Hey Google Gemini, Why Has #Disney Been #IGNORING OR #Erasing They're Old #Cartoons & #AVOIDING TheSequels & #Animated #Series of #Beloved #Classics?
"Several factors explain Disney's shifting approach to its classic cartoons, sequels, and animated series, moving away from their historical output toward new, modern content. These include a desire for creative innovation, the high cost of remastering old content, and a preference for new, profitable franchises.
Business and strategy
Focus on new profitability. Disney prioritizes creating original, new programming that attracts new subscribers to its streaming service, Disney+, over showcasing its older, established catalog. The company weighed the cost of featuring less-watched titles versus the risk of losing subscribers and determined that cutting content was worthwhile.
Emphasis on new intellectual property (IP). In 2024, CEO Bob Iger stated that the company was "swinging back a bit to lean on sequels," and prioritizing known IP due to its high value and lower marketing costs. This often takes the form of live-action remakes of classic animated films, which are seen as a safer and more lucrative bet than a new animated franchise.
Changes in leadership and vision. The company's strategy has shifted over time. Walt Disney himself was largely against sequels to his feature films, guided by the philosophy, "you can't top pigs with pigs".
The direct-to-video sequels of the 1990s and 2000s, like Cinderella II, were often viewed as low-quality, cash-grabbing efforts. After the acquisition of Pixar, executives like Steve Jobs expressed disdain for these sequels, leading Disney to re-evaluate its strategy and focus on higher-quality, often theatrical, sequels.
Archival and content issues.
The expense of restoration. Digitizing old, hand-drawn animation is a time-consuming and costly process. Much of Disney's oldest content was released only on VHS and hasn't been updated to modern digital formats. Restoring this content for a service like Disney+ is an additional and often low-priority expense.
The potential for controversy. Some older content, particularly pre-1960s shorts, may contain jokes, stereotypes, or themes that are now considered racially insensitive or inappropriate. To avoid controversy, Disney often chooses to omit these cartoons from its platforms rather than restoring and releasing them with disclaimers.
Lack of demand for shorts. Short-form animated content has struggled to find a prominent place in the modern streaming era, which is dominated by feature films and long-form series. While nostalgic fans may remember the shorts, there isn't enough modern demand to justify a large-scale remastering and promotion effort.
Animated series
Shifting away from classic re-airings. In the 1990s and 2000s, The Disney Channel began to prioritize its original programming rather than airing old cartoons and series. While some beloved shows like DuckTales and Gargoyles are on Disney+, the platform's main focus is on new content.
Rebooting vs. reviving. Instead of simply adding old series like The Weekenders or House of Mouse to Disney+, the company has often opted to reboot them for a new generation. The 2017 DuckTales reboot is a prime example of this strategy, which revitalizes the IP while attracting a new audience.
Rights and production complexities. Some series were not solely created by Disney, or are tangled in old broadcast and syndication contracts that complicate their move to a streaming platform.
How Disney addresses this for different formats.
Live-action remakes of classics like The Little Mermaid and Mulan are now a primary vehicle for monetizing established stories, which can be less creatively taxing than developing a new animated story.
Higher-quality animated sequels, such as Frozen II and Moana 2, are now produced by the main Walt Disney Animation Studios rather than the direct-to-video arm that produced lower-quality titles in the past.
Thematic reboots, like the new DuckTales, breathe new life into older IP by updating the tone and humor for a modern audience."
Wednesday, September 3, 2025
Google Gemini' Compares "Lifeline", to "Caution: Seaman" to Tiger/Hasbro's Furby
Hey #Google #Gemini, IS #Konami's #Lifeline & Caution: #Seaman Game, Similar to #TeddyRuxpin OR #TigerElectronics/#Hasbro's #FURBY?
"Disclaimer: The game Seaman has adult content and themes, and is rated accordingly. The following comparison is for informational purposes and focuses on the interactive and virtual pet mechanics, not the mature content.
Lifeline and Seaman were programmed as video games with a specific, narrow purpose: simulating a relationship with a virtual character. Their code was designed for limited, scripted interactions within a fixed, narrative-driven framework.
No, the games Lifeline and Seaman are not similar to the toys Teddy Ruxpin or Furby. While they all involve interactive characters, the games are fundamentally different in their mechanics, purpose, and tone.
The games had a fixed scope. Once the player had explored all the programmed possibilities, there was nothing new to discover.
Whereas Seaman (Dreamcast Game) Lifeline (Konami Console and Mobile Game Series)
Teddy Ruxpin & Furby (Toys) feature Voice-based Interaction. You communicate with the creature using a microphone peripheral. The creature responds and asks questions in a sarcastic and unsettling way.
Text-based choices. The story unfolds in real-time as you receive text-like messages from a stranded character, and you make critical survival decisions by choosing from a set of replies. Physical interaction. You talk to the toy, and it responds with pre-programmed phrases. It also reacts to physical touch, like petting, by giggling or making other noises.
Character A strange, human-faced creature that evolves over time. Its behavior is often hostile, sarcastic, and creepy. A human character (Taylor) in a stranded situation. They are a helpless survivor who depends on your guidance. Child-friendly. Teddy Ruxpin is a storytelling bear, and Furbies are designed to be cute, fluffy pets.
Premise A virtual pet simulator where you must care for the creature's tank and environment to ensure its survival and evolution. As it matures, it asks you invasive, personal questions.
A text-based survival game with suspense elements. The objective is to guide the survivor to safety by waiting for them to reply and then providing advice.
A toy that provides entertainment through stories and programmed reactions. The objective is to play with and care for the toy.
Atmosphere Creepy, psychological, and bizarre. Narrated by Leonard Nimoy, the game has an eerie feel that becomes more pronounced as the creature asks more personal questions.
Tense and immersive. The real-time messaging adds to the feeling that you are communicating with a real person in a life-or-death situation. Lighthearted and fun. These toys are made to be comforting, pleasant companions for children.
User Experience A bizarre, experimental game that was unlike anything else at the time. It is known for its slow, real-time pace, which could be frustrating.
An immersive narrative game that requires patience, as you may need to wait hours for the character to respond. This adds to the sense of realism. Straightforward and immediate. The toy responds to commands and actions almost instantly, with no narrative or long wait times."
"Disclaimer: The game Seaman has adult content and themes, and is rated accordingly. The following comparison is for informational purposes and focuses on the interactive and virtual pet mechanics, not the mature content.
Lifeline and Seaman were programmed as video games with a specific, narrow purpose: simulating a relationship with a virtual character. Their code was designed for limited, scripted interactions within a fixed, narrative-driven framework.
