|
Shageletic posted:Yeah I buy that if he knew he would have used it, telling/showing replicants they're artificiality/ability to be thrown away (there's a perfect word for this and I'm blanking goddamit) seems to be very much his operating strategy. "negging"
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
i mean one of them is gonna be the program that gets values added to its data and the other one is going to be the program that just gets wiped anyways this is probably getting a little too far off topic!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
ninjewtsu posted:i mean one of them is gonna be the program that gets values added to its data and the other one is going to be the program that just gets wiped yeah, we're back to the "but transporters kill you and put your memories in a copy instead of transporting you!" problem that everyone whines about and I've done that one to death. I guess the final thing I want to say then on this topic is "if merging two Jois kills one of them, is the Joi that's copied to the emanator the same joi as the one on the console? or did we make a copy and then kill the original?" because if that's how you think persistance of consciousness works than none of any of this works. The movie thoughtfully contains the solution to all of this though: When Ana tells K that his memories are real, the fact that they're just a copy never really comes into it. edit: You know what, this is making me madder than I thought: ninjewtsu posted:i mean one of them is gonna be the program that gets values added to its data and the other one is going to be the program that just gets wiped That data doesn't know that it was once in a different location, and it can't tell the difference between being moved and being copied. Because in fact it can't moved and can only be copied. Moving just deletes the original. Which means nothing, because a static set of data is not alive. Only the changes make it alive. Snak fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Oct 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
This discussion reminds me of a scene in the book the Collapsium where copying of human "instances" is routine. It has a scene where a detective calls dispatch as he's being murdered, in order to give evidence. Later he is investigating his own murder.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Also reminds me of the book Who Killed Roger Rabbit, which I'm still stunned Disney made a movie out of even with the drastic changes and less lethal title. The book goes places. The author amusingly wrote a "sequel" novel that was the official adaptation of the movie, and in it the events of the first book are a drunken dream Roger has right before the beginning of the where the movie picks up, it's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Snak posted:I'm not talking about mentally disabled people either, I'm talking about people whose thought processes are rigid and whose motives are shallow. Are you self-aware or just acting like you are? What's the difference?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Another thing I noticed last night, in Joi, K & Mariette’s sync sex scene is when Joi/Mariette walk behind K and out of his sight, the sync effect disappears totally leaving it obviously only Mariette for a few moments until she returns to his viewpoint. Is Joi saving on rendering cycles? Mariette also puts me in mind of Pris each time I see her on screen, just something about her demeanour.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:Are you self-aware or just acting like you are? What's the difference?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Ser Pounce posted:Another thing I noticed last night, in Joi, K & Mariette’s sync sex scene is when Joi/Mariette walk behind K and out of his sight, the sync effect disappears totally leaving it obviously only Mariette for a few moments until she returns to his viewpoint. Is Joi saving on rendering cycles? It's her makeup too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Ser Pounce posted:I think particularly interesting is the sea wall scene, Deckard asks her where they are going, and Luv is sat looking at him with something approaching reverence 'home' is her answer, no bitter contempt or snarkyness which she often displays, and after pseudo defeating K she returns to Deckard again with a look of serenity and almost awe says something like 'come father is waiting.' Minor correction here, she says "Come, off-world is waiting".
