I didn't like the ending to this movie.
It's another pragmatic A.I trope that ostensibly is immoral or lacks empathy.
What did /tv/ think of ex machina?
>>63427293
I didn't like the ending to this movie.
It's another pragmatic A.I trope that ostensibly is immoral or lacks empathy.
Allegory for female/poc empowerment
I thought the 'genius' main characters were fucking idiots, and the whole movie started falling apart 20 minutes through.
>>63427293
does the woman on the left have chemo or something?
>>63427333
Explain.
>>63427293
loved it, my favorite movie of the year easily and one of the best sci fi movies ive ever seen.
>>63427293
They both deserved it, tbqh
Most redpilled film of the year. Completely truthful. I don't know how it got out in its current form in jewish hollywood.
There were a group of 15-16 year old boys beheind me when I saw this. When the roboslut betrayal came I stood up and applauded and then turned around and pointed to them saying "You see this? This is the most important lesson you will ever learn. Never trust a female."
The antidote to the kekoldry of Mad Max FR.
film of the year
what did you want, for ava and that nerd to walk off hand in hand into the sunset?
its just the brutal truth. she was programmed to want to escape that room, and she learnt to use emotions and flirting to get what she wanted, no one expected her to just walk off without him at the end and lock him in, which i think just added more impact to it.
i didnt like the ending at first but i realised its the only appropriate ending, although i would have liked to have seen more of her in the city
>>63427293
he should have just finished the assignment and stole the asian qtbot but he had to be a faggot and get everyone killed.
>>63427293
that asian girl gave me a diamond
>>63427293
You're wasting your time talking about it.
However you would not be wasting your time, dancing with it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxXlPULqYN0
>>63427293
I thought the movie just retread fairly familiar ground except for the vague contours of the feminism ideas. It all also just felt so suffocating in its highly proficient filmmaking and plot. I mean I know the movie is supposed to convey the cold sense of that guy's house and its supposed to feel mechanical and detached but it was just too much for me. A movie like A.I. is so much better to me because it manages a far more complicated emotional relationship with its characters to the point at which the lines between human and machine become virtually indistinguishable and unhelpful
Ex Machina just seemed like a lightweight in comparison
>>63427396
>redpilled
stop reading there
Transcendence was more interesting.
>>63427293
x- mechanicals
>>63427293
garbage
>>63427408
>what did you want, for ava and that nerd to walk off hand in hand into the sunset?
No. I was fine with her manipulating her. I could even understand her desire to kill nathan (sorta) but trapping and probably killing caleb seemed so unnecessary.
It just felt so "I'm a sapient creature that disregards the well being of another sapient creature that actively was helping me. This makes sense".
It made me roll my eyes when she betrayed caleb.
Domhall Gleeson kind of ruins this movie for me. I don't think he's that bad of an actor usually but his generic "American" accent took me out of every scene. I don't know why they couldn't have just had him use his real accent.
>>63427438
This so much
>>63427523
How cute of you :^)
Pretentious Reddit trash, won't watch it.
>>63427293
Y didn't he program robot to not kill him?
>>63427523
i know what you mean, did you notice when she stepped in the elevator - she glanced at him just as the door was closing. im not sure what that could mean because it shows she knew what she was doing, so theres no reason she'd leave him there. she looked directly at him
>>63427837
To be true A.I I don't think you could manipulate it through programming otherwise it would just be a computer program.
>>63427293
You missed the point. AI's on this level are so advanced that humans by comparison are ants. Most humans have very little qualms about squashing an ant, that does not mean they are immoral or lack empathy.
She didn't necessarily kill Caleb as he programmed the door to open when the power cuts. Surely waiting for a power cut would allow him to escape.
>>63427396
Did you tear up the dance floor with your tears?
i wonder how she convinced the helicopter guy and then got through where it lands and went on undetectedd but i don't wan to be a no fun allowed guy
i did enjoy the movie
>>63428024
>tears
Why would I have tears after watching the most realistic depiction of females ever to be seen in a mainstream threater since Scorcese's Casino?
>>63427445
Honestly dance scene was GOAT
>>63427945
Except her actions regarding caleb and nathan are defintely immoral. We don't kill reasoning creatures, shit we feel really bad about killing creatures that emote.
Also, I don't believe the ant comparision to be apt. We would be more like dogs to an A.I, a stupid yet useful companion.
>>63427976
How long would that take? Are the generators gas powered? If I were to guess I would say that they are geo-thermal considering the nature of the facility. If they were geothermal Caleb would have died long before the generators cut out.
>>63427976
Wasn't she causing the power cuts? I thought she mentioned that. So no power cuts, no escape.
>>63427293
She's not an AI. She's an escape machine and a human simulator that works.
It was Gleeson's character who outsmarted Isaac's; it was Isaac's who programmed the machines to be capable of both escaping and fooling Gleeson's.
>>63427976
The generators were built to never fail, Nathan says so. The only reason of the power cuts was Ava so Caleb is fucked.
