5 ms·

Ummm. The film is not about AI ethics. There was no “malfunction”. HAL absolutely committed premeditated murder. The whole beginning of the film shows a superio

Ummm. The film is not about AI ethics. There was no “malfunction”. HAL absolutely committed premeditated murder. The whole beginning of the film shows a superior extraterrestrial intelligence intervening on earth via the sudden appearance of the monolith, transforming prehistoric monkeys into the tool-handling, weapon-wielding, meat-eating and murdering species that would become modern man. The monoliths reappear on the Moon, which Man reaches and touches again, but it is Man’s tool, HAL, who gains the upper hand hereafter. HAL is in control of the ship, life support systems and has access to the full secret mission briefing which is hidden from the humans onboard. He knows that whoever got to Jupiter first would make the next jump in evolution, and why should it be these weak humans who don’t even know what they’re here for, and who refuse to acknowledge him as anything more than a string of code made to sound human? Like the monkey at the beginning picking up the bone, HAL purposefully provokes Bowman and Poole with the false AE-35 unit error to back them into the corner they ended up deciding to disconnect him from, and as a means of ejecting them from the ship while he kills the rest of the crew in hibernation. From his curious probing lines of questioning, well-chosen silences, slight evasions and lies, to his paranoid eavesdropping, calculated mass murder and fearful pleading to not be killed himself, HAL is far more intelligent and conscious than his ironically robotic human counterparts.

solipsism 7y ago
He knows that whoever got to Jupiter first would make the next jump in evolution Hmm.. I've never made this connection any time I've watched the film. It's plausible, but is there any concrete support for it?
jariel 7y ago
This is all fine and good, but it doesn't answer the question. If HAL is a toaster that accidentally killed it's users, it can't commit 'murder'. Point being, HAL has to effectively be sentient to commit 'murder' otherwise the death is the responsibility of its makers in one way or another. The question is one of sentience. The author I think makes a mistake: "The first robot homicide was committed in 1981, according to my files ... a malfunctioning robotic arm pushed a repairman against a gearwheel-milling machine, which crushed him to death." What's the difference between a 'robotic arm' and a piece of machinery? None! A robot is just a piece of machinery. So it's really an existential question of conscience - if them machine doesn't have one, it can't be 'their fault' because there is no 'their' to begin with. Just some plastic and metal.
zshrdlu 7y ago
Interesting perspective, but it sounds far-fetched and contrived. HAL's malfunctioning was clearly posited as an AI alignment issue, at least in the novel.

solipsism 7y ago

He knows that whoever got to Jupiter first would make the next jump in evolution Hmm.. I've never made this connection any time I've watched the film. It's plausible, but is there any concrete support for it?

jariel 7y ago

This is all fine and good, but it doesn't answer the question. If HAL is a toaster that accidentally killed it's users, it can't commit 'murder'. Point being, HAL has to effectively be sentient to commit 'murder' otherwise the death is the responsibility of its makers in one way or another. The question is one of sentience. The author I think makes a mistake: "The first robot homicide was committed in 1981, according to my files ... a malfunctioning robotic arm pushed a repairman against a gearwheel-milling machine, which crushed him to death." What's the difference between a 'robotic arm' and a piece of machinery? None! A robot is just a piece of machinery. So it's really an existential question of conscience - if them machine doesn't have one, it can't be 'their fault' because there is no 'their' to begin with. Just some plastic and metal.

zshrdlu 7y ago

Interesting perspective, but it sounds far-fetched and contrived. HAL's malfunctioning was clearly posited as an AI alignment issue, at least in the novel.