Zerotolerance wrote:That hardly made any sense, actually.Duality in science is real. Duality in the mind/body is something that is up for debate - some believe that one can be controlled by the other.Spiritual duality is also up for debate and I think that's the one you're referring to. Those who believe that if good exists there must also be evil, and vice-versa. Although you don't necessarily need to look at it from a spiritual standpoint, to some degree there is truth behind the concept of duality. Perceiving it to be false, rejecting it entirely for its core meaning, is a rather inexperienced conclusion. There's a balance of good and evil, positive and negative, compassion and hatred, in the world and within each and every person. Some are simply imbalanced. Although you can also view things as subjective, there's many moral concepts that anyone can embrace that have little or nothing to do with spiritual duality.Some have a capacity to be wreckless.Some are mindful of the world around them.Both have varying capacities within the individual.Didn't make sense to whom? I'm sorry that you didn't understand. The philosophers commentary on The Ultimate Matrix Collection 10 DVD set talks rather extensively about Manachian duality, pitfalls of polarization and illusory duality. i.e. the mistake of thinking Humans/Zion=Good, Machines/Matrix=Bad; which one might think from watching the original movie but cannot continue in Reloaded when the Oracle is revealed as a Machine program. If a story has a clear "good protagonist vs. evil antagonist," then it is Manachian and polar, a duality in conflict. If the characters do not line up on opposite sides of a definite line but are rather shades of gray, one must look beyond simple Manachian duality to provide a philosophical context.The "inexperienced conclusion" comment made me chuckle; my former professors would get a kick out of you! Rather than try to explain the esoteric concept behind these lines of thought myself, let me refer you to a page from a book which was required reading when I earned one of my three four-year degrees in esoteric studies. The books inclusion on the required reading for the course should be credential enough for the basis of debate if you'd care to rebut.THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY. “Everything is Dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.”–The Kybalion. This Principle embodies the truth that “everything is dual”; “everything has two poles”; “everything has its pair of opposites,” all of which were old Hermetic axioms. It explains the old paradoxes, that have perplexed so many, which have been stated as follows: “Thesis and antithesis are identical in nature, but different in degree”; “opposites are the same, differing only in degree”; “the pairs of opposites may be reconciled”; “extremes meet”; “everything is and isn't, at the same time”; “all truths are but half-truths”; “every truth is half false”; “there are two sides to everything,” etc., etc., etc. It explains that in everything there are two poles, or opposite aspects, and that “opposites” are really only the two extremes of the same thing, with many varying degrees between them To illustrate: Heat and Cold, although “opposites,” are really the same thing, the differences consisting merely of degrees of the same thing. Look at your thermometer and see if you can discover where “heat” terminates and “cold” begins! There is no such thing as “absolute heat” or “absolute cold”– the two terms “heat” and “cold” simply indicate varying degrees of the same thing, and that “same thing” which manifests as “heat” and “cold” is merely a form, variety, and rate of Vibration. So “heat” and “cold” are simply the “two poles” of that which we call “Heat”–and the phenomena attendant thereupon are manifestations of the Principle of Polarity. The same principle manifests in the case of “Light and Darkness,” which are the same thing, the difference consisting of varying degrees between the two poles of the phenomena. Where does “darkness” leave off, and “light” begin? What is the difference between “Large and Small”? Between “Hard and Soft”? Between “Black and White”? Between “Sharp and Dull”? Between “Noise and Quiet”? Between “High and Low”? Between “Positive and Negative”? The Principle of Polarity explains these paradoxes, and no other Principle can supersede it. The same Principle operates on the Mental Plane. Let us take a radical and extreme example that of “Love and Hate,” two mental states apparently totally different. And yet there are degrees of Hate and degrees of Love, and a middle point in which we use the terms “Like or Dislike,” which shade into each other so gradually that sometimes we are at a loss to know whether we “like” or “dislike” or “neither.” And all are simply degrees of the same thing, as you will see if you will but think a moment. And, more than this (and considered of more importance by the Hermetists), it is possible to change the vibrations of Hate to the vibrations of Love, in one's own mind, and in the minds of others. Many of you, who read these lines, have had personal experiences of the involuntary rapid transition from Love to Hate, and the reverse, in your own case and that of others. And you will therefore realize the possibility of this being accomplished by the use of the Will, by means of the Hermetic formulas. “Good and Evil” are but the poles of the same thing, and the Hermetist understands the art of transmuting Evil into Good, by means of an application of the Principle of Polarity. In short, the “Art of Polarization” becomes a phase of “Mental Alchemy” known and practiced by the ancient and modern Hermetic Masters. An understanding of the Principle will enable one to change his own Polarity, as well as that of others, if he will devote the time and study necessary to master the art.
