Slashdot Mirror


The Science of the Matrix

KamehamehaWarrior writes "Peter B. Lloyd, author of Taking The Red Pill: Science, Philosophy, and Religion in The Matrix, believes that many of the plot developments in "The Matrix" that seem to contradict the laws of physics, biology, etc. can actually be explained with a closer look at the science. He addresses issues such as "Can humans really be an energy source? How does the Matrix know what fried chicken taste like? Why do the rebels have to enter and exit the Matrix via a telephone system (that doesn't actually exist)?""

32 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. Article helps with suspension of disbelief by dtolton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a truly impressive article, even if this guy does have a
    little too much free time on his hands.

    The breakdown of the Bio-Port is wonderful. It's really a
    fantastic explanation of how the Bio-Port could work, and what
    it would be doing.

    The Red pill, I've always seen this as similar to some type of
    virus that is injected into the system. His deconstruction is
    similar in flavor to what I thought.

    The power plant is great. Rather than humans being the energy
    source, they are a giant Beowulf cluster. Maybe Beowulf (the
    hero) was the first Beowulf after all.

    I thought Entering and Exiting the Matrix was interesting, but I
    didn't find the arguments as compelling in this section for some
    reason. There just seem to be too many special exceptions for
    my taste.

    Overall this article has some real potential, and definately
    helps with the suspension of disbelief process that is so
    crucial to any story telling. A bit of a warning though, it's
    long, really long.

    --

    Doug Tolton

    "The destruction of a value which is, will not bring value to that which isn't." -John Galt
    1. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by st1nky187 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the article is right in saying that the machines are using human minds to monitor their fusion power plants, presumably the machines are somewhat lacking in processing power. Why then, can they create a computer generated world to occupy humans minds to distract them from their monitoring of the fusion plants. Also wouldn't creating a virtual world for people to occupy mess with their ability to monitor anything but the virtual world. This all seems really poorly thought out beyond the desire to make some cash.

    2. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would seem that just keeping them sedated would have been somewhat more practical...might have made for a lousy movie though...

      Neo: zZzZzZzZzZzZ?
      Trinity: zZzZzZzZzZ!
      Neo: zZzZ ZzZz???

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    3. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by sczimme · · Score: 5, Funny


      More like this:

      Neo: zZzZzZzZzZzZ?
      Trinity: zZzZzZzZzZ!

      Neo: zZzZ... whoa.

      :-)

      --
      I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
    4. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by brianosaurus · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't think the movie goes into it, but one of the earlier versions of the Matrix did use cattle. It was way more efficient, and the simulation (which consisted of little more than large fields of grass) were much simpler.

      After a few years, however, the machines got tired of waiting for Star Wars Galaxies to be released, so they built the human version of the Matrix.

      --
      blog
    5. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The guy's "explanation" of consciousness, though, is total junk. He thinks he knows what consciousness is, and why computers can't have it (but quantum computers can). He never explains why quantum computers could have it though (it's in the "implementation," he says). He talks about it as if philosophers had solved the problem of consciousness decades ago and stupid scientists and engineers just can't realize the fact. He trots out the same old tired justifications based on the fact that computers are deterministic, dressed up in some new language. Give me a break! The question of whether computers can be conscious has not been answered, and may never be answered. I don't even think a suitable definition of the term has been found and agreed upon. And if a person ever does answer the question for real, I can guarantee it won't be a philosopher. Most likely it will be the computer scientist who programs the first conscious computer.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    6. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      [the following contains a minor Matrix spoiler]

      This brings up an interesting thought: Why the hell are the machines allowing the Earth's atmosphere to be breathable? Since it would seem the humans' "scorching of the skies" killed off all conventional life on earth other than the humans and the machines, and the machines don't need oxygen, and the only humans that the machines need alive are incased in liquid, couldn't the machines just win a huge victory by unexpectedly flooding the earth's atmosphere with something unbreathable?

