Westworld (HBO/Sky Atlantic) [** Spoilers **]

Frank O. Pinion

Effects wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/28/boy-11-leads-police-dangerous-car-chase-grand-theft-auto-session/

Like I said, videogames obviously make everyone do things, no exceptions. My Italian plumber is off his head on mushrooms.

ManOfMystery

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Because they're not human? Because if you destroy or abuse it, it can be replaced or reprogrammed? Only humans should have human rights. I fully support technological evolution and the merging of AI and human evolution into one reality like some scientific theories (mainly so I can upload my brain into a robot and live forever), but I'm so tired of media making robot rape a big deal. Then reading feminist articles about how allowing men to rape robots, could make men do it against real women. Like how everyone who plays GTA then goes and steals cars. The whole premise is as laughable to me as "raping" a blow-up doll. Crying over a robot you loved getting killed? Just get a new version and stick your dick in that.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying the premise of the show is ethically wrong. A wild west playground with robots programmed to act for your pleasure? Fantastic.

But its when those 'robots' start to think for themselves and show signs of having their own consciousness, when wiping them doesn't appear to remove the memories ............. that's when people need to look closer at their behaviour towards said beings within the confines of the park. Behaviour that is now having an effect on them and not something that can just be deleted off a hard disc and out of their memory. MIB isn't presented as an evil guy outside the park; it's within the park that he becomes that person, and if he believes that the hosts can become sentient then his behaviour truly is abhorrent and not just an act he puts on when on vacation.

Keyzer

Easy Rod wrote: »

Also on issue one, it's only hosts he's slaughtered so there's a disconnect there, it's not like he's murdered real people. I know he's technically in love with a host but his argument is that she's "different" than the rest.

True, but this is a chap who was horrified when Logan stabbed the old host in the bar a couple of episodes back. A radical personality change in my opinion.

Effects

Keyzer wrote: »

True, but this is a chap who was horrified when Logan stabbed the old host in the bar a couple of episodes back. A radical personality change in my opinion.

Would you rather they strung it out over another 8 episodes or so to make it more believable?

MOH

Easy Rod wrote: »

Also on issue one, it's only hosts he's slaughtered so there's a disconnect there, it's not like he's murdered real people. I know he's technically in love with a host but his argument is that she's "different" than the rest.

Deleted User wrote: »

It could also be a way of showing Logan, "hey look, I don't care about hosts anymore".

expectationlost wrote: »

i thought he would would rush off to help a sliced up delores but maybe he sliced up the soldiers in order to see how they work and how to fix them, their skin atleast.

I assumed part of the reason he dismembered all the soldiers was that he knew (or suspected) that he wouldn't be allowed harm Logan.
It'd seem logical that the Good Samaritan reflex would have to apply to human-on-human violence.

Dismembering all the hosts would be a message to Logan both how determined he was about Dolores, and that Logan might actually be in physical danger from him.

expectationlost

i wonder is there any video games where the character remember their experiences when they are restarted? only similar thing I know of is when some games made it easier if you keep dying.

Drumpot

I wonder how much ford knows about Maeve. People keep presuming she is going around doing all these things without Ford knowing. I think its more likely he is not only aware of it, but encouraging it... He could easily be covering up her actions, along with Bernard. In many cases we see things through the Hosts perception (think the photo with and without Bernard etc).

The first clue is that Ford knew exactly what Bernard was up to, but chose to play along, pretending to be under the threat of execution. This suggests that this has happened before (mini revolt from Bernard), perhaps in similar circumstances. Either that or Ford knew Bernard was after him because he knew about what happened with Maeve (where she "woke" Bernard up to his situation). Either way, Ford was ready for Bernards mutiny so he must of had something giving him a heads up.

Also, the fact that Ford has failsafes in the robots (a backdoor as Bernard puts it), suggests that Ford is nearly always a few steps ahead of what's going on in the park.

Love the show, but can get lost in so much information and timelines. Needs either a second viewing or discussions to remind me of bits missed. I can see why some people don't like it but I think its great.

cumulonimbus

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Because they're not human? Because if you destroy or abuse it, it can be replaced or reprogrammed? Only humans should have human rights. I fully support technological evolution and the merging of AI and human evolution into one reality like some scientific theories (mainly so I can upload my brain into a robot and live forever), but I'm so tired of media making robot rape a big deal. Then reading feminist articles about how allowing men to rape robots, could make men do it against real women. Like how everyone who plays GTA then goes and steals cars. The whole premise is as laughable to me as "raping" a blow-up doll. Crying over a robot you loved getting killed? Just get a new version and stick your dick in that.

