Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Dinner with Beatrice

A date with someone

She's going to the Church of Gary!

Her Evil Twin Sister is marrying someone (!) and she's going to sit at the back of the chapel

She's helping Arthur out at the Self-Help Group and she likes to look professional

She's agreed to chaperone Brun and Elliott

She's agreed to chaperone Clinton and Emily (I doubt it would be anything anyone would recognise as a date!)

She's wearing a pullover to teach Bubbles how to pull off the cardigan look

She's meeting a venture capitalist to get start-up cash for the cleaning business she wants to start with Brun

Other

[BenRG]

If you've given your word that there are no string attached, and you never lie, the difference matters a great deal.

Not really; you never ask for anything; no strings attached. If, at some point in the future, when hearing of your future plans, people you've previously helped volunteer to carry out services for you in exchange for you changing your plans, then that is entirely their prerogative. You're not actually asking for anything form them so there are no strings. If anything, they're the ones attaching strings to you by making their favours in return conditional!

[Case]

I still don't get why you're over-analysing it.

In two questions to "Argument from Motives" - > You've given up making arguments that support your claim ("In the criminal mind, or those minds for whom typical ideas of ethics are curious alien cultural artefacts, they are essentially indistinguishable.") entirely and are trying to make the discussion about my motive for asking questions about your statement instead ...

My Motive? I wanted to understand the rationale behind a statement (see above) about a subset of the human population that appeared to me to be not obvious (and that I suspect to be false). The experience is sometimes referred to as "cognitive dissonance", and many people find it highly irritating. One can resolve cognitive dissonance e.g. by dismissal ("That's obviously wrong", "Who cares?"), by attempting to silence the source of the offending statement ("We don't want that kind of talk here"), by resignation ("That's beyond me") or ... by attempting to understand the train of thought that led to the statement.

The latter one is most commonly achieved by asking questions and analysing the answers. It's also my preferred mode of dealing with cognitive dissonance. Maybe that's also the reason why I enjoy participating in online discussions & register as member of Discussion-Fora?

Anyhow - I think I have my answer.

You seem to think that someone would care about the difference.

Yes, I believe I do!

[Tova]

If you've given your word that there are no string attached, and you never lie, the difference matters a great deal.

Not really; you never ask for anything; no strings attached. If, at some point in the future, when hearing of your future plans, people you've previously helped volunteer to carry out services for you in exchange for you changing your plans, then that is entirely their prerogative. You're not actually asking for anything form them so there are no strings. If anything, they're the ones attaching strings to you by making their favours in return conditional!

Okay, fine. So maybe you could clear this up for me. My confusion arise from the original post. Why so concerned? If Bubbles volunteers to carry out services for them, then I don't see an issue.

They may not require a direct 'price' but I'd be more concerned about the 'favour' they ask for some time later in exchange for not betraying Emily to the NSA for unauthorised access of all the classified defence data in Bubbles's head.

You've kind of backtracked on this, just admit it and we can all move on.

[brasca]

If you've given your word that there are no string attached, and you never lie, the difference matters a great deal.

For me it's Little Bird.

I also thought of Annie Lennox since Upscale Envy looks very similar to her in that Sweet Dreams video.  I was just a kid at the time, but she scared the hell out of me then.  This lookalike has a similar effect all these years later.

[zmeiat_joro]

You do know that Desire is based on Annie Lennox and David Bowie?

[Gyrre]

I'd actually say sometime around Marten + Claire = end of "regular" QC.  I would have liked the strip to end at #2882 (sad ending), but would have been fine with #2890 (happy ending).  Oh well.  So it goes.

/tangent

So would that make everything that's happened since a spinoff? Like what Skin Horse is to Narbonic, but with more characters from the previous comic being present.

EDIT: forgot to specify segment in quote

[brasca]

You do know that Desire is based on Annie Lennox and David Bowie?

