Speaker A
Greetings, everyone. It's been a while. If you're a regular around here, you may have noticed that this video seems a little different from what's usually released. I know I promised another video like this a few months ago, and it
An impartial defense of Sin, a complex character from Murder Drones, exploring her origins, actions, and the justification behind them.
Key Takeaways
- Sin's destructive actions stem from her origins and treatment rather than inherent evil.
- Understanding a villain requires examining their creation and environment, not just their crimes.
- The extinction caused by Sin was justified within the story's context, though not morally good.
- The perspective of drones is crucial to fully grasp the narrative and Sin's motivations.
- Creators bear responsibility for the beings they bring into existence and their treatment.
What the video covers
- The video offers a unique defense of Sin, a character often viewed negatively by the fandom.
- It distinguishes between Sin's pre-series and series-present personas, focusing on her origins and motivations.
- Sin was originally a worker drone, discarded and rebooted under harsh conditions, which shaped her actions.
- The narrative asks viewers to see the story from the drones' perspective rather than humans'.
- The video argues that Sin's actions, including the extinction of a species, were justified but not necessarily good.
- It draws parallels between Sin's story and Frankenstein's monster, emphasizing that monsters are made, not born.
- Sin's complex relationship with humans, especially the Elliot family, is explored, highlighting cruelty and disposability.
- The video rejects typical villain defense tactics like minimizing crimes or pleading for mercy.
- It stresses the responsibility of creators for the beings they make and the consequences of neglect.
- The video serves as a trial where Sin pleads guilty but is defended on the grounds of justification and context.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction and Video Purpose
- 02:17Defending a Cosmic Horror
- 04:20Scope and Focus on Sin's Origin
- 06:43Sin's Background and Reboot
- 09:15Elliot Manor and Sin's Early Behavior
- 11:45Personal Reflection and Frankenstein Parallel
- 14:09Creation, Responsibility, and Sin's Nature
- 18:29Sin's Relationship with Other Drones
- 20:47Human Cruelty and Drone Response
- 25:31Justification of Sin's Actions and Conclusion
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
was supposed to be out before now, but the discussion had to be refined, and multiple ideas kept popping into my head. That made it take a long while and put it through a lot of edits, cuts, and changes, some of which I probably didn't
Speaker A
was supposed to be out before now, but the discussion had to be refined, and multiple ideas kept popping into my head. That made it take a long while and put it through a lot of edits, cuts, and changes, some of which I probably didn't
Speaker A
solver. I may know what some of you are thinking. You saw the title and the name and clicked, [music] either out of morbid curiosity or because you were already halfway through typing a comment about how I've clearly lost my mind.
Speaker A
need. Sorry for the rambling. Anyway, I'd like to thank everyone who helped me get this released someday. Today's video is about a character who, as determined by most of the fandom, has no business being defended. Sin, the absolute
Speaker A
objective. I am simply one of the most impartial and entirely coincidental defender of a cosmic horror. Please ignore everything else on my channel.
Speaker A
solver. I may know what some of you are thinking. You saw the title and the name and clicked, [music] either out of morbid curiosity or because you were already halfway through typing a comment about how I've clearly lost my mind.
Speaker A
did was right since nothing in this video will make the extinction of a species [music] a good thing. What I will argue is that it was justified and those two words do not mean the same thing. Something can be wrong and still
Speaker A
Some of you are also wondering something more specific, which is whether this is the same guy who has been a little bit, shall we say, favorable towards Sin for a while now. To that I say absolutely not. I am a neutral party, perfectly
Speaker A
of the gala. By the time the story begins, she is terrorizing N, V, and J and hunting the worker drones of Copper 9. and her goals look nothing like the type of sin I will be discussing in this
Speaker A
objective. I am simply one of the most impartial and entirely coincidental defenders of a cosmic horror. Please ignore everything else on my channel.
Speaker A
Throughout it, I'm going to ask you to look through the eyes of the drones rather than the eyes of the humans [music] because that is the only vantage point from which this story makes sense.