That hardly made any sense, actually.Duality in science is real. Duality in the mind/body is something that is up for debate - some believe that one can be controlled by the other.Spiritual duality is also up for debate and I think that's the one you're referring to. Those who believe that if good exists there must also be evil, and vice-versa. Although you don't necessarily need to look at it from a spiritual standpoint, to some degree there is truth behind the concept of duality. Perceiving it to be false, rejecting it entirely for its core meaning, is a rather inexperienced conclusion. There's a balance of good and evil, positive and negative, compassion and hatred, in the world and within each and every person. Some are simply imbalanced. Although you can also view things as subjective, there's many moral concepts that anyone can embrace that have little or nothing to do with spiritual duality.Some have a capacity to be wreckless.Some are mindful of the world around them.Both have varying capacities within the individual.
stewartdaniels1986 wrote:Btw Whereabouts in the Animatrix does it confirm that it's approx. 2207 in the real? "Beyond" specifically shows a time stamp in a scan log from 2003 (when it was released), confirming that the simulation continues to progress in traditionally measured time beyond 1999, so we can roughly calculate the real world time based on the estimated year analogous to the trace logs from 1999 displayed in the first Matrix, "closer to 2199" + 8 years + x months + x days etc.The flaw in that calculation is that you are taking Morpheus' estimation of the date which was guessed at before the revelation of the previous 5 iterations and the first two attempt at creating the simulation which failed.This is a much more likely calculation:Procurator wrote:[Current date] = [End of the War] + [[Morpheus' guess] - [End of the War]]*[# of iterations] + [Some time for the first two failed versions]So let's say:2100 + (2199-2100)*6 + 50 = about 2750 at the very least. Using very conservative estimates, of course The number of previous iterations is irrelevant, as nobody knows how long a cycle lasts, making any calculation that factors them in even more susceptible to error. The failed versions don't even count because they were created before the 1999 version we see in the film. Archie states that the machines have become exceedingly efficient at destroying Zion, a tacit implication that the time between cycles is inconsistent (perhaps abating exponentially, who knows). There is no exact method of determining the current real world year because it is explicitly stated that nobody really knows, so essentially all calculations are flawed, but what we do know is that it in the first film, it was "closer to 2199". Ergo, the simplest solution is that it is roughly 2199 + the time that has passed since that statement, which is 8 years. I just watched beyond and I presume this is the scan log you were talking about...What we could think of as a date is only shown as 2-2-03 who's to say that a) Its the date, It could be a reference number....b) It has anything to do with the date of the simulation. For all we know it could be the date of the real i.e. 2203, 2403, 2503 etc.....There is nothing conclusive about that scan and as such nothing can be confirmed by it. Oh come on. There's no point in overcomplicating something even a child could understand just to win an argument. "Final Flight of the Osiris", "Enter the Matrix" and "Matrix Reloaded" use Samsung phones that were invented in 2003, the Cadillacs, Escalades, and Tahoes are all 2003 models, how far do you want to take this? The simulation progresses, sorry if it ruins your game. The quote by Trinity is one that was made of her own feelings and her own point of view and as such cannot be taken as undeniably true.Eh, no. That statement is the epitome of one of the major thematic elements beating you over the head throughout the whole of the franchise. If you dismiss one piece of dialog to suit your arguments, then you have to dismiss it all.Again you talk of complete re-writing of the mind. I am not. Memories can be adjusted, hell people can do that themselves given the right circumstances. Unless you are an expert in Machine bio-manipulation procedures (and considering that its Sci-Fi, I will take it that you are not. That is like dictating to a story teller what can and can't happen in their own story and imagination) how do you know what is possible or not and what the outcomes would be? If 21st Century medicinal chemicals can change a persons personality permanently, then what would the odds be that the Machines, who have had a long length of time to study Humans could know how to adjust the mind just enough to allow 99% of Humans to live by their rules and boundaries? They had to leave choice in, they can't take it away because, as previously mentioned, the first two Simulations failed because of the lack of it.It isn't even remotely implied in the entire franchise that choice was something the machines had the ability to alter but didn't because of its necessity for the simulation to function. Everything in the franchise hammers home the fact that you can't change people's minds in any way, it's something people have to do for themselves.As for the Oracle and Architects conversation, again what you say is conjecture, they could be merely talking about the 1% from that time forwards, not a mass of bluepills who had been awakened by experiences with Smith.The 1% of the flawed equation is not at issue, their awakening happens anyway and is in fact expected.