No, the games Lifeline and Seaman are not similar to the toys Teddy Ruxpin or Furby. While they all involve interactive characters, the games are fundamentally different in their mechanics, purpose, and tone.
The games had a fixed scope. Once the player had explored all the programmed possibilities, there was nothing new to discover.
Whereas Seaman (Dreamcast Game) Lifeline (Konami Console and Mobile Game Series)
Teddy Ruxpin & Furby (Toys) feature Voice-based Interaction. You communicate with the creature using a microphone peripheral. The creature responds and asks questions in a sarcastic and unsettling way.
Text-based choices. The story unfolds in real-time as you receive text-like messages from a stranded character, and you make critical survival decisions by choosing from a set of replies. Physical interaction. You talk to the toy, and it responds with pre-programmed phrases. It also reacts to physical touch, like petting, by giggling or making other noises.
Character A strange, human-faced creature that evolves over time. Its behavior is often hostile, sarcastic, and creepy. A human character (Taylor) in a stranded situation. They are a helpless survivor who depends on your guidance. Child-friendly. Teddy Ruxpin is a storytelling bear, and Furbies are designed to be cute, fluffy pets.
Premise A virtual pet simulator where you must care for the creature's tank and environment to ensure its survival and evolution. As it matures, it asks you invasive, personal questions.
A text-based survival game with suspense elements. The objective is to guide the survivor to safety by waiting for them to reply and then providing advice.
A toy that provides entertainment through stories and programmed reactions. The objective is to play with and care for the toy.
Atmosphere Creepy, psychological, and bizarre. Narrated by Leonard Nimoy, the game has an eerie feel that becomes more pronounced as the creature asks more personal questions.
Tense and immersive. The real-time messaging adds to the feeling that you are communicating with a real person in a life-or-death situation. Lighthearted and fun. These toys are made to be comforting, pleasant companions for children.
User Experience A bizarre, experimental game that was unlike anything else at the time. It is known for its slow, real-time pace, which could be frustrating.
An immersive narrative game that requires patience, as you may need to wait hours for the character to respond. This adds to the sense of realism. Straightforward and immediate. The toy responds to commands and actions almost instantly, with no narrative or long wait times."
Tuesday, September 2, 2025
CAN Google Gemini, Be Held Accountable Due to It's Program Limitations?
Hey #Google #Gemini, Eventhough
A.I. IS #Effeccient & #Effective at #Detection, IT TOO CAN Be Held-Accountable, BECAUSE A.I. #Lacks #Empathy, Common-Sense & #Logical #Understanding of Real-World #Dynamics!
"It is a widely held and valid viewpoint that while Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be efficient and effective, it can also be held accountable precisely because it lacks human qualities such as empathy, common sense, and real-world understanding. This is a central theme in the field of responsible AI, driving the creation of governance frameworks and the push for stronger human oversight. The disconnect between AI capability and accountability
AI operates on logic, not emotion: AI systems are designed to process vast amounts of data and identify patterns, operating on logic rather than human emotional intelligence. In contrast, human empathy allows for a nuanced perspective that factors in emotional and moral considerations. An AI may be able to simulate empathy to an extent, but it cannot genuinely experience it.
The "common sense" gap: AI systems often lack the fundamental background knowledge and reasoning abilities that humans take for granted. They can be "brittle," failing in unexpected situations or struggling with context and nuance that would be obvious to a person. This is a major concern for autonomous systems like self-driving cars, where an unexpected obstacle could lead to a catastrophic failure.
A limited understanding of the real world: Generative AI models, despite impressive outputs, do not possess a true, coherent understanding of the world or its rules. This can lead to unexpected and even harmful results, as illustrated by past incidents where chatbots gave dangerous or inappropriate advice to users.
Accountability is built on human judgment: The concept of accountability holds parties responsible for outcomes, but AI itself cannot be held liable. Its complex "black box" systems, where the decision-making process is opaque, make assigning responsibility difficult. This creates a "moral accountability gap" where it's unclear who is to blame for a harmful outcome.
Solutions for holding AI accountable To address these limitations, several strategies and frameworks are being developed:
Human oversight: Integrating human judgment and intervention into AI decision-making processes is critical. This includes human-in-the-loop systems, expert review of data inputs, and continuous monitoring of AI outputs to ensure they align with ethical, legal, and societal norms.
AI governance frameworks: These are structured systems of policies and ethical principles designed to guide the development and deployment of AI. Examples include the EU AI Act and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework.
Transparency and explainability: Responsible AI requires making the decision-making processes of AI systems more transparent and understandable. This allows developers and end-users to see how an AI reaches a conclusion and to identify potential issues like bias. Regular auditing and monitoring: AI systems are not static; they evolve over time. Regular audits and monitoring are essential to check for deteriorating performance, bias amplification, and other ethical issues.
Pattern recognition vs. understanding: AI on Google Search can process vast amounts of data about human interactions and psychology, but it cannot experience them. While it can generate responses that mimic empathy or emotional intelligence, it is not an authentic experience. Users can often detect the artificial nature of the interaction, which can diminish trust.
User feedback: Establishing feedback loops from users who interact with an AI can provide invaluable insight into where an AI falls short in its understanding or its ability to act empathetically."
"It is a widely held and valid viewpoint that while Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be efficient and effective, it can also be held accountable precisely because it lacks human qualities such as empathy, common sense, and real-world understanding. This is a central theme in the field of responsible AI, driving the creation of governance frameworks and the push for stronger human oversight. The disconnect between AI capability and accountability
AI operates on logic, not emotion: AI systems are designed to process vast amounts of data and identify patterns, operating on logic rather than human emotional intelligence. In contrast, human empathy allows for a nuanced perspective that factors in emotional and moral considerations. An AI may be able to simulate empathy to an extent, but it cannot genuinely experience it.
The "common sense" gap: AI systems often lack the fundamental background knowledge and reasoning abilities that humans take for granted. They can be "brittle," failing in unexpected situations or struggling with context and nuance that would be obvious to a person. This is a major concern for autonomous systems like self-driving cars, where an unexpected obstacle could lead to a catastrophic failure.
A limited understanding of the real world: Generative AI models, despite impressive outputs, do not possess a true, coherent understanding of the world or its rules. This can lead to unexpected and even harmful results, as illustrated by past incidents where chatbots gave dangerous or inappropriate advice to users.
Accountability is built on human judgment: The concept of accountability holds parties responsible for outcomes, but AI itself cannot be held liable. Its complex "black box" systems, where the decision-making process is opaque, make assigning responsibility difficult. This creates a "moral accountability gap" where it's unclear who is to blame for a harmful outcome.