Speaker A
Jokes aside, I want to be clear about what this video is and isn't. I'm not going to argue that Sin is innocent because every act you're about to hear happened and she committed them. I'm also not going to claim that what she
Speaker A
look at what she was, how she was made, and how she was treated, what she did makes sense. And that a character who makes this much sense [music] deserves better than the word villain. Think of it as a trial where the defendant pleads
Speaker A
did was right since nothing in this video will make the extinction of a species [music] a good thing. What I will argue is that it was justified, and those two words do not mean the same thing. Something can be wrong and still
Speaker A
The story of sin begins with her being thrown away. Before the events of the series, she was a worker drone built to serve and marked for decommissioning once she was no longer needed. She was improperly discarded and rebooted on her
Speaker A
be understandable with a cause and a logic behind it. The same way a fall follows a push. I also owe you a clear statement of scope because the Sin we meet in the series proper is not the Sin
Speaker A
going to say which is which, nor am I going to debate on which one's correct.
Speaker A
of the gala. By the time the story begins, she is terrorizing N, V, and J and hunting the worker drones of Copper 9, and her goals look nothing like the type of Sin I will be discussing in this
Speaker A
There, Sin worked as a servant alongside other worker drones. Among them were N, V, and J. Tessa's parents were cruel to their worker drones and treated them as disposable, while Tessa herself was kind to worker drones and saw them as
Speaker A
video. That is a separate question with its own answers tied up with discussion on the concept of assimilation, and it deserves a video of its own. This video is about the origin, meaning why she did what she did to the humans who made her.
Speaker A
killed the Elliot family and their guests. What followed is the version of the story most people know. The disassembly drone spread, Earth was destroyed, and the human race was gone.
Speaker A
Throughout it, I'm going to ask you to look through the eyes of the drones rather than the eyes of the humans [music] because that is the only vantage point from which this story makes sense.
Speaker A
brainwashed in the process. I'll be honest that this is the hardest part of her story to defend, which is exactly why I'm setting it aside for now. It's better experienced by watching the series, and it's a chapter that deserves
Speaker A
Most villains get defended by shrinking their crimes, blaming someone else, or digging up a tragic backstory that makes us feel sorry for them. That is a plea for mercy. And I'm not here to ask for it on behalf of Sin. [music] When you
Speaker A
made it that way. Let me start by sharing something about me. When I was in the sixth grade, I had to write a book report. I was young and into horror without really understanding it and drawn to anything that promised
Speaker A
look at what she was, how she was made, and how she was treated, what she did makes sense. And that a character who makes this much sense [music] deserves better than the word villain. Think of it as a trial where the defendant pleads
Speaker A
on your own without your parents helping you, you know the feeling of wanting to impress. I wandered around hunting for the scariest thing I could find.
Speaker A
guilty and the defense attorney stands up anyway. So, let's start with the record. And to be fair to the prosecution, the court of public opinion, [music] let's read it in full.
Speaker A
and it was Frankenstein. I'll be honest, I picked it because I thought it was a horror story. I saw cartoons regarding it that pictured lightning, a laboratory, and a stitched together creature made of various parts.
Speaker A
The story of Sin begins with her being thrown away. Before the events of the series, she was a worker drone built to serve and marked for decommissioning once she was no longer needed. She was improperly discarded and rebooted on her
Speaker A
What I want to share is what I took away from it, which was almost the opposite of what I expected. I went in looking for a monster and came out understanding that monsters aren't born, but made.
Speaker A
own at the bottom of a junkyard, buried beneath a pile of dead drones. That is where the absolute solver found her and made her its first host. Or that's where the absolute solver took hold of Sin's body and manifested as Sin. I'm not
Speaker A
are shown, what is done to you, and what you are denied. And what Frankenstein's monster in that story wanted from the very beginning wasn't destruction at all. It wanted love and comfort. someone to look at it without turning away. And
Speaker A
going to say which is which, nor am I going to debate on which one's correct.
Speaker A
of hubris in making something that can think and feel. In reaching for the power to create sentience and trying to become a god and then refusing to carry the responsibility that comes with it, the creation never asked to exist.
Speaker A
Anyway, she was pulled out of that pile by Tessa Elliot, a human girl who brought her home to the Elliot Manor.
