In theory...
Theory is all this is working on.
but I occasionally have to work with computerized control systems as well as ye old relay logic control interlocks.
Guess what, they do loose data. Sometimes it is just a bad memory cell on a control module or media degradation or just a stray cosmic ray flipping a bit or two [Murphy at play].
So there is that.
Which I have stated more than once now, I not only accept, but agree with.
Then there is assumptions in general - you know what that word implies right?
Is this "insult the newb" day , or what??? I find that comment quite insulting.
A good analyst looks at the evidence first before building a model, not the other way around.
And again, I reiterate, that the absence of evidence that something does not exist is not evidence that it exists.
I think you might mean "absence of evidence that something does not exist, is not evidence that it DOES NOT exist"... no?
But that has exactly what to do with any comment I have made?
I have not argued that lack of evidence of anything.
I have argued the only evidence we have is real life versus comic reality... and comic reality has done nothing to counter that.
But until such time as the issue is actually addressed 'in comic', what else have we to draw from?
I would imagine this is why the rules of 'canon' exist... and an absence of evidence that something exists, does not make anything enter comic canon.
But... one last time... (as I am beginning to get annoyed at the casual swipes at my intelligence).
My concern is simply that Bubbles entire trauma did not need to be 'bolstered' by the (to my mind) silly statement that she cannot remember the faces of her squad.
I DEEPLY hope it comes out that those very memories have been deliberately purged by someone... otherwise it is simply not believable. The suggestion that ANY person, AI or otherwise, would so easily forget the faces of their colleagues... ESPECIALLY those they were in combat with... flies in the face of 'real-life' experience.
I shan't go into too much personal detail here, but I had a great deal of experience when I was younger, discussing 'Living History' matters with WWII veterans. All of them at some point said the same thing. They never forgot those experiences, and can recall their 'lads' as if it were yesterday. My grandfather was one of those, and he was shot in the face (and survived, thankfully).
Even on a personal level. my memory is hardly photographic, but I can plainly see the faces of almost all the kids in my primary seven class... that's over 40 years ago.
If an AI can't retain memories longer than that, for people who are particularly important to them (particularly in the military), is that an acceptable tolerance?
(Particularly when such persons have been created to feel emotions.)
So with respect to the memory loss and the volatility of memories in an AI we have at the moment exactly ONE data point.
Yes... and that is the VERY CRUX of the problem I have with it.
That ONE data point came out of nowhere and counters any physical and intuitive proofs we have IRL.
As the youngsters say these days... End. Of.