I don't know if his purpose was ever to destroy the machines to free the humans. In the end of the first movie he said "I don't know how it ends, but I know how it begins. I'm gonna hang up this phone. And I'm gonna show these people what you don't want them to see. Where we go from there, is up to you". So I think a truce was one of his possible goals.
What I find interesting is the contrast between the father program in the train station and Smith. The father program repeatedly reminds Neo that "love" is just a word, and so is "karma". These are belief systems that sustain many human, the difference is when they're reasons for someone to live they don't realize the constructs itself is artificial and meaningless. The indian father program sees the contradiction. But he embraces the concepts of love and karma. Smith sees the artificial construct to mean that the concepts don't exist. Thus the purpose is life is death. He's partially right. One purpose of life is to experience the end, as Neo does. Neo lets go of his grip on his life.
The question is what is the purpose of life. While some would rather have ignorance in a dogmatic belief system, like cypher. Some like the indian father program, chooses to live life for the experience and connections it offers. Smith is someone who has broken though the ignorance but has gained no perpective of the significance of existence. Neo shows the final problem, death, he shows you can't fight control forever, in the end there are things you can't choose. But that doesn't mean there's nothing that can be chosen.
I imagine both humans and software who wants out will be released. For humans they have to be ready to be unplugged otherwise they would end up like cypher did. So the freed people will continue showing the people what they don't know. Programs who chooses to exist even without a purpose will be allowed to exist in the matrix. Eventually the machines will be able to reclaim a power source not using humans. With the lasting peace the sky could be cleaned up, who knows.
Actually I thought it was a very complete ending. Here's why:
1. Trinity dies for no reason, as they don't use her death in any meaningful way.
Trinity's death is essential in helping Neo let go in the end of the battle with Smith. Neo saw death up close and personal, he lost the only thing he was living for, he realized that "everything that has a beginning has an end". Neo realized something at the end of this battle with Smith, I don't know what it is, still trying to absorb it all, but it helped him make up his decision to let go of his life.
2. The scene with the machines entering the outer hull of Zion was drawn out needlessly, as it contained no switching between the fight at Zion and Neo's plight (think: middle/end of ROTJ)
Agreed. However there is a pattern in each movie of actions sequences from different genres of video games. In this movie the defense of the hull was a reflection of mecha type games. The ship racing home was a reflection of space race games.
3. The fight scene with Smith/Baines and Neo in the Logos was completely extraneous.
This part was a plot filler scene. Neo had to understand that Smith was out of control and what he was after.
4. Neo's death in the end leaves the humans without a powerful weapon against the machines if they were to decide to attack the humans again. Contrast this with Star Wars and LotR, where the playing field is leveled at the end, or slightly in favor of the protagonists.
At the end of the movie the oracle talks about how she believes the peace can last only for as long as they can keep it. The end of this war is an end to a cycle of death and rebirth. The struggle bettween control and choice will continue between machines and humans, and within life. Neo is supposed to show the way to live without the struggle.
5. Keanu Reeves performance was subpar, even for him. In the climactic battle with Smith at the end, he looked drugged and was not convincing as the leader of the free world. He had no fire, and it was the machines and the Oracle that actually spurred him on to defeat Smith (esp. the machines, as they revived him after being consumed by Smith).
Agreed. This was a diffcult role to play and Reeves did not fully pull it off.
6. In the beginning, he was trapped in the train station for no conceivable reason but to lengthen the movie. It served no purpose, benefitted the movie naught and did not lead to any great discoveries that were used later in the film. Likewise, how we could be jacked in without being jacked in was never satisfactorily addressed.
Here's the interesting part about the movie. Neo meets a program family in the trainstation. The contrast is between Smith who is a Nilhist, and the indian program who even though he realizes that what people treasure are constructs they create, still chooses to embrace those constructs. Remember Smith says "only humans can create something as insipid as love", yet in the begining of the movie there's is a program who loves his daughter. The program realizes that "love", and "karma", are human created constructs, just like "beauty" which trinity sees when the ship is beyond the clouds. The contrast between Smith and this program is the key to the question of the purpose.
In the end I think that this was a very ambitious movie in attempting to raise the bar to certain questions. I'm not entirely sure they pulled it off. Non the less I find the philosophy interesting.
