|
|
Post by Max on Jun 20, 2011 7:01:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Amethyst on Jun 20, 2011 7:02:38 GMT
Oh dear. As if Kat didn't feel bad enough about waking a robot from his death, now she has to kill him.
|
|
|
|
Post by mudmaniac on Jun 20, 2011 7:19:46 GMT
Oh this puts me in mind of Sandman. As such there was a part where this one character is killed, and being a subject of the Dreaming, Dream attempts to recreate him back to life. This character promptly told Dream, that while grateful, bringing him back would make his death, and therefore his life, meaningless.
Plus, I believe someone did mention that we cannot have a character with accurate historical knowledge answering all the questions! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by eightyfour on Jun 20, 2011 8:12:08 GMT
Oh dear. As if Kat didn't feel bad enough about waking a robot from his death, now she has to kill him. But that must be the nicest way I've ever seen anyone ask for his or her own death anywhere. So calm and dignified and so very gentle towards Kat.  |
|
|
|
Post by rafk on Jun 20, 2011 8:14:44 GMT
In the thread for the last comment, I said it raised the following questions:
1) Does the robot want to be switched back off?
2) Are they going to switch all the rest of them back on?
3) Could the nice robot tell them a bit more about Diego and how his tech worked and they wouldn't happen to know anything about an arrow, would they?
It appears the answer to 1 is 'Yes" and the answer 2 is probably going to be "Please don't", but hopefully this renewed life is not so unbearable for the robot that he can't spend 5 minutes answering questions about the Court As It Used To Be before they switch him off. He's managed to spend a few minutes being philosophical with them, what's a few more minutes?
Unless what happens is Annie says "Say, what can you tell me about a woman named Jeanne?" and our robot goes into a loop of saying "SHE DIED AND WE DID NOTHING" over and over until Kat switches him off....
|
|
|
|
Post by Goatmon on Jun 20, 2011 8:49:01 GMT
I do hope that he is willing to stick around long enough to share what he knew of Diego, among other things from his time.
It'd be a shame if he simply went away without sharing whatever knowledge he and his companions took to the mechanical grave with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexandragon on Jun 20, 2011 8:52:15 GMT
How sad... Looks like "Zombiebot" wants to die again((( :'(Poor Kat. |
|
|
|
Post by legion on Jun 20, 2011 9:17:43 GMT
This is like Blade Runner in reverse.
|
|
|
|
Post by fuyukodachi on Jun 20, 2011 9:21:55 GMT
Camerabot and this guy are making sure Kat has the most severe case of PTSD in the land.
|
|
|
|
Post by Per on Jun 20, 2011 11:39:33 GMT
Chapter title: explained.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Jun 20, 2011 12:57:26 GMT
This is like Blade Runner in reverse. Wake up! Time to die. |
|
starkruzr
New Member
Banned : Rule 1
Posts: 35
|
Post by starkruzr on Jun 20, 2011 13:31:36 GMT
This is kind of nonsensical.
He hasn't really given any justification for wanting to be switched off. If life is so precious, why is he so eager to be quit of it? What is with the recurring theme in this comic of things and people wanting to die in order to bring new life into the world? It was sort of necessary with Surma - though really, woman. ADOPT, FFS.
But this robotic death wish doesn't make any sense. What, life is so wonderful that y'all can't bear it anymore?
|
|
|
|
Post by Aurelia Verity on Jun 20, 2011 14:11:04 GMT
This is kind of nonsensical. He hasn't really given any justification for wanting to be switched off. If life is so precious, why is he so eager to be quit of it? What is with the recurring theme in this comic of things and people wanting to die in order to bring new life into the world? It was sort of necessary with Surma - though really, woman. ADOPT, FFS. But this robotic death wish doesn't make any sense. What, life is so wonderful that y'all can't bear it anymore? His decisions will probably be fully explained in further pages. it's not like Kat is going to say: "Okay, Whatevs" CLICK, Done. She will question this. There might me many reasons for the robot to wish to be switched off. Ironically he might feel that the newer, more functional robots that have learned to serve and help humans and even communicate with forest creatures are more efficient than his kind of robots are. or possibly he simply feels like his time is at an end and he has no place within society anymore. "The universe has to move forward. Pain and loss, they define us as much as happiness or love. Whether it's a world, or a relationship... Everything has its time. And everything ends. " Also, women often wish to experience the physical side of bearing a child, it is a biological desire for many. Surma had the physical capacity to get pregnant so she did, it was a conscious choice she made. |
|
|
|
Post by zylonbane on Jun 20, 2011 14:18:00 GMT
The last two or three strips have really fallen flat for me, on account of someone as technically inclined as Kat would damn well know the difference between "Off" and "Sleep Mode".