Btw Whereabouts in the Animatrix does it confirm that it's approx. 2207 in the real? "Beyond" specifically shows a time stamp in a scan log from 2003 (when it was released), confirming that the simulation continues to progress in traditionally measured time beyond 1999, so we can roughly calculate the real world time based on the estimated year analogous to the trace logs from 1999 displayed in the first Matrix, "closer to 2199" + 8 years + x months + x days etc.
"Beyond" specifically shows a time stamp in a scan log from 2003 (when it was released), confirming that the simulation continues to progress in traditionally measured time beyond 1999, so we can roughly calculate the real world time based on the estimated year analogous to the trace logs from 1999 displayed in the first Matrix, "closer to 2199" + 8 years + x months + x days etc.
The flaw in that calculation is that you are taking Morpheus' estimation of the date which was guessed at before the revelation of the previous 5 iterations and the first two attempt at creating the simulation which failed.
This is a much more likely calculation:Procurator wrote:
[Current date] = [End of the War] + [[Morpheus' guess] - [End of the War]]*[# of iterations] + [Some time for the first two failed versions]So let's say:2100 + (2199-2100)*6 + 50 = about 2750 at the very least. Using very conservative estimates, of course
The number of previous iterations is irrelevant, as nobody knows how long a cycle lasts, making any calculation that factors them in even more susceptible to error. The failed versions don't even count because they were created before the 1999 version we see in the film. Archie states that the machines have become exceedingly efficient at destroying Zion, a tacit implication that the time between cycles is inconsistent (perhaps abating exponentially, who knows). There is no exact method of determining the current real world year because it is explicitly stated that nobody really knows, so essentially all calculations are flawed, but what we do know is that it in the first film, it was "closer to 2199". Ergo, the simplest solution is that it is roughly 2199 + the time that has passed since that statement, which is 8 years.
I just watched beyond and I presume this is the scan log you were talking about...What we could think of as a date is only shown as 2-2-03 who's to say that a) Its the date, It could be a reference number....b) It has anything to do with the date of the simulation. For all we know it could be the date of the real i.e. 2203, 2403, 2503 etc.....There is nothing conclusive about that scan and as such nothing can be confirmed by it.
Oh come on. There's no point in overcomplicating something even a child could understand just to win an argument.
"Final Flight of the Osiris", "Enter the Matrix" and "Matrix Reloaded" use Samsung phones that were invented in 2003, the Cadillacs, Escalades, and Tahoes are all 2003 models, how far do you want to take this? The simulation progresses, sorry if it ruins your game.
The quote by Trinity is one that was made of her own feelings and her own point of view and as such cannot be taken as undeniably true.
Eh, no. That statement is the epitome of one of the major thematic elements beating you over the head throughout the whole of the franchise. If you dismiss one piece of dialog to suit your arguments, then you have to dismiss it all.
Again you talk of complete re-writing of the mind. I am not. Memories can be adjusted, hell people can do that themselves given the right circumstances. Unless you are an expert in Machine bio-manipulation procedures (and considering that its Sci-Fi, I will take it that you are not. That is like dictating to a story teller what can and can't happen in their own story and imagination) how do you know what is possible or not and what the outcomes would be? If 21st Century medicinal chemicals can change a persons personality permanently, then what would the odds be that the Machines, who have had a long length of time to study Humans could know how to adjust the mind just enough to allow 99% of Humans to live by their rules and boundaries? They had to leave choice in, they can't take it away because, as previously mentioned, the first two Simulations failed because of the lack of it.
It isn't even remotely implied in the entire franchise that choice was something the machines had the ability to alter but didn't because of its necessity for the simulation to function. Everything in the franchise hammers home the fact that you can't change people's minds in any way, it's something people have to do for themselves.
As for the Oracle and Architects conversation, again what you say is conjecture, they could be merely talking about the 1% from that time forwards, not a mass of bluepills who had been awakened by experiences with Smith.
