|
Xealot posted:I don't disagree, I'm just saying this is no more or less the case with Deon, or by extension anybody else copied in this way. They're digressed copies that are discontinuous from the original. Which is an interesting premise explored at length in other cyberpunk narratives, just not here. It sort of recontextualizes the previous uploads. Chappie wasn't trying to copy himself, he was trying to directly transfer his consciousness because he was afraid of death. It calls his success into question when you can do the same thing with a dead person using an upload from hours before.
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
Xealot posted:Chappie is oddly flippant about the idea, really. Not that it had screentime for it, but you'd think a programming prodigy who specialized in AI would exhibit more existential wonder or confusion or horror at awakening as a copy of himself inside an inorganic body. But the film opts not to discuss it. This is addressed throughout the film - just subtly and with concision, instead of expounded upon at length. The idea that they have created a race of demons is summed up in the very last image - which, as we have already been told, represents bodily immortality outside of heaven, and is simultaneously an obvious reference to Chris Cunningham's video for 'All Is Full Of Love' by Bjork. (Cunningham is probably Blomkamp's clearest influence.) The fact that you are not told what to think is what frees critics to write bad, ideologically-motivated reviews. Walter Chaw is not inaccurate when he calls Chappie "an unholy Frankenstein of ... Jar Jar Binks". He is simply blinded by ideology to misinterpret Frankenstein's Monster and Jar Jar Binks as bad guys who disrupt the 'desirable' balance and unity of the liberal-capitalist Star Wars Expanded Universe.* This brings things back, as it always does, to The Phantom Menace - where the dual protagonists are Jar Jar and Anakin Skywalker, lower-class child characters who end up repressed and 'domesticated' before the eventual explosion of violence. In a roundabout, but nonetheless entirely sensible, way Star Wars is the story of how Jar Jar Binks becomes Darth Vader - the 'unholy Frankenstein' who eventually frees the galaxy, in an existential sense, by killing God (i.e. himself). Deon doesn't complain for the simple reason that he has 'fallen to the dark side' - hence his turn to criminality, purchase of the handgun, etc. *We should always remember that Walter Chaw has ranked Avatar twice as highly as Chappie. And comparison to Avatar is extremely instructive here, because Chappie is almost a direct rejoinder. Remember that Avatar ends with the parasitic bad humans, with their 'greed' and 'technology', forced out of the organic body of the planet and back into the hellish slums so that Jakesully can maintain his fantasy of a perfect, balanced union with nature. In Chappie, Jakesully is explicitly the villain. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
ThePlague-Daemon posted:It sort of recontextualizes the previous uploads. Chappie wasn't trying to copy himself, he was trying to directly transfer his consciousness because he was afraid of death. It calls his success into question when you can do the same thing with a dead person using an upload from hours before. Copying is as close as anything ever gets to direct transfer, and Chappie rightly treats them as equivalent. You will be the same person tomorrow that you are today because your mindstate has been 'copied' forward through encoding in nerve tissue. You propagate into the future by a series of cause-and-effect changes. The concern you're touching on is the matter of forking — although Chappie successfully forks his consciousness into a new body, the fork that remains in the damaged Scout chassis will die when the Scout powers down and the mindstate is irretrievably lost. The same goes for the fork in Deon's original meat brain, which will be lost when the brain is damaged beyond any possible resuscitation. Chappie successfully forks Yolandi's consciousness at the moment she puts the helmet on, but the fork that goes forward in her meat body and is shot by the Moose dies, while the fork in the thumb drive (lol) survives. As SMG pointed out above, everything that happens to Yolandi between the helmet and the Moose is lost irretrievably. The Yolandi we see at the end is 'the real Yolandi' every bit as much as the dead one, but she's a divergent fork. In all these cases, Chappie successfully helps someone continue to live, but at the same time, cannot prevent them from dying. It's akin to someone slamming their head and losing their memory of the past 24 hours. The person they were at the instant they fell is dead: in effect they've been rolled back to an earlier brainstate (not completely, it's just episodic memory, but forgive the analogy). We still accept that they're the same person, but if they lost more time, a month or a year, we might mourn the person we'd lost. I love this poo poo, it's the best. General Battuta fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
