Forums > RWBY

Pyrrha Nikos general discussion

Posts (38239)

  • BakedBrain

    BakedBrain FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33747031 - 4 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    Otto von Lilienthal said "There has to be sacrifice" and went ahead setting a good example.


    Please do not clog up the forum with statements, that the discussion is of no interest for you. Just drop out if this is the case. You will notice that most people will not carry on alone (3 entries at the most), and if they are not alone, it is interesting for at least two and that is enough.


    I for my part pretty much enjoy this discussion about good and evil (or doubleplus ungood, plus ungood or just simple ungood).

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747032 - 4 days ago

    In reply to BakedBrain

    The only person clogging up the forum is actually YOU.

    and I didnt say it was no interest to me I said we werent discussing BAD we were discussing EVIL.

    A completely different subject you tried to change our discussion to when we never spoke on Bad never gave it any attention and so forth.

    Its also a subject we both know will just circle around generating posts on people being unable to agree so we instead agreed to disagree and move on.

    Something you are unwilling to do and that makes you the one clogging up the form on a subject that clearly the rest of the forum doesnt share your interest in.


    By trying to change the subject to something we werent speaking on you in fact clogged the forum up with your statements that have no meaning and weight to the subject that was at hand.


    And this is an ongoing problem with you were you miss the point of a subject and try to change it to something it is not.

  • mach56gs

    mach56gs

    #33747033 - 4 days ago

    In reply to BakedBrain


    These are not retroactive patches. These fit the universe and were always a part of the design of the movies - especially when there is no perfect balance when it comes to designing warships. 


    The fact that the Death Star was constructed in secret and the Empire was counting on the fact that the Rebels had no forward plan to find a structural weakness is a key detail you're forgetting. It's a single exhaust port in a station the size of the moon that was supposed to be a black box. As the Rebels said - many people died to get the vital information that Leia was carrying (the crucial piece of plot that the main characters were carrying for the entire movie) and it's a wonder that the people aboard the deathstar even realized during the attack that the Rebels were aiming for the exhaust port, save Vader. All of the fighters in the world were horribly unprepared for taking down the deathstar, even with it's crucial weakness - and with the power and capabilities of a deathstar I don't see what the fuss about design is - it's like complaining about an aircraft carrier not being properly outfitted for ship-to-ship combat.


    I don't even have to get into Rogue One to explain why the Empire wasn't inept in it's logic or why it's design is acceptable/logical, though I will do nothing to argue in defense of stormtroopers, their aim sucks.


    I have no idea what you're saying about fuel/ammo storage, that is not the case with the Lucrehulk. Aircraft carriers use elevators to lift munitions up to the flight deck, and it's just a fact of life there is no 'ideal' place to store explosives, or power generators, or any critical system. They're a liability, but they're also necessary. Just look at the Lucrehulk design and try and improve upon it - if you are really complaining about the security of the power generators then I dunno man... it's placed in the safest possible area possible. And once again, it's original design was a cargo ship retrofitted to be a carrier.


    Flybys? I have no idea what you're onto there. That is a job for star destroyers, not for the death-star. 


    I am not getting into Warhammer. 

  • BakedBrain

    BakedBrain FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33747041 - 4 days ago

    In reply to mach56gs

    The problem with the Death Star is, that its armament is basically 1906 Dreadnought, apart from the superlaser which is not so useful when fighting moving ships. There is one class of artillery (the turbo lasers). And you go with this in a carrier heavy environment. Because of the size, fitting "fighter bases" on the surface would be negligible concerning extra weight. The always active combat air patrol of even a modest deployment of fighters (relative to size) would have been able to stop the attack.

    At best this is game like design, something like escorts trump fighters, fighters trump capitals, capitals trump escorts. but only if you play dumb for the sake of balance or drilling plotholes.


    And an aircraft carrier is excellently suited for counter ship action.


    And I'd rather not look into the plans or I get some serious non-compact design nervousness


    The Death Star or other super sized ships are not flying by, they are passed by smaller ships to show off their size. You can play dramatic music or roll credits while the smaller ships pass kilometers of spaceship-deco. 


  • mach56gs

    mach56gs

    #33747048 - 3 days ago

    In reply to BakedBrain


    No, it's armament is not comparable to anything because it's literally the size of a small moon. It also can destroy planets and has shown to be capable of singling out ships and accurately hitting them with it's stupid turbo-laser. Weight isn't even an issue because it's space.


