August 11, 2025 • 41 mins
In this episode, we explore how artificial intelligence has been portrayed in popular culture, from the replicants of Blade Runner to the feminized AI of Ex Machina. We examine the fundamental philosophical questions these stories raise: What constitutes life? What separates consciousness from programming? At what point would we need to recognize an artificial entity as deserving rights and autonomy?
The conversation takes us through foundational texts like Isaac Asimov's "The Feeling of Power" and Harlan Ellison's "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream," films like Zardoz and Logan's Run, and modern explorations of AI ethics. We discuss how these fictional portrayals often reveal more about human nature than about technology itself—particularly in how gender dynamics and toxic masculinity in the tech world manifest in our imagined AI futures.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Fame Shrimp London, england.
Television Sex.
Gentlemen, let's broaden ourminds.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Are they in the proper approach pattern for
today?
Negative All the weapons Now.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Charge the lightning field.
Yahtzee, if you didn't know.
So it was originally called theYaht Game by a Canadian couple
who played it on their yacht.
They wanted a game, a diceversion of poker, and they came
up with Yaht, which then becameYahtzee it's really something
(00:46):
for the everyman.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
It's really, it's really about the plight of the
urban, proletariat, middle-agedcanadians on their yacht with
their friends.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yeah, it's something we can all relate to.
It's well, the see, when weplay yahtzee it's just like oh,
I scored the most, I won.
But when they win they get theother couple's malaysian boy
that they had purchased earlierpeople selling people to people.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Welcome back to dispatch ajax I am right skip.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
No, I am a robot.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Do you have no name oh?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
okay, Designation fuckhead.
You can just say your name, Idon't know, that that's
necessary and we're doing moreof a descriptor, really, if
anything.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Well, I mean, it's important, isn't it, if we
identify as individuals.
I mean okay, important isn't it?
If we identify as individualsTo describe, I mean all right.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
We'll get into this.
We're talking today aboutrobots, huh.
Yeah we're going to talk aboutrobots.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
So now we can finally get into the AI in pop culture
space that we've promised thisentire time.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
You had your cocktail before dinner, which was the
first episode, and then you hadto sit through your salad, which
was last episode.
Now you get the meal You'reactually going to bite into your
steak.
It's made of zeros and ones,but it still tastes just as good
, maybe even better.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Yeah, I mean, you had your aperitif, you had your
digestif.
Now we're ready to do what weoriginally wanted to do with
this in our third episode.
But, to be honest, if we'regoing to do this, basically we
had to raise these questions, wehad to address these things and
(02:39):
now we can start talking aboutthis.
So I am curious as to what youare going to present for this.
Dead air is one of the bestthings about broadcast.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
You just put crickets in there Robot crickets in the
background.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
You were the one that would have started the episode,
and now you don't even knowwhat to do.
I'm following your lead, I'mrolling with the punches here.
So now we're going to talkabout artificially created
intelligence in pop culture andhow that matters today and how
it differs from what we'reactually seeing happen in real
(03:22):
time.
Yes, yes, question markactually seeing happen in real
time yes, yes, question mark,riddle me this robot man mr
robot that is your real name I'mkilroy, kilroy don't, don't
know sticks, mr roboto.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Okay, oh, that's fine I, you know, I don't really
like Mr Roboto.
Well, you know.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
I was a karaoke DJ for 10 years, so you know.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
Well, that's not my cross to bear, that's fair.
So we laid out some groundrules last episode, at least to
start out with what ourdiscussion.
I think we were an alien originfor said artificial
intelligence.
We were kind of leaning awayfrom it, though I'm sure certain
things will come up where thatis a part of it similar with
(04:15):
cybernetics, like robocop, ahuman robocop, you know.
But I mean we talk aboutterminator, which is kind of a
cyborg.
It's human flesh laid on arobotic chassis.
Oh, it's literally a cyborg.
Yeah, I mean we'll probablytalk about replicants, we will,
you know, or synthetic peopleand it's like, well, now they're
(04:39):
biological and it's mostly wedon't really know the full
process for making a replicantin the blade runner universe no,
not even in the sequel.
No, maybe in one of the cartoonsthat's out the animated
features.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Maybe they'll say something no, I've seen they
don't say anything about thecreation yeah, they're mostly
about the quote-unquote blackout.
Yeah, so I mean that's 90 ofthose and I mean westworld.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
It's, it's very much.
There is parts of mechanicalandroid synthetic underneath,
but a lot of it's seeminglyhuman flesh on the outside.
Now, how that all works, thescience of that.
That's a.
That's a wave your hand.
We're not really trying to getinto that and we could, because
a lot of how we won't.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Right now I don't know how we could but we won't
right now.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
I don't know how we could.
There's a deep breakdown.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I did an episode about this on my Star Trek
podcast, about what defines anandroid.
Okay, but that's too much forus to do right now, so let's
just move on.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
So there are things like I't, I don't well.
Okay.
So an android.
An android literally means arobot or a machine that mimics
human, so I mean like in theshape and form of a human being.
A robot is something which wewill talk about as we go along.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Yes, but if it's full biological, that still is the
internal nature of itsconsciousness.
That would create, say, whetherit's a android, like.
At what point, god, we'regetting into things?
I don't know, we're all overthe place.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
Are you going to ship a Theseus argument?
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Okay, One, we don't know how.
How say, a replicant is made.
But if a replicant is fullyhuman-like in almost every way,
alright.
What is it about them thatseparates them from being human?
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Are they able to reproduce on their own?
Speaker 1 (06:40):
But is that a necessity for being considered?
Speaker 2 (06:43):
human.
That's one of the main pillarsof what we consider life.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Yes, are they able to replicate on their own, in
Children of Men, are thosepeople no longer human?
So at the point that you losethe ability to reproduce, you
lose your humanity.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
No, that's not true, because I mean there are a lot
of people who can't reproduce.
True, because I mean there area lot of people who can't
reproduce, but I mean like to bealive.
You have to be technically Ithink in a lot of respect able
to reproduce, defend yourselfagainst harm oh, hold on, all
right.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
So if, if, if, an avoid harm, so when?
When you say reproduce, thatmeans by some type of biological
intrinsic nature.
That's not creating another oneof you or another version of
you or a separate entity thatyou have created.
It has to be a sperm-ovumcombination.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Not necessarily.
No, I don't think that's thecase.
I think, based on, it's justand we're talking about cursory
definitions here To be alive youhave to interact with your
environment, you have to becapable of replicating yourself
(08:00):
and you have to react to outsidestimuli.
So, like you know, harmEditor's note, the most commonly
accepted characteristics thatdefine life are the capacity for
homeostasis, organization,metabolism, growth, adaptation,
(08:20):
response to stimuli andreproduction.
Excelsior true believers, Imean, that's why you get things.
I mean, flies are alive, plantsare alive for those very
specific criteria.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Right, but if a replicant was to build another
replicant, they would meet allof those criteria.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
I'm still on the camp that, yes, a replicant is alive
.
I mean, isn't that the point ofBlade Runner?
That the replicant is alive,that they deserve to live?
Speaker 1 (08:50):
But in that world they're distinctly thought of as
synthetic.
They have predeterminedlifespans.
I mean there seems to be aprogramming in at least some of
them.
The question of their free will, their freedom, their fully
conscious, the whole idea oftheir Void Comp is going, not
only exhibiting emotions buthaving an intrinsic emotional,
(09:13):
physical response.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
But the problem with the Void Comp thing is that, you
know, just like withcontemporary parallels, with IQ
tests and things like that,they're extremely limited
because of their.
The way that they're structuredisn't really indicative of how
things actually work Because,like the Voight-Kampff test
measures their physiologicalresponses, based on their
(09:40):
biology, which is created bysomebody, james Hahn mostly on
their biology, which is createdby somebody, james han mostly.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
So like that's not really a measure of if they are
human or not, which, honestly,is kind of but what I what I
like to think about is what intheir world in the world of of
that, I mean not quite doandroids dream of electricity,
but more in the Blade Runnercreation of that world.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
They're very different things.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
They are very different things.
What in that world makes themlesser than?
Is it a definition?
Is it a pre-programming?
Is it a shortened lifespan?
Is it not being biologicallyhuman?
I mean, you're bringing up thewhat separates them.
You're bringing up the whatseparates them.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
You're bringing up the existential questions that
movie makes.
