roboredom: (I AM SHINY AND NEW.)
Robo-Ky ([personal profile] roboredom) wrote2012-02-11 05:52 pm

Log 009 ◄► Voice

[Surely, Luceti, you were not prepared for the loud, robotic voice blaring over the journals with no warning. Nor the fact that in the video feed, he is reflecting a bright light off of his face.

He might be doing the reflection portion on purpose.]
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ALL OF YOU DEFECTIVE BEINGS. THINK LONG AND HARD, AND GIVE ME AN HONEST ANSWER. BECAUSE I'LL BECOME THE HUMAN EQUIVALENT OF PISSED OFF IF I GET A FAKE ANSWER. REALLY ANGRY.

WHICH OF YOU THINK YOU ARE SUPERIOR THAN ME?
[Pause.] BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT.

[It's almost like a rhetorical question. This is definitely an informative PSA brought to you by Robo-Ky.]
haveiliedtoyou: (Did you think that that would work?)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-03-27 06:07 am (UTC)(link)
I wouldn't be so sure of that.
haveiliedtoyou: (Oh. It's you again.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-03-29 09:16 am (UTC)(link)
I wouldn't know. I'm sure you're a much better answerer of that question that I am.
haveiliedtoyou: (There's always time for more testing.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-03-31 02:11 am (UTC)(link)
Considering the situation is hypothetical, it's impossible for me to be wrong unless we set up such an experiment and see the results. Otherwise we're forming conclusions based on pure speculation.

Which would make you wrong in your assessment that I am wrong.
haveiliedtoyou: (Just look at this mess.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-04-10 01:12 am (UTC)(link)
Remember that thing about you not wanting to prove you can't beat me, so you didn't even want to try? What we have here is a similar situation. Except in this case I'm not putting it off because I know I'll be wrong. I'm delaying it because you're not here for me to test.
haveiliedtoyou: (Oh. It's you again.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-04-14 06:08 am (UTC)(link)
And yet considering your intelligence, I'm quite confident you'd be surprised at how many humans perform poorly. Or maybe you wouldn't, but I suspect your processing capacity is far too close to theirs for you to properly realize just how simple it is to overestimate human performance.
haveiliedtoyou: (Did you think that that would work?)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-04-14 10:08 pm (UTC)(link)
A failure is when nothing can be learned from the experiment. Poor performance can still be analyzed and produce results.
haveiliedtoyou: (Oh. It's you again.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-04-16 11:30 pm (UTC)(link)
One key point to succeeding is learning from mistakes. And humans make quite a lot of mistakes. If you write them off, you'll wind up doing the same things that they did because you don't know any better, meaning you'll perform no better than a human would in the first place.

Which explains a lot about you, I suppose.
haveiliedtoyou: (Oh. It's you again.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-04-26 06:07 pm (UTC)(link)
We've only had a single conversation and you've already done several. I'd say that's evidence enough.
haveiliedtoyou: (There's always time for more testing.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-05-01 05:12 am (UTC)(link)
Do you really think I'd lie to you? You're probably so gullible you're not even worth lying to.
haveiliedtoyou: (Oh. It's you again.)

[personal profile] haveiliedtoyou 2012-05-08 01:32 am (UTC)(link)
You're also insecure, and a poor liar yourself.