    No, an aircraft carrier does not have material to trade with a battleship's fusillade. It's perfectly capable of surviving a couple rounds, maybe, but the carrier's entire design is to serve as an launch-point for fighters that coordinate strikes hundreds of miles away with no risk to the carrier. That's why it's the superior ship.


    I don't even know what your last paragraph is saying, I don't even know why showing size matters when the whole point of argument was the design choices and if they were logical ones given the universe.

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747049 - 3 days ago

    In reply to mach56gs

    What is good?  Great idea, let's discuss.  I'll start I guess.  Starting with the most basic of things.  Can anything be good or bad for unliving things?  I suppose it can if you mean it in the sense of whether it becomes destroyed or not.  Say, an atom being broken in two.  


    However, if the question is of goodness in the sense of morality, I can't imagine that anything that is not able to think at at least some level, can possibly care about anything, like caring about whether it itself exists or not.  


    I think it's clear that since we humans are even having this discussion, we have a level of intelligence that is able to have a sense of morality, to care about things so that things could even be considered good or bad.


    But before we go further, I would question, what is thought?  Does a computer think?  Does a virus think?  Does a bacteria think?  Also, how does thought work?  A computer can compute, a human mind can also compute (by compute I mean calculate).  A computer has electric impulses that does the computing as code.  A human brain has electro-chemical impulses that compute as code (although we as yet do not understand that code).  


    I would say the difference seems to be that humans can initiate thought and create algorithms and thought patterns not preprogrammed.  Computers as far as I know, can only do as they've been programmed.  I have heard of people trying to make AI programs, I don't know that any have been at all successful.  Human minds are self-aware, whereas computers are not.


    With that said, back on topic.  It begs the question, is there a minimum level of intelligence needed for a sense of morality?  I think so.  I think a high level of abstract thought is required.  Animals have intelligence and emotions I think, but I think theirs is lower than humans.  Animals do not have art museums, they have yet to write any math textbooks, they haven't created space shutttles... I could go on.  A monarch butterfly doesn't need to go to school to learn how to migrate, it knows it innately - called instinct.  That is, animals are programmed to use their bodies as they are made to to survive.  


    Humans also have instinct.  But we can go beyond that.  Instinct did not tell humans what the periodic table of elements was.


    So before I go further, what do ya'll think?  Is intelligence required for good/bad?  Is there a level requirement?


    In reply to BakedBrain

    Well we agree on something, that most things are not too complicated for people to have a consensus on if it is bad or good.  And for you I'll refrain from using the word evil as I do think it is one of the words society has attached a trigger to, like the word conspiracy.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747050 - 3 days ago

    In reply to Jianju

    I will go ahead and answer yes people have made AI's there is many well known was that can enter competive games such as starcraft League and others and have been very successful. 


    Are they on our levels? Not yet but its not as far off as people seem to think we will probably see a fully sentient AI in our life times.


    And again yes Animals do have intelligence and emotions for example elephants think we humans are cute as their brains respond like ours do when we look at puppies or kittens. 

    Doplhins are actually as smart as most young children same goes for chimps and other apes.


    There is actually a reason why we have Math shuttles and so forth and they dont. Its refinement.

    Apes and other like animals with high intelligence will use the most direct path to rewards and no more. For example a real experiment was a box was produced that monkeys and humans were shown to "work" to get a treat. Then another group was shown the same way to "work" the box but said box was clear showing all the steps except one were useless. The monkeys cut out all steps except the one with a reward. Humans do not. And the reason is we humans do direct transmission which is then at a much later point in age used to refine but the first usually critical steps are taught then refinement.

    This allows us to learn and understand to better refine and continue to refine well past the point we should stop learning.


    Also another thing Moral behavior has 100% been observed in other animals with lower intelligence such as rats. One rat was in a dry cage another rat was placed in distress such as water without being cruel. The fine rat worked to help its other rat with no reward or betterment.

    Just plain aultrism and this was repeated showing the majority responded this way.

    Whales have also saved and protected humans from Sharks many times as well same goes for dolphins.


    So intelligence outside of a basic level all multicell organsims is not needed for good at the very least as shown by MANY real world examples.