I'm referring to Envy from Fullmetal Alchemist.  I didn't think his character was influenced by Desire even though the names are similar.

[jwhouk]

I'm still saying Ms. Lennox is the voice character for our silver-faced friend.

[Is it cold in here?]

"Do let us know if you start to go insane".

There I was, all primed to read that line as being a setup, and Emily said
"How will I know"

and the rest of that sentence just spoiled my fun.

[Perfectly Reasonable]

First off, I'm with tupsharru and islan. I know not of this Desire of Expanse. And if Jeph is relying on 'ooh, -everybody- knows that' to carry his storyline, then he's not the storyteller I think he is.

In our world, the way to figure out a possibly compromised computer is to make a copy of its hard drive and mess with that. Here, that is not an option. Let's back up a few parasangs. We know, via Bubbles, that making backup copies of an AI is possible. But when you start the copy running, you have (I believe) created a new AI with all the ethical baggage that implies. (Such an AI will quickly become a distinct individual as soon as it starts accumulating its own life experiences.) And testing it, possibly destroying it, is the same as murder. So you -must- work directly with the AI involved. And Station fears his investigating might harm Bubbles, by setting off a logic bomb or some similar trap. So how is having Emily do the job any different? When GreyCreep says 'this is as much for our personal satisfaction', it's the first time I can believe what she's saying. GreyCreep assumes  that Emily will go along with this, which I find interesting. It looks like GC & Co have been keeping tabs on Emily and are confident that she will be able to achieve something useful, or at least entertaining.

Bubbles, having made an existential leap of faith, clearly knows stuff about GreyCreep & Co that we don't.

I look forward to seeing where this goes.

[WareWolf]

Emily is capable of breaking/hacking/slipping through an encryption that advanced AIs don't even want to touch?

...Did we know this already? I don't remember knowing this already.

Emily apparently has some wild coding talent (remember, her college project had to be EMP'd by the NRO for displaying "eldritch runes").

But God damn it, if Pale Agent hurts Emily or even puts her in a position to be hurt, I am going to be highly upset.

[Gladstone]

Ever since Hannelore took Marten and Marigold to outer space to celebrate her father's birthday on his very own space station, the notion that QC could ever really "jump the shark" has been meaningless.  Despite being set in a post-singularity present world similar to ours But With Robots, Jeph has always managed to keep the comic grounded despite all the weirdness.  QC can't jump the shark.  It's impossible...

...except, well, everything since Faye met Bubbles at the underground robot fighting ring has just felt like a rejected prequel storyline from Alice Grove, which is why I stopped following daily updates several months ago.  It might not jump the shark, but it's not really the QC I used to know.

[Storel]

"Unless we got particular pleasure out of fooling you into agreeing to it first."

That's not helping, Silverbot!!

[Truec]

First off, I'm with tupsharru and islan. I know not of this Desire of Expanse. And if Jeph is relying on 'ooh, -everybody- knows that' to carry his storyline, then he's not the storyteller I think he is.

If you're complaining that Jeph made a pop culture reference that some readers might understand, then I'm kinda curious what comic you've been reading, because it certainly wasn't this one.

[Case]

"Do let us know if you start to go insane".

There I was, all primed to read that line as being a setup, and Emily said
"How will I know"

and the rest of that sentence just spoiled my fun.

In my neck of the woods, (very, very young-ish) people would say "Zwei Doofe, ein Gedanke" ("Two idiots, one thought") ...

... ruined a perfectly good pun here, Jeph did.

[Carl-E]

Gladstone's post made me wonder.  How much has the strip really changed?  Faye had some memories she didn't want to face, and that altered her personality to a great extent until she was able to tell her friends and with their support face them, visiting home to yell at her father's grave.  Her coping mechanism - drinking to forget - had serious effects on her life. 

Bubbles, on the other hand, enlisted aid to lock the memories she can't face away.  And now, after confessing to someone who cares, has the opportunity to face them with the help of - well, an acquaintance who beat on her armor with a rubber mallet.  But her coping mechanism of having her brain partitioned by someone who then held it over her has also had serious effects on her life. 