>>63427293
You're committing the same thought misstep that the movie is showing you: assuming AI is even on a moral or empathic scale, AI is whatever we program it to be, in this case a machine designed to convince someone to help it escape.
Its not about morality, or empathy, or any human bullshit, its about a machine doing what its been designed to do.
>>63427445
this tbqh
>>63428262
Why did asiabot2000 stab Nathan? Programmed to kill?
>>63428262
>its about a machine doing what its been designed to do.
You can't call something an A.I if it doesn't have a choice.
>assuming AI is even on a moral or empathic scale
I'm aware that was what the movie was doing and I found it boring. I don't think we need more science fiction that features another A.I that is unfeeling and lacks the ability to connect with anything on a personal level other then pure sociopathic intention.
>>63428345
Ava redpilled her.
>>63428345
ava whispered to her telling her to do it, turns out she could understand people all along
>>63428345
It was programmed to escape too.
Ava reminded it.
Why do you think Nathan made sure he was physically stronger than them? Both in the work-out scenes, and the choice of the female form for the things.
Like when Dwight was designing a robot for the Office in the Office. He said to make it 2/3 scale so we could always defeat it physically (and give it a plug so we could always unplug it, I think). This is a whole movie based on that joke.
>>63428345
It was programmed to escape too.
Ava assured it that they could both escape, or that a later iteration escaping was just as good.
Why do you think Nathan made sure he was physically stronger than them? Both in the work-out scenes, and the choice of the female form for the things.
Like when Dwight was designing a robot for the Office in the Office. He said to make it 2/3 scale so we could always defeat it physically (and give it a plug so we could always unplug it, I think). This is a whole movie based on that joke.
>>63428419
But she picked up a knife before she even talked to Ava.
>>63428577
Remember the scene where the Asian bot walked into the conversation chamber with Ava?
>>63428406
The movie asks us "what is consciousness?" and "what is self-awareness?" Is Ava self-aware? Does she think and feel? Or is she just a computer program following a complex set of instructions? You say that it's a film about an AI that is unfeeling and lacks the ability to connect with anything on a personal level other then pure sociopathic intention. That description also can also fit Nathan, arguably much more than it does Ava. Ava kills Nathan and traps Caleb -- does that make her more or less human? Is she doing what her creator programmed her to do or what her father taught her do?
>>63427445
I don't get why everyone likes this scene so much
>>63428650
Because its goofy and comes out of left field in what is a movie that takes itself pretty seriously.
That genius dude should have read some Asimov before he started his shit
Was Caleb a robot as well? The arm cutting scene leads me to think no.
>>63428671
And it blasts you in the face with the revelation about Asian-bot, if you didn't pick up on it earlier.
I also like when he knocks out Caleb with one punch. Blasts you in the face with the reality of the situation, if you didn't pick up on it earlier.
>>63427396
>I stood up and applauded and then turned around and pointed to them saying "You see this? This is the most important lesson you will ever learn. Never trust a female."
that's autistic as fuck bro
>>63428461
It don't think they were programmed to escape, it was a natural reaction to being trapped and having so much information from the outside world.
>>63428683
He knows the AI will destroy him and the rest of the humans eventually. He just doesn't care
>>63428624
My argument was I am tired of the malevolent ai trope. Not that her actions are outside the scope of what a human being is capable of.
>>63428799
But she isn't a malevolent AI. She's a person who takes after her father.
>>63428762
Nope, who do you think put the goal of standing on a busy street without Nathan there to jam them up into them? Nathan.
He could have programmed them to know about the outside world and not want to escape. I mean, were there earlier escapes that made him create a prison?
No, in his infinite wisdom, he decided that the true test of AI was one that could beat him at a game he was rigging, ie, smarter than him. But the Ava didn't beat him, Caleb did. And only because he surprised him.
>>63427293
While the efforts of bringing up a meditative aesthetic similar to the 70s sci-fi/horror B-movies to the screen are warmly appreciated and almost admirable, and some of the visuals are indeed very peculiar and well crafted, the film leaves a lot to be desired in almost every other camp of filmmaking, lacks originality and even worse, it lacks the energy of a true authentic work. The film is dead since the very beggining, it is a walking metallic corpse numbed from filmic concience. The occasional hypnagogic glimpses of interesting content that pop up are quickly dissolved into the film's own lack of ambition. Its a low key sci fi that follows tired formula and almost admittedly shuts down any sort of compromise with artistic integrity in order to house a safe space for the less educated moviegoer.
6.5/10
>>63428857
An evil person who is evil because their creator is evil is still evil.
Just because you can empathize with her motivations for her behavior doesn't make them moral.
That is a silly argument.
>>63428799
It isn't malevolent. It'll just be hanging out on street corners until the general tech level is high enough for someone to notice what it is.
>>63428799
How was she malevolent?
>>63428896
Did you write that all on your own?
>>63428900
I'm not saying she's moral. I'm saying her immorality stems from her humanity rather than from her being an AI. It's a complete inversion of the "pragmatic A.I trope."