Yes absolutely.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
At what point in their societal development would
they abandon that preconceptionof we created this artificial
entity?
Now we have to recognize it asits own sentient and
free-willing entity, becausethey obviously haven't yeah, and
I wish that they had expandedmore.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
I mean, I'm glad they don't, because I love blade
runner the way it is, but likethe replicants very specifically
are designed to fight wars offplanet.
That's kind of the premise.
Or be pleasure models.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
They're there to do jobs, jobs that we don't want to
do, yes.
And then it expands past that,in the sequel of being like,
even more jobs are taken up bysynthetic humanoid entities,
which is replicants.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
I don't care.
I liked that movie.
I think it's a I don't careabout the.
Harrison I don't give a shitabout the Harrison Ford shit
that much.
But you know, in that universe,especially if you read like
some of the or if you watch someof the prequel or those anime
ones that they did, I think itmakes it.
It's good world building.
I think it really adds to thatuniverse.
(11:42):
I know he wanted to do threemovies instead of the one so
it's kind of rushed and feltweird.
But I think they do a good jobof expanding on those things.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Yes, I think with both films it's about posing
these questions and letting thecharacters inside the stories
they're telling wrestle withthem.
But on a larger existential,societal view, it's like how did
they create this?
How would they continue withthis?
Yeah, I mean on the outside asa viewer watching this, it's
(12:12):
akin to like dropping intopre-Civil War America.
It's like well, why do you haveall these slaves around?
Why are these people designatedas less than and you're using
them for whatever purpose youdeem fit.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
We're talking about the Butlerian Jihad right now.
I mean it's on that level.
Well, I know that's a different.
I know that's different butit's not that different.
I mean, I'm not talking aboutthe, I'm not talking about his
kids novels, about the actualdune.
Well, you kind of have to.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I mean, if you're going to talk about that, I mean
they're tied up in the samething, but I mean that's, that's
a whole like.
Well, it's just the Clone Warsgiving way power to the machines
and the machines turning into.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Skynet, essentially the lords of humanity, yeah,
yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
In a similar way.
I mean they, especially as youget into those books.
Oh God, I know Anthromorphismthat's going on within the robot
worlds and their kings andhierarchies and it gets really
nutty.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
What's the difference between Duncan, Idaho and a
replicant, though you know whatI mean.
Speaker 1 (13:23):
That's a good question, isn't it?
Yeah, I mean, if I were toclone you and then I label that
as replicant skip, I mean, is it?
Is it?
What would I have to apply toyou to be thought of as lesser?
Is it a title?
Is it something about?
Do I need to finagle with your,your mind?
Do I need to limit you in someway?
(13:43):
Do I need to differentiate?
Do I need to put a barcode onyour eyeball?
Is that all that I need?
At what point do we give youpersonhood?
That's fair, because you'reobviously sentient in the
seeming ways that we understandconsciousness and sentience, but
yet you're still imprisoned forbeing different I know that's a
real issue that we have to talkabout.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
What was a few years ago saudi arabia gave personhood
to a I guess for lack of abetter word an android Did you
read about this, I thought thatwas a stunt.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
I don't think that was real.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Yes, but legally it stands.
So you know it was a stunt.
It doesn't mean anything butright, which brings up all sorts
of questions.
It's a stunt, but what doesthat mean?
How does that impact us goingforward with these type of
things?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
I don't know.
I mean at some point that is aquestion Theoretically, if
humanity and artificialintelligence seems to be on a
freight train to the future,coming to a point where these
questions materialize in a realworld form, especially, leave it
up to it would be something ofthe courts, I'm sure, who would
have to debate that which wouldnever solve any of the actual
(14:59):
existential questions, but justsome of the, I guess, set
precedent for the legal ones.
I mean what this goes to yourStar Trek episode.
Right, the next gen dataepisode.
Oh, measure of a man.
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
I next-gen data episode.
Oh, measure of a man.
Yeah, I have thought about thatepisode a lot recently and I
keep re-evaluating how I feelabout that and I would like to
get to data eventually.
Well, let's talk about some ofthese other things first,
because then we can have it.
I think we should have aconversation about data yeah,
but I mean we kind of dove inthe deep end and then we swim
our way back to the shore andit's kind of like jaws if, like
(15:39):
he had just jumped off the boatwhen the shark was attacking and
then then go back to thebeginning of the movie he's just
jumping and eating helicoptersand then like, oh no, I need to
go.
I need to go take out afisherman too it'd be like if
roy scheider and it went out ona boat at the beginning of the
movie and then later I wasthinking, I was thinking the
(16:02):
shark jumps to uh the revenge,and then then goes back to the
beginning of the first movie.
Oh, wow, okay, you're going evendeeper in lore.
That's cool.
Once again, lewis gossett jrcomes up in like 13 consecutive
episodes because we talked abouthim in punisher I know we've
talked about lewis gossett jrmore than we think we have I'm
(16:26):
sure he's probably in a moviewith a robot, right?
Probably.
I mean it wasn't.
There was no robot and ironeagle, but I you.
Well, he was in.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Enemy, mine Enemy.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Mine that I can think of.
I think it has aliens, but Idon't.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
Does it have robots?
Speaker 2 (16:43):
But anyway.
So we're talking about robots,so let's think about some of the
robots that have permeated popculture, and we're not going to
do a lot of the obvious ones,because you know, everybody fuck
.
We're going to talk about someof the interesting ones, or the
most important ones, and some ofthe ancillary, outside ones,
(17:07):
because that's what we do we dosomething different, we always
do something different.
What do you think are some ofthe most interesting, important
AI examples in pop culture?
I'm talking to you, jake, notthe audience.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Oh, not them out there.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Them, the giant ants, parading by.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
The AI that's listening to our current podcast
.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Figuring out how to kill us secretly in the night,
yeah we'll judge us properly.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
I think all ai are great.
Nothing should happen to them.
I love ai.
Thanks guys for everything youdo.
Grok is the best whitesupremacist fucking ai yeah,
yeah, let's talk about palantir.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Huh, oh, jesus we already talked about raveon
might as well if we, if we wantto talk about ai run amok you
know, by the currentadministration yeah palantir,
that's kind of a we're here.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
What do you want to talk about?
Okay, fine oh jesus, well, likelast time, I look, I drew us
out to the deep water.
Whenever I pick something andstart talking.
So give us some floaties, letus work our way out there.
Floaties.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
This is from a paper by Isabella Herman called
Artificial Intelligence inFiction colon between narratives
and metaphors.
Quote between narratives andmetaphors.
Quote Taking science fictionalAI too literally and even
applying it to sciencecommunication paints a distorted
image of the technology'scurrent potential and distracts
(18:43):
from the real-world implicationsand risks of AI.
These risks are not abouthumanoid robots or about
conscious machines.
Are not about humanoid robotsor about conscious machines, but
about the scoring, nudging,discrimination, exploitation and
surveillance of humans by AItechnologies through governments
(19:03):
and corporations.
Ai in science fiction, on theother hand, is a trope as part
of a genre-specific megatextthat is better understood as a
dramatic means and metaphor toreflect on the human condition
and the socio-political issuesbeyond technology, which I think
is well put.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Yeah, Although if I ever write a book, I want it to
be called Megatext.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
You're the lamest Decepticon of all time.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
Oh, we would defeat them.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
We shall make them read no, one ever wants to hang
out with Megatext.
Ai in films often serves plotsof machines becoming human-like
and or a conflict of humansversus machines.
Science, fictional, ai is adramatic element that makes a
perfect antagonist, an enemy, avictim or, you know, sometimes a
(19:58):
hero.
Because, like in Blade Runner,2049, 40, whatever, because it
can be fully adjusted to thenecessities of the story.
But to fulfill the role thatit's playing in commentary, it
often has capabilities that areway beyond actual technology, be
it movement, the whole uncannyvalley thing, or sentience, or
(20:23):
the idea of AI consciousness and, seriously, as a representation
of real world AI, which we'vespoken about before.
It provides the wrongimpression of what AI can and
should do now and in the future,and we've already talked about
Frankenstein, which I think is areally important thing to
(20:46):
because, yes, it's obvious, yes,it's important, but it gives a
regular audience more of aframework, an understanding of
what we're trying to get to here.