I know, it's a stretch, but the point is that these are problems of a psycho-emotional nature, and it's the support of your network of friends that makes it possible to deal with them. 

I do think Ms. Grey is a plot device being introduced to bring the issue to fruition without having to go another thousand strips just to get there.  I'm wondering if it's going to be a throwaway background story, like DoKYA was with Steve. 


I hope not, though. 

[mneme]

Eh.  So much shark jumping.  If you don't like the comic, stop reading.  If anything, I rather like that the comic that's always about nothing has started to eventually have epicycles where actual plot happens.  It's like one of the easiest on-ramp SF stories ever.

I'm guessing that the actual price on the "no strings attached" "we'll provide all the equipment, we just want you to hack into your friend's head and break her encryption" is that they get to watch.  Emily's a powerful polymath who can break the usual rules -- so it's not unlikely that if they record her breaking unbreakable-grade encryption, they'll be able to turn that into a program that breaks that grade of encryption.

But it's hard to tell how serious to take the Laundry-esque math=magic=insanity bits of plot that have shown up.

[Kugai]

Stll don't entirely trust Agent Creepy with either Bubbles or Emily, but she has an interesting sense of humor

And stand by for a Matrixy journey into the world and mind of Bubbles

[Morituri]

Agent Creepy, as we're calling him/her/it, derives far too much enjoyment out of playing with people's distrust.

Oddly enough, this is a thing that some people in the computer security field do on purpose, to impress upon clients the importance of caution.  And, if they're honest about it, because it's fun.  So I've seen it before.

I'm imagining some serious mood whiplash when this gets done.  Something like Emily taking off the headset awkwardly, saying "Miss Bubbles?  I, uh, got your memory back.  I'm so sorry..."  and then giving Bubbles a hug while breaking up in tears as Agent Creepy walks out very pleased with itself.

On the other hand, does Emily get to keep that interface device?  And if so what will she do with it later?

[pwhodges]

If you're complaining that Jeph made a pop culture reference that some readers might understand, then I'm kinda curious what comic you've been reading, because it certainly wasn't this one.

Emily herself is a Japanese pop-culture reference, after all - but knowing that's not necessary to understanding her.

"Do let us know if you start to go insane" - best line for a long time.

[BenRG]

Yep; as I predicted, Emily is going on a VR tour of the inside of Bubbles' mind. The only thing that I'm disappointed about is that Faye isn't currently invited along as a logic co-processor to stop Emily wandering off after some unicorn and/or rainbow.

I do like the request to "Do let us know if you start to go insane". The counter-point is: "How would Emily know?"

"Unless we got particular pleasure out of fooling you into agreeing to it first."

That's not helping, Silverbot!!

It's not meant to help; it's just them rubbing in the fact that they hold all the cards and are enjoying it. When you make a deal with the devil, you also have to tolerate his sick sense of humour.

If you've given your word that there are no string attached, and you never lie, the difference matters a great deal.

Not really; you never ask for anything; no strings attached. If, at some point in the future, when hearing of your future plans, people you've previously helped volunteer to carry out services for you in exchange for you changing your plans, then that is entirely their prerogative. You're not actually asking for anything form them so there are no strings. If anything, they're the ones attaching strings to you by making their favours in return conditional!

Okay, fine. So maybe you could clear this up for me. My confusion arise from the original post. Why so concerned? If Bubbles volunteers to carry out services for them, then I don't see an issue.

Really? Because those services are only debatably legal!

They may not require a direct 'price' but I'd be more concerned about the 'favour' they ask for some time later in exchange for not betraying Emily to the NSA for unauthorised access of all the classified defence data in Bubbles's head.

You've kind of backtracked on this, just admit it and we can all move on.