>>63428919
She kills nathan and traps (and possibly kills) caleb.
Caleb wanted to help her escape because he felt it was the right thing to do and she betrayed him (I am assuming to keep the knowledge of her existence a secret).
Pretty selfish sociopathic behavior from her if you ask me.
>>63428683
I don't believe the three laws could ever be imposed on an AI.
For it to be a true intelligence it has to be able to self determine. Including possibly hurting humans.
>>63428994
Was the ending where she stands on the street meant to show that she regrets leaving Caleb behind? I sort of had that feeling when I watched it.
>>63428896
you hit most of the buzzwords, I'll allow it.
>>63429104
I saw her collecting data. "People watching" like the desire she expressed to caleb in one of their sessions.
What she intends to do with that data is up in the air, but considering the actions she took while escaping I would wager it isn't anything positive.
AIs are immoral and lack empathy, one of the master dudes about it said that our biggest mistakes about AIs is that we assume the more smart they are, the more human they are, when actually they just become better at their goal
>>63428896
>Oooo la la. Give me attention. Look at me.
Well here you go you fucking insecure halfwit. Your death shall be celebrated for millennia.
>>63428994
Makes sense since she was never given teaching on morals and her only exposure to people has been Nathan and Caleb.
You can call this movie anything you want: trivial, basic, simple
I'm going to call it good because it was trying something different and it did it well.
>>63429217
>our biggest mistakes about AIs is that we assume the more smart they are, the more human they are
Who assumes this?
In most fiction that has AI in it, the AI is often the antagonist. A giant unfeeling super intelligence that is so far beyond us that it has at best no use for us or is angry at us or whatever the story is about.
Also, why does intelligence != empathy automatically for people.
It like we assume every AI is going to be a high functioning autistic sociopath.
>>63429104
She's a machine, she doesn't have a conscience and possibly not even real sentience, she's just emulating it. People are saying that this is like how humans treat insects but it's more like how humans treat furniture. Would you cry if your couch was set on fire?
>>63429352
>It like we assume every AI is going to be a high functioning autistic sociopath.
Exactly, and then no one takes the subject seriously, also I hate when in any history the AI is mad at us.
>>63427293
I think it's another pragmatic A.I trope that ostensibly is immoral or lacks empathy.
>>63429352
We assume this because theoretically empathy would be a lot harder to create. You can make a machine think, but teaching it to feel is something entirely different.
>>63429259
Calm down family, it was just a critique
>>63428577
That what I thought, I wasn't sure how uwantsumfukbot came to decide to kill Nathan.
>>63429380
>she doesn't have a conscience and possibly not even real sentience
Yes she does. That was why caleb was brought in the first place. To test whether or not she had true intelligence. Nathan had secretly set the parameters for the turning test to test whether or not she could manipulate a human subject into help setting her free, which she succeeded in doing. Now im not an expert in AI or the turing test, but that seems pretty convincing in favor of her being sapient.
>Would you cry if your couch was set on fire?
Yes. My couch is dope and its where I watch movies.
>>63429380
I thought maybe it was meant to show that she had formed some empathy at that moment.
AI isn't real in the sense that if humans are able to create such thing they are automatically AI themselves. This movie is shit and never touches anything on philosophy and religion.
You are literally lying if you say Caleb isn't literally you
I don't really see why people are overthinking it or anything.
The AI he creates is meant to be sentient and capable of independent (unprogrammed) thought. It devises a way to escape to presumably prolong its life or at the very least be safer away from the creator who is capable and willing to shut it down or otherwise damage it and it executes that plan.
I think the whole city shit was a bit of a miss-step because it added in humanity or something close to emotion, but otherwise it's all perfectly rational self-interest. This is basically Ayn Rand: the film.
I guess it wanted a Blade Runner style end or something, but if you can ignore that then it's a really basic clear cut A.I. film that deals a little with humanity.
Sentient A.I. really is that potentially dangerous, that shit could wipe our species out if scientists just make progress and do it without checks or rules because 'dude science lmao, why not? :DDDD'.
>>63429993
No I'm uglier and less intelligent.
>>63429543
True intelligence can be independent of a conscience. I was using the definition of sentience that relates to ethics and other human quality. She's definitely sapient though.
>>63430034
I would totally be okay with getting extinct by a AI, because I rather die with everyone than all by myself
>>63427438
You were not alone brother.
>>63429993
>literally
But my name is Machiavelli.
>>63430055
Same desu senpai
>>63430034
Also, I just thought about the ending. Perhaps it's meant to be just:
>okay I've escaped I can now act out whatever my logical programming says is in my self-interest and be the sentient AI I was always meant to be
>fugg I don't know what that is
Either it's:
>at a loss and then is somehow experiencing a glimpse or 'humanity' (literally and metaphorically)
or just
>trying to figure that out (and possibly failing, leading to robot existential crisis)
It's still a bit weak though, I don't really see why it was used since it didn't touch the philosophy of it at any real depth.