Solutions for holding AI accountable To address these limitations, several strategies and frameworks are being developed:
Human oversight: Integrating human judgment and intervention into AI decision-making processes is critical. This includes human-in-the-loop systems, expert review of data inputs, and continuous monitoring of AI outputs to ensure they align with ethical, legal, and societal norms.
AI governance frameworks: These are structured systems of policies and ethical principles designed to guide the development and deployment of AI. Examples include the EU AI Act and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework.
Transparency and explainability: Responsible AI requires making the decision-making processes of AI systems more transparent and understandable. This allows developers and end-users to see how an AI reaches a conclusion and to identify potential issues like bias. Regular auditing and monitoring: AI systems are not static; they evolve over time. Regular audits and monitoring are essential to check for deteriorating performance, bias amplification, and other ethical issues.
Pattern recognition vs. understanding: AI on Google Search can process vast amounts of data about human interactions and psychology, but it cannot experience them. While it can generate responses that mimic empathy or emotional intelligence, it is not an authentic experience. Users can often detect the artificial nature of the interaction, which can diminish trust.
User feedback: Establishing feedback loops from users who interact with an AI can provide invaluable insight into where an AI falls short in its understanding or its ability to act empathetically."
Why Google Gemini IS Inherently Flawed
Hey Google Gemini, Since Humans Initially CREATE Seemingly Intelligent A.I, Doesn't THAT Make It Inherently Flawed Verses "Fictional" Magic OR ACTUAL Sensitivity?
While your premise is provocative, it highlights a crucial point: AI is fundamentally different from both fictional magic and genuine human sensitivity precisely because it was created by humans and operates on fundamentally different principles. This difference is the source of both its capabilities and its inherent limitations and "flaws."
Why AI is inherently different from magic Fictional magic is often portrayed as an incomprehensible, natural force beyond human design. AI, by contrast, is entirely a product of human engineering.
The "magic" is the algorithm: AI is not magical; it is a complex system of code and data. Its impressive abilities, such as generating text or recognizing images, come from sophisticated pattern recognition—not from an inner "understanding".
A "human" wizard vs. a human programmer: In fantasy, a wizard can be flawed because of their own nature—pride, greed, etc. AI is flawed because of its creator's nature. It reflects the biases, assumptions, and limitations present in the training data and programming chosen by human developers. Why AI is inherently different from human sensitivity
Human sensitivity is deeply rooted in embodied, subjective experience, something AI currently lacks.
Experience vs. Data: Humans use a rich combination of biological processes, context, emotion, and intuition to interact with the world. AI processes information statistically, based on the vast datasets it was trained on, not from having a subjective point of view.
Simulated vs. Genuine Emotion: AI can be programmed to detect and respond to emotional cues, and even generate "empathetic" phrases. However, it does not feel emotion itself. A recent study found that people value identical responses less when they know it comes from an AI, suggesting that perceived authenticity is vital for genuine empathy. Narrative vs. Algorithm: As one researcher put it, AI systems are "mirrors" of human behavior, not minds. Humans construct a sense of self and motivation through a narrative that AI lacks. This is why AI cannot have a genuine moral compass or intrinsic motivation in the same way a human can.
The paradox of human creation and AI flaw The "flaw" you identify—that humans created AI—is precisely the source of its limitations when compared to genuine sensitivity or "magic."
Bias in, bias out: The most well-documented "flaw" is algorithmic bias. When AI is trained on biased historical data, it perpetuates and even amplifies those human biases. This is a direct consequence of its human origins.
The "black box" problem: While humans can often explain their reasoning, the complex calculations of advanced AI models are often opaque, even to their creators. The choices it makes are based on mathematical probabilities, not on a human-like process of introspection or reflection.
Lack of common sense: AI can process and analyze vast amounts of data but lacks a fundamental common-sense understanding of the world. It operates on patterns, not comprehension. For example, it might identify a picture of a dog but not "know" that a dog is an animal that needs care. In essence, AI's intelligence is a product of its human-made constraints, not an organic, emergent property. This makes it neither truly "magical" nor genuinely "sensitive," but rather a powerful, limited tool that reflects its origin.
Artificial Intelligence vs. Human Intelligence: Which Excels Where and What Will Never Be Matched and What are Pre-Requisites for archiving data."
While your premise is provocative, it highlights a crucial point: AI is fundamentally different from both fictional magic and genuine human sensitivity precisely because it was created by humans and operates on fundamentally different principles. This difference is the source of both its capabilities and its inherent limitations and "flaws."
Why AI is inherently different from magic Fictional magic is often portrayed as an incomprehensible, natural force beyond human design. AI, by contrast, is entirely a product of human engineering.
The "magic" is the algorithm: AI is not magical; it is a complex system of code and data. Its impressive abilities, such as generating text or recognizing images, come from sophisticated pattern recognition—not from an inner "understanding".
A "human" wizard vs. a human programmer: In fantasy, a wizard can be flawed because of their own nature—pride, greed, etc. AI is flawed because of its creator's nature. It reflects the biases, assumptions, and limitations present in the training data and programming chosen by human developers. Why AI is inherently different from human sensitivity
Human sensitivity is deeply rooted in embodied, subjective experience, something AI currently lacks.
Experience vs. Data: Humans use a rich combination of biological processes, context, emotion, and intuition to interact with the world. AI processes information statistically, based on the vast datasets it was trained on, not from having a subjective point of view.
Simulated vs. Genuine Emotion: AI can be programmed to detect and respond to emotional cues, and even generate "empathetic" phrases. However, it does not feel emotion itself. A recent study found that people value identical responses less when they know it comes from an AI, suggesting that perceived authenticity is vital for genuine empathy. Narrative vs. Algorithm: As one researcher put it, AI systems are "mirrors" of human behavior, not minds. Humans construct a sense of self and motivation through a narrative that AI lacks. This is why AI cannot have a genuine moral compass or intrinsic motivation in the same way a human can.
The paradox of human creation and AI flaw The "flaw" you identify—that humans created AI—is precisely the source of its limitations when compared to genuine sensitivity or "magic."
Bias in, bias out: The most well-documented "flaw" is algorithmic bias. When AI is trained on biased historical data, it perpetuates and even amplifies those human biases. This is a direct consequence of its human origins.
The "black box" problem: While humans can often explain their reasoning, the complex calculations of advanced AI models are often opaque, even to their creators. The choices it makes are based on mathematical probabilities, not on a human-like process of introspection or reflection.