    And no this isnt me continuing the discussion on Evil or anything like you asked some questions and I know some answers as an anthropologist since anthro by its very nature is a field that needs a LOT of other fields to work. For example we can use Tree pollen and DNA from it to date something so we need to understand how DNA works, the climate and topography, the biology and so on in order to do it as just a basic example.


    And the question of good evil and so forth is one humanity has been asking since the dawn of it.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747051 - 3 days ago

    So moving onto another subject

    EW has posted a sneak peak to Ep 7


    Now this is interesting because for awhile I have held the idea Maria might be connected to the Day of the dead as her Last name Calavera is a type of design they use for skulls as an icon of the Day of the Dead.

    She even has said Design on her cane in fact.



    Her mask in the EW sneakpeak also has the design on it. But here is the thing Saint Muerte who is depicted as a skeleton is also shown with a scythe. And she is all about Death specifically safe delivery to the afterlife.

    Something like a shaman would do.


    Now yes Maria had Silver eyes but here is the thing as we get to see from her point of view she cant see color. She had no way to know that Ruby was a Silver eyed person as well. So then the question becomes why did she follow her?


    Well she is connected to Death icons that are more about speaking with the dead and protecting them from harm. For example one item Saint Muerte is known for is an hourglass that death is not an ending but a chance to start over as the hourglass is flipped over.


    And they are now on the road to Argus. We know it has connections to Pyrrha and we still have those odd Pyrrha dreams. It might all be coming to a head.

  • acw28

    acw28

    #33747053 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    Cloak? Check.

    Scythe? Check.

    Facing an incredibly large/powerful Grimm by themselves? Check.


    Anyone else now have the headcannon that Maria is related to the Rose's? Also I have a feeling she lost her second scythe when she lost her eyes.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747054 - 3 days ago

    In reply to acw28

    I think the scythe thing is likely.

    The relation may not be.

    Hard to say right now but both act like they dont know each other at all.

    Tai seems the type if he still had his mother he would introduce his daughters same goes for summer especially after her passing he would try to let his girls know their grandmother.

    So I think relation outside of MAYBE a distant ancestor is not likely though who knows to be honest.


    It seems the scythe and style of dress is a combo of Qrow her teacher and her mother's cloak. Basically her way of carrying her teachers forward.


    It also could be the SE are naturally drawn towards that for some reason.


  • acw28

    acw28

    #33747056 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    I know, just some wild speculation on my end. And really this could be true and no one knows it. Spoilers for My Hero Academia, but All Might's mentor gave up her son for adoption because she didn't want him being harmed by a villain, making everyone close to her promise not to seek out her kid. Fast forward in the story and one of the central villains is her grandson, but almost no one knows this connection. This could be a similar case, Maria may have a child without Silver Eyes, but knows someone is hunting SEW so she gives her kid away, never knowing their fate.


    Agreed on Ruby's choice of weapon and style. As I mentioned over in the main thread, it would be cool if Qrow heard about Maria's past exploits and it influenced his choice in using a scythe to fight.


    You know what they say, Remnant is a small world after all, just something else that ties back into the headcannon.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747057 - 3 days ago

    In reply to acw28

    Well right now Summer had silver eyes and so does her daughter Ruby so we dont know if its even possible for it to skip a generation or not.  For all we know its a direct line you either have it or you dont and no skips or anything like that.

    Right now there is a LOT we dont know.


    It might have if she is a legendary rumor but something tells me Maria would be well before his time more Ports time I think. Which we know Port was a teacher's aide when STRQ was in school.

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747058 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    I had in fact noted that animals have both a level of intelligence and emotions.  However, while they may be capable of actions we humans call "good" or "bad" the question becomes if animals are aware of what good and bad are?  Or are they simply acting on instinct or acting without understanding concepts of good or bad?


    As far as animals, I have an example of what humans may conceive of as an animal portraying justice.  My friend had a cat.  She was in a hurry one morning and as she walked thru the hallway she accidentally stepped on the cat's tail.  The cat sat in that spot all day until she got back home about 8 hrs later.  (my friend's mom was home all day and verified the cat didn't move from that spot)  As she walked by the cat it charged her, pounced her legs, and then ran off and then sat like everything was dandy.  Tit for tat.


    Keep in mind that the discussion I'm having with Mach and BakedBrain is about what "good" is.