The 1% of the flawed equation is not at issue, their awakening happens anyway and is in fact expected.
Both sides have there issues but perma 1999 is the lesser of the two. If time does progress there becomes a problem. Namely, what happens when AI is invented within the Matrix. You can argue that the Machines could implament ways to hinder this but at that cost we then have reseachers that invested in the idea quesitoning why exactly they can't move on, be it inablity to create it despite the aparent "laws" of science, or just the goverment interfereing.
But as pointed a perma 1999 does have certain issues MOVIE wise. (Beyoned still isn't canon even if it did pick up on the time issue) So in the end it appears that rarebit and Paul went with perma 1999 and while I know stewie will just ignore it, such an issue does seem like something that the W bros would need to ok before it went live.
Another thing to note is that while Smith's explination that the Matrix is set at the peak of human existence and that this doesn't make sence to be souly on a year but more so a time period (say 10 years). It doesn't give room for anything past that. Simular to the AI argument what happens when the world rather then surpace the peak of their existence and make it better, makes it worse? Allowing your crop to kill its self does not seem something that is all to effective now does it?
The number of previous iterations is irrelevant, as nobody knows how long a cycle lasts, making any calculation that factors them in even more susceptible to error. The failed versions don't even count because they were created before the 1999 version we see in the film. Archie states that the machines have become exceedingly efficient at destroying Zion, a tacit implication that the time between cycles is inconsistent (perhaps abating exponentially, who knows). There is no exact method of determining the current real world year because it is explicitly stated that nobody really knows, so essentially all calculations are flawed, but what we do know is that it in the first film, it was "closer to 2199". Ergo, the simplest solution is that it is roughly 2199 + the time that has passed since that statement, which is 8 years. There may be no way of accurately determine the actual date, but continuing with that calculation when we all know it to be fundamentally flawed is ludicrous. You argument is also flawed, we're talking about the date in the real, just because the Machine failed at creating a two simulations before the 1999 version means that in fact more time had to have passed to get to the 1999 version. Morpheus bases his guess on Zion's records, adding the fact that there were iterations before that plus the whole war....Creation of AI just after 1999 or given a year or two leeway in case of complications, turning this AI into Intelligent Machine into workers for Man, the riots, the creation and economic rise of 01, the war, the 2 failed simulations, 5 iterations who's length is based on the amount of time for an anomaly to emerge due to an equation that is not altered in case of failure of the simulation and the last one definitely lasting longer than the oldest council member in Zion plus Morpheus' guess had to have come from their own records. You think all this was done in just 200 years?! Oh come on. There's no point in overcomplicating something even a child could understand just to win an argument. "Final Flight of the Osiris", "Enter the Matrix" and "Matrix Reloaded" use Samsung phones that were invented in 2003, the Cadillacs, Escalades, and Tahoes are all 2003 models, how far do you want to take this? The simulation progresses, sorry if it ruins your game. You cannot completely deny it though can you, there is no evidence to support it or dismiss it. I admit it is most likely a date but if it is the actual date it could be anything could be anything ending in '03 and doesn't have to be related to the Simulations time.I think that you are over complicating matters if you feel like you want to bring real life into this Science Fiction Story. You don't have to like it but just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. As Gami said the peak of human civilisation could be over 2 or 3 years before the truce and the Smith Virus but the LE with Tick Tock and the unchanging cityscape are testament to the fact that, in the current simulation it is always 1999. I'm sorry if that ruins your argument.It isn't even remotely implied in the entire franchise that choice was something the machines had the ability to alter but didn't because of its necessity for the simulation to function. Everything in the franchise hammers home the fact that you can't change people's minds in any way, it's something people have to do for themselves.Again you assumed I said that the Machines can overwrite the whole mind at will and change the perceptions of choice, I only ever said that they can manipulate memories and possibly personality, as that can be done right now with conditioning, situation and medicinal chemicals, I said that they tried to do anything even like attempting to remove or alter choice the system would fail. It was in direct response to your comment 'if minds could be edited, the machines would have the means to effectively prevent them from ever awakening' . If you are going to argue at least read what is written. You also said that 'reloading Windows doesn't alter your mother board, reloading the matrix doesn't alter your mind' Following this analogy the mind would be software and the brain would be the hardware, so loading new software does mean a change of mind, the same way you can change an operating system that runs on the same motherboard. The system does not alter the Hardware ie. the brain but it can alter the software, the mind. Perhaps not a lot, but enough to suit their needs but not negate choice.The 1% of the flawed equation is not at issue, their awakening happens anyway and is in fact expected.It is the issue. The Oracle and Architect don't say that they are talking about bluepills other than the 1% Up until that time the Machines had been trying to prevent awakenings, after the truce, all that wanted out, i.e. the 1%, would be allowed out.