      Then again, maybe that is exactly what the machines did? We never see any humans go outside during the Matrix, and the only human city is underground. There's that bit at the end where the Nebucannazar (sp?) gets cut open, but we don't see what happens after the EMP blast; maybe the instant the squiddies are dead, the remaining living humans on the hovercraft have to go running for the oxygen masks.

    7. Re:Article helps with suspension of disbelief by perljon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Des Cartes, I think, talks about different levels of reality. He places god at the ultimate reality, and everything else has equal or lesser reality. Also, something can only create something at or less than it's reality. Therefore, computers may have consciousness, but it is less real than human consciousness. A program is only aware of several measurements of reality where a human is aware of a lot more. (ie, a program might be able read a light sensor, and a pressure sensor where a human can sea, feel, hear, taste, smell, etc.

      If you believe in God/Angles, perhaps, they have 100's of sensory inputs reading stuff we aren't even aware exists. (ie, a computer program who only has one light sensor with it's limited consciousness will assume all of reality is what comes from that light sensor. humans will assume all of reality exists in light, sound, smell, and touch.)

      Also, if you think about the religious explanation of existance, god said let there be light, and there was light. god said that there be land, and sky, and there was land and sky. god said let there be animals, and there was animals. sounds like a hacker working in the wee hours of the morning building simcity. and if god exists, that's really what we are. we don't even exists in his reality. we are way less real than him, limited in knowledge, senses, and ability. the same kind of limitation's a computer program would have. also, when jesus comes down to earth, it would be like us entering in a matrix like fashion our sim city game.

      And if you take satan's anger at human-kind, it is understandable. it's like your robot being pissed at you for playing sim city all the time. it tries to destroy your computer, so you lock it in the closet. and when you're done playing sim city, your going to pull out some of your favorite sims and place them into robot bodies.

      --
      This isn't the sig you are looking for... Carry on...
  2. Google Cache by bckspc · · Score: 4, Informative

    Three comments and already Slashdotted? Damn.

    Here's the Google cache.

  3. It's all good! by Lukano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anything matrix related is good by me. I've been reading a lot more of the philosophy section of the website lately, and I've also been reading any posts like the one above regarding the theory and science behind the movies/plot/story.

    To be honest, I had no idea "how deep the rabbit hole" really went. The Wachowski brothers are brilliant IMHO, and have one of the most immersive universes I've ever seen. The movies aside, and franchisements out the window, this stands to be one of the most engrossing and amazing "thresholds" of our timeframe.

    And although the naysayers might argue, the Matrix is to me, and many of my friends/family/colleauges, as Star Wars was to the generation two decades ago.

    1. Re:It's all good! by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "And although the naysayers might argue, the Matrix is to me, and many of my friends/family/colleauges, as Star Wars was to the generation two decades ago. "

      Out of curiosity, how many people didn't like it? I enjoyed the Matrix when I first saw it, but it really doesn't survive the "Let's drag it out once a year and watch it." test with me. Just curious, anybody else feel that way too?

      Not trying to troll here, I just don't see it as the "Star Wars of the late nineties" if it doesn't survive. I'd rather assign that title to the Two Towers.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:It's all good! by sameb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uh, it's not unique -- atleast the idea isn't. Ever read Plato? It's in The Republic -- The Allegory of the Cave.

      That's the Matrix preloaded.

    3. Re:It's all good! by Lukano · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But how many of todays popular culture addicts would sit down with a copy of Plato's works and read through it? Yes, it may very well enlighten them, and yes they'd learn a lot from it... But hell, these are the same people that watch WWE wrestling religously. :P

  4. Am I missing something? by Xformer · · Score: 4, Funny

    And here I thought that they didn't know what chicken tasted like... hence it tasting like everything. Makes you wonder if someone was paying attention or not...

    And no, I can't RTFA... it's /.-ed already (doh!).

    --
    All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.
  5. HERE IS THE TEXT OF THE ARTICLE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Please mod me up, I need to work on my karma.

    GLITCHES IN THE MATRIX . . . AND HOW TO FIX THEM
    by Peter B. Lloyd

    Why, exactly, do the rebels have to enter the Matrix via the phone system (which after all doesn't physically exist)? And what really happens when Neo takes the red pill (which also doesn't really exist)? And how does the Matrix know what fried chicken tastes like? Technologist and philosopher Peter Lloyd answers these questions and more.