  • acw28

    acw28

    #33747060 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    Oh yes, fictional genetics...fun. I remember having a conversation with someone who was arguing the Qrow is the father theory because he and Summer have dark hair like Ruby...but then you realize that Qrow and Raven are twins and would have the same genetics, which would mean that they would be heterozygous in terms of hair color (since Yang is blond and would need to be homozygous recessive) which means the same odds for hair color with either man...it gets so confusing so fast...


    True, but if you make a big enough name for yourself the legend of your deeds becomes timeless, even if some details (such as your name) become forgotten (explaining why Qrow didn't recognize her).

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747062 - 3 days ago

    In reply to acw28

    Possible but so far hasnt been brought up. So far no legendary hunter has really been addressed.


    In reply to Jianju

    Considering they ignore treats and so forth yes they do. Its also been noted that if they are not indistress the rats for example will not help the other most times.

    Also MANY examples of animals helping out humans are found they are creatures outside their species and should not be seen on the same level yet they help out.

    It may not be on the same level but something IS there.


    Keep in mind the discussion of what Good is, is not what I was answering you asked a couple of questions and I answered them specifically.

    No more no less.

    I was SPECIFICALLY staying away from that discussion and even noted I was and yes I know I said evil but to me its the same discussion just a different side of the coin.

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747064 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    Calavera, another form of the word we hear more often in English, "Calvary."  Often used in church names like "Calvary Baptist Church" or something like that.  Calvary comes from yet another word, a latin translation of "golgotha," and the reason it's used in churches is because of the name of the place where Jesus was killed.  It was called Skull Place.


    Good points about the day of the dead and possible Pyrrha connections.  Makes sense to me.

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747065 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    I agree that animals do those things, and that "something IS there."  So the question is Why?  Do they understand good vs bad as humans do, or are they acting on instinct?  You say they help humans and other animals, but why?  


    I gotta go to sleep, so I'll give you all a chance for some replies before I say more of my thoughts on that.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747066 - 3 days ago

    In reply to Jianju

    We currently dont know and a LOT of study goes into it.

    And I mean a LOT like there is always a study going into why this happens.

    But we do know this does happen and it happens across many different species and it can even cross species barriers.

    I cant answer if this means they understand good vs bad like humans do I dont think a single person can honestly.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747069 - 3 days ago

    In reply to Jianju

    Something to throw a wrench in that is Spanish Calavera means skull.

    And it more commonly refers to the sugar Skulls they do for the elaborate designs which her cane and younger self's mask both carry.

    So while the calvary is an interesting thing probably not at all meant and its instead the spanish Calavera in reference to the Skull candy and its designs 

  • BakedBrain

    BakedBrain FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33747073 - 3 days ago

    In reply to mach56gs

    The patch "it was a saboteur" is retroactive, Rogue one is from 2016, if they patch a plothole from 1977 that is retroactive. Patching it with "intent" also says something about the dimension of the original hole.


    Weight or more precise mass is an issue because when not traveling at a constant speed in a constant direction, inertia has to be overcome and you have to accelerate the thing to the constant speed in the first place. And I also assume the energy required for hyperspace jumps has a relation to the object jumping.


    The ship hit by the Death Star was not taking evasive maneuvers, which in this case is acceptable since they did assume that the Death Star was not operational. The Death Star has to aim with hull movements and most likely the rotation rates are just plain sh*t. The rate of fire is also plain drek and it has to be on target when fully charged up, I do not believe there is a hold option. Chances of hitting ships aware of the danger and taking evasive maneuvers should thus be considered low.


    With the aircraft carrier vs battleship we have consensus. But then it is just plain dumb to design a capital ship that is not capable of defending itself against a fighter attack in a world loaded with carrier type warships. You can swap idiot design for idiot tactics if you assume that the Death Star was supposed to always have an escort which would defend against fighter attack.

    Sorry I have to repeat myself. The Death Star is just incapable of defending even against a conventional mixed fleet of carriers/capitals. The fighters just have to destroy the functional installations on the surface (weapons, sensors) which do not enjoy the supposedly superheavy armor because they are (have to be) outside. This is already an operational kill, because the muzzle of the superlaser can also be damaged/blocked that way. You then bring in larger ships which supposedly have weapons to get through the armor.

