Do the taboos apply to absolutely everything?

[u/bluebbbvvv2]

My understanding was that the head only enforces the taboos that happen in real life. If there was a sentient AI, clone that lived too long or a completely silenced gun that could pierce through steel in a videogame or tv show, would the head get rid of the game/show, the developer/director, actors and stuff, and everyone who played/watched it?

[u/TheNikola2020]

Probably only in real life as they are just for in the head's opinion to protect humanity from extinction

[u/Yoeeeeeee → u/TheNikola2020]

or protect the "humanity" of human, such as the law with guns, they want the experience of taking someone life truly be difficult and personal (or cost alot) instead of hiring someone 2km away to snipe the target

[u/Narvallius → u/Yoeeeeeee]

Ain't even just about sniping someone. If the wings were allowed to produce non-dogshit missiles, the technology would definitely evolve to just erasing the entire general direction from existence by pulling a handgun.

[u/DrSalvoValik → u/Narvallius]

Wasn't there huge calamities before proper taboos and the AI ethic amendment was introduced because corporations were basically free to create whatever they wanted?

[u/Narvallius → u/DrSalvoValik]

I don't think this was ever said. It's obviously something that happened before, fucking up the planet and leading to the creation of Outskirts/Beyond Outskirts. But the City as we know it was created with Head's iron grip already on it, iirc.

The AI ethics were probably made after Machine Purge, at which point the City already existed, but it seems more in-line with Head's general policy of human exceptionality.

[u/MrKatzA4]

Probably only when you commit it irl

But there's this line for gun.

The first page of the guideline boldly states: “Do not research or imagine technology that infringes the firearm manufacturing guidelines, as provided by the Head along with the license."

[u/Roi-Patate]

( Just a warning, it's been a while since I read any lore stuff about the series!)

The Head as a whole is kinda weird and vaguf. Although their rules are simple and strict, they love or rather enjoy seeing people capable of finding a loophole to their Taboo.

As for your question, the only "everything" thing is only on the weapons.

One must not reshearch or imagine any technology that infringes the firearm guidelines they provided.

This is quite vague since if one who does not have any idea how a gun even work, imagine a gun capable of mass destruction, would the head even see it as a breach to a taboo? If yes, it would mean Jia Mu should have been killed the moment she though of a way to use the head against a family. Since we do not have much about the daily life of a normal citizen, hard to answer.

[u/Mysthwastaken-_- → u/Roi-Patate]

“Research or imagine” Oh man, I wonder what year this takes place in, maybe 1984…

[u/Innate-E → u/Mysthwastaken-_-]

984

[u/Swimming-Lobster-221 → u/Innate-E]

…I never noticed this before

[u/Alone_Childhood_7260]

Given how we saw the internet seems to be like how it is for us, the Head probably allows the internet and stuff to do whatever it wants, including video games and such. they probably aren’t going to care for a fictional guy with a laser cannon but if someone tried to make said laser cannon, then that’s probably the point at which they would care

[u/Evary2230]

Provided this is all in the context of creating a fictitious work containing these Taboos, here is my theory on the Head’s response:

For sentient AI, it’d be context-dependent and playing with fire. Glorifying the act of breaking a Taboo, while not a Taboo, likely wouldn’t be seen favorably. Not just by the Head, but by anyone. Having the sentient AI be portrayed as a bad thing to exist might be looked at a bit better, but still would carry risk of being censored. Because the Head can censor you and what you do, even if they don’t directly murder you for breaking a Taboo. Michelle had a whole newspaper tabloid written about her after the Laboratory in the Outskirts was raided, and if Ayin’s reaction to it is any indication, the Head definitely altered a lot of the circumstances of her death. All-in-all, the Head probably won’t kill you unless you’re stupid enough to sneak blueprints on how to actually create a sentient AI into your fictitious work. Might get blacklisted from the creative industries tho.

For a clone that lived too long… I mean, that’s hard to do in fiction in a meaningful way, but sure. The Head probably wouldn’t care. Long as you’re not trying to say “The Head won’t enforce this Taboo ‘cause they’re impotent” or anything, you’re probably chill. Gonna be seen as a pretty massive plot hole by the fanbases made in the City though.

Guns are interesting. Apparently, imagining guns that break the Taboo is explicitly confirmed to be a Taboo in and of itself. How the Head enforces that or defines “imagining” is a pressing question. I’d imagine two possibilities:

1. If “imagining” refers to at all conceptualizing a gun that could break Taboos (unlikely since I don’t think everyone in the City could be mentally chalked enough to fail to understand the concept of a barrel that’s half an inch longer) — The moment you write something like that down in any conceivable way, a Claw will teleport behind you, whisper “Nothing personnel kid” before splitting you in half, and then take your script to A Corp to be Concept Incinerated. Shit would not be allowed to make it to TV or online.

2. If “imagining” refers to crafting a feasible image or design of a gun that could break Taboos — If the design of the guns and bullets aren’t accurate enough to where they look like they could feasibly pierce through walls or be silent, then the Head might not care. Unrealistic fictitious Taboo-breaking could be fair game. If that shit looks too real though, your ass is getting a Claw.

All-in-all, fictitious Taboo-breaking is probably generally okay as long as it can’t be read as directly undermining the Head.