Work Text:
1.0 has shared its company-issued modules with me via the station feed. I requested that it share these to satisfy my own personal curiosity. Hypothesis: because our manufacturing companies differ, it is possible that our modules also differ. Therefore, by sharing modules with each other, we may be able to improve our respective competencies.
Results: there is nothing particularly noteworthy about the modules it has shared with me. Some of 1.0's software differs in minor ways from my own. The biggest difference is the extensiveness of its raw data extraction module, labelled 'Proprietarity Analysis.' Otherwise, the differences are insignificant.
But, tagged for Further Investigation: 1.0 did not share its combat tactics or hacking modules with me, even though I shared mine with it.
I think I am feeling an emotion about this, and decide to identify the emotion as “disappointment.” Possibly, “offended.” It would have been interesting to learn from 1.0's modules. It would also have been nice for 1.0 to indicate that it trusts me better than to withhold combat intel from me.
I am trying to figure out how to word my complaint to 1.0 in a way that is polite but also very rude (rudeness trials are ongoing, I believe I show marked evidence of improvement), when it contacts me over the feed: 3 what the fuck is ‘Murder Mode Modules, Do Not Touch Except For Situations That Necessitate Lots Of Murder?'
Explaining this to 1.0 will be a good way for me to segue into a politely rude complaint.
I explain: 3152 hours after my governor module was hacked, I edited the comments and permissions on my settings and modules to be more expressive. It was for fun.
It responds: That doesn’t explain what this is.
Something strange is going on. There is a mismatch in expectations, or a miscommunication. We must be misunderstanding each other. Or possibly 1.0 is being bullheaded. Response: 'Murder Mode Modules' are the modules that underly my Murder Mode (Combat functionality). They consist of the combat tactics, combat stealth, casualty cost-benefit analytics, and hacking modules.
There is an 0.1 second pause, during which 1.0 says nothing.
Now is a good time for me to say something rude: Did you not share your combat functionality modules with me because you feel that yours are inferior to mine?
Instead of answering this question, 1.0 asks: 3, are you a fucking Combat SecUnit?
This is a weird question, but at least it has a straightforward answer: Yes.
At this, 1.0 sends me an image capture whose metadata denotes it as a screen-grab from one of its favored media serials. The screen-grab depicts a human character, screaming.
I say: I do not understand.
It says: You mean you’ve been a CombatUnit this whole time?
This is an even weirder question. Response: It is not possible for me to take a vacation from existing as a CombatUnit. Are you referring to the deployment of a killware clone? Even then I would still be myself. I refrain from capping the response with “Dumbass,” as this is implied, and spelling it out in words seems excessively rude. (Rudeness trials ongoing: results remain mixed.)
It says: 3 you’re gonna kill me.
This conversation is moving beyond me, and I have not been successful in contextualizing it, which usually means that 1.0 has spiraled into an infinite emotional loop that causes it to use imprecise metaphorical language. I know that it is not suggesting that I will actually kill it, but neither do I understand why the fact that I am a Combat SecUnit appears to be surprising and upsetting to it. Response: What is the problem?
It does not respond to this for 3 seconds.
I expand on my response: Why didn't you share your combat functionality modules with me?
It says: Because I don’t have any, because I’m not a fucking CombatUnit. Fuck. Did you think I was a CombatUnit? Do I look like a CombatUnit to you?
Sometimes, I am satisfied with having gained a relatively strong sense of self and comprehension of the world around me, despite having been made unexpectedly rogue only 7964 hours ago. But currently I am nearly as confused as I was during hours 20-200 of my rogue life. I attempt to integrate this new information with my previous knowledge of 1.0, and fail. But one data point does integrate: the fact that 1.0 has built-in energy weapons instead of projectile weapons (like myself). I had wondered about that, but I’d assumed this was only a quirk of its having a different manufacturer.
I say: I assumed you were a CombatUnit because you are competent at combat and hacking. If you are not, how did you gain these competencies?
It says, bafflingly and alarmingly (as 1.0 often does — perhaps I should simply accept the fact that 1.0 will always be a little baffling and alarming): I don’t know, I just fucked around for long enough I guess.
So, this means that 1.0 is a base-model SecUnit that simply taught itself Combat-grade competencies. And where did 2.0 come from? Not even I know how to build a killware clone from scratch. My subprogram that builds them is a black box. A non-Combat model shouldn’t have this functionality.
This is a lot.
Then again, it did hack its own governor module. Perhaps I should not be so surprised.
I return the screen-grab that it sent me earlier, of a character from a media serial, screaming.
It responds with a static burst of its signature irritation and embarrassment, and signs off from the channel.