  • BakedBrain

    BakedBrain FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33747074 - 3 days ago

    In reply to Jianju

    I see this intelligence thing as something gradual. Although there is a large gap between humans and the other species on the planet. Presumably because the humans have occupied the higher intelligence territory in the evolution. Species tend to defend their territory and so other humanoids were either blended in or exterminated (not so sophisticated in the ethics realm). If you want to have a cave where others live who are sufficiently less intelligent than you, you will get the cave and their development will be cut off.


    With the current AI design I do not believe in sentience. If you put up a test, you may design an AI which passes the test without being sentient. There are some interesting questions here and with Pennybot there is the potential to investigate related questions in the show.

    A computerized AI may be copied without loss of information, humans currently cannot.

    A computerized AI may be set up exactly to fit the creator's requirements. Its development depends on the learning data and especially on the reward system. Basically you can determine an AI's ethical competence with a slider bar. If you reward unethical behaviour the AI will learn how to be unethical. Humans as most parents will know cannot be teached so easily.

    A computerized AI is cold-start capable because of the copy capability and the possibility to replicate the "chassis". Humans are currently not.

    I do not know which ruleset Pennybot has, it is possible that she had either a copied human personality, that we may meet Flesh-Penny in Atlas or a transferred one. The Pyrrha machine had a similar functionality. In this case the personality is not artificial. And if you can move from human to robot you may also be able to do it the other way.


    A little bit good an bad (or evil). This concept is a little bit fluid, if you consider what humans did in the past or are doing today. My example for this is sports. Normally most people will be able to identify foul play, but when your own team is concerned this ability almost completely vanishes. Fans routinely overlook fouls of their own team despite "It is just a game!".

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747085 - 3 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    I never thought they were using a biblical reference, i just thought it an interesting aside.  About Calvary that is.

  • revanninja

    revanninja FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold One who is judged by the

    #33747086 - 3 days ago

    In reply to Jianju

    No and I understand that but the thing to keep in mind is that it can easily lead you off track presenting all that. Too much information especially if its not what is meant can confuse and distract from what is meant.

    I had a teacher in Math who did that and EVERYONE flunked and he got fired because he would show us one way to solve a problem but then would show us over a dozen different ways to solve the problem and it confused the heck out of us because it was too much information and often not connected to what was meant or what we were suppose to learn.

    By springbreak we were still in what I think chapter 5 of 15 if I recall correctly. It was stupid.

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747097 - 2 days ago

    In reply to revanninja

    umm... ok.  Don't worry, I won't give you a test, and you can't fail a forum.  Or can you?

  • Jianju

    Jianju 愛の戦士

    #33747100 - 2 days ago

    In reply to BakedBrain

    Good thoughts on AI and gradual intelligence.  

    Now the reason I bring it up, is because in order to find out what us humans think about good and bad, you have to understand how we think.  And a good way to figure that out is by starting with how our intelligence differs from other forms we know, as well as how it is similar.  Just to reiterate, the questions are: What is intelligence?  And what is human intelligence?  (Because intelligence is a prerequisite for good and bad - aka moral judgement or action.)

    ...now those questions are of course something that people are still trying to figure out.  Which to me makes it all the more interesting to try and figure out myself.


    So, stay with me for a moment, I'm gonna go down a bit of a rabbit hole... 

    with intelligence we think lifeforms (as we agreed, AI currently doesn't exist to our knowledge - and if it did, would it be alive?), with the basics of life we think survival.  When we think of survival, we may think about individual beings, but since organisms in almost all cases have lifespans, and reproduce for more of a type of lifeform to continue to survive over generations, we can also think of a species as trying to survive together.  And since planet earth's species almost all rely on each other for survival (humans for one could not live without plants for food and oxygen, many plants need other beings to pollinate, etc etc), we can also think of most all the species of a planet as trying to survive together.


    And since bad can be seen as people harming each other, and good seen as helping each other, then if survival is all that is the point, then it's only bad if it means the end of life on earth, and only good if it means the continuation of life on earth.  In which case you could justify animals killing animals for the cycle of life, or even humans committing genocide or other strong methods of population control if they decide human populations are so large they are destroying the chance of life on earth.


    However, back to the matter of intelligence.  If you are to take an evolutionary perspective, how can all these lifeforms even realize they have to cooperate for survival?  Many humans barely think about how much they need grass and trees to live or understand it much less an animal.  So is a sense of good or bad just our gut instinct that we all need to survive together?


    That's the first rabbit hole, what are your thoughts?