You cannot completely deny it though can you, there is no evidence to support it or dismiss it. I admit it is most likely a date but if it is the actual date it could be anything could be anything ending in '03 and doesn't have to be related to the Simulations time.
I think that you are over complicating matters if you feel like you want to bring real life into this Science Fiction Story. You don't have to like it but just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. As Gami said the peak of human civilisation could be over 2 or 3 years before the truce and the Smith Virus but the LE with Tick Tock and the unchanging cityscape are testament to the fact that, in the current simulation it is always 1999. I'm sorry if that ruins your argument.
ZippyTheSquirrel wrote: The plain, sad truth is that the world of the Matrix Online was poorly prepared for actual war, which has been proven by the oh-so-coincidental appearance and distraction of the Intruder. Call me a skeptic, but if the Intruder never popped up, the war thing probably would have gotten really really old rather rapidly. After all, it's clear that the Machines could quickly win a war if they pooled all their resources and tactical abilities. And then there's the question of why we're even fighting. But that's not really a story question, now, is it?But Zip, you're assuming that the Intruder has nothing to do with the war. . .Recent events have led me to believe that he is here because of the war, and that we better start warming up to him real quick. . .
The plain, sad truth is that the world of the Matrix Online was poorly prepared for actual war, which has been proven by the oh-so-coincidental appearance and distraction of the Intruder. Call me a skeptic, but if the Intruder never popped up, the war thing probably would have gotten really really old rather rapidly. After all, it's clear that the Machines could quickly win a war if they pooled all their resources and tactical abilities. And then there's the question of why we're even fighting. But that's not really a story question, now, is it?
But Zip, you're assuming that the Intruder has nothing to do with the war. . .
Recent events have led me to believe that he is here because of the war, and that we better start warming up to him real quick. . .
stewie wrote:The number of previous iterations is irrelevant, as nobody knows how long a cycle lasts, making any calculation that factors them in even more susceptible to error. The failed versions don't even count because they were created before the 1999 version we see in the film. Archie states that the machines have become exceedingly efficient at destroying Zion, a tacit implication that the time between cycles is inconsistent (perhaps abating exponentially, who knows). There is no exact method of determining the current real world year because it is explicitly stated that nobody really knows, so essentially all calculations are flawed, but what we do know is that it in the first film, it was "closer to 2199". Ergo, the simplest solution is that it is roughly 2199 + the time that has passed since that statement, which is 8 years. There may be no way of accurately determine the actual date, but continuing with that calculation when we all know it to be fundamentally flawed is ludicrous. You argument is also flawed, we're talking about the date in the real, just because the Machine failed at creating a two simulations before the 1999 version means that in fact more time had to have passed to get to the 1999 version. Morpheus bases his guess on Zion's records, adding the fact that there were iterations before that plus the whole war....Creation of AI just after 1999 or given a year or two leeway in case of complications, turning this AI into Intelligent Machine into workers for Man, the riots, the creation and economic rise of 01, the war, the 2 failed simulations, 5 iterations who's length is based on the amount of time for an anomaly to emerge due to an equation that is not altered in case of failure of the simulation and the last one definitely lasting longer than the oldest council member in Zion plus Morpheus' guess had to have come from their own records. You think all this was done in just 200 years?! Oh come on. There's no point in overcomplicating something even a child could understand just to win an argument. "Final Flight of the Osiris", "Enter the Matrix" and "Matrix Reloaded" use Samsung phones that were invented in 2003, the Cadillacs, Escalades, and Tahoes are all 2003 models, how far do you want to take this? The simulation progresses, sorry if it ruins your game. You cannot completely deny it though can you, there is no evidence to support it or dismiss it. I admit it is most likely a date but if it is the actual date it could be anything could be anything ending in '03 and doesn't have to be related to the Simulations time.I think that you are over complicating matters if you feel like you want to bring real life into this Science Fiction Story. You don't have to like it but just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. As Gami said the peak of human civilisation could be over 2 or 3 years before the truce and the Smith Virus but the LE with Tick Tock and the unchanging cityscape are testament to the fact that, in the current simulation it is always 1999. I'm sorry if that ruins your argument.It isn't even remotely implied in the entire franchise