Religion and Ethics Forum

Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Jack Knave on March 01, 2016, 02:07:53 PM

Title: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 01, 2016, 02:07:53 PM
In Stanley Kubrick's film "2001 : A Space Odyssey" the computer HAL is asked if it is happy and its response is, "I'm using all my capacities to the maximum. What more could a rational entity want?"

Is Efficiency our era's truths....? Has all meaning been flatten down to this masters voice? Are we slaves to the rational demands of the machine Efficiency?
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: jeremyp on March 01, 2016, 02:09:58 PM
In Stanley Kubrick's film "2001 : A Space Odyssey" the computer HAL is asked if it is happy and its response is, "I'm using all my capacities to the maximum. What more could a rational entity want?"

Is Efficiency our era's truths....? Has all meaning been flatten down to this masters voice? Are we slaves to the rational demands of the machine Efficiency?

What does HAL's response have to do with efficiency?
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 01, 2016, 08:28:57 PM
What does HAL's response have to do with efficiency?
The first sentence of its reply - maximum.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: BeRational on March 02, 2016, 12:23:16 AM
The first sentence of its reply - maximum.

Isn't that utilisation not efficiency.

Perhaps it could perform using less than 100% of its capacity?
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: jeremyp on March 02, 2016, 06:51:00 AM
The first sentence of its reply - maximum.
"maximum" and "efficient" do not mean the same thing. In fact, running at maximum capacity is frequently highly inefficient.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Bubbles on March 02, 2016, 10:01:16 AM
"maximum" and "efficient" do not mean the same thing. In fact, running at maximum capacity is frequently highly inefficient.

Yes the whole flipping thing freezes  >:(

Can't do anything, till it stops running at maximum  :o

No room to manuver I suppose.  ::)
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 02, 2016, 03:52:55 PM
"maximum" and "efficient" do not mean the same thing. In fact, running at maximum capacity is frequently highly inefficient.
True, but when put into context with what HAL says; in its first sentence, and what HAL is - I assume you have seen the film? - then this is what it means.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: jeremyp on March 02, 2016, 03:57:50 PM
True, but when put into context with what HAL says; in its first sentence, and what HAL is - I assume you have seen the film? - then this is what it means.

Computers are very good examples of machines that are very inefficient when running at maximum capacity. The operating system has to spend so much time managing resources that there is no time to do anything productive.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Udayana on March 02, 2016, 04:31:21 PM
Yes, indeed, but is it happy like that?
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 02, 2016, 06:43:55 PM
Computers are very good examples of machines that are very inefficient when running at maximum capacity. The operating system has to spend so much time managing resources that there is no time to do anything productive.
You are so funny!!!  ;D

This is the Religion and Ethics section, not the Science section.

I'm using as a metaphor etc. a Sci-Fi film which has the perfect computer called HAL to illustrate a point of mine and a comment on our times and era.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 02, 2016, 06:51:24 PM
Yes, indeed, but is it happy like that?
It doesn't understand the question emotionally so all it can say is that it is running at full capacity, that it is being as efficient as it can, and fully productive.

But haven't we turned our values into how productive we are and incorporated even ourselves into this monstrous machine of efficiency and output?
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Bubbles on March 02, 2016, 07:55:12 PM
In Stanley Kubrick's film "2001 : A Space Odyssey" the computer HAL is asked if it is happy and its response is, "I'm using all my capacities to the maximum. What more could a rational entity want?"

Is Efficiency our era's truths....? Has all meaning been flatten down to this masters voice? Are we slaves to the rational demands of the machine Efficiency?

I think when employers expect employees to work at maximum capacity at all times without having anything left to give, I think it's called burnout.

Yes more and more, I think we are.

The downside is employees can get run down.

It doesn't lead to happiness, IMO.

Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Rhiannon on March 02, 2016, 08:34:22 PM
It doesn't understand the question emotionally so all it can say is that it is running at full capacity, that it is being as efficient as it can, and fully productive.

But haven't we turned our values into how productive we are and incorporated even ourselves into this monstrous machine of efficiency and output?

I think it's more about productivity than efficiency. Everything is about doing rather than being. You see it in schools where education is about producing results rather than learning for learning's sake.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: jeremyp on March 02, 2016, 10:55:23 PM
You are so funny!!!  ;D

This is the Religion and Ethics section, not the Science section.

I'm using as a metaphor etc. a Sci-Fi film which has the perfect computer called HAL
So you think the perfect computer would be homicidal.

Quote
to illustrate a point of mine and a comment on our times and era.
You were blathering on about maximum capacity being the same as maximum efficiency. I just pointed out your error.
Title: Re: HAL - Efficiency's Demands...
Post by: Jack Knave on March 03, 2016, 05:22:39 PM
So you think the perfect computer would be homicidal.
HAL wasn't homicidal just logical to the nether degree.

Quote
You were blathering on about maximum capacity being the same as maximum efficiency. I just pointed out your error.
And I pointed out that that was not the point of the thread, as others have gathered and responded appropriately, as it is not in the Science section.