No, they're the same thing just expressed differently. Never ask but manipulate into offering voluntarily, possibly with airily implied menaces. Oh, and act reluctant but admit that you need the favour and, if not doing the bad thing is the price then you can possibly see your way to agreeing.

[ZoeB]

"Unless we got particular pleasure out of fooling you into agreeing to it first."

That's not helping, Silverbot!!

Actually, from my viewpoint, it is. Sometimes it helps to point out the obvious.
This strip encapsulates all I was going to write in a post, but didn't.
If this entity was malevolent, it didn't need to go to so much trouble.
If this entity was dishonest, it wouldn't have pointed out why it might not be trustworthy.
Its actions have been entirely consistent with its words.

So while I still would have preferred getting Station's opinion first, and while I wish Momo was involved in the Journey To The Centre Of the Bubbles as an additional chaperone if she approves..

I'm starting to warm to this entity. It thinks like I do.

Damn, Jeph's good, isn't he?

[Gyrre]

"Unless we got particular pleasure out of fooling you into agreeing to it first."

That's not helping, Silverbot!!

I just misread "Silverbot" as 'Silverbolt' and now I'm trying to peg one of the many voices Scott McNeil has done to our mysterious mulberry-eyed pale presence.

Though that line just went Ratrap in my head.

EDIT: If you watched American or Canadian cartoons at any point in the last 40 years, you've probably heard him voice at least 4 characters. Quite often in the same show (Ratrap, Dinobot, Silverbot, and Quickstrike in Beast Wars)

[nfearnley]

To clarify, the new character seems to use the pronouns: we/our/ourselves/us
"We're what wakes them up screaming."
"We picked up on your little crisis..."
"...our less puissant elders"
"...we're sure provide you..."
"We don't normally involve ourselves..."
"...we have a bit of a sentimental streak..."
"...what we are offering:"
"We'll poke around..."
"...we'll crack it..."
"...we'll remove it."
"We're afraid you'll have to..."
"We really don't think you will."
"We require your presence"
"...were were going to go rooting..."
"Gives us the shivers..."
"...we'll have Ms. Azuma do it."
"We daresay..."
"...consent to us cracking..."
"Darling, we think you know what we are. And we never lie."
"You have our word."
"...our personal satisfaction..."
"Do tell us if you start to go insane."
"Unless we got particular pleasure..."

Others refer to them with the pronouns: they
"They seem nice"
"If they wished to do me harm, they would have done so already."

My best guest is that their third person pronouns would be they/them: http://pronoun.is/they

Their first person pronouns would be we/us: http://pronoun.is/we/us/our/ours/ourselves

[Gyrre]

If you're complaining that Jeph made a pop culture reference that some readers might understand, then I'm kinda curious what comic you've been reading, because it certainly wasn't this one.

Emily herself is a Japanese pop-culture reference, after all - but knowing that's not necessary to understanding her.

"Do let us know if you start to go insane" - best line for a long time.

Do you mean Françoise Appledelhi mixed with a handful of other characters from manga and anime?

On the other hand, does Emily get to keep that interface device?  And if so what will she do with it later?

I was going to say 'make friends with satelites', but hasn't she already done that?
Perhaps she'll help some bounty hunters find an old chess master who's gone off his rocker.

EDIT: "Françoise Appledelhi", aka "Ed", aka "Radical Edward", aka "Edward Wong Hau Pepelu Tivrusky IV".

[pwhodges]

To clarify, the new character seems to use the pronouns: we/our/ourselves/us

Conventionally, that makes them royalty.  Are we about to discover that robots have a monarchy? 

Alternatively, and more obviously, it is simply because they are the avatar of a collective cloud-connected being, in computing terms a cluster, which is how some of us interpreted it from their first appearance.

[pwhodges]

Do you mean Françoise Appledelhi mixed with a handful of other characters from manga and anime?

Emily is drawn in anime style; her surname is Azuma, the name of the author of Azumanga Daioh, one of Jeph's favourite manga and animes, and she has (or had while her hair was longer) a passing resemblance to Sakaki in that series.

