OS-tan Theory Revival

[Chocofreak13]

the opposite problem comes into play here; i don't know enough about the macs to include all of them. ^^ maybe System 6 will play a role, but like all the random windows OSes, i don't expect it to be a big one. :\

i'll make sure to post it once it's done. [spoiler]spoiler alert: DOSkitty bitch-slaps someone! >:3[/spoiler]

[NejinOniwa]

YOU GUYS DO WAY TOO MUCH WORK WHEN I'M OFFGRID. >_>

I will get on this once I've cleared out some more of my MASSIVE BACKLOG.

[Chocofreak13]

good to know it's not (officially) dead. ^^;

[NejinOniwa]

Theory never dies with a physicist around, my good minion!
And I'll try and do some more work when my inspiration finds its way back into topical territory, so we have more debate stuff to work off. ^^

[Chocofreak13]

yeey~~~ ^^

[Bella]

I had a thought involving the nature of AI (artificial intelligence) software (and how they would differ from OS- and other Software-tans) involving AI's being pretty much raised and treated as humans, as opposed to OS- and Software-tans, who are treated as non-humans. But I'm really not sure if A) That would be the best way to represent AI's - they could just be super-intelligent software-tans, though supercomputers might fill that role too or B) That a theory like this even belongs here.

[Krizonar]

In my continuality, OS Tans are an artificial intelligence. Your thought is interesting and I'd had the same one before, hence my conclusion.

[Bella]

In my continuality, OS Tans are an artificial intelligence. Your thought is interesting and I'd had the same one before, hence my conclusion.

Well, I was speaking of the -tans made of actual artificial intelligence systems, like IBM's Watson or Deep Blue, and proposing how they might vary from run-of-the-mill software-tans.

[Chocofreak13]

i imagine that AIs (since they're represented in various mediums, from real like to movies to comics) would have some inkling of being a computer, but most would be in denial of that fact, instead believing themselves to be human. any challenge to this would be met with various reactions depending on the -tan, and how self-aware that -tan is. for example, telling GlaDOS that she's a computer might result in a more apathetic response than telling HAL he's a computer.
it would probably range from laughing it off to bursting into tears, to feverish denial and even hostility. :\

[Aurora Borealis]

@Choco: What about Skynet-tan? She would be self-aware and hate humans, seeing them as a threat that needs to be destroyed. So if she were to see herself as human, wouldn't she have to destroy herself, with the resistance simply using her logic against her, nuclear war being averted assuming she doesn't try and destroy everyone with her. Either way, the Terminator continuity would be much less confusing if Skynet were that simple.

[Chocofreak13]

it's likely a personality flaw on her part. she may see herself as 'better' than human, in the way the cybermen do in doctor who. she may also see the humans as an infestation she needs to EXTERMINATE----

that said, i imagine the reaction would be different for each AI-tan. they're a special breed of -tan, anyway. not quite human, not quite OS.

[Bella]

REJOICE, I FINALLY HAVE SOMETHING TO POST HERE!

I motion we reinstate C-chan's bit-size-as-blood-type system for OS-, software- and hardware-tans.

Not much to explain here ... 8-bit hardwares/programs/OS-tans have a blood type of "8", 16-bit hardwares/programs/OS-tans have a blood type of "16", and so on and so forth. C-chan never proposed any storyline implications of having hardware/OS-tans having different blood types from one another (instead it was treated more as trivia/fun-fact), but you could make up your own ideas...

[NejinOniwa]

It sounds good, but...
I don't know if that should be ALL that bit size makes.
It's a kind of important thing, after all, which, among other things, dictates memory usage limits, the hardware composition of the -tan's nodes, and such. Blood type sounds like a good idea, but I think it should be a bit bigger than that.

[Chocofreak13]

it could present compatibility issues between older OSes and newer OSes, which might be an interesting storyline concept. :\

[Aurora Borealis]

Sounds interesting. I don't know what the bit size is for most systems, especially not the mainframe systems. I'd like to know that information to add in the list table, not just specifying that they're mainframes, but which type.

When going through the updated OS-tan list table (still in my wiki userpage sub-section), I'm still trying to make sense of some OS-tan lineages, where they start and where they end.

In particular, I remembered that BESYS-tan was Multics-tan's predecessor from a different lineage (BESYS being the half-sister of GMOS' daughters) though both at least partly originated from Bell Labs, and elements from BESYS were incorporated into Multics' creation, though Multics was created on a mainframe running CTSS. Dammit this is confusing! Did any of us ever decide what relation there was between BESYS and Multics? Whatever it'd be, they wouldn't have been very close at all, actually resentful on BESYS-tan's behalf since her life force started declining after Multics-tan was born, and Multics-tan got adopted by CTSS-tan and is considered of MIT lineage instead. @_@