Peter Weyland and David

Started by bambi_burster, Mar 23, 2012, 09:38:56 AM

Author
Peter Weyland and David (Read 10,596 times)

MrSpaceJockey

MrSpaceJockey

#15
Quote from: First Blood on Mar 23, 2012, 05:44:56 PM
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 23, 2012, 05:35:28 PM
Quote from: Eldritch on Mar 23, 2012, 05:34:38 PM
He gets an InvaldionActionException and freezes... just like any Java application out there  :P

;D

David gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death.  I like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUJBGjPeAdA#ws

http://bishopsproblem2.ytmnd.com/  ;D

SiUttley

SiUttley

#16
It may well be that David plays a similar role to Frankenstein's creature, in that he ends up turning on his creator, perhaps in ways that comply with the laws as you guys are stating.

Despicable Dugong

Despicable Dugong

#17
Quote from: SiUttley on Mar 24, 2012, 06:07:46 PM
It may well be that David plays a similar role to Frankenstein's creature, in that he ends up turning on his creator, perhaps in ways that comply with the laws as you guys are stating.

If - and it's a BIG if, lots of fanboi speculation - Weyland is searching for immortality and uses David to acquire and utilise the Space Jockeys biotech then his DNA will be changed so he will not actually BE a human being any more, thus circumventing the Asimov laws.

Deuterium

Deuterium

#18
Quote from: Despicable Dugong on Mar 24, 2012, 07:07:26 PM
Quote from: SiUttley on Mar 24, 2012, 06:07:46 PM
It may well be that David plays a similar role to Frankenstein's creature, in that he ends up turning on his creator, perhaps in ways that comply with the laws as you guys are stating.

If - and it's a BIG if, lots of fanboi speculation - Weyland is searching for immortality and uses David to acquire and utilise the Space Jockeys biotech then his DNA will be changed so he will not actually BE a human being any more, thus circumventing the Asimov laws.

Of course, we should all keep in mind that "Asimov's Laws" are purely a fictional construct...and while they may seem logical and reasonable, there currently exists no Federal or International regulations which would require a Corporation to follow "Asimov's Laws"...assuming they developed an android with true A.I.

Speaking from a purely philosophical perspective, it would be hard to justify the assignment and limitations ("inhibitors") on a fully sentient, conscious intelligence.  One could argue that such a creation should have the same ability for "free will", as we do.  Note, I am not talking about simply an "intelligent" robot...but an entity that has all the attributes of human consciousness.  Were we to impose such limits, one might question wether we were simply creating a race of slaves.

Consciousness, the Philosophy of the Mind, and the "Mind - Body Problem" are incredibly complex issues, which span the continuum between Science (neuroscience) and Philosophy...and represent an incredibly rich and exciting area of research and study.

Despicable Dugong

Despicable Dugong

#19
Why would a corporation develop a synthetic life form that has 'free will?' There would be little profit in it, especially if the creation decided one day that it didn't want to do what it's creators wished it to any more, a la Frankenstein.

'Free will' is an illusion anyway.

escroto

escroto

#20
Quote from: Despicable Dugong on Mar 24, 2012, 07:50:54 PM'Free will' is an illusion anyway.
Absolutely.

@_OP: This is going to be the first time the company knows of the engineers and of the many kinds of organisms or DNA variety that is supposed to be inside that mountain. They still don't know anything and I guess they have no more goals to seek (in this mission) other than Weyland's last desire of immortality, now that he sees death drawing near.

It was only in alien that the company already knew of the organisms and about the derelict ship, not now, because this is going to be the first contact. The mystery of how the hell the company knew of the existence of the derelict ship and the organisms inside should be the second great mystery being eventually revealed in Prometheus or Prometheus2. The first mystery of course was always the very space jockey, Its tech, what the hell happened to It and why It got infected (I think that one was not one of the engineers but one of the Prometheus crew that scapes with the derelict and gets his punishment right when the suit wraps him). The creation of the alien should be another mystery being revealed, though I guess It should quite normal to think It was the result of the combination of engineer's DNA with the DNA of those little jumping worms David is looking at in one of the latest trailers, also probably being these "serpents" when they grow.