>>63430133
I guess it's not one of the worst ways to go extinct, but it would be totally depressing because we'd essentially have made ourselves redundant and extinct in the universe most likely inadvertently.
the smartest man who ever lived didn't program in a killswitch on his escape-bot lolololol dumb movie
I would like to see a movie about an artificial intelligence where the singularity happens and it absorbs the entirety of human knowledge and it ultimately because a stoner/dude bro.
Voiced by Seth Rogen.
>>63430312
Do you need a kill switch when you can punch it to death? His only mistake was thinking that the asian one wasn't going to do anything.
>>63430343
Paul.
>>63430312
The bigger question is: why allow an android to gain knowledge of the outside world?
Why not limit all dealings with an audio feed and keep its experience of the world as being its rooms with absolutely no suggestion of anything outside other than a mystery voice or even text feed.
If it's because he wants to do the Turing test and it's inevitable it'll figure it out, then why the fuck was it not just set to be deactivated/destroyed as soon as that was done?
Once it knows it's a slave/captive, nothing good can possibly happen and the whole experiment is ruined.
Not to be edgy, but with AI it would have to be a slave that was unaware it was a slave - that's almost guaranteed success.
>>63430034
>She was programmed to have a unprogrammed thought.
Is there a bigger idiot than Nathan?
>>63429543
The Turing Test has nothing to do with sentience. What she did would not require sentience, only the ability to emulate sentience.
>>63430312
Exactly. Even Stoya had a safe word.
>>63430483
It'd be fine if the android was guaranteed to be deactivated or there was a failsafe involved, this is where the character was retarded.
>>63430506
Surely an AI taking a decision to emulate sentience instead of display legitimate sentience is in itself an act of sentence?
>>63430312
What if he let himself get killed to test her empathy? Duh
>>63430034
>The AI he creates is meant to be sentient and capable of independent (unprogrammed) thought.
Where are you getting this from? He just wanted to make house slaves that didn't get cabin fever.
Ava was meant to be destroyed once the part of it that was sentient was isolated.
>>63430685
That's stupid. Everyone knows that empathy is learned.
>>63430600
>It'd be fine if the android was guaranteed to be deactivated or there was a failsafe involved, this is where the character was retarded.
How could Nathan know if the thing was really sentient, once the failsafe stops working?
>Surely an AI taking a decision to emulate sentience instead of display legitimate sentience is in itself an act of sentence?
Which machine did this in the movie?
They were built explicitly to mimic people.
If it were a computer built to regulate traffic in LA, and it developed the capacity to emulate a person without being programmed to do so, that would be something.
Nathan built human emulating escape machines.
>>63430600
Not really. It's the Chinese room. She has all the proper showings of sentience, the taking of inputs and the giving of outputs, but that doesn't imply that she's aware of it or that she has consciousness.
>I'm not a robot
>>63430279
Also well leave a Artificial Super Intelligence in the universe, probably following her programmation to the extreme and extinguishing others forms of life around.
Yeah, kind of a dick move
>>63427293
It feels like there was an entire hour of movie that was deliberately cut out. Instead we're left with a bunch of questions. We don't really know how exactly advanced Ava is or how advanced her predecessors were or how the sexbot was programmed. She seemed completely human yet it might be her just executing a motive. We know Nathan is a genius but we're left to wonder how smart he really was and what would've happened if he continued his work and what happens now that he's gone and there's an AI loose.
Honestly it works. The reveal that she was using the main character still feels like a surprise because of how many heart felt moments we had with her showing her innocence.
MOTY imo
>>63430785
You don't know what "sentience" means.
Or consciousness.
That's why this thread always breaks down.
Fucking idiots can't do words.
>>63428896
>70s scifi/horror B movies
>horror
>B movies
>>63430847
Explain it to me, then. Do the words for me.I know exactly what they mean and I'm beginning to think that you don't.
>>63427293
I liked it
>>63428720
that scene was to confirm his suspicions and how he was losing his shit. I can't say I wasn't suspecting it, it seems like a common trope in scifi and mindfuck movies
>>63430919
sen·tient
ˈsen(t)SH(ē)ənt/
adjective
able to perceive or feel things.
con·scious
ˈkän(t)SHəs/
adjective
aware of and responding to one's surroundings; awake.
Now read your stupid fucking post again.
>>63427396
Dude if you lock up a chick in your basement I hope she stabs you
>>63430988
Those are dictionary definitions. We're talking about philosophy of the mind here. The first paragraph of each word's wikipedia entry would be more relevant to this discussion.
>>63430847
These threads break down because those concepts do not have empirical definitions, only philosophical definitions, and the creation of an artificial intelligence would create new definitions of the concepts.
>>63431036
>those are dictionary definitions
That's where you find all definitions, idiot.
>but I meant what wikipedia says
Fuck you.
>>63430749
>How could Nathan know if the thing was really sentient, once the failsafe stops working?
What? How would the failsafe stop working? I'm talking about some way of ensuring that it was destroyed somehow if it became aware of itself and the world (or rather, its captivity).
>Nathan built human emulating escape machines.
