The Ideal Film AI

Posted in film on February 18th, 2015 by Samuel Kenyon

This is prompted by Ben Bogart‘s question “What do you consider the most seminal representations of AI in cinema of all time?”

I think the best is yet to come. Ideally an AI (Artificial Intelligence) in a film would have two elements:

  1. The alien aspect: It’s not a human or some other animal (although it can be very similar).
  2. Some connection with humans (or a human), e.g. humanity created them for a job, or this particular human created this particular AI for some reason, etc. This is the difference between the screen character being just another sci-fi alien (extraterrestrial, previously-unknown terrestrial monster, et cetera).

Autómata (dir. Gabe Ibáñez)


Automata and Tron: Legacy both make meager attempts to show AI emerging and evolving and trying to figure out their own way that’s not quite the same as for humans.

The robot R2D2 (Star Wars) superficially meets these ideals: we know it’s intelligent, yet it doesn’t speak English or get subtitles. Its connection with humans however is not really used in any interesting way in the film (we don’t analyze the slavery of robots in Star Wars …at least I don’t). And if the history stories are true, R2D2 and C3PO are just metal copies of the peasants from Akira Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress.


The Hidden Fortress (dir. Akira Kurosawa)


Tags: , ,

The World’s End: Change and Consequences

Posted in culture on August 26th, 2013 by Samuel Kenyon

It has been said that true science fiction requires a story in which the world is changed—and never goes back to the way it was (I don’t remember the source of this definition). By this definition, techno-thrillers such as everything by Michael Crichton are not science fiction, since the world is returned to normal after some disaster strikes. You might notice that a lot of science fiction films, especially the more mainstream ones, conclude with humanity returning to business as usual. The knots are untied. Loose ends are taken care of. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with that, as it is the normal way to adhere to standard dramatic structure. And the dynamics of the characters might outshine the background world anyway.

The World's End

The World’s End

Warning, Spoilers Ahead

I am happy to report that the film The World’s End involves not only major character development, but also major world changes that do not revert at the end. I don’t want to reveal too much here specifically, so I won’t say much. (And if you haven’t seen a recent trailer, don’t! Just go see the movie without ruining the surprises.)

It is obviously tempting to compare The World’s End to the previous two films in the “Blood and Icecream” trilogy of Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg, and Nick Frost. The first Blood and Icecream entry, Shaun of the Dead, which on the more obvious layer is a parody of horror films (especially zombie flicks), essentially concluded with a UK returned to normal after a zombie outbreak, with the minor adjustment to allow some remaining zombies to live on in a controlled manner. The second Blood and Icecream film, Hot Fuzz, which on one layer is a parody of action films, has the typical solving of a case and elimination of a criminal element. The World’s End, however, far surpasses the conclusions of the previous two films.

Somerville Theater

Somerville Theater

I watched The World’s End on opening weekend in Somerville Theater, where I predicted accurately that it would be very popular. In fact, we actually had to form a line outside. Passer-bys gave us funny looks; one queried what event had drawn us into this odd queue—I responded that we were there for the end of the world. The stranger commented that he “didn’t realize that was a thing.” After this thrilling wait in Davis Square, my girlfriend and I were finally were admitted into the main theater. The downside to this crowd was that everything was laugh-out-loud funny. Some scenes invoked applause. In my opinion the jokes weren’t any better than Shaun or Hot Fuzz, but being as good is still pretty damn good. The climax was not excellent, and was mostly held together with more jokes. The dénouement, however, was top-notch.

But surely, somebody will argue, this is merely a comedy. What can it say about humankind, science, and technology?

Oh, but it can say so much. In fact, parody is a necessary part of civilized societies. And these Edgard Wright films are not just parody but also human drama stories. And they meet the requirements of their respective genres. The World’s End does all this…and literally ends the world as we know it.

Some questions asked in The World’s End are very important: Does it make sense to stay the same instead of growing into a new form that has comprised to some degree with a society? Both the main characters and Earth itself are posed with this problem in the film. The consequences are shown.

Image credit: Somerville Theater – Mark Andrew

Tags: ,

The Future of Crowd Madness

Posted in culture, transhumanism on May 2nd, 2011 by Samuel Kenyon

“Nothing New Under the Sun” is the title of Robert Silverberg’s column for the June 2011 issue of Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine. Although the sobering thought that humanity keeps repeating certain types of mistakes is not one I particularly relish, it should be discussed.

Sam holding a paper edition of Asimov's SF magazine

Sam holding a paper edition of Asimov's SF magazine

Crowd Stupidity

“Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable — as a member of a crowd he at once becomes a blockhead.”

—Schiller as quoted by Bernard Baruch as quoted by Robert Silverberg

Silverberg shares some excerpts from the mid-1800s book Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, written by Scottish lawyer / journalist Charles Mackay.

Silverberg compares the South-Sea Bubble disaster to the Internet dot com bubble, specifically failed companies such as Webvan (bankrupt in 2001), (broke in 2000) and (died in 2001).

England’s South-Sea Bubble so long ago was not blamed, according to Mackay, on the general public’s avarice, lust of gain, etc. Instead, like with the recent economic crash of 2008, the “evil” bankers and executives are blamed. The collective insanity of a nation seems to be a major factor though. Perhaps it does take a cunning plan to fool the masses, but it also requires the masses to act idiotically as they urgently try to consume or become rich or whatever.

My intention in this post is not to get into the issues of blame for economic bubbles, but to note the special ability for a normally intelligent person to become less so in the context of a group.