Basically, if you don't like these movies you are not intellectual enough.
Not necessarily. It could just mean that some people spend a lot more of their time analyzing the movie for it's philosophical mark. It doesn't mean that there is an "unwashed" mass that's unsophisticated, just that the people who didn't see certain elements of the movie weren't looking for them. I personally think there are elements of the movie that makes it interesting. And I respect the point of view of anyone who didn't go into the theater looking for a philosophy discussion.
At some point the benefits of releasing a technology has to be weighed with the possible safety problems with the technology. I'm not anti-technology. What I am against is poor design or failure to anticipate big problems. If you were writing code for a email program, you might be more liberal with what kind of bugs you'll allow than if you were writing a program to run someone's mechanical heart. Research on the possible safety of carbon nanotubes should never be impeded because of a rush toward progress. Of course the safety measures has to be judged to be relevant. The sooner they figure out if nano substances is toxic around people, the sooner they'll be able to develop safer nanotubes.
IMHO though, this is just another snag in the means of progress. We develop Genetic engineering and people are suffering from allergies to Gene spliced tortillas (that was Del Taco IIRC), or for a worse idea, we develop advanced shipbuilding and watch the Titanic sink (over and over again...).
You know this really is the dumbest western attitude to exploration. I prefer the space race model, where astronauts were screened on the off chance they contracted alien germs. Unlike the 17th century "oh shit we better park the ship to grab some limes cause the crew is dying of vitamin deficiency" model. But people think that they only way they can move ahead is to leap before they think. Studies on safety, double checking, and triple checking your work doesn't have to impede progress. There's so little to lose and so much to gain from safety studies, but no, they'd rather wing it than pay 4 million to study the affects.
research about atkins
on
Hackers On Atkins
·
· Score: 2, Informative
For example, in the medical journal Angiology, there was a recent study of people on the Atkins diet for one year who decreased the blood flow to their heart by 40 percent and increased the inflammatory markers. Ketogenic diets like these can also cause dilation of the heart, or cardio-myopathy. The high saturated-fat levels in those high-protein diets are linked to certain cancers. Some cancers are exquisitely sensitive to levels of saturated fat. So much so, that there's a six-fold increase in certain cancers in the saturated fat ranges that you see in some of those diets you mentioned.
Diets are always a bad idea. It's like exchanging long term health for a few months of looking fit. The point to living well should be becoming fit, not just looking fit.
I believe you can get people to care about anything, you just have to make it worthwhile for them to care. TV execs give the public too little credit, they have nothing to gain by taking risks, and all there is to lose. Public broadcasting however is willing to take the time to challenge viewers, instead of pandering to their every subconscious desire. I wouldn't have became interested in science if I had not had grown up with Bill Nye the science guy when I was young. You are right, there is a will towards clinging to the comfortable known worlds. But most people find that when they leave their caves they begin finding the world of unknowns a lot more interesting. People will put their faith in science, but first you have to put your faith in people.
Their physical bodies may not have the ability to produce the value in their labor, but you neglect to understand that their money does far more labor. Most of these people didn't get rich by stealing, they got rich by investing. Crime doesn't pay very well, contrary to what the Enrons and the Worldcoms of the world would convince you.
The obscenely rich get more obscenely rich by investing their money. Those investments creates opportunitys for people who uses the investments to create labor. Though they can't personally work millions of hours, their money can generate those millions of hours of labor from other people.
Using an online voting system to elect representatives is probably not the best idea. If it does happen i hope it maintains the highest level of security so the integridy of the votes is accurate. I think there's a better use of such a system. A representative democracy is scales because it's not simple to collect votes from a huge population of people on every key issue. An online voting system now allows the empowerment of individuals to declare their votes on key issues. In the end an online voting system may allow access to all citzens of the state to vote on ISSUES! rather than pray that their representative can secure their values.
