September 13th, 2012, 2:00 am

Average Rating: 5.00
(it's spelled different, but it sounds like "boom")
Author's Comments:

Reply Wolfie_Inu, September 13th, 2012, 2:37 am

Lettertipe / font: "HVD Peace" (urbanfonts dot com)

Ek weet ek het gesĂȘ ek sou eers later opdateer, maar toe voel ek sleg en maak 'n nuwe bladsy vir hierdie week. Ek beplan wel om hierdie naweek die volgende bladsy ook te doen :)

I know I said I'd only update later, but then I felt bad and made a new page for this week. I plan to also do the next page this weekend :)


Jane: Just think logically. They come from somewhere in outer space. We've got no guarantee that they can even think like us ... / ... let alone that they believe in the rights of sapient beings, as we understand it ... or are even worthy of it in the first place!
Louwrens: Well, they think enough like Khanites that they're nearly impossible to track down ...
Jane: As I already explained: they're programmed. You might as well say that a fictional character really exists because he's written realistically ... / They've had lots of time to observe us ... but to be able to act like us, doesn't mean that they think like us ...

Louwrens: (thinks) I don't have a choice ... but will she still trust me then? / (aloud) Jane, you're wrong ... the Om-Ankh and Khanites are the same ...
Jane: You can believe that, but you can't know it ...
Louwrens: No, I ... I know how the Om-Ankh think, because I- ... I ...

Louwrens: ... what the ... !
Jane: Fall flat!

Reply Advertisement, May 26th, 2019, 7:54 am

User's Comments:

Reply GabrielsThoughts, September 13th, 2012, 12:28 pm

Meh, the worthiness system is flawed. It's based too much on the fallibility and fragility of one's ego... Also, the only people who are heavily invested in it are usually flakes.

Reply Wolfie_Inu, September 13th, 2012, 3:16 pm

@GabrielsThoughts: ... worthiness system?

Reply GabrielsThoughts, September 13th, 2012, 8:21 pm

Worthy-ness Worth=Value

People of higher status, let's say celebrities, are given credit for abilities or qualities of character they may not possess, simply because they are more "worthy" than joe average. Serial killers also use this to their advantage.

Their flaws, and incompetence, are minimised to a spectacular degree unless they do something particularly stupid. Usually things that nobody in their right mind would do, because it violates common sense. Which, isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as it doesn't injure someone else.

Whereas some people are considered untrustworthy on site because of binary thinking and first impressions.

Reply Wolfie_Inu, September 14th, 2012, 1:51 am

@GabrielsThoughts: OK, I'm just not 100% sure how that's relevant tho.

Jane suspects that the Om-Ankh are not worthy of the rights of sapient beings (as defined by the Khanites) because they don't share the Khanites' value system, or indeed, mode of thought.

A computer, for example, can do pretty amazing things, including "acting" like a human being if programmed in enough detail. However, this doesn't mean that computers deserve human rights.

Similarly, Jane has no direct way of knowing how or whether the Om-Ankh truly "think", and hence whether they qualify as sapient in the Khanite definition (and thereby deserve the rights accorded to sapient beings).

Reply GabrielsThoughts, September 14th, 2012, 10:04 am

Tricky Sapient and sentience are often confused, almost all animals are sentient. Computers may never have that capacity, although they have the capacity for procedural memory. Sociopaths are dead inside and most likely are operating on auto-pilot.

Empathy is supposedly one of those things scientists believe develops with time, despite the fact that I think it goes the other way around. As time moves forward people become more apathetic or indifferent.

Even if the Om-Ankh met the Khanite definition of "proctologists from space" (little grey men) that would require a level of technology and intelligence beyond their current abilities, or an intelligence that has since been lost or deemed inefficient as a bow and arrow is when compared with a gun.

Either way it's asymmetrical warfare. Justice and fairness are don't exactly meet the same definition either.

Post A Comment

Verlore Geleentheid