I've been thinking...

Post by Profil1
...and i can't recall we had salve this out(or we did and my memory
sucks:]).
The thing with the Reload - so, it's running, running, running, The One goes
into the source, click, Reload - what happens?
It's year 2000, I'm an average Joe, driving to work and click...what
happens??
Considering the option without Smith taking over.
Did we get to an agreement on that or something?

The same thing that happens when Thomas Andersson *click* wakes up after the
interrogation, only that they probably wouldn't even remember it as a dream.

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-24 21:10:50 UTC

The same thing that happens when Thomas Andersson *click* wakes up after the
interrogation, only that they probably wouldn't even remember it as a dream.

Ok, and what year is it? Still 2000?

Sandman

2005-06-27 13:32:16 UTC

Post by Profil1
...and i can't recall we had salve this out(or we did and my memory
sucks:]). The thing with the Reload - so, it's running, running,
running, The One goes into the source, click, Reload - what happens?
It's year 2000, I'm an average Joe, driving to work and click...what
happens??
Considering the option without Smith taking over.
Did we get to an agreement on that or something?

The same thing that happens when Thomas Andersson *click* wakes up
after the interrogation, only that they probably wouldn't even
remember it as a dream.

Ok, and what year is it? Still 2000?

Sure, why not?

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-27 21:26:45 UTC

Post by Profil1
Ok, and what year is it? Still 2000?

Sure, why not?

Well, it would mean that after every reload the Matrix keeps on going with
the actual time. So when Smith said "Which is why the Matrix was redesigned
to this, the peak of your civilization" (it was just after first Matrix so
we didn't know that there we're previous Matrices) he probably meant all of
the Matrices not the partiular one. Since human minds rejected the perfect
world i think that they would reject placing them in 1400.

Sandman

2005-06-28 05:34:23 UTC

Post by Profil1
Ok, and what year is it? Still 2000?

Sure, why not?

Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our civilization", not
just 1990-2000.

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-28 07:19:50 UTC

Post by Profil1
Well, it would mean that after every reload the Matrix keeps on going with
the actual time. So when Smith said "Which is why the Matrix was redesigned
to this, the peak of your civilization" (it was just after first Matrix so
we didn't know that there we're previous Matrices) he probably meant all of
the Matrices not the partiular one. Since human minds rejected the perfect
world i think that they would reject placing them in 1400.

Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our civilization", not
just 1990-2000.

So what does it change to the thing i wrote earlier in this thread:)?
I did not talk about the interval just about this version of Matrix. If it
indeed went for 100 years then ofcourse it had to be considered as a whole
to be the "peak":).

Sandman

2005-06-28 08:17:33 UTC

Post by Profil1
Well, it would mean that after every reload the Matrix keeps on
going with the actual time. So when Smith said "Which is why the
Matrix was redesigned to this, the peak of your civilization" (it
was just after first Matrix so we didn't know that there we're
previous Matrices) he probably meant all of the Matrices not the
partiular one. Since human minds rejected the perfect world i think
that they would reject placing them in 1400.

Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our
civilization", not just 1990-2000.

So what does it change to the thing i wrote earlier in this thread? :)

I wasn't aware that anything needed to be changed? :)

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-28 13:00:14 UTC

Post by Sandman
Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our
civilization", not just 1990-2000.

So what does it change to the thing i wrote earlier in this thread? :)

I wasn't aware that anything needed to be changed? :)

Cause when i answered to Your "Why not?" i told You why, and i thought maybe
You could continue the thread by i.e. adding something (thus changing what i
said) or stating Your point of view and continuing the conversation but You
just stated the obvious with "Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the
"peak of our civilization", not just 1990-2000" which kind of leads to
nowhere nor ads anything. And I was wondering about the point of that reply
thus my "So what does it change to the thing i wrote earlier in this
thread".

Sandman

2005-06-28 19:24:21 UTC

Post by Sandman
Right, but 1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our
civilization", not just 1990-2000.

So what does it change to the thing i wrote earlier in this thread? :)

I wasn't aware that anything needed to be changed? :)

Cause when i answered to Your "Why not?" i told You why, and i thought
maybe You could continue the thread by i.e. adding something (thus
changing what i said) or stating Your point of view and continuing the
conversation but You just stated the obvious with "Right, but
1900-2000 might be considered the "peak of our civilization", not just
1990-2000" which kind of leads to nowhere nor ads anything. And I was
wondering about the point of that reply thus my "So what does it
change to the thing i wrote earlier in this thread".