Another popular delusion of humankind’s past is fortune telling, e.g. via astrology. Unfortunately, it’s still quite popular. As Mackay wrote:

Leaving out of view the oracles of pagan antiquity and religious predictions in general, and confining ourselves solely to the persons who, in modern times, have made themselves most conspicuous in foretelling the future, we shall find that the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were the golden age of these impostors. Many of them have been already mentioned in their character of alchymists. The union of the two pretensions is not at all surprising. It was to be expected that those who assumed a power so preposterous as that of prolonging the life of man for several centuries, should pretend, at the same time, to foretell the events which were to mark that preternatural span of existence.

Of course, most transhumanists would exactly like to do the same thing that those alchemists promised, which is to live for centuries (at least). And transhumanists are quite often found foretelling events or repeating the foretellings of popular writers. I recommend that transhumanists, including me, be all the more alert to traditional delusions dressed in sexy technolust clothes.

Crowd Intelligence

“We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first. ”

—Charles Mackay

Humans are social animals, surely there must be overall benefits to group intelligence? Well, even our relatives the chimps have group stupidity—they will keep copying the behavior of a leader even if a better strategy appears and they will copy the behavior of the dominant group member even if it results in less rewards than another way that they also learned.

But what about the so-called “wisdom of crowds?” Well, we don’t always have wisdom or higher intelligence emerging from groups because the system has to be set up correctly. The main criteria that James Surowiecki listed in his book The Wisdom of Crowds are:

  • Diversity of opinion
  • Independence
  • Decentralization
  • Aggregation

So, first every person should ideally have some private information or ideas that aren’t shared with the others. Second, people don’t allow others in the group to determine their opinions or decisions. Third, people don’t have to be stuck in a closed central structure of wisdom, they can draw from local knowledge and wisdom. Fourth, there has to be a part of the system that compiles judgements into a decision.

And it is not necessarily easy to achieve all four of those criteria for a given problem and a given group.

The Future of Madness

“Pretend to be mad? Who would notice a madman around here?”
—Capt. Blackadder (from Blackadder Goes Forth, which takes place in the trenches of World War 1)

Robert Silverberg’s essay presents the solemn attitude that humanity keeps on repeating its old mistakes. It sounds like a cliché (although perhaps not a popular enough one); in fact Silverberg says one falls back on clichés in this context. Is the adage of Alphonse Karr that Silverberg quotes, “The more things change, the more they remain the same,” really a behavior of the humanity system?

It’s been said that a true science fiction story is one in which the world is irreversibly changed by the end of the story. But can that happen in real life? Transhumanists very much want to instantiate science fiction’s promises. And it seems like certain technologies have transformed everything, such as the Internet.

Perhaps national delusions, group idiocy, Ponzi schemes, witch hunts, economic bubbles, and so on, are not actually a concern for us in the long run. But, let’s explore the premise that they are, just in case.

So, what would be some therapies for humankind’s collective insanity? One obvious answer for a transhumanist is of course to change the very nature of our intelligence, and that can be at an individual level and/or in networked assistance via computer systems, etc. But, what if we were to imagine reducing madness today, using today’s infrastructure?

Philosopher Daniel Dennett had a concept he called “Super Snopes.” is the popular debunking database which explains the truths and lies behind urban myths, chain emails, etc. Super Snopes would be some sort of more massive collection of truth utilizing the power of the Internet, and which would counter the misinformation on the Web.

But Snopes, and maybe even a Super Snopes (if that’s even possible), don’t really address the serious delusions which can last for years. And how does one even know they have subscribed to a delusion if everybody they talk to (or follow) is deluded in the same way? What would motivate a person to even participate in a (Super) Snopes?

Perhaps one glimmer of hope is that the Internet and social media allow different groups to communicate. Never are all people in the world under the exact same delusion. So if the people of sufficient difference were able to trade criticism in a way that overcame our primitive tribal nature, major delusions could be stopped before total disaster.

I suspect we have just begun to tap the power of constant global connections and social media. As Clay Shirky points out, we have a “cognitive surplus” of billions of hours per year that’s largely been used to watch television. In this century some of that time has shifted from passive consumption of media to video games (especially massively multiplayer games) and to actual content creation such as with Wikipedia and of course blogs.

Yet the memes that run rampant are often not about debunking or skepticism, they are simply viral without regards to truth. Our system presently allows simple amplification of normal human social emotions and behaviors. It doesn’t take much cognitive power to go along with bandwagons: repeating—and buying into—what everybody else says on Twitter or Facebook to a major news event. And of course, as it always has been with news, the social news gives the same attention to celebrity gossip and cat photos as it does to natural disasters and national revolutions. And the lifetime of a meme or popular event can be extremely short lived.

So, we have this powerful worldwide networked community, but could it be used for the good of groups? Could it be used at longer time scales, e.g. to stop a decade-long delusion?

Could we evolve our social web so that humankind (or at least those online) are constantly keep ahead of the game when it comes to tricks and delusions?

Also published in H+ Magazine.

Tags: , , , , ,

Evolution is the Greatest Force in the Material World

Posted in culture on March 13th, 2011 by Samuel Kenyon

“Evolution is the greatest force in the material world” is said by Jeff Bridges in this newly leaked video. “Flynn Lives: The Next Day” is a TRON:Legacy epilogue for the Blu-Ray release, but it is perhaps also a teaser for TR3N.

Via Tron-Sector.

Tags: , , , ,