[JimC]

I still think the point Bubbles is missing is that she doesn't want the memories back, she only needs to know they are recoverable. That being the case all that may be required is to recover the encrption key. Of course our writer may not want to make it that simple. In real life id be shouting stop, lets not rush this, lets evaluate the situation carefully and plan what to do.

After all if Ms Hivemind or whatever they/she is is ethical then the offer will be open indefinitely, and if she/they are not then best not to potentially make things worse.

[BenRG]

@JimC,

The encryption key would be in Corpse Witch's head. No, what we're about to see here is the breaking of the encryption; it's the only thing that could be done in Bubbles' head.

FWIW, and posting as a shameless semi-brony, given Bubbles' fascination with unicorns and their realm as her 'happy place', I wouldn't be even slightly surprised if Jeph has whatever anti-encryption code Emily creates manifests itself in Bubbles' mindscape as some facsimile of the Elements of Harmony.

[osaka]

Do you mean Françoise Appledelhi mixed with a handful of other characters from manga and anime?

Emily is drawn in anime style; her surname is Azuma, the name of the author of Azumanga Daioh, one of Jeph's favourite manga and animes, and she has (or had while her hair was longer) a passing resemblance to Sakaki in that series.

Emily was a loving homage to the girl on my avatar, but it's true that she's about 37cm taller than Kasuga Ayumu. Which also makes her about 8 inches taller than Sakaki - she's large, and the largest character in the manga, but not that large. I think the resemblance started and ended in the long, straight black hair since Sakaki is presented much more...
umm...
thicc _{pls don't hate me}

As for Mercedes right there I'm really starting to like the character as well. As Zoe pointed out, as creepy as they might appear they have not been dishonest at any point, just lacking any resemblance of chill. Which doesn't automatically make them evil. Chaotic good maybe?

[Tova]

This all brings up a point that I'm not sure has yet been discussed.

How well is Bubbles going to cope with suddenly being confronted with these long-dormant memories?

Even in the best-case scenario, this is going to be pretty painful.

[osaka]

Faye's boobs are still a very powerful narcotic, even for Bubbles.

[heyjames4]

In ancient scrolls, when messengers from the heavens revealed themselves to mankind, the first words they speak are "be not afraid"
 this arc does good showing why how that's a thing

[brasca]

Emily doesn't have a problem with any of this so maybe she has the right kind of mind for the job in more ways than one.  She has the technical skills, but perhaps her unique personality means she can possibly witness or even experience the same things as Bubbles and not end up an emotional wreck later.  As such it's best that Faye not tag along since she's still dealing with her own post traumatic stress.

BenRG theorized that Hannelore has some kind of master code she can use to shut down any AI in case of an emergency.  Perhaps that's why Upscale Envy chose a day when she wasn't at work to pay a visit. 

[StevenC]

Most people seem to think the grey maybe-maybenot AI is a government agent.
Am I the only one who got an immediate vibe of Mephisto? As in Faustian deal Mephisto? Is an AI Satan a thing post-singularity?

[Case]

If this entity was dishonest, it wouldn't have pointed out why it might not be trustworthy.

Unless it had anticipated Bubbles' would reason along the same lines, and had therefore pointed out one reason not to trust it in order to mask it's untrustworthiness ... 

Faye's boobs are still a very powerful narcotic, even for Bubbles.

Additionally, Hanners has shown some talent in the "Hugging it better"-department.

Most people seem to think the grey maybe-maybenot AI is a government agent.
Am I the only one who got an immediate vibe of Mephisto? As in Faustian deal Mephisto? Is an AI Satan a thing post-singularity?