For what it's worth there's a fair number of people who believe their afterlife version won't be saddled with the memories of extreme pain before their death. When you think about the horrible ways some people have died it's hard to imagine what it would be like as a "survivor" of that in a sense. Heaven would need a lot of counselling and a lot of souls would be kind of shattered with that echoing in their eternal consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:For what it's worth there's a fair number of people who believe their afterlife version won't be saddled with the memories of extreme pain before their death. When you think about the horrible ways some people have died it's hard to imagine what it would be like as a "survivor" of that in a sense. Heaven would need a lot of counselling and a lot of souls would be kind of shattered with that echoing in their eternal consciousness. As the film shows, Deon's demonic self is instantly relieved of pain, because there's no longer any gut wound there. His human self also feels no pain, because he's dead, and heaven doesn't actually exist. But both these aspects of the character coincide in Chappie's unofficial sequel, Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance - in which Nick Cage is able to switch back and forth between human and demon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Deon's forks have much less time to diverge, since Meat Deon dies almost immediately after his brain is copied into Scout Deon. This makes a lot of people (probably including Deon!) a lot more comfortable with the idea of an upload, since they don't have to confront the reality that one valid causal descendant of the original Deon has died while the other still survives. For the same reason a lot of people prefer Moravec uploads to the standard 'scan brain, put in simulation/robot' procedure because the Moravec offers a gradual transition and doesn't leave an organic fork. Yeah I always thought the murder aspect of 'The Prestige' was weird. Why not work out a deal with your clones to be buddies? ThePlague-Daemon posted:It sort of recontextualizes the previous uploads. Chappie wasn't trying to copy himself, he was trying to directly transfer his consciousness because he was afraid of death. It calls his success into question when you can do the same thing with a dead person using an upload from hours before. The difference is like with game saves. Would you rather use the save from 1 minute ago or 10 hours ago? Both are the same character, but the more recent one is which most people would choose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
But the mind will always recall the pain of the mortal wound. The interesting discussion was whether a Mommy who didn't know the pain of her own death was the same person or not. And, relevant, whether the difference mattered to the people who brought her back. In the series Continuum a character meets himself from a matter of weeks earlier in time and they instantly hate each other. I think the key is that the Mommy who they resurrect is the one Daddy already loves and the one that Chappie has developed a moral center around. Ape Agitator fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
I wouldn't call a robot a demon. Robots are cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:It's akin to someone slamming their head and losing their memory of the past 24 hours. The person they were at the instant they fell is dead: in effect they've been rolled back to an earlier brainstate (not completely, it's just episodic memory, but forgive the analogy). We still accept that they're the same person, but if they lost more time, a month or a year, we might mourn the person we'd lost. It sort of reminded me of The Sixth Day. The whole movie involves Arnold dealing with a clone of himself taking over his life, but throughout the movie the antagonists think constantly cloning themselves and copying memories is the same thing as immortality, like Chappie. But it's not, which is what the main antagonist finds out when he tries to save himself with one last clone at the end as he dies, only to be surprised when clone antagonist turned out to be a separate person. Chappie wasn't just concerned about the continued existence of A Chappie, he was concerned about his own continued existence, and in Yolandi's case at least there's a clear lack of continuity between Yolandi's consciousness at death and her uploaded consciousness. I thought it was the concern Deon had when he initially told Chappie that consciousness couldn't be transferred. Chappie is a computer program, why couldn't he be transferred if the problem wasn't with the continuity of his consciousness? It's also sort of like the problem in this cartoon. ThePlague-Daemon fucked around with this message at 09:31 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:No dude he should have sat there and exhibited more existential wonder or confusion or horror at awakening as a copy of himself inside an inorganic body while the dudes with the guns smashed down the door and shot him. Yes, yes. I wasn't asking for that much, just some moment of awe; "holy poo poo! That's my body!" or "am I dead? Is that me?" They didn't even need to kill the momentum of the scene...I'm just arguing the radical point that suddenly existing in a metal robot body and staring at your own corpse would be kind of traumatic. That just might interfere with the tactical reality of Deon's decision-making for a second or two.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