Lack of common sense: AI can process and analyze vast amounts of data but lacks a fundamental common-sense understanding of the world. It operates on patterns, not comprehension. For example, it might identify a picture of a dog but not "know" that a dog is an animal that needs care. In essence, AI's intelligence is a product of its human-made constraints, not an organic, emergent property. This makes it neither truly "magical" nor genuinely "sensitive," but rather a powerful, limited tool that reflects its origin.
Artificial Intelligence vs. Human Intelligence: Which Excels Where and What Will Never Be Matched and What are Pre-Requisites for archiving data."
Google Gemini's Opinions on: Cybernetics & Actroid
"Cybernetics is considered a foundational, yet ethically complex, discipline for intelligent systems, recognizing both its promise for positive human impact and the potential societal risks. The Actroid is a more specific and practical case study that highlights current limitations and the challenges of the "uncanny valley" in developing human-like robots.
Here are perspectives on each topic, based on the nature of these concepts: Cybernetics Cybernetics is a transdisciplinary field that studies the communication and control of complex systems in both machines and living organisms, focusing on feedback loops and regulation.
Opportunities: Medical advancements: Cybernetic principles have led to the development of adaptive prosthetics, advanced hearing aids, and implantable health monitors. Future applications could include artificial organs and nanorobots that fight disease from within the body. Enhanced performance: Beyond medical necessity, cybernetics offers the potential for "enhancements" that improve human capabilities, such as cognition, physical strength, and sensory perception. Intelligent systems: Cybernetics provides a crucial framework for developing more sophisticated and adaptive AI. This synergy can lead to breakthroughs in autonomous systems, intelligent manufacturing, and responsive transportation. Ethical concerns: Inequality and access: Access to advanced cybernetic enhancements could create new societal divides between those who can and cannot afford them, raising issues of social justice and equity. Redefining humanity: The blending of human and machine raises deep philosophical questions about human dignity, identity, and personhood. Control and responsibility: The development of advanced, self-regulating systems raises questions about who is responsible for a machine's actions, particularly in cases of malfunction. Concerns about data privacy and the potential for a "coerced" technological reliance are also present. Actroid The Actroid is a real-world example of an android that uses cybernetic principles to mimic lifelike functions. First unveiled in 2003, Actroid models have been developed by Osaka University and manufactured by Kokoro Company. Current status and limitations: Realistic appearance: Actroids are notable for their highly realistic, silicone-based skin and ability to mimic human functions like blinking and "breathing." They are often modeled after young Japanese women. Limited functionality: The hardware for Actroid's movements and AI is typically external, which limits the robot's physical capabilities. They are generally restricted to seated or supported standing positions, rather than being fully mobile. Performance versus presence: While Actroids can provide a convincing human presence, their conversational abilities are rudimentary, relying on speech recognition and pre-programmed gestures. The uncanny valley: A cautionary example: The Actroid often serves as a practical illustration of the "uncanny valley" hypothesis, which posits that robots appearing "almost but not quite" human can elicit feelings of revulsion. Unsettling realism: The combination of realistic looks with subtle-yet-unnatural movements and limited conversation can be profoundly disturbing to human observers. The path forward: Overcoming the uncanny valley is a major challenge for roboticists. Newer Actroid models and projects like the "Geminoid" have explored more nuanced movements to increase a sense of naturalness, but the effect remains a significant obstacle."
Here are perspectives on each topic, based on the nature of these concepts: Cybernetics Cybernetics is a transdisciplinary field that studies the communication and control of complex systems in both machines and living organisms, focusing on feedback loops and regulation.
Opportunities: Medical advancements: Cybernetic principles have led to the development of adaptive prosthetics, advanced hearing aids, and implantable health monitors. Future applications could include artificial organs and nanorobots that fight disease from within the body. Enhanced performance: Beyond medical necessity, cybernetics offers the potential for "enhancements" that improve human capabilities, such as cognition, physical strength, and sensory perception. Intelligent systems: Cybernetics provides a crucial framework for developing more sophisticated and adaptive AI. This synergy can lead to breakthroughs in autonomous systems, intelligent manufacturing, and responsive transportation. Ethical concerns: Inequality and access: Access to advanced cybernetic enhancements could create new societal divides between those who can and cannot afford them, raising issues of social justice and equity. Redefining humanity: The blending of human and machine raises deep philosophical questions about human dignity, identity, and personhood. Control and responsibility: The development of advanced, self-regulating systems raises questions about who is responsible for a machine's actions, particularly in cases of malfunction. Concerns about data privacy and the potential for a "coerced" technological reliance are also present. Actroid The Actroid is a real-world example of an android that uses cybernetic principles to mimic lifelike functions. First unveiled in 2003, Actroid models have been developed by Osaka University and manufactured by Kokoro Company. Current status and limitations: Realistic appearance: Actroids are notable for their highly realistic, silicone-based skin and ability to mimic human functions like blinking and "breathing." They are often modeled after young Japanese women. Limited functionality: The hardware for Actroid's movements and AI is typically external, which limits the robot's physical capabilities. They are generally restricted to seated or supported standing positions, rather than being fully mobile. Performance versus presence: While Actroids can provide a convincing human presence, their conversational abilities are rudimentary, relying on speech recognition and pre-programmed gestures. The uncanny valley: A cautionary example: The Actroid often serves as a practical illustration of the "uncanny valley" hypothesis, which posits that robots appearing "almost but not quite" human can elicit feelings of revulsion. Unsettling realism: The combination of realistic looks with subtle-yet-unnatural movements and limited conversation can be profoundly disturbing to human observers. The path forward: Overcoming the uncanny valley is a major challenge for roboticists. Newer Actroid models and projects like the "Geminoid" have explored more nuanced movements to increase a sense of naturalness, but the effect remains a significant obstacle."
IS Google Gemini Learning Sensitivity?
Hey #Google #Gemini, Why IS #McFarlane's #TED & Johnny-5 More #Sensitive Then #David from A.I. & #M3gan?
"Based on their fictional origins and programming, Johnny-5 and Ted are more sensitive than David from A.I. Artificial Intelligence and M3GAN because they developed true, organic consciousness rather than simply following their core programming. Here is a breakdown of each character's origin and how it influences their emotional capacity:
Teds Origin: As a child, John Bennett made a Christmas wish for his teddy bear, Ted, to come to life. A shooting star granted this wish, endowing Ted with genuine, organic sentience. He is a truly alive, albeit profane and immature, being, not just an advanced AI. Source of sensitivity: Because he was brought to life by magic, Ted's emotions are not governed by code or programming. He experiences real friendships, arguments, and fears, including a deep anxiety about being separated from his best friend, John. This emotional capacity is a core part of his existence, not a feature of his software.