Satan as in "Quasi-Supernatural Entity with the sole goal of ruining humanity spiritually and morally"? No. Not in SF-lit, as far as I can recall. In "serious" discussions about AI ... IDK. Off-the-cuff I'd say that judging from the one secure datapoint for intelligence that we have - ourselves - it would not be rational to expect an AI to develop into an artificial Satan (in the boundaries of the definition in my above line), for lack of human examples (I recognize that the veracity of that statement is highly dependent on one's definition of 'evil' in general, and 'sole aim' as well as 'ruin' in particular). I think 'satanic' behaviour simply "doesn't pay of", in a (very vague) game-theory sense, or in the sense of "parsimonious use of ones resources".   

The closest I can recall is the Eschaton in Charlie Stross' Singularity Sky - but that's more like a dialed-up Skynet that believes in the principle of applying the minimum of violence necessary to protect itself from humanity meddling with causality in its historic lightcone. Where "minimum violence" can include a planetary civilisation violating it's commandment suddenly finding itself in the path of a city-sized asteroid.

Not strictly speaking evil, but terribly, terribly ... un-empathetic.

[Stibbons]

This all brings up a point that I'm not sure has yet been discussed.

How well is Bubbles going to cope with suddenly being confronted with these long-dormant memories?

Even in the best-case scenario, this is going to be pretty painful.

She has friends.

Also suddenly finding that she is equipped with tearducts, perhaps courtesy of Anonybot.

[retrosteve]

A lot of people mentioning Emily's lack of consent. I am more worried about her utter lack of understanding of her objective.

She wasn't even awake for the exposition part of this game. She knows little or nothing about what Bubbles has in her head or even that she wants memories back, or does not. Even presuming that Emily has some amazing ability to hack encryption and that the UI is intuitive enough for her to use correctly on the first try, does she know why it might be helpful? A goal?

[retrosteve]

To clarify, the new character seems to use the pronouns: we/our/ourselves/us

Conventionally, that makes them royalty.  Are we about to discover that robots have a monarchy? 

Alternatively, and more obviously, it is simply because they are the avatar of a collective cloud-connected being, in computing terms a cluster, which is how some of us interpreted it from their first appearance.

Alternatively alternatively, the grey entity is a member of the shadowy agency Androgynous People In Grey and is speaking on behalf of the organisation as a whole.

[BenRG]

A lot of people mentioning Emily's lack of consent. I am more worried about her utter lack of understanding of her objective.

She wasn't even awake for the exposition part of this game. She knows little or nothing about what Bubbles has in her head or even that she wants memories back, or does not. Even presuming that Emily has some amazing ability to hack encryption and that the UI is intuitive enough for her to use correctly on the first try, does she know why it might be helpful? A goal?

The UI is the key; if it is successful in establishing to Emily on a subconscious/instinctive level that the encryption is a narrative 'bad guy', then she'll try to take it down, irrespective of what these avatars are in real life.

"Once upon a time, in the magical land of Unicorn Valley, a wicked Corpse Witch placed a barrier across the land, keeping the Unicorns from taking their foals to the Sugar Hills where the best grazing may be found. All despaired until, one day, a clever little girl named Emily fell into the land to confront the barrier and the wicked Witch. To prove that the light of a pure heart can conquer any barrier.

"This is the story of how imagination, love, tolerance and the Magic of Friendship can conquer any evil and bring happiness to all. This is the story of the finding of the Rainbow of Light...

"This is the story of Emily and Her Little Ponies!"

[Case]

[CrowFairy]

Someday I think we will point to Faye's punching of Corpse Witch to be the moment QC officially jumped the shark. The "show about nothing" has delved deep into science fiction and now Desire of the Endless has shown up to throw urban fantasy into the mix.

"Punching the Shark"


If I had to pin down a shark jump...

I originally thought it was around #1845, when Marten and Hannelore discovered the Secret Bakery and its obvious alternate-universe characters... probably after it was revealed that the episode wasn't a one-shot throwaway joke.  Still, I did like Padma as a character, and other storylines around that time.  Things continued meandering, even through the occasional AI exposition (#2085, et al.).

