|
Post by darlos9d on Jun 20, 2011 21:02:06 GMT
Alright. I still wonder what the other robots would think, individually. I can't help but wonder if at least one of them would say "hey... now that you mention it, there are some other things I'd like to do!" Would anybody say this theoretical robot is wrong for feeling that way? And if he wouldn't be wrong for feeling that way, what's the point of this generally applied fatalism? 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? "They should go away because the MIGHT do something bad" is, to me, an incredibly vague notion that doesn't hold much water. Were it a valid argument, you could use it to argue against a lot of things, which would be a terribly slippery slope. Also, while it might not be uncommon for a mentor to step aside, it doesn't always follow that the mentor will (or should) then go end his life permanently. The mentor could simply just do something else that interests him. While its certainly up to each individual (including individual intelligent robots) to decide what they do with their lives up to and including living or dying, the insinuation that "after a certain point in time, dying is generally the morally correct choice" is what kinda bothers me.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Jun 20, 2011 22:15:26 GMT
I think that we should wait until the next page before passing judgment on the robot's request; as someone else pointed out, he might explain the reason for his request. Since he made it only in the last panel of today's page, there's been no opportunity yet in the story for an explanation or discussion by the characters.
|
|
|
Post by darlos9d on Jun 21, 2011 1:10:15 GMT
Well, alright. I remember having similar fears about Kat's reactions to things earlier on, and those fears being alleviated in subsequent pages.
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jun 21, 2011 2:40:59 GMT
I think the reasoning has been covered in the last few threads.
What were they to do without Diego? Certainly they might be sturdy and wondrous. They could go on for a long time, no doubt, but forever? With no one to understand how to repair them at that. The only person that has come close was born hundreds of years after Diego's death.
Machines break down too, and they don't get the benefit of self repairing bodies.
Think of it like someone with a terminal illness deciding they'd prefer to die than live long enough to spend their last days with a breathing tube down their throat.
|
|
|
Post by Polly Plummer on Jun 21, 2011 2:44:47 GMT
He's just "Standing" in the way.
I also like the theme. I think it fits in with the comic's overall theme of death and rebirth/renewal. And I think it's beautiful.
|
|
jandor
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by jandor on Jun 21, 2011 8:44:34 GMT
If he chooses to stay alive, then Kat (as the only person in a few hundred years who even sort of understands Diego's work) basically functions as his carer/mechanic until she dies. At which point he switches himself off again.
Kat may even enjoying doing it, for a long while at least. But you know what the Court robots are like, he probably doesn't want to be a burden.
|
|
|
Post by fuzzysocks on Jun 21, 2011 9:47:37 GMT
Anyone else tearing up from this chapter?
|
|
|
Post by hifranc on Jun 21, 2011 13:22:10 GMT
This debate about culture reminded that that robot was probably a product of his time. We don't know exactly what year he's from but 2-300 years ago suicide was more common.
Shortly after Goethe published Die Leiden des jungen Werthers there was a wave of suicides in Europe.[1] Then, the pevailing culture held that, if you read a truly great piece of literature you should commit suicide because you had nothing left to live for.[2]
Maybe the culture shock Kat and the forum are experiencing is not because it's a difference between a human and a robot culture but because it's a difference between 21st and Xth Century culture? That's my guess.
[1] A search of the Internet suggests that the year of publication was 1774. [2] Done from memory (my memory is not exactly reliable) of discussion programmes on Radio 4.
|
|
|
Post by Polly Plummer on Jun 21, 2011 14:38:18 GMT
This debate about culture reminded that that robot was probably a product of his time. We don't know exactly what year he's from but 2-300 years ago suicide was more common. Shortly after Goethe published Die Leiden des jungen Werthers there was a wave of suicides in Europe.[1] Then, the pevailing culture held that, if you read a truly great piece of literature you should commit suicide because you had nothing left to live for.[2] Maybe the culture shock Kat and the forum are experiencing is not because it's a difference between a human and a robot culture but because it's a difference between 21st and Xth Century culture? That's my guess. [1] A search of the Internet suggests that the year of publication was 1774. [2] Done from memory (my memory is not exactly reliable) of discussion programmes on Radio 4. This is an extremely good point. I think maybe older cultures were also more focused on serving their purpose. As other posters have pointed out, Frankbot has done this. He's happy. He's at peace. Sounds good to me. He sounds like a parent who knows they have taught their child all they need to know. And yes, I am absolutely tearing up from this chapter. It has a cutting kind of truth to it that I usually find in the works of Gaiman and Lewis.