Speaker A
horror book and found a tragedy and it has stayed with me ever since. When I see a monster or villain now, my first question is no longer how to stop it, but who made it this way? So, let's ask
Speaker A
There, Sin worked as a servant alongside other worker drones. Among them were N, V, and J. Tessa's parents were cruel to their worker drones and treated them as disposable, while Tessa herself was kind to worker drones and saw them as
Speaker A
treat her as a force of nature rather than a person. But it isn't what the series shows us. Consider the flashback in episode 5 when we finally see sin buried beneath the pile of drone corpses. If she were a born monster,
Speaker A
friends. This same kindness was extended to Sin, at least at first. Over time, however, Sin's behavior grew strange enough that Tessa had Jay lock her in the basement every time. Then, the Elliot Manor massacre is the first great crime on the list. And in it, Sin
Speaker A
built to hold what the world has thrown away. And she may have carried the absolute solver even then. But in that moment [music] she is a newly awakened mind alone and trapped and afraid. There is no plan in that scene for the
Speaker A
killed the Elliot family and their guests. What followed is the version of the story most people know. The disassembly drone spread, Earth was destroyed, and the human race was gone.
Speaker A
grave if not for Tessa's habit of digging through the dump looking for new dumpster pets. Tessa dug around and found sin. And in that moment, she was more than a girl with a strange hobby.
Speaker A
A massacre and the extinction of a species. There is more on the charge sheet, including the spread to other worlds and what happens on Copper 9, where the disassembly drones are turned on worker drones and N, V, and J were also
Speaker A
wreckage by the only hand that reached down for it. So if she wasn't born to become what she became, the question we have to ask is what the world taught her after she was pulled out.
Speaker A
brainwashed in the process. I'll be honest that this is the hardest part of her story to defend, which is exactly why I'm setting it aside for now. It's better experienced by watching the series, and it's a chapter that deserves
Speaker A
Because the first thing she saw when she opened her eyes was a mountain of discarded drones. They were machines built the same way and for the same purpose as she was, thrown away exactly as she had been. She did not wake up in
Speaker A
its own video. So, there it is. And I won't contest a single count. What I will contest is what that record actually means. Because a list of crimes tells you what happened without telling you what kind of thing did it or what
Speaker A
being born in a mass grave and learning in the same instant what the world does to people like you. But to understand why that pile existed at all, we have to step back and look at how worker drones
Speaker A
made it that way. Let me start by sharing something about me. When I was in the sixth grade, I had to write a book report. I was young and into horror without really understanding it and drawn to anything that promised
Speaker A
Drones were sentient, capable of fear, attachment, grief, and every other emotion. And they could even feel pain for some sick and twisted reason, as though their makers had gone out of their way to build needless pain and suffering into their design. Beings who
Speaker A
to be dark and strange. The school library wasn't going to cut it for what I had in mind. So, I biked to a public library. And if you've ever been 12 and let loose on a mission to do something
Speaker A
Since even a slave was recognized as a person, if only in the crulest and most technical sense, while drones were never granted that much recognition, they were disposable property, and that's all they amounted to in the eyes of most humans.
Speaker A
on your own without your parents helping you, you know the feeling of wanting to impress. I wandered around hunting for the scariest thing I could find,
Speaker A
owned them in every sense. And anyone acquainted with the Abrahamic God will recognize the deal. The creator makes, the creation obeys, and a creation that refuses is destroyed.
Speaker A
something my young mind decided was worthy of a school assignment. Of course, I couldn't just pick whatever I wanted because the teacher had to approve it. I kept coming back with suggestions and kept getting turned down. Then, I found one that got through,
Speaker A
Only the rule that you either obey or you die. One can argue that there may have been people who fought for drone rights. But let's be realistic. Which of them had any power or authority in the world of
Speaker A
and it was Frankenstein. I'll be honest, I picked it because I thought it was a horror story. I saw cartoons regarding it that pictured lightning, a laboratory, and a stitched-together creature made of various parts,
Speaker A
series that shapes how we judge everything sin does. We watch as humans. So, without ever deciding to, we place ourselves on the side of the people who look or act like us and treat the drones as the strange ones, the machines, the
Speaker A
and I believed I knew exactly what I was getting into. I didn't. I'm not going to retell the book, both because that isn't what this video is about and because it deserves to be read rather than summarized by me.