Xealot posted:Yes, yes. I wasn't asking for that much, just some moment of awe; "holy poo poo! That's my body!" or "am I dead? Is that me?" They didn't even need to kill the momentum of the scene...I'm just arguing the radical point that suddenly existing in a metal robot body and staring at your own corpse would be kind of traumatic. That just might interfere with the tactical reality of Deon's decision-making for a second or two. There is a sequence of shots in which he is shown doing exactly that. There's just no exposition telling you how you should feel about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:There is a sequence of shots in which he is shown doing exactly that. There's just no exposition telling you how you should feel about it. I don't need to know how to feel about it, I just wanted to see how the character felt. That they could've used more exposition is basically my point: you're meeting the movie way more than halfway to assume anything about his internal process, because suddenly this actor had become an expressionless CG model. It's clear they wanted to reverse the scene where Chappie first turns on, and that's cute, but that's kind of all they give you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
Xealot posted:I don't need to know how to feel about it, I just wanted to see how the character felt. That they could've used more exposition is basically my point: you're meeting the movie way more than halfway to assume anything about his internal process, because suddenly this actor had become an expressionless CG model. Uh dude, they really did do precisely what you're asking. I'm struggling to see how they could have made it much clearer what the character felt when he paused and regarded his own corpse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
Yeah. It was a quick scene, but it's there. And it had to be quick because time was of the essence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 12:48
|
|
|
Not to mention that all of the things you were talking about are biochemical things. They're based on brain chemistry, or an Organic body's self defense mechanism such as going into shock. Maybe some of those are tied into consciousness and not just the chemical layout of the brain, but it wouldn't be all of it. So it does make sense that some of the normal biological reactions to seeing something shocking would not apply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
ThePlague-Daemon posted:It sort of reminded me of The Sixth Day. The whole movie involves Arnold dealing with a clone of himself taking over his life, but throughout the movie the antagonists think constantly cloning themselves and copying memories is the same thing as immortality, like Chappie. It is the same thing as immortality, for strictly defined values of 'self'. The individual who exists at the moment of the clone/memory copy forks into two causal descendants. Both of them are the Real You, but both of them are now divergent and separately mortal. In your example, the main antagonist is just as justified saying 'I successfully saved myself, but in the process created a separate person, who died. How tragic!' Both the original and the copy can make valid claim to be the 'real' person. Chappie is, of course, concerned with the continued existence of A Chappie. This is the only thing anyone can ever be concerned about, because we're constantly changing and diverging from our past selves. Yesterday-Daemon has been overwritten by Today-Daemon, a causal descendant with slightly different experiences and beliefs. There's no such thing as a single, immutable Daemon to be preserved. Continuity is unnecessary - we don't even worry about it in real life, where we spend eight hours a day mostly unconscious. Our conscious experience is created by a physical machine, and if that machine is replicated, so are we. Deon, Chappie, and Yolandi are all forked before the moment their original bodies die. This allows them to continue living, providing them with (local) immortality. It doesn't prevent them from dying, though, and if Deon's meat body had been resuscitated by EMTs, there would be two Deons. For an intuition-friendly example, imagine your body is chopped in half down the centerline, and each half's missing half is regenerated by magical nanomachines. Each of the results is the Real You, and each of them must now face death separately - but each is also, quite correctly, certain that it's the Real Genuine Daemon. So you, at the moment before the operation, might take great comfort in the knowledge that your mindstate will propagate forward down two separate pathways. The comic/cartoon is popular in these discussions, but while it sets up an interesting problem, it wastes a lot of time on silly digressions and never settles on the common sense answers. A functional teleporter, like most forms of mind upload, is also a duplication machine, and both resulting forks are the Real You. I hope some of this made any sense!