We've had two different subthreads going on here. You asked what happens when a
reload occurs, I said I thought it was the same as when Thomas "wakes" after
the interrogation. You asked if it was still 2000, and I said "sure, why not?"
not really thinking about the implications of explicitly "2000" but rather
reading it as "the peak of civilization" as references by Smith.

Because, in the first Movie, it's not even the year 2000 yet. And I think it's
1997 in Reloaded, but I don't remember. I never took your question literally.

In another subthread, we got into the nitty gritty regarding the 100 years Zion
has existed in which we were inevitably led to the clear fact that the Matrix
need to have been running for the same time period as Zion has existed.

The only counter-reference we have is the actual reload we see in Revolutions
in which it is quite clear that it doesn't reload to the year 1900, but rather
stays very much contemporary to 1997. One could of course assume that this
reload was in many was a much different reload given the deal made with Neo. It
could perhaps just have been a rehash of the world, clearing out the virus.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-06-28 20:07:02 UTC

Post by Sandman
The only counter-reference we have is the actual reload we see in
Revolutions in which it is quite clear that it doesn't reload to the
year 1900, but rather stays very much contemporary to 1997. One could
of course assume that this reload was in many was a much different
reload given the deal made with Neo. It could perhaps just have been
a rehash of the world, clearing out the virus.

The point you make here has been the basis of my thesis on this subject all
along.

I wasn't making any claims about the age of the Matrix or Zion, just the way
things appear to be inside the Matrix. I was saying that the look and feel
of the Matrix doesn't exceed certain bounds, and I was defining those bounds
using years since that's the most concise way to do so (rather than
describing what technologies are there and which ones are too old or too
new). The actual age of Zion or the Matrix was not part of my end of the
discussion. For any confusion on that point, I apologize. My fault.

My point was that the machines are running a world that seems to maintain
the technological and scientific understanding of our current human world,
plus or minus a bit depending on how things are at the beginning and end of
each reload cycle.

Plus, since the machines have virtual control of their virtual world (heh),
they get to run all kinds of programs within the system to help control the
rate of development of greater human knowledge within the system.

So while they may not have absolute control outside the context of their
need to reload the system when the systemic anomaly comes about after having
time to develop, the natural tendency for collective progress of human
knowledge is not unpredictable and therefore, as the Architect tells Neo in
another context (and not with these exact words), "not beyond measures of
control".

What this means specifically can only be speculated, but it seems certain
that the machines have a vested interest in moderating the ability and rate
of their crops' abilities to develop.

I hope this makes sense. If not, I hope we can discuss it sensibly or just
agree to disagree. :)

Profil1

2005-06-29 07:28:06 UTC

Post by JPM III
The point you make here has been the basis of my thesis on this subject all
along.
I wasn't making any claims about the age of the Matrix or Zion, just the way
things appear to be inside the Matrix. I was saying that the look and feel
of the Matrix doesn't exceed certain bounds, and I was defining those bounds
using years since that's the most concise way to do so (rather than
describing what technologies are there and which ones are too old or too
new). The actual age of Zion or the Matrix was not part of my end of the
discussion. For any confusion on that point, I apologize. My fault.
My point was that the machines are running a world that seems to maintain
the technological and scientific understanding of our current human world,
plus or minus a bit depending on how things are at the beginning and end of
each reload cycle.
Plus, since the machines have virtual control of their virtual world (heh),
they get to run all kinds of programs within the system to help control the
rate of development of greater human knowledge within the system.
So while they may not have absolute control outside the context of their
need to reload the system when the systemic anomaly comes about after having
time to develop, the natural tendency for collective progress of human
knowledge is not unpredictable and therefore, as the Architect tells Neo in
another context (and not with these exact words), "not beyond measures of
control".
What this means specifically can only be speculated, but it seems certain
that the machines have a vested interest in moderating the ability and rate
of their crops' abilities to develop.
I hope this makes sense. If not, I hope we can discuss it sensibly or just
agree to disagree. :)

In general i have to agree:). And cause Mega City(right?) is not a
simulation of any particular city Machines can create the past as they want
to, as long as they do not try to meke it to beutiful:). Even if they back
it up 300 years and it would look like yesterday the people connected would
not feel the difference. Btw i wonder how do history books look like in the
Matrix:)?