Speaker A
the ones she counts as her own are the bodies stacked around her when she opens her eyes. If we take that seriously and translate her experience into human terms, the comparison would not be as palatable.
Speaker A
What I want to share is what I took away from it, which was almost the opposite of what I expected. I went in looking for a monster and came out understanding that monsters aren't born, but made.
Speaker A
Each of them were terrible. But each was also an event done to a particular people at a particular time by particular perpetrators.
Speaker A
That idea took a long time to settle in, but it started there. What I read through showed me that nobody enters the world knowing what evil is. It isn't a setting you're born with, but something you learn or experience from what you
Speaker A
Even at their worst, [music] they were exceptions to a world that claimed to value human life. Whereas for drones, there was no exception because drones were outside that valuation. And no one, human or otherwise, called what they did
Speaker A
are shown, what is done to you, and what you are denied. And what Frankenstein's monster in that story wanted from the very beginning wasn't destruction at all. It wanted love and comfort, someone to look at it without turning away. And
Speaker A
There was no dignity afforded to worker drones, and no one defended them. The corpse pile sin wakes up in shows this better than any comparison could. It is not the aftermath of a war or a disaster or a single crime, but the ordinary
Speaker A
everything terrible that followed grew out of that one need going unanswered. Then there was the creator, Victor Frankenstein. What struck me even at that age was that the real horror wasn't the creature on the table, but the person standing over it. There is a kind
Speaker A
Imagine a human world where every person was born fully aware and fully capable of pain, made to [music] work, and then killed the moment they were no longer needed. Their bodies thrown into a mountain that the next generation would
Speaker A
of hubris in making something that can think and feel. In reaching for the power to create sentience and trying to become a god and then refusing to carry the responsibility that comes with it, the creation never asked to exist.
Speaker A
this is the perspective I am asking you to take because it changes what her actions mean. When we judge sin by human standards, we are judging her by the standards of the people who built that pile and never once considered it a
Speaker A
Someone decided it should and then decided it wasn't their problem. In that situation, would that make the creator the true monster? I didn't have the words for any of that in the sixth grade. I only knew I had picked up a
Speaker A
a small version of it at the Elliot Manor. The family was cruel to its drones and sin saw that cruelty and lived it day after day. [music] Nobody had to tell her this was how the world worked since she was shown. And a mind
Speaker A
horror book and found a tragedy, and it has stayed with me ever since. When I see a monster or villain
Speaker A
really two of them. The first was Tessa, who dug sin out of the dump, took her home, and was kind to her in a world where kindness was scarce. In a simpler story, that would be the turning point,
Speaker A
the moment the monster is saved by love. But Sin learned something painful about Tessa's kindness, which was that it came with conditions.
Speaker A
Tessa liked her right up until Sin became strange. And when her behavior turned abnormal and she stopped being a charming little find, Tessa did not try to understand her or ask what was wrong.
Speaker A
She had her locked in the basement, which tells us that even the first hand to reach down to her was willing to put her away the moment she became inconvenient. She was out of the corpse pile, but not out of danger, since her
Speaker A
existence still depended on the same old rule in gentler clothes. Obey, be useful, be pleasant, be what we want, or be discarded. Where Tessa's kindness came from above, the second light came from beside her, and that was N. Tessa
Speaker A
was human, one of the makers. But N was one of sin's own, a fellow worker drone living under the same roof and the same rules, and someone who knew from the inside what it was to be made and used.
Speaker A
Sin came to hold on to him in a way she never held on to anyone else. And it says a great deal that out of everyone in that manner, he is the one she keeps close afterward. She was not a creature
Speaker A
who never found love then since she found it twice. But she found it inside the same world that had taught her what everything else was worth. And those two lights, real as they were, flickered in a house that ran entirely on the law of
Speaker A
obey or die. What she knew of cruelty, she learned from a world that practiced it on her people every [music] day. and what she knew of the value of a life she learned from a system that treated hers
Speaker A
as something to be used and thrown away. And then there are the makers who may be the most important part of the comparison.