|
|
|
|
Post by darlos9d on Jun 20, 2011 15:05:38 GMT
I'm kinda on the same page as starkruzr I think. I get a bit annoyed with characters who are absurdly fatalistic for no logical reason. Unless their existence is actually threatening or harmful, or there is some reason to sacrifice themselves, I don't see why they can't live. Obviously they have some odd non-human philosophy going on, and see things from a different angle. And maybe we will get further explanation. But unless that explanation brings up a reason along the lines of what I just said in the previous paragraph, I'm still going to find it a bit silly. It's just a minor character though, so it's not like I'll be too beat up about it. zylonbane: yeah, this might actually be a bigger sticking point. The whole comparison between robots/computers/humans and talking about death felt like it had some... holes in it. Holes you'd think actual intelligent characters would comment upon. Honestly, the fact that Kat is getting freaked out like she just performed some kind of necromancy is a tad weird. All that happened is that she repaired a machine. That fact doesn't really change no matter how complex the machine is. Or what the machine itself says. I just don't see a reason to be really freaked out here, unless talking robots freak you out in general, which obviously isn't the case here. |
|
|
|
Post by zylonbane on Jun 20, 2011 15:18:16 GMT
zylonbane: yeah, this might actually be a bigger sticking point. The whole comparison between robots/computers/humans and talking about death felt like it had some... holes in it. Well, I wouldn't call them holes. More like, I feel like Tom is both wasting strips and undermining Kat's technical genius by requiring RetroBot to explain to her the extremely simple technical concept of ON/OFF -- a concept that is already well understood by (I would hope) most of the people reading the strip. |
|
|
|
Post by crater on Jun 20, 2011 15:22:34 GMT
I don't see why zombiebot & friends just didn't jump into a trash compactor or something more permanent???
|
|
|
|
Post by preapocalyptica on Jun 20, 2011 15:54:56 GMT
I just noticed, it's not very often we see a character in profile view.
|
|
shuis112
New Member
whatchu talkin bout Willis
Posts: 15
|
Post by shuis112 on Jun 20, 2011 15:55:37 GMT
I hope he has a receipt for that. Seriously though: I don't see why zombiebot & friends just didn't jump into a trash compactor or something more permanent??? From Frankenbot's Zombiebot's comments, it seems they felt their solution WAS permanent and never expected to be brought back. Also I don't think robots really enjoy jumping into trash compactors (or being recycled into paper clips). Not gonna bring human analogies into this. My issue with all this has been that I don't know if I should consider the robots to have the equivalent of a terminal disease, from which they could never recover and would eventually meet their end/fall into disrepair, or whether they could have continued to function alongside the newer Court robots and simply chose not to. |
|
|
|
Post by smjjames on Jun 20, 2011 15:56:36 GMT
I don't see why zombiebot & friends just didn't jump into a trash compactor or something more permanent??? Because they didn't have a trash compactor in their day? Smashing the ceramic hearts could work, but yea, they could have their own reasons why they didnt have themselves destroyed outright. Anyways, I agree with zylonbane there, Tom seems to be unnecessarily blurring the concepts of off and sleep mode with the philosophical explanation. |
|
|
|
Post by therighttrousers on Jun 20, 2011 16:13:53 GMT
Anyways, I agree with zylonbane there, Tom seems to be unnecessarily blurring the concepts of off and sleep mode with the philosophical explanation. I don't think you're agreeing with zylonbane, who seems to think that Tom is only using Frankenbot to provide a technical explanation of the difference between ON and OFF. FWIW, I'm getting a PhD in computer science, my master's degree work was in artifical intelligence, and I've been riveted for the last few pages. It's a very interesting take on how an artificial life might understand life and death. Also, one of the big problems with AI is motivation; i.e. what makes a robot want to do anything? What does it mean to "want" in the first place? Tom has made a very interesting and plausible choice on this, and has hinted at how it gave rise to the robots' philosophies of life and death. This is very smart stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by theweatherman on Jun 20, 2011 16:19:25 GMT
I'm just gunna see what happens in the next few pages, although perhaps Zombiebot has a different understanding of life, death and sleep compared to Kat. Plus he's really old. Either way trying to compare the worldview of two different species (I'm gunna go and say that Zombiebot is too alive not to be a different type of lifeform) isn't gunna be easy.
