Just when I thought 42 couldn’t get more awesome, she gets a EMP generating samurai sword.
Also 35′s face is just perfect for an older sister being bothered by a younger sibling. Seriously, 42 is filling her ear with a bunch of dirt! I would not be enthused.
Unless I’m much mistaken, EMPs tend to be rather… undescriminating in their chosen targets, and AoE…
I’m not sure it would be safe for 42 to use one (nor 35) unless she is specifically shielded against its effects.
On the other hand… in a meatbag’s hands, it would be a very handy thing to use against the likes of Gear. Preferably a meatbag without cybernetic attachments, mind you. Phenol*, perhaps.
crap. stupid computer didn’t let me finish my comment. on a side note, am I the only one that notices 42 peaking out very creepy-like from behind the kiwi blitz logo in the upper left corner? O_o
Well, if you have to be buried alive, it’s probably best to be buried alive as a robot with no need to eat and breathe, nor any issues with sensory deprivation and claustrophobia.
It’s still gonna be very, very boring until 42 brings a programmer out to the logged GPs coordinates. Unless she can find some unsecured wireless internet access. In which case, no worries! You know, assuming her programming allows boredom or amusement via pointless timewasters.
Welcome to the wonderful woolly world of the semantic, empirical, and philosophical quagmire that is the definition(s) of “alive”!
Seriously though, after years of reading arguments and pondering, IMO it’s most likely a BS intuitive concept that people mistake for a rational/objective one because of how their perceptions are organized. You can only be certain about the extremes (i.e. rocks no, people yes), and even then it’s kinda only “for a given value of certain”. Pretty much every attempt to draw a line or a set or structure of requirements is riddled with exceptions and reductio-ad-absurdum examples/arguments. This implies (to me) that the question itself may be flawed.
I think the debate is moot when the author has gone to such exacting detail to show us which of the extremes these characters lie on, and has had rather impressive success doing it. Indeed, kudos must be given to the author for not writing these robots as is so commonly done and characterizing them simply as people who happen to be mechanical. Every frame showing 42 and every line of dialogue given her is carefully crafted to avoid this lazy and stereotypical characterization.
In fact, it is vital to a few important plot points regarding the androids that they are animate and intelligent but in no sense alive. It’s why they are illegal in the first place.
Well, no, not really. I mean, the author can say “I would consider something matching xyz criteria to be alive/not alive” or “the legal system in this world defines life as…”, but that doesn’t really settle anything. The former is an argument independent of the fiction and thus open to debate. The latter would only address social/legal status, but not the actual technical question(s) of life within the fiction.
The only way to render it moot would be to create a fantasy parameter for “life” as part of the objective physical reality of the made-up world. You know, like The Force, or Lifestream energy or whatever. That, or actually solve the real world problem of defining life in order to apply it to the fictional world.
“…They are animate and intelligent but in no sense alive”, no offense, but that doesn’t actually make sense. In order to say that you have to successfully define objective, measurable parameters for “life” and “not life” and apply them. No one in recorded human history has ever been able to do that to any half way satisfactory degree, but you’re willing to go all the way as far as “in no sense”? Not to mention the direct semantic contradiction in calling something “animate” but “not alive” at the same time. It reads like you’re making the same mistake I talked about above: falsely assuming an intuitive definition as empirical.
Arguing about whether a robot is alive is like arguing about whether animals have souls. The entire thing is just a great big big pointless wank as long as the base concept remains vague and unfalsifiable even in those examples where it’s usually taken for granted (e.g. humans in both cases).
alive and animated are two different things, to be animated is to have the functions and capacity to move or act alive, sometimes, life requires growth and many other variables in order to sustain itself, in which case it’s not merely moving, or being animated.
Of course, the issue in REAL LIFE remains, but we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about robots as presented to us in the context of this fiction.
Yeah, I was thinking similar. Not dismemberment, but she’d want to physically pull a wire or two at least: give her the robot equivalent of a spinal block.
Kinda like how in horror/thriller movies where the bad guy takes a body hit, and the hero(ine) says “Thank god, he’s dead. Now lets get out of here!”, and you’re sitting there thinking “NO! You don’t actually know he’d dead! Pop him once more in the head first, THEN go!”
42′s face in panel 5 is awesome and I’m not sure why.
Fine I guess some robots CAN do sarcasm then
42 with a sword of any kind is an unsettling idea
42: Wear the sword be the samurai.
Now the real question- what will 42 do now?
@tadpole …ponder the meaning of life?
how do you pronouce the “” characters? Must be some weeaboo stuff right there.
And then the camera zooms out to show all the other freshly filled-in patches of dirt XD
Loving this track so far
. It’s great to find out more about 42.
Blue-Ten’s idea, definitely. Love that
My question is, who reprogrammed 35?
Just when I thought 42 couldn’t get more awesome, she gets a EMP generating samurai sword.
Also 35′s face is just perfect for an older sister being bothered by a younger sibling. Seriously, 42 is filling her ear with a bunch of dirt! I would not be enthused.
Unless I’m much mistaken, EMPs tend to be rather… undescriminating in their chosen targets, and AoE…
I’m not sure it would be safe for 42 to use one (nor 35) unless she is specifically shielded against its effects.