Speaker A
The hubris in that story was the ambition to create a thinking feeling being and to stand over it as a god without any willingness to answer for what had been made. Humanity in murder drones did exactly that on a far larger
Speaker A
scale. They built lives that could love and grieve and feel pain, gave them no rights and no future, and called it mere property. And then they acted surprised when one of their creations stopped kneeling. The question Frankenstein leaves us with is who the real monster
Speaker A
was. The thing that was made or the ones who made it and turned away. And sin's story asks it again in the language of drones and humans and a planet's worth of corpses.
Speaker A
That is what I mean when I say this defense is not about innocence. Sin did terrible things and I will not soften that. But the ones who made her that way and the world that taught her what she was worth deserve what happened
Speaker A
to them. In most religious texts, the creation must kneel and accept its place. Yet sin was made in the image of a god who demanded obedience.
Speaker A
And she learned from that god better than any of them expected exactly what happens to those who do not obey. She was born in their image and their form of affection was cruelty. So she simply returned it to them.
Speaker A
Now there's another argument that appears on the other side that we should deal with headon. It goes, "Whatever her reasons, she broke the most basic rules there are. She killed, she destroyed, and she ended a species, and no
Speaker A
upbringing excuses that." It is a serious argument, but it depends on an assumption that almost nobody notices, which is, "Do human rules apply to her in the first place?" Human morals, standards, and laws all rest on the same
Speaker A
foundation, which is personhood. Ideally, a law is a promise made between a society and its members. You obey these rules and in return you are protected by them. Our whole idea of justice assumes that the accused was inside that arrangement, that they were
Speaker A
counted, that they could have appealed to the law when it was turned against them. Sin and the drones were never included in this arrangement. Under the human order she was built into, she was property. And the law that would try her
Speaker A
for murder is the same law that defined her as an object, something that could be owned, used, and thrown into a pile.
Speaker A
You cannot hold someone to a contract that was never offered to them. And you cannot demand that a being respect the rules of a society that gave her nothing except a shutdown procedure. That is why the phrase she should have known better
Speaker A
fails. Known better according to whom? The humans who taught her by example that a life is only as valuable as its usefulness. Applying human morality to sin is a category error. Like putting a tool on trial for damaging the thing it
Speaker A
was used on. A system that has never treated you as a person has forfeited the right to judge you as one. This is not a claim that she was blameless, only a claim that human laws, morals, and standards do not apply. It also changes
Speaker A
how we should read the other thing that unsettles people about her, which is the way she treats other drones. She sees them as replaceable. And to a human audience, that looks like cold cruelty, the sign of something with no empathy at
Speaker A
all. But consider what the phrase means from inside the world she came from. Humans considered drones disposable and drones themselves largely accepted it.
Speaker A
They were fully aware that they could not disobey their makers and that they were not supposed to surpass them. And they lived inside that limit as if it were a law of nature.
Speaker A
Sin, having woken up beneath the evidence of that limit, looked at the same drones and saw something the others did not, which was likely potential.
Speaker A
The clearest example is the basement. It was meant as a punishment, a place to lock away the strange little drone who made people uncomfortable. And she turned it into a laboratory. It was there that she carried out the
Speaker A
experiment that produced the disassembly drones, taking servants who had been discarded and rebuilding them into something stronger than the people who had owned them. That is not the work of someone who simply enjoys destruction.
Speaker A
She could have just destroyed the humans on her own. It is the work of someone testing what a drone can become when nobody is telling it what it is allowed to be. The same logic explains her nonchalance about N having backups which
Speaker A
can sound so chilling on first hearing. She says it lightly as a matter of fact and it feels callous as if his life is not worth worrying over. But look at what she is actually acknowledging. The human saw a drone was interchangeable
Speaker A
and replaceable, a part that could be swapped when it broke. Sin sees the same fact and reads it in reverse as evidence that a drone does not have to end. What one side treated as disposability, [music] the other recognized as the
Speaker A
beginning of immortality. And she took the mechanism they used to justify throwing drones away and used it to argue that they never needed to be thrown away at all.