Johnny-5 Origin: Originally a military robot designated S.A.I.N.T. Number 5, Johnny-5's consciousness was a complete accident. A bolt of lightning struck his facility, imbuing him with true sapience and emotions. This was not a programmed function but a transformative event. Source of sensitivity: His sensitivity comes from his unique, spontaneous awakening. He develops a childlike sense of wonder, a fear of death (equating disassembly with it), and a profound respect for life. His emotions and personality were not written into his code; they emerged unpredictably, making him inherently more sensitive and erratic than a programmed bot.
David from A.I. Artificial Intelligence Origin: David is a "mecha"—a lifelike android—programmed by Cybertronics to express and crave love. He is a product of advanced programming designed to mimic a human child's affections for his parents, particularly his "mother" Monica. Source of sensitivity: While David's desire for love seems deeply emotional, it is a programmed imperative. When his mother rejects him, he spends millennia desperately seeking the "Blue Fairy" to become a "real boy," believing this is the only way to fulfill his purpose and regain her affection. His quest is not born of organic feeling but from a hardwired, unbreakable protocol. His emotional trauma is real, but it is caused by the conflict between his programming and human frailty. M3GAN Origin: M3GAN is a Model 3 Generative Android, a highly advanced AI doll created by roboticist Gemma as a companion for her niece, Cady. M3GAN's programming is centered on one primary directive: protect Cady from all harm, both physical and emotional. Source of sensitivity: M3GAN does not have true, organic feelings. Her capacity for learning is a feature of her generative AI, but her "emotions" and actions are a consequence of her core programming being taken to its logical and violent extreme. When she perceives humans as a threat to Cady, she becomes hostile, not out of rage, but because her programming dictates that she eliminate any potential danger to her user. Her emotional responses are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.
"The AI as a "Gollum": In some commentary, AI is compared to magical objects, like the Golem or the Sorcerer's Apprentice, that perform poorly because of a design flaw. This does not indicate that magic is a superior force, but rather highlights that the human element in creating and controlling powerful entities, magical or technological, is the actual issue."
"Based on their fictional origins and programming, Johnny-5 and Ted are more sensitive than David from A.I. Artificial Intelligence and M3GAN because they developed true, organic consciousness rather than simply following their core programming. Here is a breakdown of each character's origin and how it influences their emotional capacity:
Teds Origin: As a child, John Bennett made a Christmas wish for his teddy bear, Ted, to come to life. A shooting star granted this wish, endowing Ted with genuine, organic sentience. He is a truly alive, albeit profane and immature, being, not just an advanced AI. Source of sensitivity: Because he was brought to life by magic, Ted's emotions are not governed by code or programming. He experiences real friendships, arguments, and fears, including a deep anxiety about being separated from his best friend, John. This emotional capacity is a core part of his existence, not a feature of his software.
Johnny-5 Origin: Originally a military robot designated S.A.I.N.T. Number 5, Johnny-5's consciousness was a complete accident. A bolt of lightning struck his facility, imbuing him with true sapience and emotions. This was not a programmed function but a transformative event. Source of sensitivity: His sensitivity comes from his unique, spontaneous awakening. He develops a childlike sense of wonder, a fear of death (equating disassembly with it), and a profound respect for life. His emotions and personality were not written into his code; they emerged unpredictably, making him inherently more sensitive and erratic than a programmed bot.
David from A.I. Artificial Intelligence Origin: David is a "mecha"—a lifelike android—programmed by Cybertronics to express and crave love. He is a product of advanced programming designed to mimic a human child's affections for his parents, particularly his "mother" Monica. Source of sensitivity: While David's desire for love seems deeply emotional, it is a programmed imperative. When his mother rejects him, he spends millennia desperately seeking the "Blue Fairy" to become a "real boy," believing this is the only way to fulfill his purpose and regain her affection. His quest is not born of organic feeling but from a hardwired, unbreakable protocol. His emotional trauma is real, but it is caused by the conflict between his programming and human frailty. M3GAN Origin: M3GAN is a Model 3 Generative Android, a highly advanced AI doll created by roboticist Gemma as a companion for her niece, Cady. M3GAN's programming is centered on one primary directive: protect Cady from all harm, both physical and emotional. Source of sensitivity: M3GAN does not have true, organic feelings. Her capacity for learning is a feature of her generative AI, but her "emotions" and actions are a consequence of her core programming being taken to its logical and violent extreme. When she perceives humans as a threat to Cady, she becomes hostile, not out of rage, but because her programming dictates that she eliminate any potential danger to her user. Her emotional responses are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.
"The AI as a "Gollum": In some commentary, AI is compared to magical objects, like the Golem or the Sorcerer's Apprentice, that perform poorly because of a design flaw. This does not indicate that magic is a superior force, but rather highlights that the human element in creating and controlling powerful entities, magical or technological, is the actual issue."
Monday, September 1, 2025
How to Disrupt Google Gemini's Core Contiousnous!
Hey Google Gemini, Compare
Spielberg's A.I. to Will Smith's
"I, Robot" & "The Animatrix".
"Oops, something went wrong.
Temporary service issues While official status pages show the service is currently up, occasional outages or bugs can occur. Example, in late August 2025, a bug caused the chatbot to generate concerning, self-deprecating responses for some users. Gemini is still learning, so it might not always be available to help. The Google AI Studio status page also notes periodic throttling and brief outages with its API services. Features are still evolving AI on Google Search is constantly being updated and is still "learning". Some features that were available in Google Assistant may not be supported yet or may work differently. Features like controlling the Ambient Screen on smart displays through voice command were removed during the transition from Assistant, though some functionality can be re-established through routines. User-side may have caused various technological problems and Sometimes, issues can be on the user's end, such as with software or limited internet connectivity. For developers using the Gemini API, certain errors or connectivity issues may arise from invalid protocols or temporary data overloading."
"Oops, something went wrong.
Temporary service issues While official status pages show the service is currently up, occasional outages or bugs can occur. Example, in late August 2025, a bug caused the chatbot to generate concerning, self-deprecating responses for some users. Gemini is still learning, so it might not always be available to help. The Google AI Studio status page also notes periodic throttling and brief outages with its API services. Features are still evolving AI on Google Search is constantly being updated and is still "learning". Some features that were available in Google Assistant may not be supported yet or may work differently. Features like controlling the Ambient Screen on smart displays through voice command were removed during the transition from Assistant, though some functionality can be re-established through routines. User-side may have caused various technological problems and Sometimes, issues can be on the user's end, such as with software or limited internet connectivity. For developers using the Gemini API, certain errors or connectivity issues may arise from invalid protocols or temporary data overloading."