Sandman

2005-07-09 12:02:00 UTC

The point you make here has been the basis of my thesis on this subject all
along.
I wasn't making any claims about the age of the Matrix or Zion, just the way
things appear to be inside the Matrix. I was saying that the look and feel
of the Matrix doesn't exceed certain bounds, and I was defining those bounds
using years since that's the most concise way to do so (rather than
describing what technologies are there and which ones are too old or too
new). The actual age of Zion or the Matrix was not part of my end of the
discussion. For any confusion on that point, I apologize. My fault.
My point was that the machines are running a world that seems to maintain
the technological and scientific understanding of our current human world,
plus or minus a bit depending on how things are at the beginning and end of
each reload cycle.
Plus, since the machines have virtual control of their virtual world (heh),
they get to run all kinds of programs within the system to help control the
rate of development of greater human knowledge within the system.
So while they may not have absolute control outside the context of their
need to reload the system when the systemic anomaly comes about after having
time to develop, the natural tendency for collective progress of human
knowledge is not unpredictable and therefore, as the Architect tells Neo in
another context (and not with these exact words), "not beyond measures of
control".
What this means specifically can only be speculated, but it seems certain
that the machines have a vested interest in moderating the ability and rate
of their crops' abilities to develop.

Well, it's quite simple really. Zion has existed for 100 years, which means
that this incarnation has existed for 100 years. I have a hard time seeing how
you can get the human mind to accept a development stagnation for one hundred
years. Just think about what has happened between 1900 and 2000 and what will
happen between 2000 and 2100.

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-29 07:13:23 UTC

Post by Sandman
We've had two different subthreads going on here. You asked what happens when a
reload occurs, I said I thought it was the same as when Thomas "wakes" after
the interrogation. You asked if it was still 2000, and I said "sure, why not?"
not really thinking about the implications of explicitly "2000" but rather
reading it as "the peak of civilization" as references by Smith.

Ooooh, like that..

Post by Sandman
Because, in the first Movie, it's not even the year 2000 yet. And I think it's
1997 in Reloaded, but I don't remember. I never took your question literally.

Morpheus - "You believe it's the year 1999 when in fact it's closer to 2199"
And in reloaded there is a part when somebody says something like "in half
Year whe got more people than in 6 years", right? So maybe it is 2000 in
Reloaded:).

Post by Sandman
In another subthread, we got into the nitty gritty regarding the 100 years Zion
has existed in which we were inevitably led to the clear fact that the Matrix
need to have been running for the same time period as Zion has existed.

Yes and I agree with it.

Post by Sandman
The only counter-reference we have is the actual reload we see in Revolutions
in which it is quite clear that it doesn't reload to the year 1900, but rather
stays very much contemporary to 1997. One could of course assume that this
reload was in many was a much different reload given the deal made with Neo. It
could perhaps just have been a rehash of the world, clearing out the virus.

And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one". Though no
evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

JPM III

2005-07-01 15:01:35 UTC

Post by Sandman
We've had two different subthreads going on here. You asked what
happens when a reload occurs, I said I thought it was the same as
when Thomas "wakes" after the interrogation. You asked if it was
still 2000, and I said "sure, why not?" not really thinking about
the implications of explicitly "2000" but rather reading it as "the
peak of civilization" as references by Smith.

Ooooh, like that..

Post by Sandman
Because, in the first Movie, it's not even the year 2000 yet. And I
think it's 1997 in Reloaded, but I don't remember. I never took
your question literally.

Morpheus - "You believe it's the year 1999 when in fact it's closer
to 2199" And in reloaded there is a part when somebody says something
like "in half Year whe got more people than in 6 years", right? So
maybe it is 2000 in Reloaded:).

Post by Sandman
In another subthread, we got into the nitty gritty regarding the
100 years Zion has existed in which we were inevitably led to the
clear fact that the Matrix need to have been running for the same
time period as Zion has existed.

Yes and I agree with it.

Post by Sandman
The only counter-reference we have is the actual reload we see in
Revolutions in which it is quite clear that it doesn't reload to
the year 1900, but rather stays very much contemporary to 1997. One
could of course assume that this reload was in many was a much
different reload given the deal made with Neo. It could perhaps
just have been a rehash of the world, clearing out the virus.

And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one". Though
no evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

Fact 1: As far as we know, the current version of the Matrix is
approximately as old as the current incarnation of Zion.

Fact 2: Smith and the Architect both tell us that there were previous
versions of the Matrix that were failures.

Fact 3: The Architect tells us that the current version of the Matrix has
gone through six cycles, counting by the cyclical emergence of the systemic
anomaly.

Fact 4: The Architect reveals that Zion has been destroyed and rebuilt with
the emergence of each anomaly, which means that the estimated age of the
Matrix and Zion being around 100 is only based on how long its been since
the last anomaly, NOT since the Matrix was created.

Conclusion:

There were five more cycles of the Matrix before this one, plus the failed
versions, which probably means it's closer to the year 2699.

