time flies like an arrow

Buckminster Fuller reminds us that we humans are robots with AI controls...

What is Man?

A self-balancing, 28-jointed adapter-base biped; an electro-mechanical reduction-plant, integral with segregated stowages of special energy extracts in storage batteries, for subsequent actuation of thousands of hydraulic and pneumatic pumps, with motors attached; 62,000 miles of capillaries; millions of warning signal, railroad and conveyor systems; crushers and cranes (of which the arms are magnificent 23-jointed affairs with self-surfacing and lubricating systems, and a universally distributed telephone system needing no service for 70 years if well managed); the whole, extraordinarily complex mechanism guided with exquisite precision from a turret in which are located telescopic and microscopic self-registering and recording range finders, a spectroscope, et cetera, the turret control being closely allied with an air conditioning intake-and-exhaust, and a main fuel intake.

Within the few cubic inches housing the turret mechanisms, there is room, also, for two sound-wave and sound-direction-finder recording diaphragms, a filing and instant reference system, and an expertly devised analytical laboratory large enough not only to contain minute records of every last and continual event of up to 70 years' experience, or more, but to extend, by computation and abstract fabrication, this experience with relative accuracy into all corners of the observed universe. There is, also, a forecasting and tactical plotting department for the reduction of future possibilities and probabilities to generally successful specific choice.

Finally, the whole structure is not only directly and simply mobile on land and in water, but, indirectly and by exquisite precision of complexity, mobile in air, and, even in the intangible, mathematically sensed electrical "world," by means of the extension of the primary integral mechanism to secondary mechanical compositions of its own devising, operable either by a direct mechanical hook-up with the device, or by indirect control through wired or wire-less electrical impulses.

from Chapter 4, "The Phantom Captain," "Nine Chains To The Moon." by Buckminster Fuller 1938

Here, Buckminster Fuller describes “The Phantom Captain” which operates our human body. Not sure if this is the same as the Autonomic Nervous System or something more metaphysical. It operates independently from our personality/ consciousness. Various religions and psychologists speak of multiple mind circuits animating the body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomic_nervous_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-circuit_model_of_consciousness

Buckminster Fuller The Phantom Captain

Common to all such "human" mechanisms - and without which they are imbecile contraptions - is their guidance by a phantom captain.

This phantom captain has neither weight nor sensorial tangibility, as has often been scientifically proven by careful weighing operations at the moment of abandonment of the ship by the phantom captain, i.e., at the instant of "death." He may be likened to the variant of polarity dominance in our bipolar electric world which, when balanced and unit, vanishes as abstract unity I or O. With the phantom captain's departure, the mechanism becomes inoperative and very quickly disintegrates into basic chemical elements.

This captain has not only an infinite self-identity characteristic but, also, an infinite understanding. He has furthermore, infinite sympathy with all captains of mechanisms similar to his ....

An illuminating rationalization indicated that captains - being phantom, abstract, infinite, and bound to other captains by a bond of understanding as proven by their recognition of each other's signals and the meaning thereof by reference to a common direction (toward "perfect") - are not only all related, but are one and the same captain. Mathematically, since characteristics of unity exist, they cannot be non-identical.

@jleo: Regarding human sales personnel at shops: I'm always astonished how little most of them even try to demonstrate any usefulness. 9 out of 10 times, when I ask any question, the answer is always the same: "Only what you see on the shelves!" - which I think is the short version of "Don't try asking me questions - my understanding is that I am paid to linger around in this shop, not to know anything about our products, not even which products we sell. Please tell my boss to replace me with a robot or close presence stores all together."

When I recently bought my new 5k€ OLED TV, it was again like that: I asked for the specific model number I knew I wanted to see/buy, and I had read about the availability in the shop I visited on their web site. And still, the two sales clerks I approached were first denying the presence of that product in their shop, then reluctantly looked it up in their inventory system, and (after being corrected on a typo) finally found it. Of course, they didn't know shit about its specifications. Really, those guys need to be replaced by some automated "type in your model number and be directed to the shelf position" terminal.