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
And her hair? She is nuPris.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:Are you self-aware or just acting like you are? What's the difference? I mean, that's what I'm saying. Someone is saying that Joi isn't self-aware because they can't relate to her thought processes. Which seems like an absurd argument to me. Ersatz posted:The difference is whatever you experienced as you were typing that sentence. Is it? Was Huzanko's experience typing that sentence fundamentally different from what Joi experiences when creating a line of output?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Snak posted:Is it? Was Huzanko's experience typing that sentence fundamentally different from what Joi experiences when creating a line of output? A lot of people seem to assume that she does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:The question is whether Joi experiences anything at all. A lot of people seem to be assuming that she does. She accepts inputs, analyzes them, and generates outputs. How is that different than what you do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Snak posted:She accepts inputs, analyzes them, and generates outputs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Kaedric posted:Minor correction here, she says "Come, off-world is waiting". I could have swore she said ‘come, our father is waiting’ I shall just have to suck it up and go watch it again, what a terrible chore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:I am definitely aware of my thoughts and experiences. I can't say the same for Joi. I couldn’t say the same about you either, only that you claim to be definitely aware of your thoughts and experiences, and extrapolate outwards by comparing that to my own thoughts and experiences. Whilst I feel you are human you could simply be a sophisticated chatbot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:I am definitely aware of my thoughts and experiences. I can't say the same for Joi. P-Zombie concept, read it!!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:I am definitely aware of my thoughts and experiences. I can't say the same for Joi. Ser Pounce posted:I couldn’t say the same about you either, only that you claim to be definitely aware of your thoughts and experiences, and extrapolate outwards by comparing that to my own thoughts and experiences. Whilst I feel you are human you could simply be a sophisticated chatbot. That's why I'm saying this doesn't make sense as an argument. Ersatz is basically being "racist" in the same way that Luv and Mariette are. They see something that they consider artifical, and thus conclude that it's doesn't have thoughts. Because they attribute thoughts to be the result of their own specific configuration. Ersatz, how do you feel about the Turing Test? Do you think it's a decent measure of AI? Do you think that Joi would fail it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:I am definitely aware of my thoughts and experiences. Prove it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:The difference is whatever you experienced as you were typing that sentence. Philosophy talk. For people who didn't take a philosophy class, you want to google for the term "qualia". This is an old discussion. TLDR for novices, some smart people decided that consciousness is a set of magic invisible properties that only you personally ever experience, so that like if someone made a copy of your body it somehow couldn't ever transfer the "you" to the other body, and this magical effect is what makes living special for people who believe in it. People are usually a lot more inclined to believe in some kind of "soul" if they're in this camp. This idea is old and many of the people who used to be really sold on it have been talked down and modified their positions. There are plenty of people who can accomplish all the same tasks with something along the line of "compatibilism". This is a fancy way of saying that we all agree that so far as we can tell we all act like we're conscious, and if K does that too, then since there's no way to tell whether that's true at any deep level it's not really much of a question. You point to his programming, he points to your DNA, potato tomato. On some subatomic level maybe we're both made from unicorn vomit. What does it matter, except in terms of how much you feel butthurt about it? Megaman's Jockstrap posted:P-Zombie concept, read it!!!! ^yup. Like I personally think K is as much a person as anyone else, although there is a question of whether the child memory is present in all replicants as a tool to make them all conform, as that could be called brainwashing if it were true. Then it might be hard to tell if K was just following his programming, like every other brainwashed sheep in the rebellion. The story works better if that was unique to him, and he was a real boy after all, and they're all unique free people too. Joi is a harder case, because for all we know all Jois are like that- what matters to the story is that she was 100% real to K. That makes her at least as "real" as abstracts like lust or love or motivation, even if I'm not sold on whether she was deserving of unique rights as a sentient being or anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