Also since Kat can raise the robot dead it means my theory makes a little more sense! Hooray!
|
|
|
|
Post by basser on Jun 20, 2011 16:43:06 GMT
Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't immediately assume the modern technical concepts of on/off/sleep apply to quasi-magical robogolems operating on software scribbled on the surface of a pottery sculpture. Quite nice of Frank to assure us that they (sort of) do.
|
|
jandor
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by jandor on Jun 20, 2011 17:08:27 GMT
Maybe it's just me but I wouldn't immediately assume the modern technical concepts of on/off/sleep apply to quasi-magical robogolems operating on software scribbled on the surface of a pottery sculpture. Quite nice of Frank to assure us that they (sort of) do. Spot on! It's not exactly Windows (17)95, it's an etherically animated Golem. --- Kat may be a technical genius, but she's also only 13 (maybe 14?). You surely don't think a 13 year old girl should handle resurrecting centuries dead constructs that then smash walls and asked to die as if she just repaired a PC? |
|
|
|
Post by Georgie L on Jun 20, 2011 17:20:14 GMT
Oh this puts me in mind of Sandman. As such there was a part where this one character is killed, and being a subject of the Dreaming, Dream attempts to recreate him back to life. This character promptly told Dream, that while grateful, bringing him back would make his death, and therefore his life, meaningless. Yeah it does remind of that as well. Bless that old rolling meadow with water in it. |
|
|
|
Post by zylonbane on Jun 20, 2011 18:12:52 GMT
FWIW, I'm getting a PhD in computer science, my master's degree work was in artifical intelligence, and I've been riveted for the last few pages. It's a very interesting take on how an artificial life might understand life and death. I guess one man's interesting is another man's stating the bleeding obvious. |
|
|
|
Post by Polly Plummer on Jun 20, 2011 18:43:57 GMT
Oh this puts me in mind of Sandman. As such there was a part where this one character is killed, and being a subject of the Dreaming, Dream attempts to recreate him back to life. This character promptly told Dream, that while grateful, bringing him back would make his death, and therefore his life, meaningless. Yeah it does remind of that as well. Bless that old rolling meadow with water in it. Would you mind telling me which volume of the graphic novels this is in? I've read all the way up to Brief Lives so far. Or are you talking about Fiddler's Green? |
|
|
|
Post by darlos9d on Jun 20, 2011 18:44:24 GMT
While I don't have a PhD in Computer Scientist, I do have a Bachelor's and am a professional programmer. And I can't really say it's made me any more tolerant of the absurd pseudo-death-seeking philosophies of weird robots. Living beings tend to like to stay alive. If they could live forever, they would likely choose to do so, a majority of the time. You'll sometimes hear or even think "oh gee, living forever would get boring eventually" or something to that effect, but really I think that's just us mortals trying to convince ourselves that having to die isn't so bad, when in fact deep down we don't want to die ever.
Now, there can be exceptions of course. Maybe some people decide they personally want to die. They wouldn't represent the majority though. Which raises the question: does frank represent the majority? If you woke up all the old bots, would they ALL want to go back to being deactivated?
Sadly, I have a funny feeling that the answer would be "yes" in this case. Which bugs me, because that kinda kills their potential individuality a bit.
On a slight tangent: I've done cultural study and lived in another country for a year. Through all that, I began to realize that the notion that you have to be 100% tolerant of all the ideas of cultures different from yours is rather faulty. Sometimes bad and senseless notions are just bad and senseless, no matter how much you try to understand the context of it. As such, I'm not afraid to look at some weird non-human robots and say "your beliefs are dumb" without feeling culturally ignorant. As long as I attempt to see it their way first. And I'm not really seeing it, in this case.
|
|
|
|
Post by Per on Jun 20, 2011 18:54:37 GMT
Would you mind telling me which volume of the graphic novels this is in? I've read all the way up to Brief Lives so far. Or are you talking about Fiddler's Green? It's after Brief Lives, and the less spoiled the better. |
|
|
|
Post by atteSmythe on Jun 20, 2011 19:56:43 GMT
Everything's been done.
Frank isn't concerned with living just to live. He's served his Grand Purpose, and succeeded even better than he thought was possible. What else is there to do? What else could possibly compare?
And more than that, would he do more harm than good by staying? Even in this short life of ours, it is not so uncommon for a mentor to step aside, so that their influence doesn't stifle progress. If Frank were to remain, he would have great influence. Could it disrupt hundreds of years of development? Or prevent it from continuing?
What Frank is asking for is more than most of us will get - to die in full knowledge that our work made the world a better place for years to come. That our good deeds lived beyond us.
I think it's part of this story's constant theme of renewal, and I like it.
|
|