In the Feeling of Power, a 1958short story by Isaac Asimov, a
futuristic society where humansrely on AI for everything, a
(21:07):
singular man discoversarithmetic and trains himself to
do multiplications, which issomething that had been long,
you know, relegated to AI andautomation.
At first the politically elitewrite it off as quote human math
and a useless parlor trick,like it's just a gimmick.
(21:28):
But military advisors see it asextremely valuable because if
humans understand calculationsthey can replace expensive
computers on warships.
It's a really obviousswitcheroo that Asimov does, but
it is one of the earliestrelevant sci-fi stories about AI
(21:48):
.
So in the short story, have noMouth and I Must Scream.
Harlan Ellison writes about analternative reality where the
Cold War becomes World War III,escalating in the form of a
three-way supercomputer armsrace between the USSR, the US
and the People's Republic ofChina, version just called am.
(22:17):
Am capital eventually gainssentience, self-awareness and
overtakes the other two, butthen wipes out humanity, save
for five survivors who were keptalive by am to endure endless
torture as a form of revengeagainst its creators.
Some Battlestar Galactica shit,it's some.
You know.
It is like a fundamental AItext, but its themes are not new
(22:39):
.
Well, I mean, maybe it was oneof the first, but it and you're
going to love this in Zardoz.
Zardoz, mankind is separatedlargely into two camps the
Eternals not the terrible,terrible marvel movie, who does
complete disservice to jackkirby who are effectively
immortal, and the brutals, whoare, I don't know.
(22:59):
Mortal, uh, the eternals areoverseen and protected from
death by the tabernacle what's?
Speaker 1 (23:07):
what's the distinction?
Speaker 2 (23:08):
I can't figure it out which is an artificial
intelligence, and and so in theas the movie progresses.
Given their limitless lifespan,the Eternals have grown bored,
corrupt, and they're slowlydescending into madness.
The needlessness of procreationhas rendered the men impotent,
and meditation has replacedsleep.
(23:30):
I don't know what John Bormanis going for in that movie.
I really have no fucking clue.
I don't know what John Bormanis going for in that movie.
I really have no fucking clue.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
I don't know.
I mean, there's a reason thatit's so weird and cult because
it's almost indecipherable.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, it really is indecipherable.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
And we're not even talking about, like you know,
sean Connery in a wedding gownor the giant floating head
vomiting guns, saying that thepenis is evil, the gun is good,
penis is evil.
The gun is good, so fuckingweird.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
But yes, their lives are run by and regulated by an
artificial intelligence thatkeeps them alive basically
forever.
It's essentially like the timemachine, kept alive forever
because of this artificialintelligence.
That is kind of commentary onpeople's need to work, to create
things, to do things, to beproductive.
(24:30):
Because the immortals or, I'msorry, the, the eternals,
they're going crazy in thatmovie because they don't have
anything to do, they're notcreating anything, they're not
making anything, and so why areyou alive forever if you're not
doing anything?
Speaker 1 (24:49):
yeah, that's where the ai went wrong.
So what they needed to have wasthe AI from Logan's Run.
Good call, I was thinking thattoo, when it's like well, if you
don't live long enough to findout that your life has no
purpose, then there's not goingto be any problems.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Man, you're right, there's such a great crossover
there and relatively around thesame time.
I mean, it's about a jar does a74?
Oh, so it's around almost theexact same time.
It's two years before logan'srun and they're making the same
commentary.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
well, well, not the same commentary, but there are
similar elements in both filmsthere are connective tissues, so
they're not making the samecommentary.
I don't know if I can tell youwhat commentary Zardoz is making
at all.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
It's not.
It feels like Stephen Kingdirected it during his weird
cocaine binge period, you know,like Maximum Overdrive.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Yeah, Maximum.
Yeah, exactly what I wasthinking of.
Oh really, that's like theperfect cocaine movie.
Speaker 2 (25:52):
Oh, it's the most cocaine movie.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Nothing, but excess makes no sense.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
And completely masturbatory to his own
narrative structure.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
It's true, but at least there's some skill and
some artistry going on.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Oh, absolutely.
At least there's a narrative.
Speaker 1 (26:06):
Maximum Overdrive has a truck with Green Goblin's
face, which again so cocaine.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Where did that come from?
Why is that there?
Why is that there?
Why is that on a truck?
Why is that in that movie?
Speaker 1 (26:18):
I have no clue it was officially approved by Marvel
Comics, so it was done onpurpose.
It's not like a truck they justfound.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
That leads even more into the fact that it was
cocaine fueled Cocaine's a hellof a drug.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Yeah Well, we're talking about AI overlords.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
I don't understand what you're telling me right now
.
Sure, I'm willing to entertainthat the penis is bad, but yeah
so Murray Shanahan, professor ofcognitive robotics at Imperial
College, who was consultedspecifically by Alex Garland for
Ex Machina, thinks that ExMachina is a great film because
(27:01):
people, after they saw it, couldspend the rest of the evening
arguing with each other aboutwhether the AI is or isn't
conscious.
And so my next quote will comefrom a paper we talked about
earlier.
Such discussions areinteresting philosophical
thought experiments, but theydon't help us to grasp where the
(27:21):
actual risks concerning AI are.
These risks are not about thepossibility that a fully
autonomous, slash conscious,human-like robot or software
program eventually willmanipulate us, you know, for its
own will, but that software andalgorithms we don't see
manipulate us in the politicaland commercial interests of
(27:44):
other people.
This is what tech journalistMartin Robbins says about Ex
Machina quote.
And so Nathan becomes andNathan is the, I guess,
protagonist.
He's the one that is trickedinto.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
No, isn't Caleb the protagonist?
I thought Nathan was thedeveloper, right.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
Nathan is yeah, he's the AI developer guy quote.
And so Nathan becomes kind of athree-part study of ego.
He represents the maleego-driven culture of the tech
world.
He represents the film's buy-into the idea that great egos
drive great scientific advances,which is 100% on display in
(28:22):
that movie, and the decay of hischaracter shows that what
happens when an ego faces thereality of its own extinction?
True, his hubris is, I think,really really really relevant to
today.
That's why it's one of thebetter alex garland movies.
He tries so hard later, likewith men, yeah, civil war yes,
(28:43):
civil war, sometimes people needto collaborate.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Ex machina is one of the few examples I can think of
off the top of my head thatactually uses social media and,
like their ai algorithms, usingall that information coming in
and turning that into asynthesis format for ai becoming
sentient.
And it's fascinating becauseit's kind of like the most
logical, like upcoming avenuefor that, like in the real world
(29:08):
of the massive amounts of datathat something like Meta has you
know on human behavior and howthey would turn that into a more
lifelike entity.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
Man, you remember when the that scandal happened,
when they employed the what wasthat company called Cambridge
Analytica, when we all learnedabout how they were secretly
collecting all of our data?
Speaker 1 (29:33):
Oh, that scandal.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
That happens all the time.
Now that's like standardoperating procedure and everyone
knows that, so like nobody evenbats an eye, even though it's
still completely immoral,unethical and illegal in so many
ways.
The things that they're doing,the way they're collecting data
to feed into these ai models orwhatever.
Back when that happened, thatwas like a big scandal.
(29:57):
Now it's like, well, yeah,that's how it works.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
That's sad yeah, that's a sign of the time.
It sure is what we consider thecost of doing business in
modern day life.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Jesus christ, it fucked While we're talking about
Ex Machina.
Ex Machina is a reallyinteresting example because it's
not a new idea necessarily, andit's not a new commentary, but
it is a more modern and nuancedone on current or modern day
conceptions of AI, but I thinkit is very important in and of
(30:33):
its own right.
One of the things we don't talkabout when we talk about modern
AI is that AI, as addressed inEx Machina and, honestly,
legitimately, certain otherfilms, including Her, is dealing
with toxic masculinity, which Iknow sounds like a 2020 hashtag
(30:54):
, but is a problem specificallywithin the tech world, and Ex
Machina deals with that ideabecause it implies that male
fears concerning powerful women,or just women with agency, is
terrifying to them.
It deals with the idea that theproblem we're having now with
(31:17):
uber masculine tech oligarchs,or at least the ones that wish
they were that technology isn'tneutral, but mirrors existing
sexism, but completely amplifiesit in all variations, from
design to development toapplication and, as a result,
for example, real world digitalassistants such as think about
(31:40):
this Alexa.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
Siri.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Cortana they're all feminized right.