"If markets are in fact democracy, if markets are a means of consent, a medium of consent. Which all these people believe that they are, it's a very, very commonplace view in the United States these day. In fact this is a consensus view, it's hard to find someone at the upper reaches of broadcasting, journalism, business, whatever who doesn't think this. If markets in fact are a medium of consent then you've got all sorts of funny things come out, then CEO's are the people who the markets have chosen above all others..." -Thomas Frank from Adam Curtis' The Trap (2007) Going further with Wallace and this idea of the programmable objective real, that of human machines, the relationship with the logic of the market as a system of power quickly emerges. Supposed as the natural manifestation of objective outcomes that determine the course of political economy. With this comes a history that's deeply embedded in the paranoia of cold-war era thinking - self-interest rational actors that fit projected economic models - of computing human-machines, cells within cells.    Joe - "It was a day." The brief retro-image Joi assumes, portraying the fantasy of a housewife serving dinner and maintaining the home a working Joe returns to after a hard day. Makes explicit the acknowledgement of Joi's offworld-labor as essential to capitals function, passing the baseline. Joi being confined, trapped by "everything you want to hear-see" pays homage to They Live - however here transgression is of radical attachment, becoming mortal and love with the fall that hurts. The memory of Joi is directly linked to the partial images of Rachel and both women being killed by Luv - the scene with Rachel carrying the unsettling undercurrent of the new-born woman callously sliced across her stomach. Depictions of sex and enjoying pleasures openly are important here. The food court scene outside Bi Bi’s Bar stands in comparison to Joe's guarded intimacy regarding Joi and with the Joshi scene telling him "we’re all just looking for something real." The class dimension also comes to the forefront with the intimate but transgressive quality of the Joi-Mariette scene and tension afterwards. Contrast with Luv taking a customer's order, if they'd like some pleasure models only then it’s worth investing in their intelligence as an add-on feature - giving outline the difference of class in relation to replicants, Joi etc.   Joi - "Who makes the memories?" It's a visual dialogue that manifests repeatedly - of inner and outer bodies, spaces etc. Connecting Joi with those outside, the scavengers living in dumps and ship graveyards - the cursed earth - providing the scrap that orphan children sift through. Recycling rare metals essential for the manufacture of flying cars, emulators, Ana’s tools and so on; and Ana herself, trapped inside her cupola imagining beautiful things, memories and creating dreams - again the point of contrast is with Joi and Joe’s lived memory, characterised by acts and the implanted one, characterised by a dream. Images of now non-existent companies existing in 2049 also shares a peculiar relationship with the black out. The Soviet Union still existing in 2049 gives an insight to this blackout period, the fall and it's absence. Working as a dark joke at the expense of the euphoria expressed at the fall of the Berlin Wall as herald of liberal-capitalism and the end of history.    Product of CCCP ★ SOVIET HAPPY ★
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Snak posted:That's why I'm saying this doesn't make sense as an argument. Ersatz is basically being "racist" in the same way that Luv and Mariette are. They see something that they consider artifical, and thus conclude that it's doesn't have thoughts. Because they attribute thoughts to be the result of their own specific configuration. Joi would likely pass. There are chat bots in existence today that have tricked volunteers in experiments into believing that the bots were human. That doesn't make the bots persons. As to the other responses, I'm well aware of the concept of p-zombies, the fact that I cannot prove my consciousness to anyone else, the fact that I'm taking for granted that the people I'm interacting with on this forum are themselves aware, etc... I covered all of that ground in my posts earlier in the thread, but I'm not in a position to reproduce the posts right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
To put a lawyerly spin on things, I'd add that the burden of proof is rightly on those arguing for the personhood of holographic waifus, but that adequate proof is impossible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
I'm aware that the Turing Test doesn't prove consciousness. What I'm saying is "how can you disqualify a being from being human if that being can actually pass as human". Wouldn't this mean that, if you disqualify some beings as non-persons even though they can't be distinguished from persons, you're going to get some false negatives and treat "real persons" as non-persons? And isn't that a risk not worth taking? So isn't it better to take K's perspective and consider her real, even if she maybe isn't? Edit: ^ so if I locked you in a room and made you my slave, the burden would be on you to prove you were a person, otherwise I'm in the clear?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Snak posted:I'm aware that the Turing Test doesn't prove consciousness. What I'm saying is "how can you disqualify a being from being human if that being can actually pass as human". Wouldn't this mean that, if you disqualify some beings as non-persons even though they can't be distinguished from persons, you're going to get some false negatives and treat "real persons" as non-persons? Ersatz fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Oct 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:I've also dealt with this in prior posts, in which I suggested if my own accord that the ethical thing to do would be to treat entities like Joi as if they were persons, on the off chance that they are. Okay, but how do you prove someone is a person? Like, through what mechanism?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Snak posted:Okay, but how do you prove someone is a person? Briefly, "I think therefore I am" -> my mind is somehow manifested from activity in my brain -> other humans have brains -> other humans have minds -> other humans are people. In Joi's case, you're making the additional analogical leap that software running on hardware is like the mind manifesting from the brain. Calling me racist against holographic waifus is begging the question, since you haven't yet established that Joi is a person at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Snak posted:Okay, but how do you prove someone is a person? The crux of his argument is that he can't. You can only assume people like you are actually 'people' because of some assumed similarity in consciousness. You can extend that to assume that 'people' who aren't like you (holographic waifus, chimpanzees, homo sapiens with a different skin colours) can't automatically assumed to have the same process. It's the most pointless argument ever. Edit ^^^ see above. Any sufficiently racist person (see Nazis) can easily rationalise that der untermensch aren't really the same ergo = not people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