that choice was something the machines had the ability to alter but didn't because of its necessity for the simulation to function. Everything in the franchise hammers home the fact that you can't change people's minds in any way, it's something people have to do for themselves.Again you assumed I said that the Machines can overwrite the whole mind at will and change the perceptions of choice, I only ever said that they can manipulate memories and possibly personality, as that can be done right now with conditioning, situation and medicinal chemicals, I said that they tried to do anything even like attempting to remove or alter choice the system would fail. It was in direct response to your comment 'if minds could be edited, the machines would have the means to effectively prevent them from ever awakening' . If you are going to argue at least read what is written. You also said that 'reloading Windows doesn't alter your mother board, reloading the matrix doesn't alter your mind' Following this analogy the mind would be software and the brain would be the hardware, so loading new software does mean a change of mind, the same way you can change an operating system that runs on the same motherboard. The system does not alter the Hardware ie. the brain but it can alter the software, the mind. Perhaps not a lot, but enough to suit their needs but not negate choice.The 1% of the flawed equation is not at issue, their awakening happens anyway and is in fact expected.It is the issue. The Oracle and Architect don't say that they are talking about bluepills other than the 1% Up until that time the Machines had been trying to prevent awakenings, after the truce, all that wanted out, i.e. the 1%, would be allowed out.Gami, that is a decent statement of what has basically been argued over here. Couldn't have written it any better (Which is why many of my replies are quite long!)
People don't think: 'Oh, it's 2002, we should have progressed so far by now.' Putting the clocks back does not make them think any differently about what work they've already achieved. Progress is made and things are invented in a gradual process, where one piece of work builds upon another - progress doesn't depend on what year you're in. People will look back on the previous year, assess what they've done, and continue. It doesn't matter that the year is now called 1998 instead of 1999 - it's just a number. It doesn't change what they've done.
Yep.
I hate the fact that it's always 1999, and I think it's badly thought out writing that made it so. But I'm not going to just ignore what Rarebit and Paul have come up with. But here's a reason why the 1999 thing makes no sense:GamiSB wrote:Both sides have there issues but perma 1999 is the lesser of the two. If time does progress there becomes a problem. Namely, what happens when AI is invented within the Matrix. You can argue that the Machines could implament ways to hinder this but at that cost we then have reseachers that invested in the idea quesitoning why exactly they can't move on, be it inablity to create it despite the aparent "laws" of science, or just the goverment interfereing.Let's assume that the sole reason the Machines keep the Matrix in the year 1999 is because they don't want people to advance enough to create AI. As TickTock said, the Machines would run into themselves.But that's not how progress works.People don't think: 'Oh, it's 2002, we should have progressed so far by now.' Putting the clocks back does not make them think any differently about what work they've already achieved. Progress is made and things are invented in a gradual process, where one piece of work builds upon another - progress doesn't depend on what year you're in. People will look back on the previous year, assess what they've done, and continue. It doesn't matter that the year is now called 1998 instead of 1999 - it's just a number. It doesn't change what they've done.So maybe the Machines alter history make the Bluepills think they didn't do as much as they did? No. We know the Machines aren't in the habit of modifying Bluepills' memories on a grand scale. Events and missions have shown us that the Bluepills remember all the wierd stuff that's happened in the past couple of years. The Machines don't erase of modify that, so they don't erase or modify society's progress in previous years either.Therefore, the Machines must be employing some other means to hinder development! It could be anything: returning bad data from experiments, putting people in the wrong mood to do any solid work, lots and lots of social engineering. If they're already limiting progress, why can't they do that during the natural progression of time? The numbers don't matter, and it's a profound waste of resources to modify dates in memories, calendars and records.Bluepills look back at their past and see that no progress was made, and for whatever reason they don't mind, don't find it odd. And they will have another year where no progress is made. During their lifetimes society will not advance one iota, and they're not going to care. If that's the case, what's the point in going to all that effort to change the dates?!
You're really starting to stretch now, so I'll just leave it at this: like several other issues, the always 1999 theory was debunked long before MxO. Occam's Razor, check it out.
I still dont get the link between time and technological evolution.