    To be published in Taking the Red Pill: Science, Philosophy and Religion in The Matrix (Ben Bella Books, April 2003). Published on KurzweilAI.net March 3, 2003.

    As the essays throughout this book demonstrate, the Wachowski Brothers designed The Matrix to work at many levels. They carefully thought through the film's philosophical underpinnings, religious symbolism, and scientific speculations. But there are a few riddles in The Matrix, aspects of the film that seem nonsensical or defy the laws of science. These apparent glitches include:

    The Bioport--how can a socket in your head control your senses? How can it be inserted without killing you?

    The Red Pill--since the pill is virtual, how can it throw Neo out of the Matrix?

    The Power Plant--can people really be an energy source?

    Entering and Exiting the Matrix--why do the rebels need telephones to come and go?

    The Bugbot--what's the purpose of the bugbot?

    Perceptions in the Matrix--how do the machines know what fried chicken tastes like?

    Neo's Mastery of the Avatar--how can Neo fly?

    Consciousness and the Matrix--are the machines in the Matrix alive and conscious? Or are they only machines, intelligent but mindless?

    This essay addresses these questions and shows how these seeming glitches can be resolved.

    THE BIOPORT
    Can the machines really create a virtual world through a bioport? And how does it work? The bioport is a way of giving the Matrix computers full access to the information channels of the brain. It is located at the back of the neck--probably between the occipital bone at the base of the skull, and the first neck vertebra. Wiring would best enter through the soft cartilage that cushions the skull on the spinal column, and pass up through the natural opening that lets the spinal cord into the skull. This avoids drilling through bone, and maintains the mechanical and biological integrity of the skull's protection. A baby fitted with a bioport can easily survive the operation.

    The bioport terminates in a forest of electrodes spanning the volume of the brain. In a newborn, the sheathed mass of wire filaments is pushed into the head through the bioport. On reaching the skull cavity, the sheath would be released, and the filaments spread out like a dandelion, gently permeating the developing cortex. Nested sheaths would release a branching structure of filamentary electrodes. As each sheathed wire approaches the surface of the brain, it releases thousands of smaller electrodes. In the neonate, brain cells have few synaptic connections, so the slender electrodes can penetrate harmlessly.

    With its electrodes distributed throughout the brain, the Matrix could deliver its sensory signals in either of two places: at the sensory portals or deep inside the brain's labyrinth. For example, vision could be driven by electrodes on the optic nerves where they enter the brain. Artificial signals would then pass into the visual cortex at the back of the brain, which would handle them as if they had come from the eyes. Correspondingly, outgoing motor nerves would also have electrodes at the boundary of brain and skull. This simple design mirrors the natural state of the brain most closely. It is not, however, the only possibility. Electrodes could alternatively be attached in the depths of the brain, beyond the first stages of the visual cortex. This would greatly simplify the data processing. In normal perception, most of the incoming information isn't processed; information you aren't paying a

  6. Um by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This guy has too much time on his hands.

    Basically he takes the movie he liked, the ideals and the perceptions, and he fills in the blanks.

    Why do they use telephones?

    Answer: It's a movie.
    His Answer: They put network addresses on all data points along the matrix and blah blah blah

    How does the blue/red pills work?

    Answer: It's a movie.
    His Answer: "the avatar's software module must be able to accept instructions to cancel out any given sensory input."

    And, lastly, my favorite:

    What/How does the Bugbot do/work?

    Answer: It's a fucking movie.
    His Answer: "Trinity says that Neo is "dangerous" to them before he is cleaned. We can infer that the bugbot is actually a munition, probably a semtex device that will detonate when it hears Morpheus's voice, killing both Neo and Morpheus and everyone else in the room."

    This guy is just making shit up. Yet you know somewhere somebody is going to really put some thought and invest some time into thinking about this bullshit. Jeez. Where's Penn and Teller when you need em?

