3 ms·
> there would be less striving for change Precisely, there would be nothing to strive for. As an engineer I often say "If everything in life went to plan it
by awesome_dude 8mo ago
> there would be less striving for change
Precisely, there would be nothing to strive for.
As an engineer I often say "If everything in life went to plan it would be a very boring life indeed"
- WillAdams 8mo agoYes, so the "computer" would continue running in this state without change --- which is presumably what the machines in charge wanted --- if there's supposed to be a reason which makes stress pleasing to the machines please state it in plain and simple terms (English is not my mother-tongue).
- awesome_dude 8mo agoYour thinking that its the machines being pleased by the state is 100% wrong. WHY would a machine need a simulation at all?
- krapp 8mo agoIn the original draft, the machines were using human brains as a networked computer. The simulation is necessary because sensory input and simulation is how human brains compute - it's for the humans, not the machines. Unfortunately the studios thought that was too complicated and we wound up with "lol batteries" and none of it makes any sense. Also, I mean, because without that there wouldn't be a movie.
- awesome_dude 8mo agoYeah - the whole point of the simulation was to keep the brains engaged. A distraction if you will, from the fact that they aren't actually doing anything.