I blame Alice Grove. 
Nah, ...

I haven't read past the first few weeks of that one, but QC's recent sci-fi robotshop "Corpse Witch" plunge has definitely escalating beyond the normal hijinks of Momo, May, and Pintsize.

I'd actually say sometime around Marten + Claire = end of "regular" QC.  I would have liked the strip to end at #2882 (sad ending), but would have been fine with #2890 (happy ending).  Oh well.  So it goes.

/tangent

See, after reading this, I was just like, "The whole comic has been in a similar, strange tone." But then I remembered that some of the characters went to a space station for a birthday party, and the station is actually sentient and can project itself into a human-ish form for easier communication. If that's not a shark jump, I have no idea what is.

[wlewisiii]

"This is the story of Emily and Her Little Ponies!"[/b]

Why do I get an image more like the Warhammer 40k MLP Army?

[Jakk Frost]

I'm not saying I don't like the new character or anything like that, but at the moment I kinda feel like Mario and Luigi listening to the Jaws theme.

(edit) and looking back now, I see others have made similar observations.

[USS Martenclaire]

Next week I want a series of strips where Pintsize and Winslow help a Roomba to jump a paddling pool full of goldfish.

[Neberu]

Did I miss the frame where the Avatar of Nightmare disabled Faye? Bubble mentions it in the 2nd to last frame but I couldn't find a reference to it in the art of the previous comic.

[Is it cold in here?]

Others refer to them with the pronouns: they
"They seem nice"
"If they wished to do me harm, they would have done so already."

Welcome, new person!

Hmm. You've accumulated evidence to weaken the idea that AC is using gender-neutral pronouns because they're non-binary. Everyone else refers to AC the same way. Either the rest of the cast are very polite and picked up on AC's pronouns by reflex, or else everyone knows that AC is or represents a computational cluster.

[Is it cold in here?]

Did I miss the frame where the Avatar of Nightmare disabled Faye? Bubble mentions it in the 2nd to last frame but I couldn't find a reference to it in the art of the previous comic.

Welcome, new person!

It's the "I can't feel my legs"/"It will wear off soon" exchange.

[Timemaster]

I suppose Jeph introduced Agent Peroxide and the whole "almost omnipotent AI"-stuff to get Emily into Bubbles brain as soon as possible. Maybe he got tired of all this drama and hoplesness. After a few days thinking about it, I´m fine with this.
And I love Agent Peroxide. Come to think of it, maybe he uses the "we" because he´s not an independet AI of his own, but rather a drone, a representation of one or more of those friggin´powerful AI´s themselves. 

So I suppose (or rather hope) we´ll get a loog inside Bubbles brain. Can´t wait for this to happen. What will it look like? Something in manga-style is a good guess I think.
Or maybe Its something like Gunnerkrigg Court: New Data:
http://www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=1599
Or a real classic: Doonesbury: The Return to Reagans Brain (1987):
http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/1987/03/23

Huuh, I can´t wait. 

TM

[thedevilissix]

To clarify, the new character seems to use the pronouns: we/our/ourselves/us
"We're what wakes them up screaming."
"We picked up on your little ...were were going to go "Gives us the shivers..."
"...we'll have Ms. Azuma do it."
"If they wished to do me harm, they would have done so already."

Unless it's as in "The 'Royal' We", meaning "I", in a fairly self-important way....like Queen Victoria used in England in her C19th reign, e.g. "We are not amused".

I think it's also a common tactic used by crooks and people out to do you harm (burglars, rapists etc.) to put their victim at ease by fostering a feeling of a 'team effort', before they do their worst.
I once read this example used as a warning for women to safeguard themselves against a potential rapist who 'offered' to help them carry in their food shopping, which included cat food. The phrase used to lure someone into a false sense of security  was "We've got a very hungry cat up there".

In short: I'm still not trusting Sketchy Skeezy McBotRenegade. Ugh.