Even in Avengers, when Jarvisbecomes Vision, he gets Friday
the computer in Star Trek.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Yeah, mother in Alien 100%.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Well, obviously her Joy from Blade Runner 2049.
Funny that it's spelled J-O-I.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Which I honestly, I didn't get until a while after I
saw the film.
Oh yeah, and that's what?
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Right, especially since he basically uses it as a
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
Although in that there's a undermining of that
within that film.
Yes, because if you see Joy inlike her natural context, you
know a live, naked woman open toproviding sexual sexual
experiences.
But when you see how heinteracts with it he puts
clothes on her it's a somewhatmore chaste relationship.
In a lot of ways, if anything,it's she's the one trying to
(32:42):
centralize the relationship,while he's having trying to have
an emotional connection yeah,but he's also.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
We know off the bat that he's a replicant.
So, like is he just emulatingan emotional?
Like he's emotionally awareenough that he should be having
these feelings and he's tryingto do them?
Is he just going through themotions because he's at least
cognizant enough to know that heshould be doing these?
(33:09):
You know what I mean?
Because, like, they set it upwhere, like, oh, he misses this
person or he wants this person,but at the same time, is it that
he's just trying to simulatethe things that he thinks he
should be?
Speaker 1 (33:24):
doing emotionally.
You could say that about all ofus really.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
True, which is one of the reasons we brought all this
up.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Yeah, I mean.
Examination of artificialintelligence is an examination
of ourselves and what makes usall what we are, what drives us,
what the meaning of our ownhumanity is.
That's part of the reason thatwe watched it and we were so
fascinated by these stories.
Is the true, relevant andexciting.
Science fiction is a mirrorinto our own souls.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
And we literally could do like 17 episodes about
documenting AI in sci-fi andfantasy.
We've never talked about theagency of droids in Star Wars or
data.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
I do want to get into .
Yeah, I mean, mean I obviously.
Well, unless we cut ourselvesoff to find some definitive
stopping point of what it isthat we fully want to say, I
don't think we've met thatthreshold yet.
No, no, not yet I think westill have distinct more to say,
so definitely this will not bethe last episode of this series
we did with like five episodesof rocky.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
I think we can.
I think we can go deep intofucking artificial intelligence.
We did what five episodes onHighlander.
I think we can get intoartificial intelligence.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
This exploration of the engendrification if that's
even a word of artificialintelligence, the male gaze and
the masculine bent in the techworld, both in fiction and in
nonfiction, that's fascinatingit is and it's not not mutually
exclusive, but it's also notmutually exclusive.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
The reasons behind both of those things, I think,
are endemic of bigger socialproblems, but also both parallel
sort of coincidentally, butalso not coincidentally it's
extremely complicated into howwe get to that point and if you
really want to go down all theway down that rabbit hole, which
we should the first on-screenartificial intelligence ever is
(35:25):
in Metropolis, where herecreates his wife, his dead
wife, into this robot, ultimaterobot woman who, I have to feel
like HR Giger took a lot ofinspiration from, based on just
aesthetics.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
I mean, let's be honest, Everybody after 1912, I
mean it's like everything afteris like that C-3PO looks very
similar yes.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
I mean, it's so on the nose yeah, which means that
that was an incredible creationthe visual aesthetic of
metropolis.
If people haven't seen it,watch metropolis.
It's a silent film and it's oneof the craziest, most ambitious
science fiction films ever made.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
It's a fundamental building block of science
fiction post-1927, when the filmcame out.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
And then, hilariously later, that director would go
on to do a version of the Wizardof Oz before the Wizard of Oz
came out.
Really, yeah, he did, and it'sweird, fritz Lang.
I don't know that, fritz Lang,that's this so, once again, we
barely scratched the surface ofai and pop culture, which is why
we put off doing this kind ofthis episode specifically for a
(36:41):
long time.
We just knew it would be so big.
It's going to be big and weweren't going to solve it.
But at least we could raisequestions and at least we can
pose questions and at least wecan hopefully spark some sort of
debate, or at least highlightcan pose questions, and at least
we can hopefully spark somesort of debate, or at least
highlight debates that havealready existed.
For I don't know, since we werehuman, considering we've been
trying to make artificial lifesince, basically, the idea that
(37:04):
we realized we were conscious,yeah, and the poor need for our
patriarchal society to excisebodily sovereignty and
self-determination from women.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
That certainly isn't a new concept and it doesn't
surprise us, shouldn't surpriseus in the least that it's
supposed to express in ourfiction looking at the future
possibilities, you know a lot ofit obviously is misogyny.
Speaker 2 (37:30):
Think about aliens.
What's the ultimate terrifyingpinnacle of the xenomorph?
The alien queen?
The queen?
Obviously yeah.
This is built into our society,and so it's going to be built
into our AI as we develop it.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
You could counteract that by the protagonist being a
woman, who then is gains evenmore strength and autonomy.
In that alien sequel, true, andwe could have an entire, just
as a counterbalance.
Speaker 2 (37:56):
No, no, that's fair and we can have an.
I guarantee we could have anentire episode just debating
that very specific example,considering ripley already
existed, and so like it's almostlike you're one of the first
times that you have a femaleprotagonist, not a final girl,
but a protagonist that lives andtriumphs over the ultimate evil
(38:17):
.
And then how is she challengednext?
What's bigger than her, abigger woman?
And also then, during that,she's protecting a child.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
The second film's all about motherhood in so many
ways.
Yeah, we could have an entireseries just on aliens, but we
motherhood in so many ways.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Yeah, we could have an entire series just on aliens,
but we don't have time for that.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Yeah, we do, but not right now.
This exact episode.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Not right this very second.
No, yeah, now we've opened adifferent door, another avenue
for you to think about things,to debate things, to consider
what we're talking about with AI.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
We have much more to say.
There will be more coming.
Maybe we'll actually really getinto it.
There's more.
I want to talk about Alien, thesynthetic people, as it were.
I got about an hour's worth ofstuff on Chappie, because
Chappies obviously are all ourfavorites.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
It's funny because I've got a two-hour episode
about Short Circuit, so we'regoing to do an entire batteries
not included episode, can't,can't, aliens.
But ironically it's mostlyabout hume cronin.
So I mean, and jessica tandy,obviously she's a dandy, she's
miss daisy.
Speaker 1 (39:23):
We we will have much more coming next time on next
episode, as we continue ourjourney down the digital circuit
pathways of artificialintelligence the coming
robopocalypse we haven't talkedabout data at all we mentioned
data.
Did we mention exocomps?
Speaker 2 (39:44):
oh shit, no, we haven't talked about exocomps,
which is extremely important.
I don't know, but extremelyimportant well, I mean, if
you're going down the star trekrabbit hole, but sure, I still
don't think exocomps areextremely important.
Speaker 1 (39:56):
Even in the star trek rabbit hole they should be the
doctor from voyager.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
Obviously it's really relevant to my current viewing
interests you know, the funnything is, the best show that
addresses these things is lowerdecks yeah, yeah, we've talked a
bit about ex machina.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
I think there's obviously there's plenty more to
say about all of these things,but we're just we're dipping our
toes.
We've talked about Blade Runner, got 2001, terminator,
battlestar I mean.
We haven't even talked aboutsomething like iRobot.
Well, not necessarily the movie, not the movie, but the idea, I
mean.
That's it.
Anyway, we can have ourdiscussion about what we're
going to talk about off air, butfor you, gentle listener, we'd
(40:33):
like to thank you and hope thatyou can thank your AI overlords
for bringing this to your ears.
If you wouldn't mind sharing itwith your other AI overlords,
it would definitely help us getseen and heard.
Like, share, subscribe.
Please give us five genderbiased exocomps on your favorite
(40:55):
podcast app of choice.
Apple podcast is the best wayfor us to get heard and seen.
Obviously we're uh, we'reweaving, bobbing, meandering,
but we'll get there.
We'll get there.
Hopefully, the robot friendsyou made along the way is better
than the destination you'regoing to get to.
But until we meet that big AIZardoz, god in the sky, skip,
what should we?
do it's evil.
(41:16):
Tell us about the penis Skipit's evil.
Tell him about the Twinkie.
That's one hell of a.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
Twinkie.
Oh, thank you, we're not evenin the same room.
Make sure, ladies and gentlemen, that you have cleaned up after
yourself to some sort ofreasonable degree.