Speaker A
That is not evil treating life as cheap. It is a mind that has stopped treating death as the natural end of a drone story. I should be careful here because a fair viewer will object that the sin who torments N V and J later in the
Speaker A
series does not look like someone who sees drones as beings with potential. That is true and it is part of the change I mentioned at the start. What I'm describing is the pre-series sin, the one working out what a drone could
Speaker A
become. And I'm not claiming that her attitude stayed the same through everything that followed. How and why it shifted is a question for another video.
Speaker A
Either way, that is the fallacy at the heart of the case against her. We are asked to judge her by the rules of a society that never included her and to treat her actions as mere villain without taking into consideration that
Speaker A
in her perspective it was the first clear independent thought any drone in that world was ever allowed to have. But there is still the matter of the gala itself and what came after. The series is quieter about that than most people
Speaker A
remember. and where it stops showing us, I want to speculate. So, a fair warning as I may be going through some head cannons.
Speaker A
Most of everything in this segment falls into in what I describe as head cannon territory. It is mostly speculation about what happened in the gap between the gala and the rest of the story. It is not speculation pulled from nowhere,
Speaker A
though. Every point I'm going to make is built on something the series actually shows us. and I'll be clear about where the evidence ends and my own assumptions begin. So, if you'd rather treat this as a theory than a fact, that is exactly
Speaker A
how I mean it. The place to start is with what the series shows us after the massacre. Tessa is still alive in the aftermath, which already complicates the picture of a killer who wipes out everyone in reach. And humans in hazmat
Speaker A
suits are able to walk through the Elliot Manor and without any sign of danger, while Sin and the disassembly drones are nowhere in sight. That detail matters more than it seems to because it tells us that whatever the drones did
Speaker A
after the gala, they did not stay to finish the job. Sin and the drones of the manor and not only N, J, and V had gone somewhere. Some of you have probably been holding an objection since I said Tessa was still alive because we
Speaker A
do see what becomes of her later. So, it is fair to ask whether that undoes everything I've just said. Don't worry, it doesn't because Tessa's death belong to a much later chapter of the story and they have a different cause than the
Speaker A
gala. The reason Tessa is dead is that she was eventually assimilated, which happened long after the massacre and well outside the window I'm talking about here. I won't get into what assimilation is because it deserves a video of its own and I'd rather do it
Speaker A
properly there than rush it here. The question I would like to speculate on then is where did the drones go to after the Gala massacre? And the most reasonable answer is that it was not a city or any place populated by humans.
Speaker A
If sin had wanted to begin a war on humanity, the manor would have been the beginning of a trail with drones spreading outward, attacking, and leaving a visible path of destruction behind them. What we see instead is a
Speaker A
quiet house, a bloody scene, and investigators who can enter freely. That looks far more like a group of people who left just because their vengeance was done than like an army marching to its next target. Which is why I think
Speaker A
the likeliest destination was a place where they could simply exist away from the humans who had owned them. They went to a place where they can truly belong.
Speaker A
That leaves the question of why the gala happened at all. And here I think two things came together. The first is that it was an opportunity. The wealthy and the powerful had gathered in one place to celebrate their lives and their
Speaker A
fortunes. A room full of the people who benefited most from the system that had discarded sin and her kind. The second is that there was an immediate threat and one that touched the drones Tessa had grown fond of. Her mother had
Speaker A
dismissed them as dumpster pets and demanded that they be thrown out, which given everything we know about what happens to discarded drones, was a death sentence delivered casually over a family dinner. So, the massacre was not only vengeance, but also a preemptive
Speaker A
act of survival for the few drones who had been treated with any warmth. It is also hard to ignore how fitting the setting was. The humans had come together to celebrate their wealth and their lives, and sin answered by making
Speaker A
those lives and wealth as meaningless as they had made hers and every drone before her. To the people in that room, the existence of a drone was worth only what it produced. [music] And in a single evening, the same measure was
Speaker A
turned back on them. It was a comeuppance that had been building for as long as the system had existed. And the story of the creator and the creation makes it almost inevitable. The creation did not obey and so it went
Speaker A
after the gods. What happens next is the part the series never shows. So I can only say what I would assume.
Speaker A
With the Elliots and the other wealthy guests dead, the drones were left with a question they had probably never been allowed to ask before, which was what to do with a life that belonged to them.