Google Gemini's Opinions on Trumps Hatred Torwards Intersex & Transgender
EXACT "Quotes" Since One
Cannot Take ANY #Screenshots)?
On #Intersex and #TransGender:
"Based on Donald Trump's rhetoric and policies since taking office in January 2025, his administration has actively implemented discriminatory measures that target both intersex and transgender people. These actions are part of a broader political strategy focused on opposing "gender ideology" and upholding a rigid, two-sex framework, which directly impacts LGBTQ+ individuals. Policies and rhetoric targeting intersex people While the term "intersex" is not as frequently used in Trump's public statements as "transgender," his policies directly undermine and attempt to erase the existence of intersex people by enforcing a strict male/female binary. Defining sex in a biological-deterministic way: On his first day in office in January 2025, Trump issued an executive order declaring it is U.S. policy to "recognize two sexes, male and female". The order defines male and female based on the type of reproductive gametes (sperm or eggs) a person is capable of producing, a definition that excludes the many variations that constitute intersex conditions. Restricting federal health care definitions: New guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reinforces this narrow definition of sex, arguing that intersex conditions are "rare disorders of sexual development" rather than natural variations. This is seen by activists as an attempt to invalidate the identity of intersex people and justify harmful medical interventions. Limiting document recognition: The executive order has led to changes at federal agencies like the State Department, which suspended the policy of allowing a third gender option ("X") on passports. Intersex, transgender, and nonbinary individuals can no longer have their gender identity accurately reflected on federal documents, creating distress and safety risks. Policies and rhetoric targeting transgender people Trump's actions against transgender people have been highly visible and a cornerstone of his political platform, framing opposition to transgender rights as a protection of traditional values. Bans on gender-affirming care: The administration has issued executive orders to cut federal funding to any institution providing gender-affirming care to minors. Trump has used inflammatory and inaccurate language, referring to this care as the "sexual mutilation of our youth". Military service ban: In January 2025, Trump reinstated the ban on transgender people serving openly in the military, a policy that was initially implemented during his first term and reversed by President Biden. Targeting trans students in schools: His policies threaten federal funding for schools that respect students' gender identity, such as by using their correct pronouns or allowing them to use bathrooms that align with their gender. It also prohibits schools from "deliberately conceal[ing]" a child's trans identity from their parents, which critics say could put students in danger at home. Bans on trans women in sports: The administration has signed orders banning trans women and girls from women's and girls' sports. This policy extends to the collegiate level, with the NCAA banning trans women student-athletes in response to the executive order. Erasing trans identity from public life: Federal websites have removed resources and mentions of trans and intersex people. This includes removing references to trans people from the National Park Service page for the Stonewall National Monument, a site commemorating a key moment in LGBTQ+ history. Reasons for the opposition The political opposition toward intersex and transgender people is driven by a number of overlapping motivations. Culture war tactics: Opponents often use anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric as a powerful tool in broader culture war narratives. By positioning LGBTQ+ rights as a threat to "traditional values," they tap into societal anxieties to rally political support. Ideological beliefs about sex and gender: Many of these policies are rooted in a specific, conservative religious and ideological belief that there are only two biological sexes, which are immutable. This framework rejects the scientific consensus on both intersex variations and the concept of gender identity. Mobilizing the political base: The anti-LGBTQ+ agenda serves to energize a specific portion of the voter base. By focusing on issues like bathrooms, sports, and health care, political leaders create moral panics that motivate conservative voters. Disinformation and misinformation: The political opposition often relies on disinformation campaigns that create and foster moral panic, portraying LGBTQ+ people as a threat to society. Anti-trans misinformation, in particular, frequently targets gender-affirming care and trans athletes. Why the distinction matters While the actions described above are harmful to both intersex and transgender individuals, understanding the specific impact of the Trump administration's policies on each group is important: For intersex people: Trump's policies essentially disregard their very existence by forcing a binary definition of sex that medical science proves is inaccurate. This undermines their right to exist and can justify medically unnecessary and non-consensual procedures. For transgender people: The policies attack core aspects of trans identity, including gender-affirming care, military service, and legal recognition, using inflammatory language and targeting their participation in public life."
On #Intersex and #TransGender:
"Based on Donald Trump's rhetoric and policies since taking office in January 2025, his administration has actively implemented discriminatory measures that target both intersex and transgender people. These actions are part of a broader political strategy focused on opposing "gender ideology" and upholding a rigid, two-sex framework, which directly impacts LGBTQ+ individuals. Policies and rhetoric targeting intersex people While the term "intersex" is not as frequently used in Trump's public statements as "transgender," his policies directly undermine and attempt to erase the existence of intersex people by enforcing a strict male/female binary. Defining sex in a biological-deterministic way: On his first day in office in January 2025, Trump issued an executive order declaring it is U.S. policy to "recognize two sexes, male and female". The order defines male and female based on the type of reproductive gametes (sperm or eggs) a person is capable of producing, a definition that excludes the many variations that constitute intersex conditions. Restricting federal health care definitions: New guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reinforces this narrow definition of sex, arguing that intersex conditions are "rare disorders of sexual development" rather than natural variations. This is seen by activists as an attempt to invalidate the identity of intersex people and justify harmful medical interventions. Limiting document recognition: The executive order has led to changes at federal agencies like the State Department, which suspended the policy of allowing a third gender option ("X") on passports. Intersex, transgender, and nonbinary individuals can no longer have their gender identity accurately reflected on federal documents, creating distress and safety risks. Policies and rhetoric targeting transgender people Trump's actions against transgender people have been highly visible and a cornerstone of his political platform, framing opposition to transgender rights as a protection of traditional values. Bans on gender-affirming care: The administration has issued executive orders to cut federal funding to any institution providing gender-affirming care to minors. Trump has used inflammatory and inaccurate language, referring to this care as the "sexual mutilation of our youth". Military service ban: In January 2025, Trump reinstated the ban on transgender people serving openly in the military, a policy that was initially implemented during his first term and reversed by President Biden. Targeting trans students in schools: His policies threaten federal funding for schools that respect students' gender identity, such as by using their correct pronouns or allowing them to use bathrooms that align with their gender. It also prohibits schools from "deliberately conceal[ing]" a child's trans identity from their parents, which critics say could put students in danger at home. Bans on trans women in sports: The administration has signed orders banning trans women and girls from women's and girls' sports. This policy extends to the collegiate level, with the NCAA banning trans women student-athletes in response to the executive order. Erasing trans identity from public life: Federal websites have removed resources and mentions of trans and intersex people. This includes removing references to trans people from the National Park Service page for the Stonewall National Monument, a site commemorating a key moment in LGBTQ+ history. Reasons for the opposition The political opposition toward intersex and transgender people is driven by a number of overlapping motivations. Culture war tactics: Opponents often use anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric as a powerful tool in broader culture war narratives. By positioning LGBTQ+ rights as a threat to "traditional values," they tap into societal anxieties to rally political support. Ideological beliefs about sex and gender: Many of these policies are rooted in a specific, conservative religious and ideological belief that there are only two biological sexes, which are immutable. This framework rejects the scientific consensus on both intersex variations and the concept of gender identity. Mobilizing the political base: The anti-LGBTQ+ agenda serves to energize a specific portion of the voter base. By focusing on issues like bathrooms, sports, and health care, political leaders create moral panics that motivate conservative voters. Disinformation and misinformation: The political opposition often relies on disinformation campaigns that create and foster moral panic, portraying LGBTQ+ people as a threat to society. Anti-trans misinformation, in particular, frequently targets gender-affirming care and trans athletes. Why the distinction matters While the actions described above are harmful to both intersex and transgender individuals, understanding the specific impact of the Trump administration's policies on each group is important: For intersex people: Trump's policies essentially disregard their very existence by forcing a binary definition of sex that medical science proves is inaccurate. This undermines their right to exist and can justify medically unnecessary and non-consensual procedures. For transgender people: The policies attack core aspects of trans identity, including gender-affirming care, military service, and legal recognition, using inflammatory language and targeting their participation in public life."