On the other hand… in a meatbag’s hands, it would be a very handy thing to use against the likes of Gear. Preferably a meatbag without cybernetic attachments, mind you. Phenol*, perhaps.
(* : My nickname for Ben when he gets … caustic.)
Hope you got some nice game apps 35.
@Timberot My guess is someone within the Japanese government.
I wonder if robots can get bored?
Um…at least getting buried alive is better than getting hacked to pieces? O_O
Oh my.. Now she is going to have dirt in her ear. :< That can't be good for all of that inner-machinery.
“42:
There can be only ONE!”
and now 42 to the
crap. stupid computer didn’t let me finish my comment. on a side note, am I the only one that notices 42 peaking out very creepy-like from behind the kiwi blitz logo in the upper left corner? O_o
:I
I sure hope 42 doesn’t forget where she buried her sister.
I can just imagine the conversation 42 is going to have when she gets home.
Steffi: So… Where did you get that sword?
42: I took it from my sister and buried her alive.
Well, if you have to be buried alive, it’s probably best to be buried alive as a robot with no need to eat and breathe, nor any issues with sensory deprivation and claustrophobia.
It’s still gonna be very, very boring until 42 brings a programmer out to the logged GPs coordinates. Unless she can find some unsecured wireless internet access. In which case, no worries! You know, assuming her programming allows boredom or amusement via pointless timewasters.
I don’t think you can be “buried alive” when you’re not “alive” in the first place.
Welcome to the wonderful woolly world of the semantic, empirical, and philosophical quagmire that is the definition(s) of “alive”!
Seriously though, after years of reading arguments and pondering, IMO it’s most likely a BS intuitive concept that people mistake for a rational/objective one because of how their perceptions are organized. You can only be certain about the extremes (i.e. rocks no, people yes), and even then it’s kinda only “for a given value of certain”. Pretty much every attempt to draw a line or a set or structure of requirements is riddled with exceptions and reductio-ad-absurdum examples/arguments. This implies (to me) that the question itself may be flawed.
I think the debate is moot when the author has gone to such exacting detail to show us which of the extremes these characters lie on, and has had rather impressive success doing it. Indeed, kudos must be given to the author for not writing these robots as is so commonly done and characterizing them simply as people who happen to be mechanical. Every frame showing 42 and every line of dialogue given her is carefully crafted to avoid this lazy and stereotypical characterization.
In fact, it is vital to a few important plot points regarding the androids that they are animate and intelligent but in no sense alive. It’s why they are illegal in the first place.
Well, no, not really. I mean, the author can say “I would consider something matching xyz criteria to be alive/not alive” or “the legal system in this world defines life as…”, but that doesn’t really settle anything. The former is an argument independent of the fiction and thus open to debate. The latter would only address social/legal status, but not the actual technical question(s) of life within the fiction.
The only way to render it moot would be to create a fantasy parameter for “life” as part of the objective physical reality of the made-up world. You know, like The Force, or Lifestream energy or whatever. That, or actually solve the real world problem of defining life in order to apply it to the fictional world.
“…They are animate and intelligent but in no sense alive”, no offense, but that doesn’t actually make sense. In order to say that you have to successfully define objective, measurable parameters for “life” and “not life” and apply them. No one in recorded human history has ever been able to do that to any half way satisfactory degree, but you’re willing to go all the way as far as “in no sense”? Not to mention the direct semantic contradiction in calling something “animate” but “not alive” at the same time. It reads like you’re making the same mistake I talked about above: falsely assuming an intuitive definition as empirical.
Arguing about whether a robot is alive is like arguing about whether animals have souls. The entire thing is just a great big big pointless wank as long as the base concept remains vague and unfalsifiable even in those examples where it’s usually taken for granted (e.g. humans in both cases).
alive and animated are two different things, to be animated is to have the functions and capacity to move or act alive, sometimes, life requires growth and many other variables in order to sustain itself, in which case it’s not merely moving, or being animated.
great wall of text batman D:
Of course, the issue in REAL LIFE remains, but we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about robots as presented to us in the context of this fiction.
I declare the Humpty Dumpty Clause on this entire conversation.
I wonder if 42 is programmed to be able to wield a katana properly.
“I wonder if 42 is programmed to be able to wield a katana properly.”
I thought the point of an AI was that they could learn how to do things by themselves?
Maybe 42 should have taken a finger from her first. She is still down a digit, after all, and 35 certainly won’t be using it.
to be on the safe side she probably should have taken her apart first… wouldn’t want her digging her way out now would we
Yeah, I was thinking similar. Not dismemberment, but she’d want to physically pull a wire or two at least: give her the robot equivalent of a spinal block.
Kinda like how in horror/thriller movies where the bad guy takes a body hit, and the hero(ine) says “Thank god, he’s dead. Now lets get out of here!”, and you’re sitting there thinking “NO! You don’t actually know he’d dead! Pop him once more in the head first, THEN go!”
Wasn’t the point of panels one and two that 42 hacked her ability to move? That’s why they can have this leisurely conversation in the first place.
pfft…last pannel..35′s face is totally “|:I”