in the rulebook).
As a neuroscientist I don't buy that there is any important quantum stuff going on in the brain until I see some strong evidence for it. But I do agree that perfect scanning of a biological brain is a fairly tough goal, and that we shouldn't expect perfect copies. I like the idea that the copies are not quite the same as the original. However, your idea essentially requires the whole EP setting to be redone. Egocasting is out, so hence it will take years to get anywhere in the outer solar system. *Very few* people survived the Fall, the rest are betas - who are significantly less brilliant than the original. Once you are a synthmorph you can preserve your identity perfectly and egocast fine, so synthmorphs will slowly be taking over. Death is a significantly bigger problem - not to mention brain damage. Overall, I see this setting as even bleaker than normal EP: a few million "real humans" slowly dwindling as members "defect" to become infomorphs/synthmorphs, a vast mass of dumbed-down copies of mankind that are even more plausible to enslave, an outer solar system where there is little point in having any biomorphs (and biospheres) except for aesthetics. As I would run things, uploading is a mature discipline in EP. Mainly because the code and equipment needed to do it well was distributed widely for the desperate evacuations during the Fall. A year before that would have been expensive best-brand technology. That doesn't mean it is perfect: to properly scan a brain you need to disassemble it quite profoundly. What biomorph brains and stacks do is that they cheat a bit by having a fairly artificial neural structure with nanotech support that can be read and written (this is IMHO where the big, hard to swallow fudge comes in - the writing to brains is less believable than reading from brains). This process is however always noisy. When you sleeve somebody their ego changes slightly in the new brain, and similarly each readout produces a slightly different ego from what was in the brain. This is small enough that most people are fine with it identity-wise. Part of this is that human identity is pretty sloppy to begin with: you will form a narrative identity from whatever memories you have, and it takes plenty of disruption to make people feel they are not themselves anymore. So even when they do change they will insist they are the same. Furthermore, our memories and personalities are to some degree attractor states that persist even with minor disruptions. A mis-connected neuron will relearn its functions based on the largely correct rest of the brain, returning to the right connections most of the time. Acknowledging that sleeving and uploading affects identity is not done in polite society: nobody wants to be told that they are not "really" who they are. The dualists and monists who could not accept the functionalist worldview hesitated to upload during the Fall and ended up TITAN food. So the people who tended to survive already had philosophies accepting this kind of identity changes. In game terms I don't think I would do much, except that characters jumping morphs too often should get a slow accumulation of "neural noise". Maybe a lowering of LUC, maybe some weird neural damage or occasional glitches. Ideally one should just convey to the players a mild sense of existential dread. Meanwhile the AGIs look forward to inherit the world.
Extropian
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
I agree: brain-copying is almost certainly very imperfect, but not in ways that the 'ego' (self-consciousness) is prepared to care about. It still basically believes it is itself, regardless of little glitches that it doesn't even notice. The OP is talking about 'lossy' copying, in extremely noticeable ways (significant Aptitude degradation). In some ways, EP already has this (continuity, alienation, Lucidity, stress, etc.), but the question is still interesting. Basically, what happens if you start moving the threshold? What if every fork dropped your Apts by just 1? 2? How and at what point would that completely alter the EP universe? Fun stuff. Another factor is Rez, basically. It's not an in-character quantity, but between functional immortality and psychosurgery, people can basically expect to do 'brain therapy' to compensate for forking/backup losses, right? (And improve beyond their original levels, of course).
Gee4orce Gee4orce's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
One of the key themes of EP is horror, and yet it's pretty hard to be that scared of anything if you know you've got a perfect backup copy of yourself that you can revert to if things go wrong. Yes, there's the possibility of psychological damage to your ego that can never be repaired, but that's probably too ephemeral to be truly frightening, at least to a player. I like the thought that if you resleeve you aren't going to be quite the person you were before, least not until you rebuild your skills somewhat. I like the idea that space is big and the distances are huge, and getting anywhere is going to take you a long time. At for the infogees - well theyve had 10 years of runtime to rebuild themselves, that should be plenty to recover the damage. Maybe part of the reason for the depopulation is that the uploaded choose not to resleeve because they don't want to get stuck in a biomorph again - they prefer the freedom that digital existence gives them. Looking at the rules for Beta forks I things they are a bit harsh for what I had in mind, but a drop of 5 points all attributes could be just the right amount to give pause for thought.
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
That's the beauty, really. You can make the drop anything, even a little random (1d10/2, etc.?). It could affect apts or skills, or both. If it was numerically minimal (like, -1 to all, or -1d10/5), would that break the whole universe? What about that suggested -5, that's a significant chunk?
Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Gee4orce wrote:
One of the key themes of EP is horror, and yet it's pretty hard to be that scared of anything if you know you've got a perfect backup copy of yourself that you can revert to if things go wrong.