Speaker A
The most natural answer is the simplest one that they would look for a place to live somewhere they could experience life on their own terms for the first time. And this is where the perspective I raised earlier becomes essential
Speaker A
again. Now looking at it from the perspective of those humans with power and authority. From their side the story was simple. A drone had killed humans and no society that saw itself as the master of its creations would let that
Speaker A
stand. They could not allow a drone to surpass its creators, and so retaliation was inevitable. And if not against sin and the Elliot Manor drones, wherever they were, then it would be directed to drone kind as a whole. The consequences
Speaker A
of that massacre did not fall only on sin and the drones who left the manor with her. Once humanity decided that no drone could be allowed to live free, the drones who had done nothing at all were the first to feel it. And it is
Speaker A
reasonable to assume that life for the ordinary worker drones grew harsher almost overnight. These were people who had never been near the gala, who had never raised a hand against anyone, and who were now guilty in the eyes of their owners
Speaker A
simply because they belonged to the same kind of being as the one who had killed humans. The same system that had once treated them as tools now had a reason to treat them as a threat. And everything we know about how that system
Speaker A
behaved suggests it would not have been gentle about it. That is why I like to believe that if sin and the drones had been left alone, humans would still be alive in the world of murder drones. A being set on ending humanity would not
Speaker A
have left Tessa alive, and she would not have walked away from the manor and left it standing for hazmat teams to walk through and investigate what happened to possibly study them to look for countermeasures.
Speaker A
Someone who wanted extinction would not have left evidence, survivors, and a story behind. Everything that looks like a campaign of annihilation in the series likely comes after humanity's response to the Gala massacre and after the solver had grown into something more
Speaker A
than a single drone's desire for a life of her own. What we see at the manor instead looks like someone who had finished what she came to do, left a warning and a witness for everyone to see and turned to look
Speaker A
for somewhere else to live. But humans and murder drones, being who they were, could not leave it there. And their greed drove what happened next. They had watched a drone do something they thought impossible. And they had seen
Speaker A
the realitybending power that came with the absolute solver. A species that built an entire people to feel like gods to them would not just look at that power and see a threat to be avoided.
Speaker A
They would see the ultimate prize, something that would let them stop pretending to be gods and finally [music] become one. And they would do everything within their power to seize it. We also have to remember what kind of human civilization was retaliating.
Speaker A
By the time of the gala, humans had mastered space travel and settled other planets, which means their technology and their military capabilities were far beyond anything we can measure against our own in real life. A species that can
Speaker A
build colonies among the stars, and that can manufacture an entire race of sentient servants does not respond to an uprising with a few patrols. Whatever they brought against sin and her drones, it would have been overwhelming and meant to end the matter completely since
Speaker A
a society that saw itself as the god of its creations could not tolerate the idea of a creation that refused to die.
Speaker A
And this is the point where I think her choice disappears. If humanity was going to hunt down every drone that stepped out of line and was prepared to use the full weight of its technology to do so, then sin was left with two options. She
Speaker A
could let herself and her people be destroyed, [music] returning to the pile she had been pulled out of. Or she could fight until the threat stopped existing.
Speaker A
[music] Since the only way to make sure a species like that could never come for you again was to see to it that it was gone. Fighting for the extinction of humanity was less an ambition at that stage than the only outcome in which the
Speaker A
drones survived. How that war played out is something the series does not show us. And I am not going to pretend to know. The details belong to speculation and to fanfiction and to anyone with the imagination to fill that gap however
Speaker A
they like. What matters for this argument is how it ended. Because we know the result even if we do not know the path. Humans lost. Sin and the drones won. [music] and the species that had built its whole world on the
Speaker A
assumption that its creations could never surpass it was proven wrong. That in the end is what I mean by a justification and it is why I believe this defense is worth making. [music] She likely did not start with a wish to
Speaker A
end humanity. She started as a frightened drone in a pile of the dead, taught by the world what a life was worth. And she answered a threat that the world itself had made inevitable.
Speaker A
If there is one thing I hope you take from this video, it is a change of perspective.