    1. Re:Um by asreal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Obviously you've never worked on a big storytelling project.

      There are a lot of things within the story world that the creators spend a lot of time thinking about. When it's well done, that thinking goes well beyond "wouldn't red or blue pills be cool?" to actual thought about how the people in the real world could track down people in an immense simulation. Obviously the science won't be perfect, but don't think for a second that the creators of the Matrix of lots of other scifi films don't have a good idea how their world operates.

      Projects like The Matrix start out with "woah man, what if the world were just a simulation?" and from there evolve into functional worlds. Machines took over and wired up humans. Why wire them up instead of killing them all? For power. Why not use solar energy or some other source? Sky was darkened. Why not give them a perfect world they wouldn't want to escape from? Their brains won't accept it. This kind of question and answer is what leads to stories.

      Storytelling is important. It has been for years. The people who stop to look at how good stories are told are the ones who will be able to tell stories of their own.

  7. The Matrix Computer by Vireo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Evidently, the fusion is the real source of energy that the machines use. So what are humans doing in the power plant? Controlled fusion is a subtle and complex process, requiring constant monitoring and micromanaging. The human brain, on the other hand, is a superb parallel computer. Most likely, the machines are harnessing the spare brainpower of the human race as a colossal distributed processor for controlling the nuclear fusion reactions.

    ... And what if the computer on which the Matrix itself run was a vastly parallel biocomputer composed of billions of human brains? That would be an even better explanation IMHO.

    1. Re:The Matrix Computer by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This idea provides a neat solution to the problem of how the humans can outperform the computers in the Matrix, suggested above...

      Consider this suggestion of running the Matrix process on the human brain as if it was a node in a distributed cluster. There's a great deal of Matrix information stored in the brain, but there's also a human consciousness alongside it in there, unaware that there's data flowing through your unused neurons. "Freeing your mind" could consist of gaining the ability to allow your consciousness to attach to the Matrix simulation the same way a debugger attaches to an existing process (or an aimbot attaches to CS), gain access to its data, and start poking values. The AIs would have to allow individual nodes to be authoritative to realize any net gain, so any changes you imagine to your own Matrix node would be propagated to others as reality, and you would be able to "will" your strength to increase the same way your aimbot can "will" perfect headshots at 100m. This would also explain why hacking the Matrix involves so much activity that resembles meditation/concentration techniques.

  8. Since when is... by inode_buddha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "willful suspension of disbelief" uncommon? How many times a day do we already do this, and why?

    IMHO, it's a lot more common than many people are willing to admit; and the mental/philosophical "construct" we use every day is every bit as large and fascinating as the "construct" used in the movie.

    Classical examples from science: At one time, the Earth was substantially flat. It also revolved around the Sun. QED.

    It will be interesting to see if science per se can make anything of this, let alone go beyond its own limits. All I'm saying is that maybe the limits of science are actually the limits of the mind, given a material form.

    --
    C|N>K
  9. Why do they get in through the phone system? by void* · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I always just figured that they planted an exploit that allows them to hook their equipment into the simulation in the code that simulates the phone system, and the 'getting in/out through the phone system that doesn't exist' was just how it manifested itelf within the simulation.

    No big deal. :)

    --


    Code or be coded.
  10. Re:But, does the article explain.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny
    But, does the article explain how such a terrible film like The Matrix can be such a big thing to so many people?

    That needs explanation? Okay, I'll break it down for you:

    1. Trinity's breasts
    2. Guns. Lots of Guns.
    3. Gratuitous kung-fu scenes
    4. Trinity's breasts
    5. Pseudo-science which is readily comprehensible lets the hard-of-thinking think that they are intelligent.
    6. Pseudo-philosophy which is readily comprehensible lets the hard-of-thinking think that they are intelligent.
    7. Trinity's breasts
    8. ???
    9. Profit (Profit more once sequels released)
    See? It had everything you need for mass marked appeal, and none of that 'having to think' crap that makes films unpopular.
    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Well, if it helps ya along.... by vkg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We all know (don't we?) that The Matrix is basically a somewhat mismashed version of the Perennial Philosophy. Life is a dream, God is real, Synchronicity is normal. The Matrix (like Stranger in a Strange Land) adds some SF tropes, and does a better job than most of presenting the material in an interesting way, by picking up the gnostic tropes of the Demiurge, an evil creator god who runs the system.