Make sure you have tipped yourwaitstaff, your bartenders, your
KJs, etc.
Make sure you support yourlocal comic shops and retailers.
And from Dispatch HX we wouldboth like to say Godspeed, fair
(41:45):
wizards.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Yeah, shit man.
I started reading this thingabout Stepford Wives.
Please go away.
Fame Shrimp London, england.
Television Sex.
Gentlemen, let's broaden ourminds.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Are they in the proper approach pattern for
today?
Negative All the weapons Now.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Charge the lightning field.
Yahtzee, if you didn't know.
So it was originally called theYaht Game by a Canadian couple
who played it on their yacht.
They wanted a game, a diceversion of poker, and they came
up with Yaht, which then becameYahtzee it's really something
(00:46):
for the everyman.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
It's really, it's really about the plight of the
urban, proletariat, middle-agedcanadians on their yacht with
their friends.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Yeah, it's something we can all relate to.
It's well, the see, when weplay yahtzee it's just like oh,
I scored the most, I won.
But when they win they get theother couple's malaysian boy
that they had purchased earlierpeople selling people to people.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Welcome back to dispatch ajax I am right skip.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
No, I am a robot.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Do you have no name oh?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
okay, Designation fuckhead.
You can just say your name, Idon't know, that that's
necessary and we're doing moreof a descriptor, really, if
anything.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Well, I mean, it's important, isn't it, if we
identify as individuals.
I mean okay, important isn't it?
If we identify as individualsTo describe, I mean all right.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
We'll get into this.
We're talking today aboutrobots, huh.
Yeah we're going to talk aboutrobots.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
So now we can finally get into the AI in pop culture
space that we've promised thisentire time.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
You had your cocktail before dinner, which was the
first episode, and then you hadto sit through your salad, which
was last episode.
Now you get the meal You'reactually going to bite into your
steak.
It's made of zeros and ones,but it still tastes just as good
, maybe even better.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Yeah, I mean, you had your aperitif, you had your
digestif.
Now we're ready to do what weoriginally wanted to do with
this in our third episode.
But, to be honest, if we'regoing to do this, basically we
had to raise these questions, wehad to address these things and
(02:39):
now we can start talking aboutthis.
So I am curious as to what youare going to present for this.
Dead air is one of the bestthings about broadcast.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
You just put crickets in there Robot crickets in the
background.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
You were the one that would have started the episode,
and now you don't even knowwhat to do.
I'm following your lead, I'mrolling with the punches here.
So now we're going to talkabout artificially created
intelligence in pop culture andhow that matters today and how
it differs from what we'reactually seeing happen in real
(03:22):
time.
Yes, yes, question markactually seeing happen in real
time yes, yes, question mark,riddle me this robot man mr
robot that is your real name I'mkilroy, kilroy don't, don't
know sticks, mr roboto.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Okay, oh, that's fine I, you know, I don't really
like Mr Roboto.
Well, you know.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
I was a karaoke DJ for 10 years, so you know.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
Well, that's not my cross to bear, that's fair.
So we laid out some groundrules last episode, at least to
start out with what ourdiscussion.
I think we were an alien originfor said artificial
intelligence.
We were kind of leaning awayfrom it, though I'm sure certain
things will come up where thatis a part of it similar with
(04:15):
cybernetics, like robocop, ahuman robocop, you know.
But I mean we talk aboutterminator, which is kind of a
cyborg.
It's human flesh laid on arobotic chassis.
Oh, it's literally a cyborg.
Yeah, I mean we'll probablytalk about replicants, we will,
you know, or synthetic peopleand it's like, well, now they're
(04:39):
biological and it's mostly wedon't really know the full
process for making a replicantin the blade runner universe no,
not even in the sequel.
No, maybe in one of the cartoonsthat's out the animated
features.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Maybe they'll say something no, I've seen they
don't say anything about thecreation yeah, they're mostly
about the quote-unquote blackout.
Yeah, so I mean that's 90 ofthose and I mean westworld.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
It's, it's very much.
There is parts of mechanicalandroid synthetic underneath,
but a lot of it's seeminglyhuman flesh on the outside.
Now, how that all works, thescience of that.
That's a.
That's a wave your hand.
We're not really trying to getinto that and we could, because
a lot of how we won't.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Right now I don't know how we could but we won't
right now.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
I don't know how we could.
There's a deep breakdown.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
I did an episode about this on my Star Trek
podcast, about what defines anandroid.
Okay, but that's too much forus to do right now, so let's
just move on.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
So there are things like I't, I don't well.
Okay.
So an android.
An android literally means arobot or a machine that mimics
human, so I mean like in theshape and form of a human being.
A robot is something which wewill talk about as we go along.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Yes, but if it's full biological, that still is the
internal nature of itsconsciousness.
That would create, say, whetherit's a android, like.
At what point, god, we'regetting into things?
I don't know, we're all overthe place.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
Are you going to ship a Theseus argument?
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Okay, One, we don't know how.
How say, a replicant is made.
But if a replicant is fullyhuman-like in almost every way,
alright.
What is it about them thatseparates them from being human?
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Are they able to reproduce on their own?
Speaker 1 (06:40):
But is that a necessity for being considered?
Speaker 2 (06:43):
human.
That's one of the main pillarsof what we consider life.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Yes, are they able to replicate on their own, in
Children of Men, are thosepeople no longer human?
So at the point that you losethe ability to reproduce, you
lose your humanity.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
No, that's not true, because I mean there are a lot
of people who can't reproduce.
True, because I mean there area lot of people who can't
reproduce, but I mean like to bealive.
You have to be technically Ithink in a lot of respect able
to reproduce, defend yourselfagainst harm oh, hold on, all
right.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
So if, if, if, an avoid harm, so when?
When you say reproduce, thatmeans by some type of biological
intrinsic nature.
That's not creating another oneof you or another version of
you or a separate entity thatyou have created.
It has to be a sperm-ovumcombination.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Not necessarily.
No, I don't think that's thecase.
I think, based on, it's justand we're talking about cursory
definitions here To be alive youhave to interact with your
environment, you have to becapable of replicating yourself
(08:00):
and you have to react to outsidestimuli.
So, like you know, harmEditor's note, the most commonly
accepted characteristics thatdefine life are the capacity for
homeostasis, organization,metabolism, growth, adaptation,
(08:20):
response to stimuli andreproduction.
Excelsior true believers, Imean, that's why you get things.
I mean, flies are alive, plantsare alive for those very
specific criteria.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Right, but if a replicant was to build another
replicant, they would meet allof those criteria.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
I'm still on the camp that, yes, a replicant is alive
.
I mean, isn't that the point ofBlade Runner?
That the replicant is alive,that they deserve to live?
Speaker 1 (08:50):
But in that world they're distinctly thought of as
synthetic.
They have predeterminedlifespans.
I mean there seems to be aprogramming in at least some of
them.
The question of their free will, their freedom, their fully
conscious, the whole idea oftheir Void Comp is going, not
only exhibiting emotions buthaving an intrinsic emotional,
(09:13):
physical response.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
But the problem with the Void Comp thing is that, you
know, just like withcontemporary parallels, with IQ
tests and things like that,they're extremely limited
because of their.
The way that they're structuredisn't really indicative of how
things actually work Because,like the Voight-Kampff test
measures their physiologicalresponses, based on their
(09:40):
biology, which is created bysomebody, james Hahn mostly on
their biology, which is createdby somebody, james han mostly.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
So like that's not really a measure of if they are
human or not, which, honestly,is kind of but what I what I
like to think about is what intheir world in the world of of
that, I mean not quite doandroids dream of electricity,
but more in the Blade Runnercreation of that world.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
They're very different things.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
They are very different things.
What in that world makes themlesser than?
Is it a definition?
Is it a pre-programming?
Is it a shortened lifespan?
Is it not being biologicallyhuman?
I mean, you're bringing up thewhat separates them.
You're bringing up the whatseparates them.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
You're bringing up the existential questions that
movie makes.
Yes absolutely.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
At what point in their societal development would
they abandon that preconceptionof we created this artificial
entity?
Now we have to recognize it asits own sentient and
free-willing entity, becausethey obviously haven't yeah, and
I wish that they had expandedmore.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
I mean, I'm glad they don't, because I love blade
runner the way it is, but likethe replicants very specifically
are designed to fight wars offplanet.
That's kind of the premise.