Where will this fusion be carried out?, I think It is going to be in the chair. I don't even think the chair serves to control the ship but only for this I'm talking about.

Ballzanya

Ballzanya

#21
Quote from: Despicable Dugong on Mar 24, 2012, 07:50:54 PM
Why would a corporation develop a synthetic life form that has 'free will?' There would be little profit in it, especially if the creation decided one day that it didn't want to do what it's creators wished it to any more, a la Frankenstein.

'Free will' is an illusion anyway.

I certain think it is, or at least if we have any degree of what we can call "free will" it is very limited in its scope, with subconscious processes controlling much of what we do, and only giving us the sense of having desires once those rise to the level of conscious awareness. I haven't read Sam Harris' book/essay entitled, "free will" but I'd like to.

SiUttley

SiUttley

#22
Lindelof's comments on David's character would certainly suggest these are themes the film will explore:

"He (Fassbender) plays a robot. One of the things that evokes the idea of 'Blade Runner' is, 'What does the movie look like from the robot's point of view?' If you were to ask him, 'What do you think about all of this? What's going on? What do you think about these humans who are around you?"

Will he eventually turn on his creators? Will he side with the Engineers? Will he be humanity's saviour?


Despicable Dugong

Despicable Dugong

#23

aliennaire

aliennaire

#24
Quote from: Despicable Dugong on Mar 24, 2012, 07:50:54 PM
Why would a corporation develop a synthetic life form that has 'free will?' There would be little profit in it, especially if the creation decided one day that it didn't want to do what it's creators wished it to any more, a la Frankenstein.

'Free will' is an illusion anyway.
It's no way an illusion, free will enables you with the power to choose and agree or oppose, depending on your choice. I'm not talking about situations when you are obliged to act in certain manner due to laws, conventions, habits, etc, I mean you true reaction, which you always have inside yourself.

RICH-ENGLAND

RICH-ENGLAND

#25
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 23, 2012, 05:35:28 PM
Quote from: Eldritch on Mar 23, 2012, 05:34:38 PM
He gets an InvaldionActionException and freezes... just like any Java application out there  :P

;D

David gets the equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death.  I like it.


Despicable Dugong

Despicable Dugong

#26
Quote from: aliennaire on Mar 24, 2012, 09:19:33 PM
It's no way an illusion, free will enables you with the power to choose and agree or oppose, depending on your choice. I'm not talking about situations when you are obliged to act in certain manner due to laws, conventions, habits, etc, I mean you true reaction, which you always have inside yourself.

Really? So you refute the various peer reviewed experiments carried out by well respected neuroscientists that have found, using MRI technology, that a subject's decisions can be predicted up to seven seconds before they have consciously decided to make a 'choice?' Upon what basis does your refutation lie? Please, enlighten us.

Cvalda

Cvalda

#27
I don't think it's a matter of free will being predictable, it's more a matter of us being slaves to our biological instincts and mental conditioning. We may think we as individuals or a species operate under free will, but we're still acting out Nature's plans borne of hundreds of millions of years worth of evolutionary hardwiring, and nothing is going to change that.

I take the romantic, James Tiptree Jr.-ish view that the most admirable thing a person can do is try and rise above their instincts, however doomed a struggle it is. It's the only way to taste any sort of real freedom or clarity of vision.
*puts away bong*

Despicable Dugong

Despicable Dugong

#28
Bonging?! Ewwwwwwwww. Nasty. Get on the DMT if you really want enlightenment.

Cvalda

Cvalda

#29
Quote from: Despicable Dugong on Mar 24, 2012, 09:42:10 PM
Bonging?! Ewwwwwwwww. Nasty. Get on the DMT if you really want enlightenment.
DMT is so bourgeois.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News