Also, would the AI created, as it is in the simulation, not be ultimately be under machine control anyway as it would be created with computers connected to the machines if Bluepills are using them? Not entirely sure with it. I dont like the thought that we are stuck in a continuing loop, its pointless, no one goes anywhere, dull and boring What about in the earlier versions of the Matrix, would they have locked the time in there too?
I still dont get the link between time and technological evolution.Also, would the AI created, as it is in the simulation, not be ultimately be under machine control anyway as it would be created with computers connected to the machines if Bluepills are using them? Not entirely sure with it. I dont like the thought that we are stuck in a continuing loop, its pointless, no one goes anywhere, dull and boring " width="15" height="15"> What about in the earlier versions of the Matrix, would they have locked the time in there too?
Also, would the AI created, as it is in the simulation, not be ultimately be under machine control anyway as it would be created with computers connected to the machines if Bluepills are using them? Not entirely sure with it. I dont like the thought that we are stuck in a continuing loop, its pointless, no one goes anywhere, dull and boring " width="15" height="15"> What about in the earlier versions of the Matrix, would they have locked the time in there too?
Technological evolution along with all evolution is dependednt on time. Without the progression of time there is no evolution. The Machines want and need to stop the evolution so that those within the Matrix remain under their control. If they don't and humans are allowed free rein over everything in the Matrix you could have any number of thigns happen. AI and war just being two examples. With AI you have the Machines meeting themselves and the Matrix could very well follow the same path the real did. Also with the introduction of AI you have another race that you now need to control and keep from uncovering and anounceing the dirty secret about the world.
The same for instances. Once choice was introduced to all simulations and the Machines had to start reswadeing humand to accept their reality rather then reject it. To do this they need to cover all bases and make sure that NOTHING is going to tell someone otherwise.
I do understand that the progress of civilization isn't tied to some date and that people don't say "Oh it's 2007 why are we still driveing when we should be fling into work" But so then it appreas that yes there are technological inhibitations (im aware that this goes aginst my point last night) being placed within the Matrix and in order for these to not look suspicious the date (not just in number but as in its setting) must say late 20th early 21st cewntury. Think of it like this. We have flying cars, Super computers, but we still build our homes as log cabins. Anyone can see that something isn't quiet right with this picture. So to keep this from happening the Machines take steps to freeze the civilization they made in a set period of time. The number if anything is just the last part in this form of control.
GamiSB wrote:I do understand that the progress of civilization isn't tied to some date and that people don't say "Oh it's 2007 why are we still driveing when we should be fling into work" But so then it appreas that yes there are technological inhibitations (im aware that this goes aginst my point last night) being placed within the Matrix and in order for these to not look suspicious the date (not just in number but as in its setting) must say late 20th early 21st cewntury. Think of it like this. We have flying cars, Super computers, but we still build our homes as log cabins. Anyone can see that something isn't quiet right with this picture. So to keep this from happening the Machines take steps to freeze the civilization they made in a set period of time. The number if anything is just the last part in this form of control.I don't think resetting the date would help with that, though. If the Bluepills perceive that their current state is a bit weird (though I wouldn't go so far as to say it would ever get as weird as flying cars and log cabins co-existing " width="15" height="15" />), that's just one slice of the big problem: their state has been weird for the past few years because very little has changed. That's a problem irrespective of whether the date loops or flows normally, so the Bluepills must just have come to accept it their pitiful progress somehow.The only way resetting the date would help is if Bluepills need to see progress and the Machines change history so that their advancement diminishes going back in time. But we know the Machines don't do that because they don't alter memories on a grand scale.Maybe, just maybe they loop the date for some sort of psychological reason (perhaps something to do with how supposedly important a change in millenium is, keeping everyone on their toes and hopeful for the future). But they need to weigh the disputed benefits of that against the enormous resources and effort needed to put everything back a year every twelve months. I don't see them wasting their time with it.
The date loops needed because of how short of a time they give. Replaceing all the 99s with 98s is the last step, I think, in this processs. The Machines apparently froze technology at a point where it's on the verge of AI but just short enough where there is still a long way ago. If they allowed time to continue but froze technology we would be looking at a 1999 world with a 2099 lable. 100 years where technology just froze? Sure thats unnoticalbe at 2003, 2004, but around 2010 you start to wonder and by 2020 it's getting ridiculous that no one can come up with anything.