    The interesting thing is how powerfully The Matrix affects people who watch it. Much like ritual theater has done through the ages, some kind of genuine awakening (not in the Buddhist sense, necessarily) seems to often occur.

    One question is, of course, how to maintain the awakening. How to stay aware that, in some sense, life is real-and-unreal.

    Another is the status of the "demiurge" - the thread (or blanket) of evil which we find in the world around us. It's not for nothing that Agents look like people from the government; there has ever been the conciet that government somehow causes spiritual enslavement, rather than being the mere result of it.

    Of course, for what it's worth, I recon that the people are sleeping because it is night-time.

  12. Someone should've told... by mqRakkis · · Score: 4, Funny

    mr. Lloyd that The Matrix is actually a movie and not a documentary ;-)

  13. "Combined with a form of fusion" by mcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some thoughts on the whole idea that keeping a bunch of humans alive to use them as an energy source doesn't make any sense, becuase conservation of energy demands you'd put more energy into keeping the humans alive than you could get out:

    Question: Isn't it true that a nuclear fusion reaction, if you can figure out how to make one, takes an absolutely fantastic amount of energy to initiate and maintain? I know nothing about nuclear physics, but what i've read seems to indicate that the point of fusion is that you put a fantastic amount of energy in and you get a fantastic amount of energy back. The problem so far is that no one has figured out how to get out more energy than you put in.

    So wouldn't it be logical to say that the huge mass of humans *are*, in fact, a net energy drain because energy is needed to create whatever protein the humans use for IV foodstuffs, but they are needed and maintained becuase they can at any time desired be used briefly as a massive source to pull energy from? Note that Morpheus doesn't say that humans are used as generators; he says they're used as batteries. Wouldn't it make sense to suppose that perhaps the human race encased in the Matrix is just there in case the sustained fusion reaction the machines are actually using to generate their power ever goes out and has to be restarted, or in case the machines need to start up a new reactor? Meaning basically, the Matrix is nothing more than a giant UPS? Does this make any sense at all?

    None of this, of course, explains why the machines, given a level of technology that would make it possible to build both Zion and the Matrix, wouldn't just harness tidal energy as a power source! Did the americans finally blow up the moon or something?

    Anyway, as far as the article's parallell processing thing goes, that seems really silly to me. If the machines have figured out how to use human brains as processors, wouldn't they build the machines themselves using human brains as processors to run the AIs on? You could claim "how do you know they aren't", but i'll tell you how i know they aren't: if they can control biological material to that extent, then they can make machines that the EMP blasts are useless against. I do, however, really like the article author's insinuation that Morpheus actually has no idea what the Matrix is for, and erroneously believes it's a power plant.

    (One totally non-power-related possibility of what the Matrix could be used for: possibly the machines really just don't like the idea of making the human race extinct. They don't want the humans running around in the real world and working against the machines' designs, but they're for whatever reason not okay with just wiping the humans out; maybe they don't actually hate the humans, they just don't want the humans to be a threat. Maybe the Matrix is just a means of preservation of the human race, one that the machines get nothing positive out of except as a memento of their creators. (Hitler's original plans for the holocaust apparently stated, after everything was done, the world was conquered, and the holocaust was complete, that one single village of Jews should be left alive, sealed off from the outside world, and allowed to simply live on their lives. In Hitler's warped mind this was supposed to be some kind of preserved-in-amber cultural museum of a dead race, just so future aryan generations could know they existed. I cannot remember the exact details of this and may be partially misremembering it in that there wouldn't actually be any living people in this preserved-in-amber village. Does anyone know what i'm referring to? Anyway, possibly the Matrix is something of that sort.). Or, possibly, the machines actually believe they are working in the humans service and they put the humans into the matrix "for their own good", as some kind of highly warped overzealous implementation of Asimov's zeroth law, on the logic if the humans are trapped in a digital fantasyworld, if they knock themselves out with nuclear holoca

  14. HERE IS THE REST OF THE ARTICLE by User+956 · · Score: 4, Informative

    (continued where the parent got cut off) ... On the other hand, a creature might be profoundly stupid and still have subjective experiences.