Re:I hate to break this to you
on
Glade 2 Tutorial
·
· Score: 2, Informative
when it comes to designing interfaces, it's best to exercise the rule of least surprises. it's better to behave exactly like what other people would expect you to behave like than to do things in a more efficient manner but alienate all your users by pulling the rug from under them. An example of this is the QWERTY keyboards, sure there's more efficient ways of doing it but QWERTY has lasted because so many people has been trained with it that it has in effect become a standard.
so seeing as how there's no trojan cleaning program in linux, how does a person infected with the trojan rid his system of it? is it as simple as installing the non-trojan version?
no you expected mike and carol brady to raise me, i learned the facts of life... From watching the facts of life! but there's plenty of cable boys and girls out there, somebody's got to kill the babysitter.
either way it looks like it's intel who wins, they get to beat out all the old unix companies while the software is what's causing the shift. what the hell happened to all those unix server companies anyway? they're just gonna go down without putting a fight.
Oh please people don't just fear other people. The origin of religion is the cave painting, you think those people were afraid cause other people are selfish? Fear is a part of life, deal with it.
I absolutely agree about evolution not implying anything about the existence of god. Religion is about what it means, not how it works. But back to morality. I don't agree that without god there's nothing to prevent human morality. There are basic human emotions that keeps things right or wrong, morality is a system required for humans to be social. The difference is the moral truth is a human truth, not a universal truth.
can someone explain to me why SSL is still used? didn't slashdot report that SSL was cracked anyway? shouldn't someone be working on a more secure encryption for the web? or is SSL still secure enough?
i'd like to see this kind of simple desktop on one CD you can run on any system, Knoppix style. It would be cool just to be able to carry a cd around and have a nice simple desktop with you all the time. Beats loging on in WinXP on the computers all over my campus.
i think everything they've brought in the pass has been too add to the value of their business. i don't think that donating to blender would make it high on that list. well the other thing is redhat doesn't have all that investment money to throw around anymore.
well to be fair they are using an implementation of X designed to be small and fast. http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8925620279.html sounds like it's a good trade off to be able to run all the software writen for linux. and anyway if it wasn't X what would be the alternative? reinvent everything to shave off a few bytes?
I have no joke, replaced them with Emacs, join, sort, grep, and cut.
hope you don't mind me asking but what exactly is it that you do with your computer? As a student i can't imagine myself giving up ms office although i think it's slow as hell and i have a list of bugs i want fixed. explain how you would write a lab report or something like it with just those tools.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if his purpose was ever to destroy the machines to free the humans. In the end of the first movie he said "I don't know how it ends, but I know how it begins. I'm gonna hang up this phone. And I'm gonna show these people what you don't want them to see. Where we go from there, is up to you". So I think a truce was one of his possible goals.
What I find interesting is the contrast between the father program in the train station and Smith. The father program repeatedly reminds Neo that "love" is just a word, and so is "karma". These are belief systems that sustain many human, the difference is when they're reasons for someone to live they don't realize the constructs itself is artificial and meaningless. The indian father program sees the contradiction. But he embraces the concepts of love and karma. Smith sees the artificial construct to mean that the concepts don't exist. Thus the purpose is life is death. He's partially right. One purpose of life is to experience the end, as Neo does. Neo lets go of his grip on his life.
The question is what is the purpose of life. While some would rather have ignorance in a dogmatic belief system, like cypher. Some like the indian father program, chooses to live life for the experience and connections it offers. Smith is someone who has broken though the ignorance but has gained no perpective of the significance of existence. Neo shows the final problem, death, he shows you can't fight control forever, in the end there are things you can't choose. But that doesn't mean there's nothing that can be chosen.
I imagine both humans and software who wants out will be released. For humans they have to be ready to be unplugged otherwise they would end up like cypher did. So the freed people will continue showing the people what they don't know. Programs who chooses to exist even without a purpose will be allowed to exist in the matrix. Eventually the machines will be able to reclaim a power source not using humans. With the lasting peace the sky could be cleaned up, who knows.
Actually I thought it was a very complete ending. Here's why:
1. Trinity dies for no reason, as they don't use her death in any meaningful way.
Trinity's death is essential in helping Neo let go in the end of the battle with Smith. Neo saw death up close and personal, he lost the only thing he was living for, he realized that "everything that has a beginning has an end". Neo realized something at the end of this battle with Smith, I don't know what it is, still trying to absorb it all, but it helped him make up his decision to let go of his life.