Or be pleasure models.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
They're there to do jobs, jobs that we don't want to
do, yes.
And then it expands past that,in the sequel of being like,
even more jobs are taken up bysynthetic humanoid entities,
which is replicants.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
I don't care.
I liked that movie.
I think it's a I don't careabout the.
Harrison I don't give a shitabout the Harrison Ford shit
that much.
But you know, in that universe,especially if you read like
some of the or if you watch someof the prequel or those anime
ones that they did, I think itmakes it.
It's good world building.
I think it really adds to thatuniverse.
(11:42):
I know he wanted to do threemovies instead of the one so
it's kind of rushed and feltweird.
But I think they do a good jobof expanding on those things.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Yes, I think with both films it's about posing
these questions and letting thecharacters inside the stories
they're telling wrestle withthem.
But on a larger existential,societal view, it's like how did
they create this?
How would they continue withthis?
Yeah, I mean on the outside asa viewer watching this, it's
(12:12):
akin to like dropping intopre-Civil War America.
It's like well, why do you haveall these slaves around?
Why are these people designatedas less than and you're using
them for whatever purpose youdeem fit.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
We're talking about the Butlerian Jihad right now.
I mean it's on that level.
Well, I know that's a different.
I know that's different butit's not that different.
I mean, I'm not talking aboutthe, I'm not talking about his
kids novels, about the actualdune.
Well, you kind of have to.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
I mean, if you're going to talk about that, I mean
they're tied up in the samething, but I mean that's, that's
a whole like.
Well, it's just the Clone Warsgiving way power to the machines
and the machines turning into.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Skynet, essentially the lords of humanity, yeah,
yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
In a similar way.
I mean they, especially as youget into those books.
Oh God, I know Anthromorphismthat's going on within the robot
worlds and their kings andhierarchies and it gets really
nutty.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
What's the difference between Duncan, Idaho and a
replicant, though you know whatI mean.
Speaker 1 (13:23):
That's a good question, isn't it?
Yeah, I mean, if I were toclone you and then I label that
as replicant skip, I mean, is it?
Is it?
What would I have to apply toyou to be thought of as lesser?
Is it a title?
Is it something about?
Do I need to finagle with your,your mind?
Do I need to limit you in someway?
(13:43):
Do I need to differentiate?
Do I need to put a barcode onyour eyeball?
Is that all that I need?
At what point do we give youpersonhood?
That's fair, because you'reobviously sentient in the
seeming ways that we understandconsciousness and sentience, but
yet you're still imprisoned forbeing different I know that's a
real issue that we have to talkabout.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
What was a few years ago saudi arabia gave personhood
to a I guess for lack of abetter word an android Did you
read about this, I thought thatwas a stunt.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
I don't think that was real.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Yes, but legally it stands.
So you know it was a stunt.
It doesn't mean anything butright, which brings up all sorts
of questions.
It's a stunt, but what doesthat mean?
How does that impact us goingforward with these type of
things?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
I don't know.
I mean at some point that is aquestion Theoretically, if
humanity and artificialintelligence seems to be on a
freight train to the future,coming to a point where these
questions materialize in a realworld form, especially, leave it
up to it would be something ofthe courts, I'm sure, who would
have to debate that which wouldnever solve any of the actual
(14:59):
existential questions, but justsome of the, I guess, set
precedent for the legal ones.
I mean what this goes to yourStar Trek episode.
Right, the next gen dataepisode.
Oh, measure of a man.
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
I next-gen data episode.
Oh, measure of a man.
Yeah, I have thought about thatepisode a lot recently and I
keep re-evaluating how I feelabout that and I would like to
get to data eventually.
Well, let's talk about some ofthese other things first,
because then we can have it.
I think we should have aconversation about data yeah,
but I mean we kind of dove inthe deep end and then we swim
our way back to the shore andit's kind of like jaws if, like
(15:39):
he had just jumped off the boatwhen the shark was attacking and
then then go back to thebeginning of the movie he's just
jumping and eating helicoptersand then like, oh no, I need to
go.
I need to go take out afisherman too it'd be like if
roy scheider and it went out ona boat at the beginning of the
movie and then later I wasthinking, I was thinking the
(16:02):
shark jumps to uh the revenge,and then then goes back to the
beginning of the first movie.
Oh, wow, okay, you're going evendeeper in lore.
That's cool.
Once again, lewis gossett jrcomes up in like 13 consecutive
episodes because we talked abouthim in punisher I know we've
talked about lewis gossett jrmore than we think we have I'm
(16:26):
sure he's probably in a moviewith a robot, right?
Probably.
I mean it wasn't.
There was no robot and ironeagle, but I you.
Well, he was in.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
Enemy, mine Enemy.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Mine that I can think of.
I think it has aliens, but Idon't.
Speaker 1 (16:40):
Does it have robots?
Speaker 2 (16:43):
But anyway.
So we're talking about robots,so let's think about some of the
robots that have permeated popculture, and we're not going to
do a lot of the obvious ones,because you know, everybody fuck
.
We're going to talk about someof the interesting ones, or the
most important ones, and some ofthe ancillary, outside ones,
(17:07):
because that's what we do we dosomething different, we always
do something different.
What do you think are some ofthe most interesting, important
AI examples in pop culture?
I'm talking to you, jake, notthe audience.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Oh, not them out there.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
Them, the giant ants, parading by.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
The AI that's listening to our current podcast
.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Figuring out how to kill us secretly in the night,
yeah we'll judge us properly.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
I think all ai are great.
Nothing should happen to them.
I love ai.
Thanks guys for everything youdo.
Grok is the best whitesupremacist fucking ai yeah,
yeah, let's talk about palantir.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Huh, oh, jesus we already talked about raveon
might as well if we, if we wantto talk about ai run amok you
know, by the currentadministration yeah palantir,
that's kind of a we're here.
Speaker 1 (18:07):
What do you want to talk about?
Okay, fine oh jesus, well, likelast time, I look, I drew us
out to the deep water.
Whenever I pick something andstart talking.
So give us some floaties, letus work our way out there.
Floaties.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
This is from a paper by Isabella Herman called
Artificial Intelligence inFiction colon between narratives
and metaphors.
Quote between narratives andmetaphors.
Quote Taking science fictionalAI too literally and even
applying it to sciencecommunication paints a distorted
image of the technology'scurrent potential and distracts
(18:43):
from the real-world implicationsand risks of AI.
These risks are not abouthumanoid robots or about
conscious machines.
Are not about humanoid robotsor about conscious machines, but
about the scoring, nudging,discrimination, exploitation and
surveillance of humans by AItechnologies through governments
(19:03):
and corporations.
Ai in science fiction, on theother hand, is a trope as part
of a genre-specific megatextthat is better understood as a
dramatic means and metaphor toreflect on the human condition
and the socio-political issuesbeyond technology, which I think
is well put.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Yeah, Although if I ever write a book, I want it to
be called Megatext.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
You're the lamest Decepticon of all time.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
Oh, we would defeat them.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
We shall make them read no, one ever wants to hang
out with Megatext.
Ai in films often serves plotsof machines becoming human-like
and or a conflict of humansversus machines.
Science, fictional, ai is adramatic element that makes a
perfect antagonist, an enemy, avictim or, you know, sometimes a
(19:58):
hero.
Because, like in Blade Runner,2049, 40, whatever, because it
can be fully adjusted to thenecessities of the story.
But to fulfill the role thatit's playing in commentary, it
often has capabilities that areway beyond actual technology, be
it movement, the whole uncannyvalley thing, or sentience, or
(20:23):
the idea of AI consciousness and, seriously, as a representation
of real world AI, which we'vespoken about before.
It provides the wrongimpression of what AI can and
should do now and in the future,and we've already talked about
Frankenstein, which I think is areally important thing to
(20:46):
because, yes, it's obvious, yes,it's important, but it gives a
regular audience more of aframework, an understanding of
what we're trying to get to here.
In the Feeling of Power, a 1958short story by Isaac Asimov, a
futuristic society where humansrely on AI for everything, a
(21:07):
singular man discoversarithmetic and trains himself to
do multiplications, which issomething that had been long,
you know, relegated to AI andautomation.
At first the politically elitewrite it off as quote human math
and a useless parlor trick,like it's just a gimmick.
(21:28):
But military advisors see it asextremely valuable because if
humans understand calculationsthey can replace expensive
computers on warships.