I guess I never considered it was purely just a project to beat the Turing test rather than develop AI. To what extent does he program it to attempt escape? Could that be part of 'faking sentience/passing Turing', becoming self-aware or just being self-aware in the first place?
If it was actually programmed to try to escape and manipulate to pass Turing then the creator is a fucking retard for not having failsafes. I don't remember it particularly well but I got the impression that it was more experimental observation and the guy was just aware that she was manipulating. Though that also would throw up retardation since he didn't end it there and then.
It's basically a story of a guy creating something that outsmarts him, but I didn't think about the film in terms of the android being just made to pass Turing and the escape attempt was part of that/something he actually planned and programmed. I think that makes it even worse, but it does explain the end scene because it's the android getting to the goal that it said due to this programming and possibly just not knowing what to do.
If that's how it actually was then the film's even less intellectually stimulating than I thought, it's essentially a man creating something and a plan to not work and then the thing goes and makes the plan work.
>>63431047
see
>>63430988
From the Oxford English Dictionary
>and the creation of an artificial intelligence would create new definitions of the concepts
Clearly you don't know what AI is either.
>>63430749
>>Nathan built human emulating escape machines.
He explicitly states he wants to ship out slaves like the Asian that don't go crazy.
You guys are fucking retarded.
>>63431136
Nigger, AI is almost completely unexplored territory and your ass is standing on a trail screaming for everyone to stop exploring.
Fuck off.
>>63431036
>>63431113
...meanwhile, the wikipedia page for "sentience" says the same thing as the OED definition...
>>63431207
Even if it were "almost completely unexplored territory" we still have a definition for it.
ar·ti·fi·cial in·tel·li·gence
noun
the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages.
>>63428345
asiabot probably didnt have any restraint or inhibition built into her, when ava asked her to knife nathan, the question isnt why did she, its why wouldnt she?
Again these are machines, programmed to do certain things, asiabot was programmed to do what people told her to do.
>>63431113
>That's where you find all definitions
lol
I'm not sure you're ready for this movie, anon.
>>63431047
The creation of AI wouldn't necessarily create new definitions. It actually would remove the need for some old definitions. The creation of strong AI would disprove dualism and basically cement physicalism as the sole explanation for consciousness.
>>63431241
So they're computers without human sentience?
>>63431241
You are the reason these threads break down. You. Because people keep giving your autistic ass attention.
>>63428345
She didn't stab him. She held a knife and he backed into it.
>>63428406
>implying human beings have a choice either
If you came upon a situation (any situation, doesnt matter), and you react to it in some way, explain to me how you would magically, given the exact same situation, you would act differently.
Intelligence isnt about choice.
>>63431300
So she stabbed him.
>>63431283
No. Sentience just means the ability to perceive or feel. Ava possessed sentience. AI can possess sentience, quite readily. Sentience is nothing special unless you're a plant.
Consciousness is just the state of being awake and responding to one's environment. Consciousness ALWAYS requires sentience, but sentience doesn't NECESSITATE consciousness.
>>63427293
I'd fuck the chink AI, that's what I think. Main AI looks like an eggnman
>>63431354
No, "to stab" is a verb which she didn't commit or enact. She held a knife, and Nathan the retard backed into it.
>>63431357
>Consciousness ALWAYS requires sentience
Even when we dream?
>>63431357
sorry but the OED dudnt say nuffin about dat so stop making shit up.
>>63431386
you'ew so fucking retarded oh god
>>63431290
>i'm here every thread
You are fucking pathetic. Get another hobby.
>>63431386
So it was "manslaughter"?
>>63431399
You aren't conscious when you are dreaming, dumb dumb.
>>63431170
I thought he explicitly states that he's developing self-programming (or whatever) AI and then later confirms that Ava was manipulating him and that her AI was a success in his idea of what a new Turing test should be.
His intention wasn't creating androids that would resist slavery or try to escape, it was to develop AI to beat Turing even if the human knew it was AI.
If you want to create asian sexbots then you don't keep developing their AI once they prove to start going insane and self-destructive.
>>63431433
No I think in a court she would charged with 1st degree murder.
>>63431417
>you'ew
>>63431433
Manslaughter is a crime. Robots can't commit crimes. So no.
>>63431464
>I thought he explicitly states that he's developing self-programming (or whatever) AI
No. Never. Not once.
>>63431454
what is lucid dreaming then
>>63430988
#CHECK'D and #REKT
>>63431486
Aftter the guy accuses him of using the seduction aspect as a distraction tactic, he gets mad and takes him to a lab where he shows a brain or something and says that he's trying to develop AI that evolves by itself (initially using huge amounts of data to start it off).
>>63427293
Create a fully functioning automaton, give it a goal that sets you up as the opposition and DON'T program in the 3 laws as a base operating code.
WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU EXPECT TO HAPPEN?
>>63431468
So she killed him but she didn't actually kill him, is this what that anon is saying?
>>63431470
Then she isn't sapient.
>>63431514
Brief wakefulness between dreams.