2. The scene with the machines entering the outer hull of Zion was drawn out needlessly, as it contained no switching between the fight at Zion and Neo's plight (think: middle/end of ROTJ)
Agreed. However there is a pattern in each movie of actions sequences from different genres of video games. In this movie the defense of the hull was a reflection of mecha type games. The ship racing home was a reflection of space race games.
3. The fight scene with Smith/Baines and Neo in the Logos was completely extraneous.
This part was a plot filler scene. Neo had to understand that Smith was out of control and what he was after.
4. Neo's death in the end leaves the humans without a powerful weapon against the machines if they were to decide to attack the humans again. Contrast this with Star Wars and LotR, where the playing field is leveled at the end, or slightly in favor of the protagonists.
At the end of the movie the oracle talks about how she believes the peace can last only for as long as they can keep it. The end of this war is an end to a cycle of death and rebirth. The struggle bettween control and choice will continue between machines and humans, and within life. Neo is supposed to show the way to live without the struggle.
5. Keanu Reeves performance was subpar, even for him. In the climactic battle with Smith at the end, he looked drugged and was not convincing as the leader of the free world. He had no fire, and it was the machines and the Oracle that actually spurred him on to defeat Smith (esp. the machines, as they revived him after being consumed by Smith).
Agreed. This was a diffcult role to play and Reeves did not fully pull it off.
6. In the beginning, he was trapped in the train station for no conceivable reason but to lengthen the movie. It served no purpose, benefitted the movie naught and did not lead to any great discoveries that were used later in the film. Likewise, how we could be jacked in without being jacked in was never satisfactorily addressed.
Here's the interesting part about the movie. Neo meets a program family in the trainstation. The contrast is between Smith who is a Nilhist, and the indian program who even though he realizes that what people treasure are constructs they create, still chooses to embrace those constructs. Remember Smith says "only humans can create something as insipid as love", yet in the begining of the movie there's is a program who loves his daughter. The program realizes that "love", and "karma", are human created constructs, just like "beauty" which trinity sees when the ship is beyond the clouds. The contrast between Smith and this program is the key to the question of the purpose.
In the end I think that this was a very ambitious movie in attempting to raise the bar to certain questions. I'm not entirely sure they pulled it off. Non the less I find the philosophy interesting.
Basically, if you don't like these movies you are not intellectual enough.
Not necessarily. It could just mean that some people spend a lot more of their time analyzing the movie for it's philosophical mark. It doesn't mean that there is an "unwashed" mass that's unsophisticated, just that the people who didn't see certain elements of the movie weren't looking for them. I personally think there are elements of the movie that makes it interesting. And I respect the point of view of anyone who didn't go into the theater looking for a philosophy discussion.
At some point the benefits of releasing a technology has to be weighed with the possible safety problems with the technology. I'm not anti-technology. What I am against is poor design or failure to anticipate big problems. If you were writing code for a email program, you might be more liberal with what kind of bugs you'll allow than if you were writing a program to run someone's mechanical heart. Research on the possible safety of carbon nanotubes should never be impeded because of a rush toward progress. Of course the safety measures has to be judged to be relevant. The sooner they figure out if nano substances is toxic around people, the sooner they'll be able to develop safer nanotubes.
IMHO though, this is just another snag in the means of progress. We develop Genetic engineering and people are suffering from allergies to Gene spliced tortillas (that was Del Taco IIRC), or for a worse idea, we develop advanced shipbuilding and watch the Titanic sink (over and over again...).
You know this really is the dumbest western attitude to exploration. I prefer the space race model, where astronauts were screened on the off chance they contracted alien germs. Unlike the 17th century "oh shit we better park the ship to grab some limes cause the crew is dying of vitamin deficiency" model. But people think that they only way they can move ahead is to leap before they think. Studies on safety, double checking, and triple checking your work doesn't have to impede progress. There's so little to lose and so much to gain from safety studies, but no, they'd rather wing it than pay 4 million to study the affects.
For example, in the medical journal Angiology, there was a recent study of people on the Atkins diet for one year who decreased the blood flow to their heart by 40 percent and increased the inflammatory markers. Ketogenic diets like these can also cause dilation of the heart, or cardio-myopathy. The high saturated-fat levels in those high-protein diets are linked to certain cancers. Some cancers are exquisitely sensitive to levels of saturated fat. So much so, that there's a six-fold increase in certain cancers in the saturated fat ranges that you see in some of those diets you mentioned.
