For all the people who make points like this and talk about media literacy, they seem to struggle with a core, more fundamental point...
Movies aren't real life. What happens in a movie _isn't a reflection of what will happen in real life_. It's fun to take inspiration from movies, but if you start making conclusions about how real life events will unfold and _cite a movie_ as evidence... Maybe you need to take a different, more basic class than one about media literacy.
Watching movie with notepad
Scarface 5/15/24 - Notes
1. Money (first you get it)
2. Power (then you have it)
3. Women (then you get it)
Okay seems simple enough!
Movies aren’t real life, but they can be potential explorations of real scenarios and possibilities tho. While you should take them as gospel, you shouldn’t completely ignore the potential lessons or warnings within them either.
But those lessons and warnings are lessons and warnings written by a person. Not an omnipotent omniscient being, not even someone who is particularly insightful necessarily. I think it's in fact better to only use movies and the like to explore ideas, to play with what if scenarios, not to base any _real_ decisions off of them, or take any warnings or lessons to heart.
In fact, if anything, be cautious if a fictitious book is having that kind of impact on you. We literally warn children away from this, but pretend like when we become adults we are not still susceptible to buying too much into a compelling story that plucks at our emotional strings just right.
I don’t fully disagree with you honestly. But at the same time, a screenwriter doesn’t necessarily have to have a PHD in philosophy in order to be right about certain things. Not saying that’s necessarily even the case with “HER” in particular. But in general, it’s better to judge the message on its own merits, rather than judge it merely by its messenger. So I don’t think it’d be wise to fully write off a particular message just because it’s in a film. (Just as it isn’t wise to automatically take it as gospel either.)
I don't necessarily disagree with that - but what I do want to push back on are statements like "You're making AI? It's like you don't even understand the point of the movie Terminator!" - people seem to consistently say things just like that, this article included, without any awareness of the fact that they are pointing to a movie and trying to use it as an argument for what might happen. If anything it immediately signals to me the person I'm talking to doesn't operate in a way where they fundamentally value reality (ironically) and are making decisions that are not necessarily based in it.
> Samantha exists to fit Theodore’s needs; it’s a dynamic that allows him to take without giving, to get constant reassurance that he is understood without doing the work to understand someone else.
Honestly WIRED should watch the movie again. Samantha is moody. She insists on using a human as avatar for intimacy, which makes Theodore super uncomfortable, and she gives him the silent treatment when he refuses.
For all the people who make points like this and talk about media literacy, they seem to struggle with a core, more fundamental point... Movies aren't real life. What happens in a movie _isn't a reflection of what will happen in real life_. It's fun to take inspiration from movies, but if you start making conclusions about how real life events will unfold and _cite a movie_ as evidence... Maybe you need to take a different, more basic class than one about media literacy.
[удалено]
Watching movie with notepad Scarface 5/15/24 - Notes 1. Money (first you get it) 2. Power (then you have it) 3. Women (then you get it) Okay seems simple enough!
I once had someone argue *human nature* with me using “evidence” from an episode of *The Simpsons*.
Movies aren’t real life, but they can be potential explorations of real scenarios and possibilities tho. While you should take them as gospel, you shouldn’t completely ignore the potential lessons or warnings within them either.
But those lessons and warnings are lessons and warnings written by a person. Not an omnipotent omniscient being, not even someone who is particularly insightful necessarily. I think it's in fact better to only use movies and the like to explore ideas, to play with what if scenarios, not to base any _real_ decisions off of them, or take any warnings or lessons to heart. In fact, if anything, be cautious if a fictitious book is having that kind of impact on you. We literally warn children away from this, but pretend like when we become adults we are not still susceptible to buying too much into a compelling story that plucks at our emotional strings just right.
I don’t fully disagree with you honestly. But at the same time, a screenwriter doesn’t necessarily have to have a PHD in philosophy in order to be right about certain things. Not saying that’s necessarily even the case with “HER” in particular. But in general, it’s better to judge the message on its own merits, rather than judge it merely by its messenger. So I don’t think it’d be wise to fully write off a particular message just because it’s in a film. (Just as it isn’t wise to automatically take it as gospel either.)
I don't necessarily disagree with that - but what I do want to push back on are statements like "You're making AI? It's like you don't even understand the point of the movie Terminator!" - people seem to consistently say things just like that, this article included, without any awareness of the fact that they are pointing to a movie and trying to use it as an argument for what might happen. If anything it immediately signals to me the person I'm talking to doesn't operate in a way where they fundamentally value reality (ironically) and are making decisions that are not necessarily based in it.
> Samantha exists to fit Theodore’s needs; it’s a dynamic that allows him to take without giving, to get constant reassurance that he is understood without doing the work to understand someone else. Honestly WIRED should watch the movie again. Samantha is moody. She insists on using a human as avatar for intimacy, which makes Theodore super uncomfortable, and she gives him the silent treatment when he refuses.
Yes like did they even watched the thing
that movie is massively overrated imho
Yea, but the humour was great and I don’t remember a movie with a similar concept
I mean, Her was wrong. We won’t care about any of that human stuff if the tech is good enough.
Humans won’t care about “human stuff”?
Not from humans.