The problem isn't that there is going to be a happy version of you in the future. The problem is that there will be a you who is dead, in anguish or continually insane. One of the interesting horrors of EP is that it easier to damn an ego to hell than to kill it. Put it in a torture simspace on a server somewhere and forget about it. I have had characters accidentally damn forks of themselves to an eternity of pointless, closed simspace. But yes, something many players fear more than character death is character degradation. If every return from the stack is slightly eroded (and the offsite backup is always out of date), then local death will be more painful. But that assumes you want to keep local deaths an important matter. Many people seem to think that a world where death has no meaning at all is more deeply unsettling than a world where it is permanent and unavoidable.
Extropian
Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Gee4orce wrote:
One of the key themes of EP is horror, and yet it's pretty hard to be that scared of anything if you know you've got a perfect backup copy of yourself that you can revert to if things go wrong. Yes, there's the possibility of psychological damage to your ego that can never be repaired, but that's probably too ephemeral to be truly frightening, at least to a player.
What's scariest to a player is the loss of their morph and Rez points, if you're talking purely mechanical. Plus, as anyone who's taken a drama class can tell you, death is the end of good storytelling; once someone dies, the scene ends. If the storyteller does the job right, they can really prolong your suffering until you're not trying to avoid your death but cause it. Also, remember that death means your adventure is likely over; you failed. Just because you come back doesn't mean you lack consequences, like an angry employer or a group of Exsurgents that just started to rampage your home habitat, or even simply the terror of being killed. Plus, if you really want to bring the point home, you could always devise a situation that threatens their back-up.
Gee4orce wrote:
I like the thought that if you resleeve you aren't going to be quite the person you were before, least not until you rebuild your skills somewhat. I like the idea that space is big and the distances are huge, and getting anywhere is going to take you a long time.
Technically, you're not the same person. If I copy you, then pop you in the skull, then create a copy a minute later, you are definitively dead; your continuity has ended. Even cortical stacks are questionable in their maintaining continuity. That is, unless some ephermal quality is contained between you but I have no evidence for such so I can only assume it isn't. In game terms, though, a very real argument could be made for this, since such a quality does exist in the form of the players.
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Technically according to who? :) The mind probably thinks it's the same person, whether killed, forked, or whatever. That's how it works. It's the whole 'is the universe destroyed and created every moment?' thing. If there's measurable degradation, that changes things significantly.
Gee4orce Gee4orce's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Axel the Chimeric wrote:
What's scariest to a player is the loss of their morph and Rez points, if you're talking purely mechanical.
Which kind of begs the question, why would players ever choose to Egocast ? They've just invested a ton of character points at creation to build a cool custom morph, and the gm announces that mission #1 for Firewall is to egocast to the ass-end of the solar system and leave all that behind ?! :) The whole issue of continuity is a can of worms in itself - if Alpha forks are technically possible, then which of them is 'you' ? Doesn't the alpha fork have equal rights with the original ? Is there even any way of determining which copy is the alpha and which is the original ? These aren't necessarily questions that need answering here and now - they are part of the mystery and horror of the setting, and something worth exploring in-game. (A pretty cool campaign idea is to have the players sent to hunt down illegal alpha forks of themselves, only to discover eventually that THEY are the alpha forks…) In a setting that has Psi powers, it's not too much of a stretch of the imagination to say the consciousness is somehow external to the physical self, and distributed between each instance. So if you fork, your sense of 'self' gets spread out between all the instances. The more forks you have, the more 'distant' you seem to everybody else. When the forks are merged or erased, your sense of self gets more focussed, but you have no loss of continuity, even if you've crossed morphs in doing so. If you get re-instantiated from a backup then you do get a discontinuity. I quite like this idea, as it neatly solves continuity, and also discourages forking too much. Also, the idea that the *player* is the external source of consciousness of a character is a really, really neat idea. It also answers how the ego created from a backup can have some half-memory of events it never experienced.
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
I really can't support adding souls to a game that seems explicitly designed not to have them. Does this idea depend on the forks being aware of each other's existence, or is it straight-up magic?
Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Yerameyahu wrote:
Technically according to who? :) The mind probably thinks it's the same person, whether killed, forked, or whatever. That's how it works. It's the whole 'is the universe destroyed and created every moment?' thing. If there's measurable degradation, that changes things significantly.
According to logic, really. Just because you think you're someone doesn't make you them, as the long-standing joke about psych wards being filled with Napoleons suggests. An amnesic who loses their memories and sense of identity is still the same person, after all; they just end up tabula rasa. They might reinvent themselves, certainly, but it's still objectively the same person. Now, before I go on, I just want to add...