It's a really obviousswitcheroo that Asimov does, but
it is one of the earliestrelevant sci-fi stories about AI
(21:48):
.
So in the short story, have noMouth and I Must Scream.
Harlan Ellison writes about analternative reality where the
Cold War becomes World War III,escalating in the form of a
three-way supercomputer armsrace between the USSR, the US
and the People's Republic ofChina, version just called am.
(22:17):
Am capital eventually gainssentience, self-awareness and
overtakes the other two, butthen wipes out humanity, save
for five survivors who were keptalive by am to endure endless
torture as a form of revengeagainst its creators.
Some Battlestar Galactica shit,it's some.
You know.
It is like a fundamental AItext, but its themes are not new
(22:39):
.
Well, I mean, maybe it was oneof the first, but it and you're
going to love this in Zardoz.
Zardoz, mankind is separatedlargely into two camps the
Eternals not the terrible,terrible marvel movie, who does
complete disservice to jackkirby who are effectively
immortal, and the brutals, whoare, I don't know.
(22:59):
Mortal, uh, the eternals areoverseen and protected from
death by the tabernacle what's?
Speaker 1 (23:07):
what's the distinction?
Speaker 2 (23:08):
I can't figure it out which is an artificial
intelligence, and and so in theas the movie progresses.
Given their limitless lifespan,the Eternals have grown bored,
corrupt, and they're slowlydescending into madness.
The needlessness of procreationhas rendered the men impotent,
and meditation has replacedsleep.
(23:30):
I don't know what John Bormanis going for in that movie.
I really have no fucking clue.
I don't know what John Bormanis going for in that movie.
I really have no fucking clue.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
I don't know.
I mean, there's a reason thatit's so weird and cult because
it's almost indecipherable.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, it really is indecipherable.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
And we're not even talking about, like you know,
sean Connery in a wedding gownor the giant floating head
vomiting guns, saying that thepenis is evil, the gun is good,
penis is evil.
The gun is good, so fuckingweird.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
But yes, their lives are run by and regulated by an
artificial intelligence thatkeeps them alive basically
forever.
It's essentially like the timemachine, kept alive forever
because of this artificialintelligence.
That is kind of commentary onpeople's need to work, to create
things, to do things, to beproductive.
(24:30):
Because the immortals or, I'msorry, the, the eternals,
they're going crazy in thatmovie because they don't have
anything to do, they're notcreating anything, they're not
making anything, and so why areyou alive forever if you're not
doing anything?
Speaker 1 (24:49):
yeah, that's where the ai went wrong.
So what they needed to have wasthe AI from Logan's Run.
Good call, I was thinking thattoo, when it's like well, if you
don't live long enough to findout that your life has no
purpose, then there's not goingto be any problems.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Man, you're right, there's such a great crossover
there and relatively around thesame time.
I mean, it's about a jar does a74?
Oh, so it's around almost theexact same time.
It's two years before logan'srun and they're making the same
commentary.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
well, well, not the same commentary, but there are
similar elements in both filmsthere are connective tissues, so
they're not making the samecommentary.
I don't know if I can tell youwhat commentary Zardoz is making
at all.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
It's not.
It feels like Stephen Kingdirected it during his weird
cocaine binge period, you know,like Maximum Overdrive.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Yeah, Maximum.
Yeah, exactly what I wasthinking of.
Oh really, that's like theperfect cocaine movie.
Speaker 2 (25:52):
Oh, it's the most cocaine movie.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Nothing, but excess makes no sense.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
And completely masturbatory to his own
narrative structure.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
It's true, but at least there's some skill and
some artistry going on.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
Oh, absolutely.
At least there's a narrative.
Speaker 1 (26:06):
Maximum Overdrive has a truck with Green Goblin's
face, which again so cocaine.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Where did that come from?
Why is that there?
Why is that there?
Why is that on a truck?
Why is that in that movie?
Speaker 1 (26:18):
I have no clue it was officially approved by Marvel
Comics, so it was done onpurpose.
It's not like a truck they justfound.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
That leads even more into the fact that it was
cocaine fueled Cocaine's a hellof a drug.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Yeah Well, we're talking about AI overlords.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
I don't understand what you're telling me right now
.
Sure, I'm willing to entertainthat the penis is bad, but yeah
so Murray Shanahan, professor ofcognitive robotics at Imperial
College, who was consultedspecifically by Alex Garland for
Ex Machina, thinks that ExMachina is a great film because
(27:01):
people, after they saw it, couldspend the rest of the evening
arguing with each other aboutwhether the AI is or isn't
conscious.
And so my next quote will comefrom a paper we talked about
earlier.
Such discussions areinteresting philosophical
thought experiments, but theydon't help us to grasp where the
(27:21):
actual risks concerning AI are.
These risks are not about thepossibility that a fully
autonomous, slash conscious,human-like robot or software
program eventually willmanipulate us, you know, for its
own will, but that software andalgorithms we don't see
manipulate us in the politicaland commercial interests of
(27:44):
other people.
This is what tech journalistMartin Robbins says about Ex
Machina quote.
And so Nathan becomes andNathan is the, I guess,
protagonist.
He's the one that is trickedinto.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
No, isn't Caleb the protagonist?
I thought Nathan was thedeveloper, right.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
Nathan is yeah, he's the AI developer guy quote.
And so Nathan becomes kind of athree-part study of ego.
He represents the maleego-driven culture of the tech
world.
He represents the film's buy-into the idea that great egos
drive great scientific advances,which is 100% on display in
(28:22):
that movie, and the decay of hischaracter shows that what
happens when an ego faces thereality of its own extinction?
True, his hubris is, I think,really really really relevant to
today.
That's why it's one of thebetter alex garland movies.
He tries so hard later, likewith men, yeah, civil war yes,
(28:43):
civil war, sometimes people needto collaborate.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Ex machina is one of the few examples I can think of
off the top of my head thatactually uses social media and,
like their ai algorithms, usingall that information coming in
and turning that into asynthesis format for ai becoming
sentient.
And it's fascinating becauseit's kind of like the most
logical, like upcoming avenuefor that, like in the real world
(29:08):
of the massive amounts of datathat something like Meta has you
know on human behavior and howthey would turn that into a more
lifelike entity.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
Man, you remember when the that scandal happened,
when they employed the what wasthat company called Cambridge
Analytica, when we all learnedabout how they were secretly
collecting all of our data?
Speaker 1 (29:33):
Oh, that scandal.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
That happens all the time.
Now that's like standardoperating procedure and everyone
knows that, so like nobody evenbats an eye, even though it's
still completely immoral,unethical and illegal in so many
ways.
The things that they're doing,the way they're collecting data
to feed into these ai models orwhatever.
Back when that happened, thatwas like a big scandal.
(29:57):
Now it's like, well, yeah,that's how it works.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
That's sad yeah, that's a sign of the time.
It sure is what we consider thecost of doing business in
modern day life.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Jesus christ, it fucked While we're talking about
Ex Machina.
Ex Machina is a reallyinteresting example because it's
not a new idea necessarily, andit's not a new commentary, but
it is a more modern and nuancedone on current or modern day
conceptions of AI, but I thinkit is very important in and of
(30:33):
its own right.
One of the things we don't talkabout when we talk about modern
AI is that AI, as addressed inEx Machina and, honestly,
legitimately, certain otherfilms, including Her, is dealing
with toxic masculinity, which Iknow sounds like a 2020 hashtag
(30:54):
, but is a problem specificallywithin the tech world, and Ex
Machina deals with that ideabecause it implies that male
fears concerning powerful women,or just women with agency, is
terrifying to them.
It deals with the idea that theproblem we're having now with
(31:17):
uber masculine tech oligarchs,or at least the ones that wish
they were that technology isn'tneutral, but mirrors existing
sexism, but completely amplifiesit in all variations, from
design to development toapplication and, as a result,
for example, real world digitalassistants such as think about
(31:40):
this Alexa.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
Siri.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Cortana they're all feminized right.
Even in Avengers, when Jarvisbecomes Vision, he gets Friday
the computer in Star Trek.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Yeah, mother in Alien 100%.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Well, obviously her Joy from Blade Runner 2049.
Funny that it's spelled J-O-I.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Which I honestly, I didn't get until a while after I
saw the film.
Oh yeah, and that's what?