If you upload your brain into a robot you would no longer be human and therefore not entitled to human rights. There isn't really a difference between your brain in a robot body and a sentient robot.

qwabercd

On the William/MIB theory, at the end of episode 9 when Dolores hears someone entering the church she says "William" and seems to start smiling as if she's happy to see him. But when MIB walks in she's horrified. Is it case that she's not aware they're the same person?

irishash

qwabercd wrote: »

On the William/MIB theory, at the end of episode 9 when Dolores hears someone entering the church she says "William" and seems to start smiling as if she's happy to see him. But when MIB walks in she's horrified. Is it case that she's not aware they're the same person?

Well I would not blame her, as even we the audience are still not sure if they are the same person.

Frank O. Pinion

cumulonimbus wrote: »

If you upload your brain into a robot you would no longer be human and therefore not entitled to human rights. There isn't really a difference between your brain in a robot body and a sentient robot.

Yes....the words before the ones you bolded explains my stance. "I fully support technological evolution and the merging of AI and human evolution into one reality like some scientific theories", in that possible future I'm talking about AI and the human race being one thing. Until then, I do see a difference between actual humans and sentient robots.

ManOfMystery

qwabercd wrote: »

On the William/MIB theory, at the end of episode 9 when Dolores hears someone entering the church she says "William" and seems to start smiling as if she's happy to see him. But when MIB walks in she's horrified. Is it case that she's not aware they're the same person?

Possibly. They may not be the same person. But if they are, perhaps she only recalls the good William, or like hosts looking at photos of certain things, can't reconcile the two.

Drumpot

qwabercd wrote: »

On the William/MIB theory, at the end of episode 9 when Dolores hears someone entering the church she says "William" and seems to start smiling as if she's happy to see him. But when MIB walks in she's horrified. Is it case that she's not aware they're the same person?

I think that perhaps she is experiencing time as we see it on the screen. The memories of the hosts are more like living in realtime memories as opposed to humans hazy recollection of events.


So in that moment when the MIB opens the church doors, the fact that 30 years have elapsed means nothing to her. Her instant reaction would be "hey that guy attacked me a few days ago in a barn". Not only did he not look like the young William she remembers, he probably doesn't act like him.

She has had her mind wiped loads of times and cannot differentiate between what happened then and what she is going through right now. She would not expect William to look like the MIB because she has no real reference point to make the connection.

Drumpot

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Yes....the words before the ones you bolded explains my stance. "I fully support technological evolution and the merging of AI and human evolution into one reality like some scientific theories", in that possible future I'm talking about AI and the human race being one thing. Until then, I do see a difference between actual humans and sentient robots.

This is a zero sum discussion. The entire premise that a robot or sentient being should have less or more rights is based on a subjective ethical stance. For me its similar to the discussion on abortion, at what stage is something deserving of equal rights to live/survive?

There is no ideal solution, only discussion and acceptable concessions. Society then changes what it deems acceptable.

In terms of how guests treat the Hosts, I think its more complicated then "guest rapes host equals rapist".

Logan is Logan and actually changes for the better as the story continues. He goes into the park knowing exactly what to expect, lets loose, like some people on stag parties going OTT more then they normally do. I think its important that Logan clearly thinks the Hosts are toys to be played with (like cutting Delores open to show her parts) and don't think there's anything sinister to his actions based on how he perceives the park. He doesn't think they feel anything. The last thing Logan did was set William free and hug him. He tried to get Logan back to reality and remind him that hes marrying his sister but that he wouldn't tell her what happened.

I would be more concerned with a William who goes in all starry eyed and goes batsh*t crazy when his unrealistic expectations are shattered. He tells his potential brother in law that he practically loves a robot and leaves said brother in law to get the crap beaten out of him. Then when Logan trys to show him some compassion (and actually get him to cop the f*ck on), he kills his entire army and holds a knife to his throat. If William is MIB, his first experience in the park defined his relationship with his wife who eventually took her life.

I'm a few episodes behind but why is the Asian surgeon guy helping the black host girl? Episodes 6/7

saneman

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a few episodes behind but why is the Asian surgeon guy helping the black host girl? Episodes 6/7

I'm not sure if it's very clear, we do see him trying to code the behavior of a bird in an earlier episode so he's obviously looking to advance his career/knowledge and he may initially see something in Maeve that would aid this. For the other technician I think it's alluded to him getting sexual favours for his assistance which would leave him open to blackmail. Of course they could also be hosts and after letting her increase her stats they're under her control, or coded by Ford to allow this.