Yerameyahu wrote:
I really can't support adding souls to a game that seems explicitly designed not to have them. Does this idea depend on the forks being aware of each other's existence, or is it straight-up magic?
I both agree and disagree. Eclipse Phase does not answer the question of the soul, for or against, which is a part of the quest for identity thing. Leaving it unanswered is the best way to do it.
Gee4orce wrote:
Which kind of begs the question, why would players ever choose to Egocast ? They've just invested a ton of character points at creation to build a cool custom morph, and the gm announces that mission #1 for Firewall is to egocast to the ass-end of the solar system and leave all that behind ?! :)
That's why I like to give the players their bodies and starting equipment, rather than having them spend CP on it. I take a certain CP total, based on the size of the group, buy a few morphs, give them a few quirks, and then let the players choose which they want. This means they don't feel entirely like it's theirs, emphasizing the fact that, in EP, your body is as much a tool as a car. Then, when they die or need to give them up, they don't feel so bad.
Gee4orce wrote:
The whole issue of continuity is a can of worms in itself - if Alpha forks are technically possible, then which of them is 'you' ? Doesn't the alpha fork have equal rights with the original ? Is there even any way of determining which copy is the alpha and which is the original ? These aren't necessarily questions that need answering here and now - they are part of the mystery and horror of the setting, and something worth exploring in-game. (A pretty cool campaign idea is to have the players sent to hunt down illegal alpha forks of themselves, only to discover eventually that THEY are the alpha forks…)
The questions of rights and such is answered in a diverse manner across the many habitats in the setting. In the PC, it's generally not really legal to alpha fork outside of special circumstances anyway for precisely this reason, and, in the event that it occurs by accident (like you going missing for a year and your back-up being reinstantiated while you're gone), the reinstantiated back-up would seem like the most likely to get precedence (and this is likely set out in whatever contract you sign for your insurance). Meanwhile, in anarchist habs, there's no such thing as private property or laws anyway, so who cares? As for which is the original, that's easy to answer if they're corporeal; whichever is still in the body is the original. If they're an Infomorph, one would assume that you just look at their process number and see which has been running longer.
Gee4orce wrote:
In a setting that has Psi powers, it's not too much of a stretch of the imagination to say the consciousness is somehow external to the physical self, and distributed between each instance. So if you fork, your sense of 'self' gets spread out between all the instances. The more forks you have, the more 'distant' you seem to everybody else. When the forks are merged or erased, your sense of self gets more focussed, but you have no loss of continuity, even if you've crossed morphs in doing so. If you get re-instantiated from a backup then you do get a discontinuity.
I actually pondered this sort of philosophy myself as an answer to the idea of copying minds; the person's continuity is unbroken and the soul, for lack of a better term, is split across several entities. However, I still ponder whether back-ups count as a loss of continuity in such a case, since they're effectively just alpha forks that are in cold storage.
Gee4orce wrote:
I quite like this idea, as it neatly solves continuity, and also discourages forking too much. Also, the idea that the *player* is the external source of consciousness of a character is a really, really neat idea. It also answers how the ego created from a backup can have some half-memory of events it never experienced.
Glad you like it.
Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
I think it would be fun to introduce souls to EP - but only synthmorphs and AGIs have them. Meat prevents you from having a soul. And the more copies there are of you, the greater your soul will be. Why keep old human prejudices?
Extropian
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Why keep them in bizarro-mirror form? You'll just end up with that crazy Ender's Game philote madness, and EP is supposed to be hard science. Surely all the nano, psi, and uploading is magical enough? :)
Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
All things considered, EP's fairly hard as far as its sci-fi goes. Personally, I love the idea of philosophy coming up in games. It'd be interesting to have a group of Buddhist scholars debating on this sort of thing. As for uploading and nanotech, I'd argue that's on the hard side of the sci-fi scale; it's plausible, at the very least. Psi is fantasy-land, of course, but I have no objection to it myself; it makes the game a little spicier.
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
Well, let's not get into it, but EP uploading and nanotech (esp. swarms and things) both have all the hard edges conveniently smoothed off. They Just Work™, because they're the basis of the setting.
Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
I think that's largely for the same reason so much sci-fi does that kind of thing: So that those without a background in physics, engineering, biology, and so on, can get into it without wondering what buckminsterfullrenes are and why everyone seems to mention them so often. That, and Science Marches On. If you leave the details fuzzy, you don't have to look like an idiot if/when new facts come to light; the game's futurist fiction, not a Kurzweil-esque attempt at explaining how the future will look.
Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture
Re: Implications of non-perfect backups
I do agree, but there's a difference between hiding solutions and hiding problems. I think EP does the latter, out of necessity. I guess this is marginally on the topic of uploading. :)