Spike Jones wrote:
>
> Anders Sandberg wrote:
>
> > Spoileresque details:
> >
> > I disagree that it is a deathist movie. The big tragedy is that the
> > android gets his meaning of life from loving somebody. He lives only for
> > his love, making him fundamentally unable to be an independent being. He
> > can't grow up, he can't live without his dreams of Rachel. The future
> > belongs to the cynical gigolo androids :-)
>
> Altho disappointing in many ways, A.I. has some redeeming qualities
> I kinda see why Eliezer kinda liked it: in the end, when the humans were
> gone and everything was a machine, it was, well... OK.
> It was OK without the orgas. It helps us see that we *are* machines,
> the mechas are machines, we are real, they are real. We are machines
> with some fascinating flaws.
>
> Regarding cynical gigolo androids, if such a thing ever came to pass,
> you know we nerds would be trying to pass ourselves off as machines,
> by learning that head trick.
>
> Also, that final scene was well done methinks, because of the mechas
> looking down thru that window creating the impression of ambiguity
> between real and simulation. Spielberg slightly defocussed the camera
> at Davids homecoming to emphasize that you really dont know
> if this is the atom world or electron world. I got the impression that
> David was in a sim for the last few minutes of the film.
>
> Question: if all the ice on earth melted, how much would the seas rise?
Allegedly 200 meters, 2 of which would be absorbed by the Caspian Sea
and other areas below sea level that are not filled with water
currently. This would require a temperature increase at a minimum of 15
degrees (since my cousin found that the Antarctic has been stable for
the last 22 million years, and that is the hottest temperature in that
period)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:41 MDT