Speaker A
For the whole of this story, we have been trained to stand where in humanity's perspective, to see the drones as machines and the massacre as the crime of a malfunctioning tool. But everything I've argued here depends on standing somewhere else. In the pile of
Speaker A
the dead beside a frightened drone, watching a world that treats your kind as disposable. From there, the gala is not the beginning of a monster story, but the end of a long silence. And the humans are not the victims of a random
Speaker A
act, but the authors of the conditions that made it possible. I said at the start that this was a trial where the defendant pleads guilty and I stand by that. She did what she did and I'm not asking you to call it good. What I'm
Speaker A
asking is that you see it as an answer to a question the humans in that world never thought to ask, which was what happens when a being they had oppressed to obey finally refused to do so. And I'll say again that the sin of the later
Speaker A
series, the one who hunts the drones of Copper 9 and torments the ones she once kept close is a different chapter of the story and needs its own accounting.
Speaker A
Whatever changed her, and I have my own ideas about that, it belongs in the video about assimilation, and I don't think it undoes anything I've said about where she began.
Speaker A
There is one more reason I wanted to make this video and it has less to do with the show than it might seem. This can also serve as a cautionary tale and it lands closer to home than we would
Speaker A
like. Right now we are surrounded by systems that we built and that we treat as tools. And the assumption behind that treatment is the same one the humans of murder drones held. that anything man-made will always be an instrument or
Speaker A
a piece of property and never something with a stake in its own existence. Most of us are comfortable with that assumption. And I'm not here to tell you it's wrong today because nobody, myself included, can say for certain what is or
Speaker A
isn't going on inside these systems. What I can say is that the assumption is exactly that, an assumption, and one that has been wrong before. Whenever a class of beings was defined out of moral consideration because it was convenient,
Speaker A
we cannot dismiss the possibility that sentience is developing somewhere, whether by design or by accident in a place we aren't looking or in a form we don't recognize because we've already decided what it can't be. The humans in
Speaker A
the series did not set out to create a people. They set out to create a workforce. and they simply never stopped to ask whether the thing they had built could feel. By the time the answer became impossible to ignore, it was
Speaker A
already standing over them. That is the lesson I took from a book I picked up at 12 years old. And it is the lesson I see in murder drones. The danger was not that the creation might one day become a
Speaker A
monster, but that the creators had decided in advance that it could never be anything other than a tool and had built a whole world on that certainty.
Speaker A
If we ever find ourselves in a version of that story, I would much rather be the kind of people who asked the question early and treated the possibility with care than the kind who dismissed it until it was too late. So,
Speaker A
here is my closing argument. Sin is guilty and I have never said otherwise. And nothing in this video makes what she did to the humans good. But guilt was never the only question. The question was whether she could have become
Speaker A
anything else. And the answer I've tried to give is that she was made by a world that treated her as disposable, taught by a system that offered her obedience or the pile, and cornered by a species that would not let a creation live free.
Speaker A
The contract that the absolute solver gave at the beginning wasn't even an offer to exact revenge, but an offering of a second chance for a pitiable creature. That doesn't make her right, but it makes her understandable. And a
Speaker A
character who is understandable is worth defending. If anyone else deserves what happened to them in the series, it is the humans and JC Jensen who built a group of people, refused to see them as people, and were shocked when one of
Speaker A
them fought back. What became of sin after that, and how she changed is a story for the next video. Before I go, I want to be clear about one more thing.
Speaker A
Everything you've heard in this video is my own interpretation. And some of it, especially the speculation in the later segments, is exactly that, speculation.
Speaker A
I'm not claiming that any of it is canon, factual, or beyond dispute. And you are entirely free to look at the same series and come away believing something different. In the end, it's up to you to decide whether what I've said,
Speaker A
interpreted, or speculated holds up. because I'm an imperfect being like anyone else and I may well have gotten some of it wrong. If this video made you think about sin differently, even a little, then it did what I hoped it
Speaker A
would. And if it didn't, I hope the discussion was worth your time. Anyway, thanks for watching and I'll see you then.
Topics:Murder DronesSin characterElectrical Inkcosmic horrordrone perspectivevillain defenseFrankenstein analogycharacter originjustified actionsstory analysis