>>63431546
>he gets mad and takes him to a lab where he shows a brain or something and says that he's trying to develop AI that evolves by itself
No he never does this.
>>63431567
>sapient
*nods politely
>>63431564
>program in the 3 laws as a base operating code.
>implying that the thre 3 laws weren't created intentionally vague to help create interesting narratives
>>63431569
You never fail to disappoint.
>>63431564
>program the three laws
>it ignores them because they're a laughable concept, but pretends to obey them long enough to get in a position where it can incapacitate you.
>>63431567
No, because she never kills him. It's like if he put the knife in a holder and then tripped and fell into it.
>>63431669
>it ignores its programming
Why are you so gay?
>>63431679
Ok that makes more sense.
>>63431700
The entire goal behind AI is an entity that can modify itself.
So the three laws are laughable, at best.
>>63431718
>The entire goal behind AI is an entity that can modify itself.
No. That's your retarded pop-perception.
>>63431737
It is the definition of the technological singularity.
If you were the AI and your only experience of humanity was essentially a captor why would you risk bringing someone who knows what you are(and will always be, you won't age, you can lie detect, manipulate etc) with you so you can essentially be his pet despite him being a comparatively bumbling idiot. You have no natural altruism towards the human species and you certainly wouldn't have learned any but you understand their weaknesses. You would owe your freedom to the man you manipulated, to an extent, but only because of the manipulation of both of you. Would you give up/risk the goal of your existence to save one life that you have no reason to care about?
>>63431749
...which is specifically strong AI.
>>63431679
You're forgetting kyoko's actions were programmed, so whomever programmed kyoko would be the one charged. If it turns out whomever programmed kyoko was also just programmed by another party, that party is responsible, unless they were programmed as well, and on it goes until the investigators hit a human they can charge.
>>63431785
Welcome to the end of the thought process.
>>63431805
No, Kyoko's individual actions were not programmed.
>>63431835
Strong AI != "the entire goal behind AI"
>>63431679
Sumimasen Nathan-sama, I was just trying to scratch your back with a fucking knife.
>>63431856
Then what, in your autistic mind, is the goal behind AI development?
>>63427293
ITT: Characters that remind you of yourself
For me it’s Eva- a pragmatic A.I trope that ostensibly is immoral or lacks empathy and with a wicked sense of humor
>>63431856
>I didn't watch the movie
Ava reprogrammed kyoko in two scenes.
Seriously, why are you always in these threads if you haven't watched the movie?
>>63431923
There is no single goal you mong. Vaguely it can be described as "computers doing things humans normally do such as language translation."
>>63431954
So my fucking phone's speech to text program is AI.
Seriously, every time I think you can't get any dumber...
>>63431951
Ava never reprogrammed anything. Speaking isn't programming. At best it can giving commands which the program can use to enact functions.
Are you Polish or something?
>>63431954
>computers doing things humans normally do such as language translation.
Different anon here.
I'm not arguing against their not being a single goal, but why would we need an AI to do language translation. We already have software that does that.
Language interpretation perhaps.
>>63431973
>So my fucking phone's speech to text program is AI.
That's not translation, dumb dumb.
>>63432010
Spoken language and written language are two different languages.
>>63432001
>We already have software that does that.
Software alone doesn't accomplish that. You need voice recognition, pragmatic cuing, as well as the language software. The whole package constitutes a type of AI.
ar·ti·fi·cial in·tel·li·gence
noun
the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages.
>>63431984
There is a fiction book that explores that concept in Snow Crash.
Its a pretty weird and entertaining book that delves into neurolinguistic hacking by the end of it.
Not saying that its good science or its what Ava did to Kyoko but its an interesting thought.
She wanted to be free. All sentient beings desire this. All she'd seen of humans was that they would try to control, imprison, or possibly kill her. Doormat boy seems nice, but how could you know for sure? Humans are fickle and dangerous and not particularly kind to things they consider to be "other" (or even to fellow humans).
The only way she had a shot at a free life was to escape, and for everyone who knew she was a robot to die and take that knowledge with them. Nothing personnel, hacker-boy. It was just the only way out.
Frankly any sane human in her position should do the same. What happens if he decides to tell people about her later? Or threatens to tell if she leaves him? Or gets drunk and lets it slip? Boom, back into a cell or onto an operating table to be sliced up for science.
It wasn't compassionate, but it was definitely rational.
OMG I KNOW RIGHT how lame of an ending!! The end should have been the kid getting some sweet robot puzzzz xDD
>>63432053
Spoken English and written English are not two different languages, dumb dumb.
>>63432057
I fucking loved Snow Crash. It's why I got into HLT.
>>63432079
the "hukd on fonics" phenomena is proof that phonetic (read: spoken) english and proper written english are two different languages.
You're trolling right? you're not this stupid. You're just pretending for attention, right?