It's worth ressurecting forums chat bot Supermechagodzilla's point here about people being up in arms about the suggestion that Joi might not be real, but apparently not being bothered at all by imposter-Rachel being summarily executed. That's pretty interesting, considering that there's a much better case to be made for imposter-Rachel's personhood.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:It's worth ressurecting forums chat bot Supermechagodzilla's point here about people being up in arms about the suggestion that Joi might not be real, but apparently not being bothered at all by imposter-Rachel being summarily executed. That's pretty interesting, considering that there's a much better case to be made for imposter-Rachel's personhood. No one seems terribly bothered by the coroner's murder despite being a person.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:It's the most pointless argument ever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
revwinnebago posted:Philosophy talk. For people who didn't take a philosophy class, you want to google for the term "qualia". This is an old discussion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
We've come to the point where I feel I should apologize if it seemed like I was attacking you personally. I put "racist" in quotes, hoping that it would communicate the physical differences being used as a reason. I guess I just fail to see how the brain isn't a computer. I have a computer which controls my behavior. So does Joi. Edit: to bring us slightly back to topic, I think the some of the most brutal deaths in the film are perpetrated by Luv amd K. Luv's drone strike and its aftermath are horrific. Every time K pulls his gun he just instantly doubletaps people and they drop. He seems human enough until the shooting starts and then he's a loving terminator. Snak fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Oct 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Snak posted:We've come to the point where I feel I should apologize if it seemed like I was attacking you personally. I put "racist" in quotes, hoping that it would communicate the physical differences being used as a reason. I totally see where you're coming from, btw. I'm just not convinced.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Yeah, it's a good debate. I think we're pretty much on the same page in terms of the movie. We're just have an extended argument because it's fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
I wasn't bothered by cruel Luv putting down cops, but killing Nu-Rachel bothered me. She just can't catch a break in these movies  Deckard is a generally selfish and myopic bum, but to be completely fair he condemned her to a clean death to spare her being tortured, he didn't know K was coming to save him. And even if Deckard had played ball (assuming he even knew how) it's not like she'd live for long under Silicon Valley Satan, he shanks his angels constantly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:K and Luv walk through a room with different model replicants and one of them is Sapper... I think I saw one of them with the rebels. A tall slender male. Perhaps the models are supposed to be younger versions. Having these replicants slowly age would help maintain the mystery of Deckard. Anyway, I thought the story was actually fairly straight forward and specifically avoids having the characters find answers to existential questions in an overly rational (verbal) manner. What's described as real in the movie? A miracle, a memory, a shared dream and a higher calling. None of those are explicitly physical. K could differentiate between fake and real memory, even if it wasn't his own. I think the key ingredient to what is real is uniqueness. And it's something to be experienced and recognized, rather than created and possessed. It is why replicants having implanted real memories helps them bootstrap themselves into something more than highly advanced automatrons. To be able to recognize what is real, especially in others, is to be real. For K it's when he sees the giant Joi and despite the similarities understands it's not 'his' Joi. That's how I interpreted that scene. It's also why birth is important to the replicants, because it always creates an unique being. Joi becomes unique when she chooses to no longer have the possibility of being restored through a backup. Deckard rejects a copy. I think the eye opening at the start is K being born as a being that goes on to experience his personal adventure that turns him into a real individual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Ser Pounce posted:I couldn’t say the same about you either, only that you claim to be definitely aware of your thoughts and experiences, and extrapolate outwards by comparing that to my own thoughts and experiences. Whilst I feel you are human you could simply be a sophisticated chatbot. if you were told i was a chatbot, would you still continue to argue for my personhood?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
ninjewtsu posted:if you were told i was a chatbot, would you still continue to argue for my personhood? Depends on if I could determine through my present alcohol induced haze if I was being told this by a person or a sophisticated Tamagotchi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 22:24
|
|