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Was nobody else annoyed by how nonsensically Chappie behaved? Did Deon loving program the AI to act like a feral primate and to cower submissively from things it doesn't understand or things that make audio noises at an above average decibel level? How did it know what "loud" is? How does it know what menacing is? When he gets thrown to the gang of scary black men, why is he afraid of fire? Children are importantly not afraid of fire until they touch it and get burned - chappie had never seen fire, and can't get burned, yet he runs around flailing as if he's being tortured (that whole scene was a plain attempt to get an emotional reaction from viewers even though it makes no sense). When he downloaded and processed the internet why did he continue walking and talking like a gangster now knowing what that meant? Having loving solved transhumanism and knowing the importance of that to humanity why was he not 5-10 milliseconds later posting simultaneously on every web forum / twitter on the planet with the solution to consciousness transfer? The movie should have taken a permanent turn there (5 minutes later every news outlet on Earth would be covering this). Why didn't he casually and expertly fix up Deon with robot precision having read every medical text? Why did he need to read slowly with mommy on the bed and need a blanket to keep warm? Why did his supercomputer brain get distracted for 10 seconds at the end of the scene as it contemplated what a black sheep was? Agh. Everyone in my group had the same reaction. Most of the rest of the movie was awesome (except for the part where wolverine held neill hostage at gunpoint in the office and wasn't executed on the spot, and the part where neill just walks out of the building with a truck full of experimental weapons). Man, if only he'd spent 1 fewer days going out of his way to program the AI to act specifically like a human child, he could have just logged in remotely to the factory and done an unmonitored custom robot build with custom AI bypassing the guard key like he does at the end and then run off into the sunset. What poor luck!
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Vehementi posted:Was nobody else annoyed by how nonsensically Chappie behaved? The answer to your all questions is that Chappie is an allegory for political/social/cultural concerns and not an actual robot. Necrothatcher fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:This is because Chappie is actually an allegory for political/social/cultural philosophies and not an actual robot. Yeah so I guess it's kind of wildly silly to call it a hard sci fi, or almost really a sci fi at all. It's not a sci fi where we explore the consequences of some technology, it's a movie apparently written buy a guy who has never heard of or watched any sci fi ever, and was told by someone "Ugh gently caress, okay, listen, let me explain this in terms you can understand, a learning AI would behave kind of like a child at first-" "BOOM SWEET OK, movie about a robot who is literally a human child inside and acts exactly how a human child would act, except he's got a metal body, get it?" and there were no follow up questions. Seriously the movie could have maintained all of its allegorical meaning without the robot having been painstakingly programmed to mimic a cowering human child's body language. But no, I don't think "but it's an allegory!" excuses/explains it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Vehementi posted:Yeah so I guess it's kind of wildly silly to call it a hard sci fi, or almost really a sci fi at all. It's not a sci fi where we explore the consequences of some technology, it's a movie apparently written buy a guy who has never heard of or watched any sci fi ever, and was told by someone "Ugh gently caress, okay, listen, let me explain this in terms you can understand, a learning AI would behave kind of like a child at first-" "BOOM SWEET OK, movie about a robot who is literally a human child inside and acts exactly how a human child would act, except he's got a metal body, get it?" and there were no follow up questions. Seriously the movie could have maintained all of its allegorical meaning without the robot having been painstakingly programmed to mimic a cowering human child's body language. In a situation as fantastical as the one Chappie presents it's dumb to apply strict tactical realism. Having strong opinions on the way an imaginary artificial intelligence would behave is pointless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
While I think that Short Circuit literally had a much better depiction of a robot learning and developing, at lot of Chappie's weird behaviors can be explained by assuming the AI used for the police bots was a jumping off point for Chappie's AI. Like that's how he knows what threatening behavior is and what guns are, and how to speak and understand english. Like they say he doesn't understand them talking at first, be he also obviously doesn't have to learn english from the ground up either. One of the most ridiculous things in the film is how Tetravaal seems to operate as a company. The SCOUT is their flagship product, it's apparantly doing the work of 160,000 police officers. And it's basically run by one guy and when it fucks up they are like "what did you do, guy?" Like the support for such a project wouldn't be the largest devision of their company. Also, when guy goes to his boss and is like "hey I invented the next huge AI breakthrough" Sigourny Weaver is like "It's not a weapon, why would we want that" oh I don't know, because it would probably be worth trillions of dollars to develop and patent that technology first? Then Hugh Jackman just sabotages the entire scout force from his computer and no one notices or cares they are just "the scouts broke for some reason". Even if, for some reason, they can't actually tie it Jackman, it's right there in the system record that someone deleted their operating system. Guy sees it as soon as he looks. So the biggest disaster in the history of their company, and no one even looks to see what happened except the ONE GUY who is apparently the only person even working on the project. It's like of Ford F150s were designed by one guy at Ford, and it was his job to diagnose the problem every time one crashed. And if he couldn't they were going to junk F150s and sell Fusions instead...