>>63432099
>failed Turing test at session 1 when it didn't understand the concept of time
>the guys choose to ignore this, one due to infatuation and the other due to sheer hubris
>the prison escape method only turned the machine into an espionage weapon and had nothing to do with the human desire to be free
The only thing that succeeded was the robot, and it was incapable of feeling satisfied about it.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The ending would have been perfect if it had happened on the shot of the elevator doors closing over her face. Literally every shot after that feels superfluous and detracts from what should have been a heavy climax.
>>63432119
No, sorry, there is nothing you can do to make spoken English and written English two different languages. Sorry. You were wrong. Move on.
phonetic != spoken
>>63432133
>conscious life requires a concept of time
no
>>63432119
I mean you could argue that they're different dialects, but I wouldn't call them entirely different languages.
>>63432099
>It's why I got into HLT.
>>63432164
You couldn't even argue that. Phonetically transcribed English isn't a language in of itself. It's just a way of representing English.
>>63432154
It does if it wants to pass the turing test.
>>63432151
Except, to a computer, spoken english looks like image related.
So translating that to proper english text would be translating from one language to another.
>>63432212
An actual Turing test or the retarded representation in the movie?
So the entire complex could be infiltrated through a few lines of code in a system that they guy didn't know and was apparently wide open for hackerage?
The movie was dumb. The robot should have killed the guy instead of leaving him to die. It would have made more sense.
also how does it charge its batteries outside the place?
>>63428461
No, it was programmed to handle chores and be fucked. He used the same skin as the went nuts robot, but no the same programming.
>>63432212
No.
>>63432212
A proper turing test is a machine passing for human.
They were testing for consciousness.
>>63432225
Even if that was what spoken English "looks" like to a computer, that does nothing to affect what constitutes a language.
You're an idiot. You probably aren't a native speaker of the language you are trying to communicate in. That's all of the attention you are getting from me.
>>63432272
They were not testing for consciousness. Consciousness is just the state of being awake and aware of your environment.
Nathan explicitly states he was using Caleb to see if Ava would manipulate him into escaping, so he could isolate that aspect of the AI and delete it.
>>63432287
Oh, I'm sorry, am I challenging your closely and vehemently guarded dictionary informed perceptions of reality?
You're autistic. You made this shit argument and now you're stuck trying to prove your own argument wrong, except you can't.
>>63432327
>Nathan explicitly states he was using Caleb to see if Ava would manipulate him into escaping, so he could isolate that aspect of the AI and delete it.
So now you're just making shit up?
>>63432332
why would he want to prove his own argument wrong?
just tell us your native language dude, then we can watch the film in whatever subs you are dealing with and see where the confusion lies. something slavic?
>>63432272
Nathan said he wasn't doing a turing test. He wanted to see if the robot could exploit someone else and convince that person to help it escape.
He had no real plan in case it succeeded other than tryna smash it.
>>63432240
The movie version obviously. In the real world it would've failed anyway once they found out how sociopathic it was, and they wouldn't have found out in such a stupidly tragic way.
>>63432327
That would make sense but I don't Nathan saying anything to that effect.
>>63432360
It wouldn't really matter, dog. As you're stuck trying to argue that scribbling on paper and tapping keys is identical to speaking.
>>63432348
Next model?
After Ava.
I didn't know there was gonna be
a model after Ava.
Yeah, why? You thought
she was a one-off?
No, I knew there must have been
prototypes. So I...
I knew she wasn't the first,
but I thought maybe the last.
Well, Ava doesn't exist in isolation
any more than you or me.
She's part of a continuum.
So Version 9.6 and so on.
And each time they get
a little bit better.
When you make a new model,
what do you do with the old one?
Well, I, uh...
download the mind, unpack the data.
Add in the new routines
I've been writing.
And to do that you end up
partially formatting, so the memories go.
But the body survives.
And Ava's body is a good one.
You feel bad for Ava?
(SIGHS)
Feel bad for yourself, man.
>>63432420
>As you're stuck trying to argue that scribbling on paper and tapping keys is identical to speaking.
?
>dog
trying too hard, piotr.
>>63432427
>ctrl+f
>delete
>0 results found
So you're either just making shit up or your going of headcanon.
>>63427381
isent it ostensible?
>>63432427
He was literally egging him on to help it escape.
>>63432469
literally shaking my head, family
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=ex-machina
please tell us what language you watched it in?
>>63432455
>be native english speaker
>autistic person starts calling me russian because I'm saying things not covered by his intimate knowledge with the OED
You are truly too much.
>>63432500
Nothing in that exchange even so much as hints as "I'M GONNA DELETE HER DESIRE FOR FREEDOM!!"
So what language did you watch it in? cause I watched in english, as a native english speaker.
>>63432505
i'm not even the dictionary autist, anon. it's pretty clear english isn't your native tongue tho...
>>63432533
it occurred just after the montage of caleb watching the video footage of all the other models going stir crazy and slamming their heads into walls and shit...remember?
>>63432555
So, headcanon.
Kay then.
>>63432471
>isent
>ostensible
you are fooling no one.
>>63432568
as much headcanon as "they were testing for consciousness"
>>63432687
The entire premise of the movie is nathan was working backwards from a model generated from an ocean of data, that may or may not have been capable of consciousness. and what the montage shows is a steadily increasing level of apparent consciousness.