|
|
starkruzr
New Member
Banned : Rule 1
Posts: 35
|
Post by starkruzr on Jun 21, 2011 20:37:38 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. I love this post so hard. It reminds me a bit of the inconsistency of the story around Kat and her eventually-avian boyfriend. His parents took "'Kay" while playing XBox to mean "Yes, by all means, reduce my intelligence and lifespan to that of a bird, effectively killing me." The lunacy and brazen nonsensicality of the premise boggle the mind.
|
|
|
Post by Tom Siddell on Jun 21, 2011 21:25:42 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. I love this post so hard. It reminds me a bit of the inconsistency of the story around Kat and her eventually-avian boyfriend. His parents took "'Kay" while playing XBox to mean "Yes, by all means, reduce my intelligence and lifespan to that of a bird, effectively killing me." The lunacy and brazen nonsensicality of the premise boggle the mind. Wow, you're still on about that? Get the hell off my forum.
|
|
alik
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by alik on Jun 21, 2011 22:37:48 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. I love this post so hard. It reminds me a bit of the inconsistency of the story around Kat and her eventually-avian boyfriend. His parents took "'Kay" while playing XBox to mean "Yes, by all means, reduce my intelligence and lifespan to that of a bird, effectively killing me." The lunacy and brazen nonsensicality of the premise boggle the mind. Who said his intelligence or life span was drained? there are dragons for christsakes
|
|
|
Post by fuzzysocks on Jun 22, 2011 1:27:32 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? Would human being react the same way towards life if we lived forever? We live because we know we are going to die. We do things and experience things for the pursuit of knowledge, pleasure, and what have you... but ultimately there is death on the back of our minds, there is the aspect of time in the equation, and an appreciation of the things around us because of death. If there was no death, would we TRULY appreciate the small things? You can say we would... and certainly, I'm sure we would appreciate the beautiful things... but I don't think it would have the same sort of appreciation we have for them now... knowing that those things around us have a limited life span... knowing that they take the time to strive to be wonderful and beautiful before they inevitably crumble away. It's not being bored to be perfectly honest to living forever, but becoming numb. Would you still feel fear? Exhilaration? Excitement? Would you really live your life to the fullest? You can say you would, you can say you would do everything... but would there be a fulfillment? I personally, don't think one would.
|
|
|
Post by mudmaniac on Jun 22, 2011 2:16:47 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. Everyone wants to live forever. Nobody wants to live forever as a wheelchair bound 110 year old who can barely see nor hear. Especially not when the wheelchair breaks.
|
|
|
Post by darlos9d on Jun 22, 2011 2:47:00 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? Would human being react the same way towards life if we lived forever? We live because we know we are going to die. We do things and experience things for the pursuit of knowledge, pleasure, and what have you... but ultimately there is death on the back of our minds, there is the aspect of time in the equation, and an appreciation of the things around us because of death. If there was no death, would we TRULY appreciate the small things? You can say we would... and certainly, I'm sure we would appreciate the beautiful things... but I don't think it would have the same sort of appreciation we have for them now... knowing that those things around us have a limited life span... knowing that they take the time to strive to be wonderful and beautiful before they inevitably crumble away. It's not being bored to be perfectly honest to living forever, but becoming numb. Would you still feel fear? Exhilaration? Excitement? Would you really live your life to the fullest? You can say you would, you can say you would do everything... but would there be a fulfillment? I personally, don't think one would. Actually, this reminds me of an interesting point: in all likelihood, TRUE immortality is a complete impossibility for intelligent creatures. The reason for this is the very implications that "living forever" holds. If you exist infinitely, then there is an infinite chance that at some point, something fatal will happen to you, in some form or fashion. To put it more simply: eventually, some freak occurrence WILL kill you. Therefor, immortality is impossible. With this in mind, we can come to the conclusion that nobody will ever forget about the ever-present threat of death. Futhermore, if everybody can live for a very long time, everybody becomes a vast well of knowledge and experience. In that situation, death becomes even MORE keen in a way, even if it's less of a general threat. Though, stepping back a bit further, I'd say that just like how there are plenty of lazy people in the world despite the fact that they're perfectly aware that they'll die some day, there would be plenty of "immortals" who would likely spend their time wisely with no need of a threat of death to spur them forward. So if death could actually be eliminated 100%, saying "we need death to appreciate life" is, to me, a fairly weak argument. Similar to "life would get boring," I feel like it's one of those things we tell ourselves so we can try and feel not so bad about the fact that we all have to die one day. Everyone wants to live forever. Nobody wants to live forever as a wheelchair bound 110 year old who can barely see nor hear. Especially not when the wheelchair breaks. Well I can't really argue with that. When talking about longevity, I kind of assume that usually people would NOT end up in such a state. But, if this is the kind of situation the old robots were actually facing, I can actually see some logic behind wanting to just shut themselves down. It'd be nice if frank would just SAY that though, as opposed to waxing philosophically about it.