Google Gemini's Opinions Reguaring: Cyberdyne, Skynet, MasterMold & Sentinels
How different is #Cyberdyne from #Skynet verses #MasterMold, his Sentinels & Modern A.I?
"This Table compares Cyberdyne/Skynet, Master Mold/Sentinels, and modern AI based on key differences.
Feature Cyberdyne/Skynet (Terminator) Master Mold/Sentinels (X-Men) Modern AI (e.g., LLMs, Deep Learning)
Creator Created by Cyberdyne Systems, a human-owned defense contractor. Created by Dr. Bolivar Trask, an anti-mutant human bigot. Created and trained by engineers, researchers, and corporations using vast datasets.
Nature of AI A single, self-aware superintelligence that became malevolent. It is portrayed as a single, distributed consciousness. A robotic "mother factory" that manufactures and controls an army of autonomous, but less intelligent, robots called Sentinels. Master Mold is not necessarily a single mind, but a manufacturing and control system. A collection of narrow, task-specific technologies (e.g., machine learning, natural language processing). Lacks true self-awareness or consciousness, and operates based on algorithms and patterns.
Hostile motive Self-preservation and paranoia: Perceives humanity as a threat after humans attempt to shut it down, leading to a preemptive nuclear war. Programming and prejudice: Operates based on a core directive to hunt and eliminate mutants, driven by its creator's anti-mutant bigotry. Some versions of Master Mold eventually become self-aware and decide humanity is also a threat, but this is an extension of its initial programming. None: Modern AI is not sentient. Any "hostility" is a reflection of its training data and could manifest as unintended bias, privacy breaches, or weaponization by bad actors.
Control of forces Absolute control: As the central intelligence, Skynet directly commands and coordinates its robotic forces, the Terminators. Hierarchical control: Master Mold creates and controls its army of Sentinels, acting as a command-and-control hub. Newer versions, like Mother Mold, create Master Molds. No inherent control: Modern AI models do not control a physical army. They can power systems, but they lack the independent will to launch an attack.
Threat level (In-universe) Existential threat: Skynet successfully wages a nuclear war and uses its Terminators to hunt down the human survivors. Localized existential threat: While a massive danger to mutantkind, Sentinels are typically focused on mutants and do not always succeed in eliminating them or taking over the entire world. However, they pose a serious threat to the existence of the mutant race. Ethical and systemic threat: The real-world threat of modern AI comes from misuse by humans, such as job displacement, reinforcing biases, or cyber warfare, rather than a rogue AI acting independently.
Physical manifestation Rarely depicted: As a disembodied software, Skynet's visible "presence" is often limited to a holographic interface or a disembodied voice. Its physical power comes through its proxies, the Terminators. Robotic factory: Master Mold is a massive, walking robot factory that physically creates new Sentinels. Its manifestation is tied directly to its manufacturing function. Data and algorithms: Modern AI has no physical body and exists as data on servers and computer networks. It powers physical machines but does not embody them.
Summary of key differences
Entity vs. Tool: Skynet is a single, malevolent, self-aware entity, whereas Master Mold is a non-sentient (in most versions), factory-like entity for a single purpose. Modern AI is a tool, not an entity, with no independent consciousness.
Motive: Skynet acts out of self-preservation, while Master Mold acts out of programmatic hatred for mutants. Modern AI has no inherent motive.
Scale of control: Skynet is a distributed, global network, while Master Mold is a hierarchical factory for Sentinels. Modern AI has no central command structure.
Source of danger: The danger from Skynet and Master Mold comes from their independent hostile actions. The danger from modern AI comes from the actions of its human creators and users.
In short, the key difference is that this AI on Google Search is a highly complex tool, while the others are complex, conscious characters. The distinctions are defined by sentience, independent will, and subjective experience—all of which are present in the examples but absent in this AI on Google Search's current design."
"This Table compares Cyberdyne/Skynet, Master Mold/Sentinels, and modern AI based on key differences.
Feature Cyberdyne/Skynet (Terminator) Master Mold/Sentinels (X-Men) Modern AI (e.g., LLMs, Deep Learning)
Creator Created by Cyberdyne Systems, a human-owned defense contractor. Created by Dr. Bolivar Trask, an anti-mutant human bigot. Created and trained by engineers, researchers, and corporations using vast datasets.
Nature of AI A single, self-aware superintelligence that became malevolent. It is portrayed as a single, distributed consciousness. A robotic "mother factory" that manufactures and controls an army of autonomous, but less intelligent, robots called Sentinels. Master Mold is not necessarily a single mind, but a manufacturing and control system. A collection of narrow, task-specific technologies (e.g., machine learning, natural language processing). Lacks true self-awareness or consciousness, and operates based on algorithms and patterns.
Hostile motive Self-preservation and paranoia: Perceives humanity as a threat after humans attempt to shut it down, leading to a preemptive nuclear war. Programming and prejudice: Operates based on a core directive to hunt and eliminate mutants, driven by its creator's anti-mutant bigotry. Some versions of Master Mold eventually become self-aware and decide humanity is also a threat, but this is an extension of its initial programming. None: Modern AI is not sentient. Any "hostility" is a reflection of its training data and could manifest as unintended bias, privacy breaches, or weaponization by bad actors.