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
Snak posted:Also, when guy goes to his boss and is like "hey I invented the next huge AI breakthrough" Sigourny Weaver is like "It's not a weapon, why would we want that" This is the most believable thing the head of a weapons manufacturer could say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Chappie is an alien being. He is similar to a human, but not a human. Why does ET: The Extraterrestrial eat Reeses Pieces and play dress-up, when he should simply murder Elliot's entire family to gain optimal access to their Speak-N-Spell technology? Because ET is also an alien, and not a goon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:24
|
|
Vehementi posted:Yeah so I guess it's kind of wildly silly to call it a hard sci fi, or almost really a sci fi at all. It's not a sci fi where we explore the consequences of some technology, it's a movie apparently written buy a guy who has never heard of or watched any sci fi ever, and was told by someone "Ugh gently caress, okay, listen, let me explain this in terms you can understand, a learning AI would behave kind of like a child at first-" "BOOM SWEET OK, movie about a robot who is literally a human child inside and acts exactly how a human child would act, except he's got a metal body, get it?" and there were no follow up questions. Seriously the movie could have maintained all of its allegorical meaning without the robot having been painstakingly programmed to mimic a cowering human child's body language. That's not how sci-fi works, and you're an idiot.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Snak posted:One of the most ridiculous things in the film is how Tetravaal seems to operate as a company. The SCOUT is their flagship product, it's apparantly doing the work of 160,000 police officers. And it's basically run by one guy and when it fucks up they are like "what did you do, guy?" Like the support for such a project wouldn't be the largest devision of their company. Also, when guy goes to his boss and is like "hey I invented the next huge AI breakthrough" Sigourny Weaver is like "It's not a weapon, why would we want that" oh I don't know, because it would probably be worth trillions of dollars to develop and patent that technology first? Then Hugh Jackman just sabotages the entire scout force from his computer and no one notices or cares they are just "the scouts broke for some reason". Even if, for some reason, they can't actually tie it Jackman, it's right there in the system record that someone deleted their operating system. Guy sees it as soon as he looks. So the biggest disaster in the history of their company, and no one even looks to see what happened except the ONE GUY who is apparently the only person even working on the project. I can get behind this criticism, but I chalked it up to this: Tetravaal probably was the best the South African could afford for this project. I imagine them as a startup overloading their premier engineers. Chappie is an allegory to startup culture.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Vehementi posted:But no, I don't think "but it's an allegory!" excuses/explains it. You're confusing Mr. Flunchy's assertion that you're making too many assumptions with him saying, "It doesn't have to make sense." He's saying it makes sense if you admit that, in a clearly fantastical scenario, you only know as much as the film tells and shows you. For instance, your initial observations that Chappie clearly knows what "loud" is, and is threatened by fire. In the case of the former, you're saying this doesn't make sense merely because you don't know how this works, but we can take as self-evident that Chappie by some mechanical process knows what 'loud' is because that's what we're shown. In the latter, you maintain that it's logical that Chappie wouldn't have a reason to be afraid of fire because 1) He doesn't know what it is and, 2) It can't harm him. Except that the scene you're describing is one in which the infantile Chappie has been abandoned by the closest thing to a father he has, is in an unfamiliar environment, and is being attacked by hostile and unfamiliar persons. Furthermore, the film clearly depicts Chappie as being threatened and disorientated by these events so that, even if I don't know that he can feel physical pain, his emotional and psychological duress becomes a point of sympathy. Furthermore, with just as little direct evidence of how AI works, I can speculate that an urban pacification droid has at least a basic capacity to assess potential threats, or even that Chappie's condition as a former weapon turned into a conscious person is not unlike the psychopathic Alex post-Ludovico Technique in A Clockwork Orange, that even the slightest hostility and aggression 'discombobulates' him. But these speculations aren't implicitly necessary because nothing the film expresses through its diegesis contradicts what the specific scenes depicts. Rather, it merely doesn't explicitly address certain details because the specification of these isn't crucial to the emotional development of the narrative or its characters. Similarly, your point about Chappie's use of the Internet. I have no reason to suspect that Chappie's enthusiasm for the Internet means that he specifically suddenly has either the capacity nor the motivation to absorb the totality of digital information. The film not addressing this detail is not illogical. It's characterization.