The source
Diets are always a bad idea. It's like exchanging long term health for a few months of looking fit. The point to living well should be becoming fit, not just looking fit.
I believe you can get people to care about anything, you just have to make it worthwhile for them to care. TV execs give the public too little credit, they have nothing to gain by taking risks, and all there is to lose. Public broadcasting however is willing to take the time to challenge viewers, instead of pandering to their every subconscious desire. I wouldn't have became interested in science if I had not had grown up with Bill Nye the science guy when I was young. You are right, there is a will towards clinging to the comfortable known worlds. But most people find that when they leave their caves they begin finding the world of unknowns a lot more interesting. People will put their faith in science, but first you have to put your faith in people.
Their physical bodies may not have the ability to produce the value in their labor, but you neglect to understand that their money does far more labor. Most of these people didn't get rich by stealing, they got rich by investing. Crime doesn't pay very well, contrary to what the Enrons and the Worldcoms of the world would convince you.
The obscenely rich get more obscenely rich by investing their money. Those investments creates opportunitys for people who uses the investments to create labor. Though they can't personally work millions of hours, their money can generate those millions of hours of labor from other people.
Using an online voting system to elect representatives is probably not the best idea. If it does happen i hope it maintains the highest level of security so the integridy of the votes is accurate. I think there's a better use of such a system. A representative democracy is scales because it's not simple to collect votes from a huge population of people on every key issue. An online voting system now allows the empowerment of individuals to declare their votes on key issues. In the end an online voting system may allow access to all citzens of the state to vote on ISSUES! rather than pray that their representative can secure their values.
when it comes to designing interfaces, it's best to exercise the rule of least surprises. it's better to behave exactly like what other people would expect you to behave like than to do things in a more efficient manner but alienate all your users by pulling the rug from under them. An example of this is the QWERTY keyboards, sure there's more efficient ways of doing it but QWERTY has lasted because so many people has been trained with it that it has in effect become a standard.
an E! channel list of the top 20 sexiest open source developers.
so seeing as how there's no trojan cleaning program in linux, how does a person infected with the trojan rid his system of it? is it as simple as installing the non-trojan version?
nothing in science is held as absolute fact, only people who lack understanding in science make that claim.
no you expected mike and carol brady to raise me, i learned the facts of life... From watching the facts of life! but there's plenty of cable boys and girls out there, somebody's got to kill the babysitter.
either way it looks like it's intel who wins, they get to beat out all the old unix companies while the software is what's causing the shift. what the hell happened to all those unix server companies anyway? they're just gonna go down without putting a fight.
Oh please people don't just fear other people. The origin of religion is the cave painting, you think those people were afraid cause other people are selfish? Fear is a part of life, deal with it.
I absolutely agree about evolution not implying anything about the existence of god. Religion is about what it means, not how it works. But back to morality. I don't agree that without god there's nothing to prevent human morality. There are basic human emotions that keeps things right or wrong, morality is a system required for humans to be social. The difference is the moral truth is a human truth, not a universal truth.
can someone explain to me why SSL is still used? didn't slashdot report that SSL was cracked anyway? shouldn't someone be working on a more secure encryption for the web? or is SSL still secure enough?
i'd like to see this kind of simple desktop on one CD you can run on any system, Knoppix style. It would be cool just to be able to carry a cd around and have a nice simple desktop with you all the time. Beats loging on in WinXP on the computers all over my campus.
i think everything they've brought in the pass has been too add to the value of their business. i don't think that donating to blender would make it high on that list. well the other thing is redhat doesn't have all that investment money to throw around anymore.
well to be fair they are using an implementation of X designed to be small and fast. http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8925620279.html sounds like it's a good trade off to be able to run all the software writen for linux. and anyway if it wasn't X what would be the alternative? reinvent everything to shave off a few bytes?
I have no joke, replaced them with Emacs, join, sort, grep, and cut.
hope you don't mind me asking but what exactly is it that you do with your computer? As a student i can't imagine myself giving up ms office although i think it's slow as hell and i have a list of bugs i want fixed. explain how you would write a lab report or something like it with just those tools.
you forgot to add LaTeX, some people actually have to format their work.