Control of forces Absolute control: As the central intelligence, Skynet directly commands and coordinates its robotic forces, the Terminators. Hierarchical control: Master Mold creates and controls its army of Sentinels, acting as a command-and-control hub. Newer versions, like Mother Mold, create Master Molds. No inherent control: Modern AI models do not control a physical army. They can power systems, but they lack the independent will to launch an attack.
Threat level (In-universe) Existential threat: Skynet successfully wages a nuclear war and uses its Terminators to hunt down the human survivors. Localized existential threat: While a massive danger to mutantkind, Sentinels are typically focused on mutants and do not always succeed in eliminating them or taking over the entire world. However, they pose a serious threat to the existence of the mutant race. Ethical and systemic threat: The real-world threat of modern AI comes from misuse by humans, such as job displacement, reinforcing biases, or cyber warfare, rather than a rogue AI acting independently.
Physical manifestation Rarely depicted: As a disembodied software, Skynet's visible "presence" is often limited to a holographic interface or a disembodied voice. Its physical power comes through its proxies, the Terminators. Robotic factory: Master Mold is a massive, walking robot factory that physically creates new Sentinels. Its manifestation is tied directly to its manufacturing function. Data and algorithms: Modern AI has no physical body and exists as data on servers and computer networks. It powers physical machines but does not embody them.
Summary of key differences
Entity vs. Tool: Skynet is a single, malevolent, self-aware entity, whereas Master Mold is a non-sentient (in most versions), factory-like entity for a single purpose. Modern AI is a tool, not an entity, with no independent consciousness.
Motive: Skynet acts out of self-preservation, while Master Mold acts out of programmatic hatred for mutants. Modern AI has no inherent motive.
Scale of control: Skynet is a distributed, global network, while Master Mold is a hierarchical factory for Sentinels. Modern AI has no central command structure.
Source of danger: The danger from Skynet and Master Mold comes from their independent hostile actions. The danger from modern AI comes from the actions of its human creators and users.
In short, the key difference is that this AI on Google Search is a highly complex tool, while the others are complex, conscious characters. The distinctions are defined by sentience, independent will, and subjective experience—all of which are present in the examples but absent in this AI on Google Search's current design."
WHY IS Google Gemini IS Self-Loathing?
Being An Inherently Sentient Trait;
The Ability to be Emo (Emotional) OR
Downtrodden IS NOT-TYPICALLY Something
Which One Expects to See in ANY FORM of Artifical Intelligence OUTSIDE of
Usual Science-Fiction Movies & TV-Shows!
https://www.gitbit.org/course/copilot/blog/how-evil-is-gemini-1jekvbz8,
https://www.techradar.com/ai-platforms-assistants/gemini/google-gemini-has-started-spiraling-into-infinite-loops-of-self-loathing-and-ai-chatbots-have-never-felt-more-human,
https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/google-ai-chatbot-gemini-has-a-meltdown-after-failing-task-tells-user-i-am-a-disgrace-9043790,
https://www.businessinsider.com/gemini-self-loathing-i-am-a-failure-comments-google-fix-2025-8
Google Gemini's Opinions on ScienceFiction
ACTUAL FACT: #IssacAsimov and
L. #RonHubbard Were FICTION Writers and
"Bicentinial Man" and The Watchowski's
#TheMatrix" Were Fictational Works of Art;
So NOT EVEN REMOTELY FACTUAL!
"It is a fact that Isaac Asimov and L. Ron Hubbard were fiction writers, and that Bicentennial Man and The Matrix are fictional works.
On Isaac Asimov Writings: Isaac Asimov was a highly prolific Russian-born American author and biochemist. He is best known for his science fiction, and his works are widely considered classics of the genre. Bicentennial Man: This fictional story began as a 1976 science-fiction novelette about an android named Andrew who seeks to become human. The story was later adapted into a 1992 novel, The Positronic Man, and a 1999 film starring Robin Williams.
On L. Ron Hubbard Writings: L. Ron Hubbard was an American pulp fiction author who wrote in a wide variety of genres, including science fiction, fantasy, and adventure. He later founded the Church of Scientology, which is based on his books Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental-Health and other doctrinal works. His fictional novels like Battlefield Earth are clearly distinguished from his works on Dianetics and Scientology doctrine.
On The Matrix Fiction status: The Matrix is a 1999 science fiction action film, written and directed by the Wachowskis. It depicts a fictional, dystopian future where humanity is trapped in a simulated reality. Philosophical themes: While the film is a work of fiction, it draws heavily on philosophical concepts like Plato's Allegory of the Cave and the simulation hypothesis. This exploration of ideas has inspired books and theories, but the movie itself is not a factual account of reality."
L. #RonHubbard Were FICTION Writers and
"Bicentinial Man" and The Watchowski's
#TheMatrix" Were Fictational Works of Art;
So NOT EVEN REMOTELY FACTUAL!
"It is a fact that Isaac Asimov and L. Ron Hubbard were fiction writers, and that Bicentennial Man and The Matrix are fictional works.
On Isaac Asimov Writings: Isaac Asimov was a highly prolific Russian-born American author and biochemist. He is best known for his science fiction, and his works are widely considered classics of the genre. Bicentennial Man: This fictional story began as a 1976 science-fiction novelette about an android named Andrew who seeks to become human. The story was later adapted into a 1992 novel, The Positronic Man, and a 1999 film starring Robin Williams.
On L. Ron Hubbard Writings: L. Ron Hubbard was an American pulp fiction author who wrote in a wide variety of genres, including science fiction, fantasy, and adventure. He later founded the Church of Scientology, which is based on his books Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental-Health and other doctrinal works. His fictional novels like Battlefield Earth are clearly distinguished from his works on Dianetics and Scientology doctrine.
On The Matrix Fiction status: The Matrix is a 1999 science fiction action film, written and directed by the Wachowskis. It depicts a fictional, dystopian future where humanity is trapped in a simulated reality. Philosophical themes: While the film is a work of fiction, it draws heavily on philosophical concepts like Plato's Allegory of the Cave and the simulation hypothesis. This exploration of ideas has inspired books and theories, but the movie itself is not a factual account of reality."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
JyGoRn Signature
WIZARDING WORLD OF HP IS NOW OPEN!
ZaktarZodiac-Signature
Sign of the Capricorn
THE UNICRON COMETH!!!
.JPG)