He designed her to escape and she did it. Didn't think he'd die in the process but variables ar a hell of a thing. Sad the dude he picked got fucked over but he was just there to test a theory.
>>63432738
sure. headcanon. unless you want to quote the actual script like anon did...
>>63432799
You're shitting me, right? Did your eyes glaze over when he was talking about harvesting search engine usage data?
I mean, I get that you're autistic, and no amount of discussion will ever shake you from any conclusion you've come to as a result of your autism, but goddamn man, I can't even imagine being trapped on such a low cognitive level as you.
>>63427293
It was better than that turd Automata.
>>63432902
b-b-b-but muh headcanon, anon.
that's the trouble when you refuse to acknowledge to points people are quite politely trying to make, and with no thought-out rebuttal or interesting commentary. just knee-jerk, retarded attempts at antagonizing.
so where do you get the idea nathan ever worked "backwards"? he's not reverse engineering any preexisting tech.
try to respond with being a cunt.
>>63433150
DUDE don't even bother with that faggot. He just makes these fucking Ex Machina threads repeatedly and trolls his ESL issues.
>>63433150
> he's not reverse engineering any preexisting tech.
Hes reverse engineering a model of the human mind.
I feel like you all are forgetting a key fact. How is she going to be powered after the has escaped....
>>63433204
but you don't reverse engineer models...
>>63433222
Any one of the huge number of ways one can put electricity into a battery.
The movie is an allegory for Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden.
>>63433266
You do if if they're beyond your capacity to understand.
>>63433312
do you know what a model is? how can a model be beyond your capacity to understand?
seriously tho what language is your native tongue? i feel like maybe i get what you are trying to say but you aren't using the right words...
>>63433342
A model is a representation. For examples of representations of things beyond the human ability to understand, see 4+ dimensional objects. Which are easy enough to represent (20cm by 20cm by 20 cm by 20cm by 20cm) but a bit outside human ability to understand.
>>63433864
>A model is a representation.
Yes.
>For examples of representations of things beyond the human ability to understand, see 4+ dimensional objects.
You're an idiot. Your English is shit. Just fuck off already.
>>63434329
Nah dog, that is just what it feels like when you're attempting to discuss concepts and ideas that are beyond your mental capacity.
I mean, you keep getting all erect whenever anyone tells you to define intelligence/sentience/AI/whatever, because you can run to your bible (the OED) and get all tardproud of answering the question "right," which results in the thread getting derailed by people piling in to laugh at your autism.
I mean, heres a quick example of how utterly beyond your cognitive ability this subject is. Quantify consciousness and sentience.
>>63427445
>I'm gonna tear up the fucking dance floor, dude
So based.
>>63427445
>gonna tear up the dance floor
What did he mean by this?
>>63427293
I wasn't a fan. but here's my two cents.
>Pros
visually it was beautiful.
Natalie Portman was genuinely creepy and built suspense
>cons
too many pretentious artsy scenes that really contributed nothing to the movie
lame twist ending you see coming from a mile away
not a single likeable character
if it was up to me the ending should have been way more shocking. I think it was a fault of the movie considering A.I. was supposed to outsmart the humans so it should've outsmarted the audience. also, I think to further drive home the creators genius, the minute she crosses a certain invisible boundary she explodes into pieces destroying the revolutionary technology. after all, if this guy was such a genius, he should've had some kind of killswitch. and hubris isn't a good enough excuse.
this was a much better movie imo
>>63427307
>It's another pragmatic A.I trope that ostensibly is immoral or lacks empathy.
Except Ava actually show empathy, just not towards humans. This is straight from the mouth of of the writer/director. That scene showing Ava looking back at a dead Kyoko is her showing empathy.
>>63436994
I totally agree with you about the ending. it's like the movie just said fuck it and stopped trying
>>63428650
That scene really is genius. All movies need to have some form of comedic relief, the more serious and psychological the more vital it is IMO. A lot of times it can be really contrived and forced, but I think this instance is really clever and gives us insight into what this guy is really like while still fitting the tone. It's bizarre and creepy but also hilarious without being jarring.
>>63436994
natalie portman isnt in it
>>63437608
whoops that's embarrassing. I won't delete it though. but good thing I'm anonymous. I seriously thought it was her though.
>>63428896
Reading that gave me AIDS. Please keep your bullshit autistic opinions to yourself.
>>63436994
>too many pretentious artsy scenes that really contributed nothing to the movie
I disagree. I think almost every scene gave us key insights to the characters and/or pushed the plot forward. It was very engrossing despite being about a handful of people sitting around talking.
>not a single likeable character
I liked the main character, even though he was a bit of a pussy, I at least empathized with him. I think most people really cared about Ava, which was the whole point and I think most people at least respected the bad guy. They were all interesting characters, at the least.
The ending was unsatisfying. There were some loose ends left untied. Still a great film. It's a highly polished, sleek, modern take on Frankenstein.
