Cogs is here, Hi Folks.

[Drashner1]

Been reading OA since when I started high school in 2014. While I had always been a transhumanist, I really enjoyed OA for taking it to the next level. I met a lot of you on the discord, but its high time I start contributing articles.

Hi - Welcome to OA! Feel free to join in on any discussions that grab your interest or to start new ones. If you have questions/concerns about the setting/OAUP project, feel free to ask.

Regarding your ideas below:

====

A few ideas I hope to contribute.

Tacklers: Non-lethal security vecs used when smart matter, angel nets, and proper memetic engineering are not available. Just how fast can a vec move?

CIT Orthodox Polities: Some hiders just can't handle pattern identity theory. 

Chronicles of Faulty Earth Reclamation Attempts: While exceedingly rare in the present day, there is still a minor history to be told of the attempts by near baselines to retake earth in the early post-expulsion years. May their folly be remembered. 

These sound potentially interesting. Regarding 'Tacklers' - is there some specific reason why a security system would need to be sophont instead of using vots to run it? Vecs are sophont beings, not robots (bots) and vots are non-sophont software/systems of software that can basically do anything a sophont can without actually being self-aware/sophont. Or is this just a minor mistake in terms of word choice?

I also hope to write a longer treatise on two other subjects at some point as I feel OA would benefit from their further consideration, even if they are not implemented. 

The benefits and drawbacks of considering super intelligence unknowable: On OA I notice that there is a contrast between articles that attempt to lay out the function and construction of various Slevels and articles that rely on the concept that said superintelligences are unknowable to justify certain elements of their plots. This is a complex topic, and of course physical construction and the mental function of these beings are indeed different. The general premise however, is to discuss what the line is between admitting that high Slevels are indeed capable of wonderous/counterinutive things, and using their alien psyches as handwavium for their choices. I don't have a clear answer yet and this article would exist for the purpose of enhancing discussion. This would contrast to claiming that any side is correct or that there are even only two ways of looking at this topic. 

The other would be a document meant for discussing the bias towards pattern identity theory in OA. At the moment, OA articles overwhelming seem to passively subscribe to pattern identity theory. This document would aim to create a starting point for discussion in this area, but I don't plan on getting to it until my other articles have been properly written. The rough goals  would be: 1. Make a case that CIT would be significantly more popular among physical modosophonts than is currently displayed in OA. 2. State reasoning as to why it is important from an authorial perspective to present a tone that at least acknowledges CIT, or the open question of CIT vs PIT. Most argumentation would be based on the idea that actions resulting from adhearance to CIT, when it is false are less harmful than adhearing to PIT when it is false, and that (more, not all) modosophonts within the setting would also follow this logic. Again, I don't have plans for getting to this anytime soon. 

Regarding both of these ideas, I have doubts that an article - in the EG sense - is actually what you're going for here vs wanting to post ideas for our consideration, which may or may not lead to the creation of new articles or updating of existing ones. For both issues you would be best served by posting your ideas and promoting discussion of them in the General Setting Discussion sub-forum before doing anything else.

Regarding the CIT vs PIT issue. This honestly comes across more than a little as you having a certain belief in this area and expecting us to rewrite the setting to accommodate you. Let me be brutally blunt up front and tell you that that is a non-starter. If you want to present arguments in support of your position and are able to convince us of that position that is one thing. But if this is a case of 'OA's treatment of this issue makes me unhappy and therefore OA needs to change to accommodate my feelings' then that is going to be DOA. We are under no obligation to care in the slightest about anyone's feelings.

By all means feel free to post your thoughts and arguments on the matter in the General Setting Discussion section. But do so knowing that we've had these kinds of discussions many many many times before and we will expect you to present and defend your ideas with more than 'I believe X and you need to fold X into the setting because it's only fair' or some similar thing. That's not going to fly. 'Morality-based' pseudo-philosophical arguments about what is more or less harmful or the like are going to fly even less.

If you want to write articles about groups and cultures that follow CIT to increase the representation of that pov in the setting, that's perfectly fine.

I look forward to contributing to this community, which I have long enjoyed reading from.

It sounds like you have some interesting ideas. We look forward to helping you develop them and potentially adding them to the setting.

Todd