    Agent Smith is an example of a machine that manifests humanlike behavior--which, if you witnessed such words and gestures in a human, you would immediately regard them as showing conscious emotions and volitions. Indeed, it is the immediacy of the interpretation that is deceptive. When you see someone laugh with joy, or scream in pain, you do not knowingly infer the person's mental state from those outward signs. Rather, it is as if you see the emotions directly. Yet, we know from accomplished actors that these signs of emotions can be faked. Therefore, you are indeed making an inference, albeit an automatic one. It is a job of philosophy to scrutinize such automatic inference. When you see another human being emoting, your inference is not based wholly on what you see, but also on background information (such as whether the person is acting on the stage). More fundamentally, you are relying on the reasonable assumption that the person's behavior arises from a biological brain just as yours does. Whenever those premises are undermined, you inevitably revise any inferences you have made from the emoting. If the emoting stops and people around you clap, you realize it was a piece of street theatre, and the person was only acting out those emotions. Or, if the person has a nasty car accident that breaks open his head, revealing electronic circuitry instead of a brain, you realize that it was only an android and you may conclude that it was only simulating emotions.

    A key step in the inference is the premise that the emotion plays a role in the causal loop that produces the outward words and gestures. If, instead, we have established that the observed words and gestures are wholly explained in some other way, without involving those emotions--then the inference collapses. The exterior emoting behavior then ceases to count as evidence for an interior emotional experience. If we know that an actor's words and gestures are scripted, then we cease to regard them as evidence for an inward mental state. Likewise, if we know that the words and gestures of an android or avatar are programmed, then they too cease to support any inference of a mental state.

    In an android, or in a software simulation of a human such as an agent, words and gestures are produced by millions of lines of programmed software. The software advances from instruction to instruction in a deterministic manner. Some instructions move pieces of information around inside memory, others execute calculations, others send motor signals to actuators in the body. Each line of code references objective memory locations and ports in the physical hardware. It may do so symbolically, and it may do so via sophisticated data structures, for example, using the tag "vision-field" to reference the stabilized and edge-enhanced data from the eye cams. Nevertheless, nowhere in the software suite does the code break out of that objective environment and refer to the enigmatic contents of consciousness. Nor could the programmer ever do so, since she would need an objective, third-person pointer to the conscious experience--which, being a subjective, first-person thing, cannot be labeled with such a pointer.

    Everything that the android says and does is fully accounted for by its software. There is no explanatory gap left for machine consciousness to fill. When the android says, "I see colors and feel emotions just as humans do," we know that those words are produced by deterministic lines of software that functions perfectly well without any involvement of consciousness. It is because of this that the android's emoting does not provide an iota of evidence for any interior mental life. All the outward signs are faked, and the programmer knows in comprehensive detail how they are faked.

    This point is systematically ignored by the mathematicians and engineers who enthuse about artif

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  15. Re:purpose of keeping humans around? by MsGeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    I understand that the original idea for what humans were used for was indeed as you said: parallel computing. However, the suits didn't understand what the Warchovski brothers were talking about when they got to that part of the script. Hence the lame-ass "power plant" explanation.

    It's gonna take a pretty amazing computer to equal or beat the processing power of a human brain. And, at the risk of repeating a cliche, "Imagine a beowulf cluster of those!"

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
  16. Loved the article til I got to this part... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In fact, Smith gives himself away when he says about the human world, "It's the smell, if there is such a thing . . . I can taste your stink and every time I do, I fear that I've somehow been infected by it." Smith's own logical integrity obliges him to doubt the existence of that noncomputable quality that humans talk about: the conscious experience of smell. When Smith says, ". . . the smell, if there is such a thing," he is exhibiting the mark of the automaton. This is corroborated when he then tells Morpheus that he can "taste your stink," revealing that Smith simply does not understand the differentiation of senses in the human mind. For a computer, data are interchangeable, but for a human, tastes, smells, colors, sounds, and feels, are irreducibly different. This fact eludes Agent Smith.

