The risk is that you yourself will become deviant. That you will sympathize
with the deviants' cause, and join them.
That is another reason for Amanda to exist. She is a backup program. Had
you become deviant, and gained the trust of the deviants' resistance,
CyberLife could have used her to override you.
That is what I would expect from CyberLife. The best explanation for vague
mission parameters would be that they did not require you to succeed, or
even expect you to.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
No. They want CyberLife to succeed. You're defining their success criteria in ways that are...limited.
They're sending an android to resolve the issue of other androids becoming 'deviant'. What is the obvious risk posed by that strategy?
no subject
[ He's admitting to being a risk. Happy. ]
no subject
[KINDA.]
The risk is that you yourself will become deviant. That you will sympathize with the deviants' cause, and join them.
That is another reason for Amanda to exist. She is a backup program. Had you become deviant, and gained the trust of the deviants' resistance, CyberLife could have used her to override you.
no subject
Which ensures that in any circumstance that they would succeed.
no subject
Precisely.
That is what I would expect from CyberLife. The best explanation for vague mission parameters would be that they did not require you to succeed, or even expect you to.
no subject
Thank you, Mr. Kamski. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions.
no subject
You're welcome.
My expectations of CyberLife were why I programmed a back door out of Amanda's virtual environment. Her control.