|
|
|
Post by theweatherman on Jun 22, 2011 11:35:29 GMT
Well perhaps it's a case of "This future is so different from my time that I don't want to change myself to fit in. I'm happy as I was and I'm willing to die." instead of just "Old now, bye." Eh, we all look towards life and death differently, for example I believe in my lifespan immortality will be discovered and/or developed. Therefore I can live however I want
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Jun 22, 2011 20:40:30 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. I don't know about that. Consider three humans, all born in 1600. Primo, for some mysterious reason (NOT involving any sort of undead!), simply never died. He's still walking around, just as he has pretty much every day for 411 years. Segundo was kidnapped by aliens in the last weeks of 1630 and put into cryogenic sleep. He was just woken up and returned to our planet yesterday. He has been technically alive for 411 years, but did not in any way experience the time from 1631 through 2010 and did not age during that period. Tertio was also kidnapped by aliens in 1630, but was shoved into a time machine. He did not exist at all from 1631 until yesterday, but is still the same person who lived from 1600 to 1630. How old is each of these characters? Primo is clearly 411 (and old), but Segundo and Tertio...? Should they also be regarded as being 411 years old? Or are they 30 years old? Or some other answer? And are they the same age?
|
|
|
Post by jasmijn on Jun 22, 2011 20:52:20 GMT
Actually, this reminds me of an interesting point: in all likelihood, TRUE immortality is a complete impossibility for intelligent creatures. The reason for this is the very implications that "living forever" holds. If you exist infinitely, then there is an infinite chance that at some point, something fatal will happen to you, in some form or fashion. To put it more simply: eventually, some freak occurrence WILL kill you. Therefor, immortality is impossible. An infinite chance? I am not sure how one would get above 1, much less to infinity, with probabilities... And it's not necessarily true. Suppose, in a "magical universe" (that is, we're not bounded by the laws of nature of our universe, and we can change the rules for the sake of argument -- except those of logic, of course), we could make freak accidents non-occurring, or simply make our immortal invulnerable to anything. Then the only thing limiting would be the end of the universe, which we could avoid by letting our magical universe never end, or be circular of some kind.
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jun 23, 2011 0:49:27 GMT
well, the planet isn't expected to live infinitely, the sun is going to go out... what happens if you live infinitely while everything is not there anymore?
|
|
|
Post by smjjames on Jun 23, 2011 1:22:55 GMT
warrl: What does realativity have to do with this page? As for Segundo, he would chronologically* be 411 years old, even if he was biologically under stasis and never aged. Tertio would be 30, obviously. *Not counting for any possible relativity time wierdness that could have resulted from the alien ships near lightspeed travel or even FTL travel. well, the planet isn't expected to live infinitely, the sun is going to go out... what happens if you live infinitely while everything is not there anymore? Unless you're an ominipotent immortal god who resides in a heaven realm/dimension/universe/whatever you want to call it. OR said immortal went off in a starship elsewhere long ago. Still, I see your point. Realistically though, the Earth is going to become a charred ball of rock as the sun enters the red giant phase. So, even if our hypothetical immortal really were truly immortal, it would be a hellish place.
|
|
|
Post by TBeholder on Jun 23, 2011 9:22:16 GMT
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 guess, it all depends on the latter part. That, and she, understandably, doesn't quite percieve as "just a machine" philosophizing golems. the insinuation that "after a certain point in time, dying is generally the morally correct choice" is what kinda bothers me. And where it is? They could go on for a long time, no doubt, but forever? With no one to understand how to repair them at that. The only person that has come close was born hundreds of years after Diego's death. Machines break down too, and they don't get the benefit of self repairing bodies. But repairable, as long as that core is not broken. Its protection is already decent (a golem have to run right with that window into something long enough to get damage) and if they don't require a specific sort of the glass there, it can be made even better, up to bulletproof, with a little effort. So yeah, they are near-eternal. But this won't help with being badly out of water and feeling like a rhino on IC factory all the time, of course - this can only get worse.
|
|
|
Post by balsamah on Jun 23, 2011 14:24:23 GMT
Frankenbot, we hardly knew ye.
|
|
|
Post by Georgie L on Jun 23, 2011 14:34:08 GMT
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? It's in the last few chapters of the novels It happens in The Kindly Ones if I remember rightly. The brief lives and all the other stories are all a build up to the events of that volume. I shall shut up now as I am too keen to give spoilers.
|
|