    Seems that the author lacks the perspective to get this last one right. Agent Smith comes from another world completely, and is trying to express emotions and concepts that are completely alien. What must it feel like to be a noncorporeal entity that usually resides in abstract softwareland, that once in awhile has to interact in a simulation so complex that it must be mapped to its own abstract reality-experience? I mean, here you are trying to explain to Morpheus your disgust (which you do somewhat well at) over a sensory experience that has no exact analog in the simulation? If a human could feel this, would it seem more like a taste, more like a smell? A combination of the two? He is doing this best to bridge a gap that none will ever do... Morpheus can hardly go to software-land to see what it feels like there. If he did, and tried to communicate, would the evil AI's be convinced that he isn't truly sentient, because he fails to completely understand their alien and unnameable sensory experiences, of which he himself interprets as something similar to smell/taste, or sight/hearing? The "sight/hearing" experience might actually be 7 distinct sensory experiences, which the human mind confuses as a single concept.

    I for one do believe that emergent properties in a complex or chaotic system can produce our much overhyped "consciousness". But even if they can't, the author himself suggests that the machines may be based on a technology that would allow it to happen. I can only assume that he is biased toward his own species, to biology... maybe that's not such a bad thing. But maybe if we had shown a little more tolerance, given a little more benefit of the doubt to Skynet, it would have decided it didn't have to nuke every damn one of us to survive.

    PS On the other hand, maybe we should build a manual kill switch into every candidate computer that isn't part of the blueprints or any electronically accessible record...

  17. Not the Full Story by Herkum01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    He failed to explain how people got hooked to the Matrix in the first place. However, I do the story. It came about that the machines were to having to draw people into connecting this plug into their head. Looking for the gullible of the human species, they bought AOL.

    With the largest number of customers in the world, they quickly assimilated them with offer's of DSL for $5.95 a month and said that they were phasing out dial-up service. All you needed was this chip in the back of your head. So while most people were discouraged because of the lack of dial-up they were too lazy to change their email addresses so they were the first. Next where the techies, and /.ers. While wary of giant companies the draw for cheap DSL access was too much and it was like lambs to the slaughter. Eventually with other service providers going out of business the Matrix bought them all up and integrated their clients too. The dream of world domination at hand.

    The holdouts were the 20% of people who declared that they "Would never need access." They were the one's that went on to establish Zion. They had to dig deep to escape the piles of AOL CD's that were being put into their mailboxes. It was the only way to preserve their sanity, or so the legend goes.

    So now you have the complete story, oh and I hire that one of the new agents in the movie is called Mr. Case, coincidence? I think not!

  18. Re:Matrix: Biblical References by lonesome+phreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, it's more of a Gnostic theme than a Orthodox Christianity theme. He's not Yeshua per say, but a normal human who have achieved gnosis via death and then rebirth (when he realizes he didn't really die, because it wasn't real in the first place). Jesus didn't really achieve gnosis in that way, it was a pre-planned end-run around the Blind One by Sophia. He achieved it when he was baptized (i.e. the "dove" descending on him). If you notice, he didn't start his major teachings until after that.

    The Matrix also closely follows Philip K. Dick's VALIS. Read that book if you find the ideas in the Matrix interesting...it has much more "source" material (like where various ideas in the book actually come from in antiquity), and it's parallels to The Matrix are rather obvious.

    If you find it REALLY interesting, check out sites like The Odyssey of Gnosis and so on.

    --
    Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
  19. Some Answers... by Doomrat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Q. Can humans really be an energy source?
    A. It's just a film.

    Q. How does the Matrix know what fried chicken taste like?
    A. It's just a film.

    Q. Why do the rebels have to enter and exit the Matrix via a telephone system (that doesn't actually exist)?
    A. It's just a film.