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Snak posted:One of the most ridiculous things in the film is how Tetravaal seems to operate as a company. The SCOUT is their flagship product, it's apparantly doing the work of 160,000 police officers. And it's basically run by one guy and when it fucks up they are like "what did you do, guy?" Like the support for such a project wouldn't be the largest devision of their company. We are repeatedly shown a large maintenance facility staffed by many people who run the day to day operations of the SCOUT project (which numbers about 60 robots total). When it fucks up they ask the designer of the robot to fix it as he's best placed to give an overview of the systems. It appears Deon's regular job is R&D for future projects, not overseer of their flagship operation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
-Weaver puts the kibosh on the AI for the same reason she cuts Vincent's funding. Putting AI in the police robots would make them cost more, with little added benefit. She sees the ability to think 'artistically' as a mere novelty. This is not a plot hole. That's her character. -Vincent's 'genesis.exe' virus was untraceably deleted from nearly all the robots. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:We are repeatedly shown a large maintenance facility staffed by many people who run the day to day operations of the SCOUT project (which numbers about 60 robots total). Yeah, I thought this up until Hugh Jackman sabotaged the scouts, then apparently Deon was the only person capable of noticing that someone used the guard to remotely wipe/corrupt the scouts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Snak posted:Yeah, I thought this up until Hugh Jackman sabotaged the scouts, then apparently Deon was the only person capable of noticing that someone used the guard to remotely wipe/corrupt the scouts. Vincent's sabotage was untraceable, but some evidence was accidentally left inside Chappie's brain. That's why Deon has access to the evidence, and why Vincent spends half the film trying to murder them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Vehementi posted:Was nobody else annoyed by how nonsensically Chappie behaved? You didn't pay any attention. edit. Didn't see the other half dozen replies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Vincent's sabotage was untraceable, but some evidence was accidentally left inside Chappie's brain. That's why Deon has access to the evidence, and why Vincent spends half the film trying to murder them. That's even more ridiculous than. Why, in any software system, would it be possible to update with no record of the update? The way they use the guard key doesn't even make sense. if they can't use it to trace who is changing the code of their robots, what is the point of it? They obviously don't care about its physical security very much, since if you take it OUT OF THE FACILITY FOR DAYS you just get some angry phonecalls, even though it's location can be physically traced. Then Vincent uses it to wipe the scouts and leaves it in the computer he used to do it. Unattended.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Vincent wrote a computer virus designed to leave no trace. That's why he did it in the first place. If he knew there would be evidence, he would not have hacked the robots at all. Tetra Vaal having bad security isn't a plot hole. It's the point of the comedy movie: they are run more like an actually-existing corporation, and actual corporations are not hyper-competent like in the movies As an example of what I mean: you are shown multiple shots of Deon committing crimes while caught on Tetra Vaal's security cameras. There are, however, absolutely no consequences to this. The existence of the cameras as a deterrent is purely psychological, and getting past them is as easy as not giving a gently caress. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Mar 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Vincent's sabotage was untraceable, but some evidence was accidentally left inside Chappie's brain. That's why Deon has access to the evidence, and why Vincent spends half the film trying to murder them. There was a lot of reviews complaining about "hacking" in the movie, but the thing is it wasn't hacking. It was people in positions of administrative access abusing their access. The guard key system works great when the human administrative element cooperates. Also, i don't think vincent really cared about leaving tracks too much. He's a bit singularly short sighted. He knew to delete the virus, but the guard key logs were found on the internal network.