Kenjataimu

For any IASIP fans

expectationlost

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a few episodes behind but why is the Asian surgeon guy helping the black host girl? Episodes 6/7

cos he wants to be involved in higher/ coding stuff etc, you could see Maeve flattering him

expectationlost

ManOfMystery wrote: »

Even if said robots are on the verge of gaining their own sentience and, like Maeve, no longer having to rely on their programming to guide their actions?

Ep2 - William arrives and asks the female showing him around if she's a host. She replies "If you can't tell, does it really matter?". This to me is the question which drives the whole show. If the hosts look human, have skin and blood like humans, feel pain like humans, and are now becoming sentient and free-thinking - why wouldn't they be deserving of the same rights as humans?

so if you had sex with a robot would it be considered cheating? #rhlstp

Skerries

don ramo wrote: »

another interesting show from HBO, but i must say it take AAAAGGGGGGGEEEEESSSSSS for the shows to air, probably wont see this till late next year or early 2015:(

nice to see their investing more of fantasy/sci-fi stuff, im just waiting for the space based show from them,

even longer

Surreptitious

expectationlost wrote: »

so if you had sex with a robot would it be considered cheating? #rhlstp

Do they have pleasure senses? If they don't have a brain how can they orgasm.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Surreptitious

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Remember the sequence with two of them having sex and they were being instructed? Maybe it is all an act.

Ben Gadot

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Just watched the 9 episodes over today and yesterday. Overall, a good show, getting better in the second half of the season, after a slow start.

But is there a show/movie like this that doesn't try to make the viewer have empathy for AI? "Morality", is a common theme with this premise, but is there anything "wrong" about raping or killing a piece of technology? I don't think so. In my eyes, characters don't automatically become evil characters if they treat robots badly, and if they fall in love with a piece of technology, they seem like a bit of moron to me.

To be fair, acting out fantasies of rape and murder is more than a little messed up. Especially if the whole pitch of the game is that you get to feel and experience every bit of the emotion as if it were real.

You mention video games and GTA, but I'm hardly getting off on the vivid experience of what it would be like to bazooka the entire police force. It's done for fun, not to experience every little real emotion of a horrific death.

Frank O. Pinion

Ben Gadot wrote: »

To be fair, acting out fantasies of rape and murder is more than a little messed up. Especially if the whole pitch of the game is that you get to feel and experience every bit of the emotion as if it were real.

You mention video games and GTA, but I'm hardly getting off on the vivid experience of what it would be like to bazooka the entire police force. It's done for fun, not to experience every little real emotion of a horrific death.

Plenty of people masturbate to rape fantasies. Plenty of people act out rape fantasies, plenty of women have rape fantasies. People think about or act these out, without ever having any intention to do it for real. If people could rape robots, men, women, couples, etc. would definitely do it. I wouldn't judge these people as "messed up", for having their fun with a piece of technology.

You might find violet video games fun, others find killing a robot fun. If neither act leads to hurting an actual human, what's the harm?

Evil_g

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Plenty of people masturbate to rape fantasies. Plenty of people act out rape fantasies, plenty of women have rape fantasies. People think about or act these out, without ever having any intention to do it for real. If people could rape robots, men, women, couples, etc. would definitely do it. I wouldn't judge these people as "messed up", for having their fun with a piece of technology.

I would.

ManOfMystery

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

You might find violet video games fun, others find killing a robot fun. If neither act leads to hurting an actual human, what's the harm?

There is no harm - until the AI in those technologies progresses sufficiently that they become sentient. And then the actions we would take against robots would have consequences

This is being played out on screen as Maeve slowly awakens, remembers what has been done to her and is now on the verge of organising a revolt. It's highly likely that humans are going to die in the course of her revenge. So someone like MIB - who killed the child she believed was her daughter just as an experiment, thinking it would do no real 'harm' - will have a bit of a rude awakening.

conorhal

ManOfMystery wrote: »

In my weak defence, I work in IT, not NASA

Also in your defence, you might be able to teraform Mars but you're not going to change the size of the planet or the gravity it exerts on people, if Westworld was set on Mars or any planet in out solar system everybody would be flying six feet in the air every time they jumped.

Effects

conorhal wrote: »

Also in your defence, you might be able to teraform Mars but you're not going to change the size of the planet or the gravity it exerts on people, if Westworld was set on Mars or any planet in out solar system everybody would be flying six feet in the air every time they jumped.

It's science fiction, you can change whatever you like really, as long as you can explain it.

ManOfMystery

Effects wrote: »

It's science fiction, you can change whatever you like really, as long as you can explain it.

That is true. Some suspension of disbelief is required given that we're dealing with cowboy robots who are indistinguishable from humans, operating in a giant disneyland-style resort run by Hannibal Lecter.