Regarding Mitsuku: Failed to provide a plausible answer to my very first question. Me: "What do you see to the right of your computer monitor?" Mitsuku: "I see you talking to me." - fail.

Regarding http://apps.liveperson.com/apps/automated-customer-service-agent - I guess there is good reason they do not provide a "click here to have our automated agent help you"-button.

Also, when some "live chat" wants me to enter personal information (address and such) before answering a single question, I know that I would waste my time with a stupid data collection system that is making money by feeding address data bases, but won't provide useful answers.

I didn't think Ex Machina was about AI at all. It was about subjugation and objectification of women... like porn actresses, girls in strip clubs or adult night clubs in metal cages or glass boxes paid to strip for money, or those unfortunate souls caught up in human trafficking ... in the internet age. They're not human to the men who stare at them and are titillated by them, they're sex bots even if they are flesh and blood humans... programed to perform for their male masters.

Nathan is the woman's captor and Caleb is the voyeur who doesn't stop to think (until towards the end of the film) why Ava is in a glass cage and can't be let out. He should have demanded Nathan release her or did it on his own (he is a skilled programmer no matter what Nathan thinks as shown towards the climax of the story) even after he knew she was a thinking, feeling entity and that Nathan was a sick creep, but he didn't. He first thought of Ava as someone from one of his porn fantasies... in fact... Nathan created her image specifically from the girls Caleb got off on, and who are also caged in a way behind a computer monitor.

Ava's empathetic patterns have been warped by her Frankenstein creator to feel nothing for men because she (and her fellow robotic sisters) was so ill treated (even sexually and psychologically abused) by a man or father figure. The screenplay is very Mary Shelley in that regard.

@JohnTollwannabe I agree... partially. To my eyes, Ava is a metaphor, not so much to do with A.I. but with "creation"... yet Nathan uses and fucks "his" creations. In the moment that a complex organism (even if made out of binary code) starts to develop conscience it would not be fair to call them machines, neither would have to respond to any "higher authority" other than her/his own will, even less to be used or slaved by anyone whatsoever. Yes, the story might also be seen as a status quo argument of our sexist society... but there are enough signs to read it as an use of present situation in an fable's fashion analogy. It's like and inverted cast of the biblical Eva. In that (proposed) scenario I suggested that we are the ones which should be Turing tested; are we humans?

I like how Rob Miles (video above) talks about evolution and A.I. the local minimum and optimization processes... and the absurd scaling of those optimization processes through multiple ( infinite -random - aleatory - improvised - chaotic) dimensions. I have a friend that studied at MIT and once, very dumbed down so I could understand it, he explained why was so ridiculously hard to make a (software based) self-conscience thing. But sci-fi can jump over this to study/play within what if? conjectures

@karl, I hear U, not too high up in my list anyway. There's a lot of stuff that I don't know, but for me Caruth's ($7000) Primer with maybe Duncan Jones' ($5 million) Moon are about the best sci-fi (how they are proposed and carried on - taking in account and balanced with budget) of 21st century... Yet Aurora's final sequence is burnt in the depths of my soul. Remember being quite impressed with Cargo ($160.000), from same year liked the dirty starting point of Cold Souls. I would have to check release's date of some great japanese flicks from the turn of the milenium. Also loved the sliperyness of Time Crimes and nonsensical funny Extraterrestre, but I highly doubt other people engage them the same as I'm quite biased ,-)

BTW I completelly forgot Eva, Kike Maíllo's 2011 film about an A.I. girl.
I went to it more 'cause of Daniel Brühl than any thing else. Watchable

 
and a short one for the road

Well, I'm not convinced there a "feminist" message in this movie, but it's a boring, implausible and not-worth-watching movie no matter whether it was meant to convey such a message or not.

Regarding movies in general, stereotypes of men are as present there as stereotypes of women. Especially men doing everything, including risking their life / spending their wealth / ridiculing themselves to mate a certain female.