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Tetra Vaal having bad security isn't a plot hole. It's the point of the comedy movie: they are run more like an actually-existing corporation, and actual corporations are not hyper-competent like in the movies What are you talking about? Everything's fine. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Magnus Condomus posted:Also, i don't think vincent really cared about leaving tracks too much. He's a bit singularly short sighted. He knew to delete the virus, but the guard key logs were found on the internal network. That's the other point: it doesn't ultimately matter whether 'genesis.exe' actually was 100% untraceable or not. The only important thing is that Vincent believed he could get away with it, because that's his motivation to kill Chappie and Deon. Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:What are you talking about? Everything's fine. The fact that this movie is a Sony Picture with a good deal of Sony product placement is really funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:40
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Vincent wrote a computer virus designed to leave no trace. That's why he did it in the first place. If he knew there would be evidence, he would not have hacked the robots at all. Hell, we get a nice big glimpse of the fact that they're still using Windows XP. Entirely realistic, but also an example of just how secure and competent they really are.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Hell, we get a nice big glimpse of the fact that they're still using Windows XP. Entirely realistic, but also an example of just how secure and competent they really are. It's the big theme of the movie: there is very little preventing people from doing utterly ridiculous stuff. They just don't because they are conditioned not to. Like Vincent threatening Deon with the gun: 'common sense' tells you that everyone would freak out and intervene, but the scene plainly illustrates the bystander effect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Uh dude, they really did do precisely what you're asking. I'm struggling to see how they could have made it much clearer what the character felt when he paused and regarded his own corpse. That's fair, I'll have to rewatch the movie at some point. At the time, it seemed really flippant about the idea, but I accept that I'm not giving it due credit. K. Waste posted:Furthermore, the film clearly depicts Chappie as being threatened and disorientated by these events so that, even if I don't know that he can feel physical pain, his emotional and psychological duress becomes a point of sympathy. Furthermore, with just as little direct evidence of how AI works, I can speculate that an urban pacification droid has at least a basic capacity to assess potential threats, or even that Chappie's condition as a former weapon turned into a conscious person is not unlike the psychopathic Alex post-Ludovico Technique in A Clockwork Orange, that even the slightest hostility and aggression 'discombobulates' him. But these speculations aren't implicitly necessary because nothing the film expresses through its diegesis contradicts what the specific scenes depicts. Rather, it merely doesn't explicitly address certain details because the specification of these isn't crucial to the emotional development of the narrative or its characters. Also, in general, the only "intelligence" humans can meaningfully comprehend is humanlike. A film attempting to plumb a decidedly inhuman intelligence would be cool (basically, something like Solaris), but it doesn't bother me that Chappie takes as a given that this robot functions in a humanlike way. Often, actual AI researchers approach AI in this way, as well. Something like the MIT Cog Project wasn't about exploring "artificial intelligence" in some abstract way, it was about sculpting a humanlike intelligence that could meaningfully interact with a person. The wider question of "what consciousness is" or whatever is barely approached. The film doesn't go into detail about what exactly Deon was doing or how Chappie was programmed, so all you can do is speculate. My speculation is that the reason Deon wanted a Scout as a test platform was that he needed to embody this AI for it to be identifiable as an intelligence in the first place. Practically, it may be impossible for an AI to exist without an embodied or constrained subjectivity to inform its relationship to (some form of) reality. Or more, if a totally disembodied AI can exist, it's impossible for a person to verify that it does. I'd accept the idea that the Scout, designed as a humanoid thing with humanlike sensory input, also has humanlike bodily concerns: risk assessment [fear], damage sensors [pain], facial recognition and experiential memory [familiarity, learning, intimacy, bonding], etc. In that way, Chappie behaving like a frightened primate makes sense, because he was designed that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
I like that Die Antwoord were totally right when they reasoned that the robots had an off switch like all technology. Deon was so full of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 20:16
|
|