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Right, especially since he basically uses it as a
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
Although in that there's a undermining of that
within that film.
Yes, because if you see Joy inlike her natural context, you
know a live, naked woman open toproviding sexual sexual
experiences.
But when you see how heinteracts with it he puts
clothes on her it's a somewhatmore chaste relationship.
In a lot of ways, if anything,it's she's the one trying to
(32:42):
centralize the relationship,while he's having trying to have
an emotional connection yeah,but he's also.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
We know off the bat that he's a replicant.
So, like is he just emulatingan emotional?
Like he's emotionally awareenough that he should be having
these feelings and he's tryingto do them?
Is he just going through themotions because he's at least
cognizant enough to know that heshould be doing these?
(33:09):
You know what I mean?
Because, like, they set it upwhere, like, oh, he misses this
person or he wants this person,but at the same time, is it that
he's just trying to simulatethe things that he thinks he
should be?
Speaker 1 (33:24):
doing emotionally.
You could say that about all ofus really.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
True, which is one of the reasons we brought all this
up.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
Yeah, I mean.
Examination of artificialintelligence is an examination
of ourselves and what makes usall what we are, what drives us,
what the meaning of our ownhumanity is.
That's part of the reason thatwe watched it and we were so
fascinated by these stories.
Is the true, relevant andexciting.
Science fiction is a mirrorinto our own souls.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
And we literally could do like 17 episodes about
documenting AI in sci-fi andfantasy.
We've never talked about theagency of droids in Star Wars or
data.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
I do want to get into .
Yeah, I mean, mean I obviously.
Well, unless we cut ourselvesoff to find some definitive
stopping point of what it isthat we fully want to say, I
don't think we've met thatthreshold yet.
No, no, not yet I think westill have distinct more to say,
so definitely this will not bethe last episode of this series
we did with like five episodesof rocky.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
I think we can.
I think we can go deep intofucking artificial intelligence.
We did what five episodes onHighlander.
I think we can get intoartificial intelligence.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
This exploration of the engendrification if that's
even a word of artificialintelligence, the male gaze and
the masculine bent in the techworld, both in fiction and in
nonfiction, that's fascinatingit is and it's not not mutually
exclusive, but it's also notmutually exclusive.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
The reasons behind both of those things, I think,
are endemic of bigger socialproblems, but also both parallel
sort of coincidentally, butalso not coincidentally it's
extremely complicated into howwe get to that point and if you
really want to go down all theway down that rabbit hole, which
we should the first on-screenartificial intelligence ever is
(35:25):
in Metropolis, where herecreates his wife, his dead
wife, into this robot, ultimaterobot woman who, I have to feel
like HR Giger took a lot ofinspiration from, based on just
aesthetics.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
I mean, let's be honest, Everybody after 1912, I
mean it's like everything afteris like that C-3PO looks very
similar yes.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
I mean, it's so on the nose yeah, which means that
that was an incredible creationthe visual aesthetic of
metropolis.
If people haven't seen it,watch metropolis.
It's a silent film and it's oneof the craziest, most ambitious
science fiction films ever made.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
It's a fundamental building block of science
fiction post-1927, when the filmcame out.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
And then, hilariously later, that director would go
on to do a version of the Wizardof Oz before the Wizard of Oz
came out.
Really, yeah, he did, and it'sweird, fritz Lang.
I don't know that, fritz Lang,that's this so, once again, we
barely scratched the surface ofai and pop culture, which is why
we put off doing this kind ofthis episode specifically for a
(36:41):
long time.
We just knew it would be so big.
It's going to be big and weweren't going to solve it.
But at least we could raisequestions and at least we can
pose questions and at least wecan hopefully spark some sort of
debate, or at least highlightcan pose questions, and at least
we can hopefully spark somesort of debate, or at least
highlight debates that havealready existed.
For I don't know, since we werehuman, considering we've been
trying to make artificial lifesince, basically, the idea that
(37:04):
we realized we were conscious,yeah, and the poor need for our
patriarchal society to excisebodily sovereignty and
self-determination from women.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
That certainly isn't a new concept and it doesn't
surprise us, shouldn't surpriseus in the least that it's
supposed to express in ourfiction looking at the future
possibilities, you know a lot ofit obviously is misogyny.
Speaker 2 (37:30):
Think about aliens.
What's the ultimate terrifyingpinnacle of the xenomorph?
The alien queen?
The queen?
Obviously yeah.
This is built into our society,and so it's going to be built
into our AI as we develop it.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
You could counteract that by the protagonist being a
woman, who then is gains evenmore strength and autonomy.
In that alien sequel, true, andwe could have an entire, just
as a counterbalance.
Speaker 2 (37:56):
No, no, that's fair and we can have an.
I guarantee we could have anentire episode just debating
that very specific example,considering ripley already
existed, and so like it's almostlike you're one of the first
times that you have a femaleprotagonist, not a final girl,
but a protagonist that lives andtriumphs over the ultimate evil
(38:17):
.
And then how is she challengednext?
What's bigger than her, abigger woman?
And also then, during that,she's protecting a child.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
The second film's all about motherhood in so many
ways.
Yeah, we could have an entireseries just on aliens, but we
motherhood in so many ways.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Yeah, we could have an entire series just on aliens,
but we don't have time for that.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Yeah, we do, but not right now.
This exact episode.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Not right this very second.
No, yeah, now we've opened adifferent door, another avenue
for you to think about things,to debate things, to consider
what we're talking about with AI.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
We have much more to say.
There will be more coming.
Maybe we'll actually really getinto it.
There's more.
I want to talk about Alien, thesynthetic people, as it were.
I got about an hour's worth ofstuff on Chappie, because
Chappies obviously are all ourfavorites.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
It's funny because I've got a two-hour episode
about Short Circuit, so we'regoing to do an entire batteries
not included episode, can't,can't, aliens.
But ironically it's mostlyabout hume cronin.
So I mean, and jessica tandy,obviously she's a dandy, she's
miss daisy.
Speaker 1 (39:23):
We we will have much more coming next time on next
episode, as we continue ourjourney down the digital circuit
pathways of artificialintelligence the coming
robopocalypse we haven't talkedabout data at all we mentioned
data.
Did we mention exocomps?
Speaker 2 (39:44):
oh shit, no, we haven't talked about exocomps,
which is extremely important.
I don't know, but extremelyimportant well, I mean, if
you're going down the star trekrabbit hole, but sure, I still
don't think exocomps areextremely important.
Speaker 1 (39:56):
Even in the star trek rabbit hole they should be the
doctor from voyager.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
Obviously it's really relevant to my current viewing
interests you know, the funnything is, the best show that
addresses these things is lowerdecks yeah, yeah, we've talked a
bit about ex machina.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
I think there's obviously there's plenty more to
say about all of these things,but we're just we're dipping our
toes.
We've talked about Blade Runner, got 2001, terminator,
battlestar I mean.
We haven't even talked aboutsomething like iRobot.
Well, not necessarily the movie, not the movie, but the idea, I
mean.
That's it.
Anyway, we can have ourdiscussion about what we're
going to talk about off air, butfor you, gentle listener, we'd
(40:33):
like to thank you and hope thatyou can thank your AI overlords
for bringing this to your ears.
If you wouldn't mind sharing itwith your other AI overlords,
it would definitely help us getseen and heard.
Like, share, subscribe.
Please give us five genderbiased exocomps on your favorite
(40:55):
podcast app of choice.
Apple podcast is the best wayfor us to get heard and seen.
Obviously we're uh, we'reweaving, bobbing, meandering,
but we'll get there.
We'll get there.
Hopefully, the robot friendsyou made along the way is better
than the destination you'regoing to get to.
But until we meet that big AIZardoz, god in the sky, skip,
what should we?
do it's evil.
(41:16):
Tell us about the penis Skipit's evil.
Tell him about the Twinkie.
That's one hell of a.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
Twinkie.
Oh, thank you, we're not evenin the same room.
Make sure, ladies and gentlemen, that you have cleaned up after
yourself to some sort ofreasonable degree.
Make sure you have tipped yourwaitstaff, your bartenders, your
KJs, etc.
Make sure you support yourlocal comic shops and retailers.
And from Dispatch HX we wouldboth like to say Godspeed, fair
(41:45):
wizards.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Yeah, shit man.
I started reading this thingabout Stepford Wives.
Please go away.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.