Profil1

2005-07-02 11:24:46 UTC

Post by JPM III
Fact 1: As far as we know, the current version of the Matrix is
approximately as old as the current incarnation of Zion.
Fact 2: Smith and the Architect both tell us that there were previous
versions of the Matrix that were failures.
Fact 3: The Architect tells us that the current version of the Matrix has
gone through six cycles, counting by the cyclical emergence of the systemic
anomaly.
Fact 4: The Architect reveals that Zion has been destroyed and rebuilt with
the emergence of each anomaly, which means that the estimated age of the
Matrix and Zion being around 100 is only based on how long its been since
the last anomaly, NOT since the Matrix was created.
There were five more cycles of the Matrix before this one, plus the failed
versions, which probably means it's closer to the year 2699.

...and? didn't we agree that in '03?
Plus we assume that it is strictly 100 years - not just somebody's
approximation and that each version lasted for the same amount of time. But
as i said it all was said.

JPM III

2005-07-03 18:32:21 UTC

Post by JPM III
Fact 1: As far as we know, the current version of the Matrix is
approximately as old as the current incarnation of Zion.
Fact 2: Smith and the Architect both tell us that there were
previous versions of the Matrix that were failures.
Fact 3: The Architect tells us that the current version of the
Matrix has gone through six cycles, counting by the cyclical
emergence of the systemic anomaly.
Fact 4: The Architect reveals that Zion has been destroyed and
rebuilt with the emergence of each anomaly, which means that the
estimated age of the Matrix and Zion being around 100 is only based
on how long its been since the last anomaly, NOT since the Matrix
was created.
There were five more cycles of the Matrix before this one, plus the
failed versions, which probably means it's closer to the year 2699.

They didn't last the same amount of time, or if they did we have no way of
knowing. Each prior version of the Matrix was running slightly more archaic
version of the code. Since the anomaly was always an improvement, then for
all we know the integration of the anomaly's code each successive time made
the system more stable... so each successive version of the Matrix could
have lasted longer than the previous one. After all, what's the point in the
system if it doesn't get better? They're always trying to improve things...

Profil1

2005-07-03 20:04:16 UTC

Post by JPM III
They didn't last the same amount of time, or if they did we have no way of
knowing. Each prior version of the Matrix was running slightly more archaic
version of the code. Since the anomaly was always an improvement, then for
all we know the integration of the anomaly's code each successive time made
the system more stable... so each successive version of the Matrix could
have lasted longer than the previous one. After all, what's the point in the
system if it doesn't get better? They're always trying to improve things...

Agreed:).

Never wanted to say something else...

Sandman

2005-07-09 12:00:04 UTC

Post by Sandman
We've had two different subthreads going on here. You asked what
happens when a reload occurs, I said I thought it was the same as
when Thomas "wakes" after the interrogation. You asked if it was
still 2000, and I said "sure, why not?" not really thinking about the
implications of explicitly "2000" but rather reading it as "the peak
of civilization" as references by Smith.

Ooooh, like that..

Post by Sandman
Because, in the first Movie, it's not even the year 2000 yet. And I
think it's 1997 in Reloaded, but I don't remember. I never took your
question literally.

Morpheus - "You believe it's the year 1999 when in fact it's closer to
2199" And in reloaded there is a part when somebody says something
like "in half Year whe got more people than in 6 years", right? So
maybe it is 2000 in Reloaded:).

Right. My bad.

Post by Sandman
In another subthread, we got into the nitty gritty regarding the 100
years Zion has existed in which we were inevitably led to the clear
fact that the Matrix need to have been running for the same time
period as Zion has existed.

Yes and I agree with it.

And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one". Though
no evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

Yes, but I have a very hard time imagining a reload occuring and the human
world reloads to ~2000 and stays that way for a hundred years.

Think about what has happend in our real world in 100 years. Electricity, cars,
airplanes, landing on the moon, sending probes to mars, and so on. How do you
get the human brain to accept a development stagnation for 100 years?

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-07-10 18:28:08 UTC

Post by Profil1
And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one". Though
no evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

Yes, but I have a very hard time imagining a reload occuring and the human
world reloads to ~2000 and stays that way for a hundred years.
Think about what has happend in our real world in 100 years. Electricity, cars,
airplanes, landing on the moon, sending probes to mars, and so on. How do you
get the human brain to accept a development stagnation for 100 years?

If the brain is grown for few generation maybe with time it is not
as...active to realize that the evolution is standing still.
Plus, we do not know if it is in a complete stagnation or is it moving but
slower then usual.
With machines having control over units that proceed forward faster than the
simulation allows it to go there is no problem to eliminate such a person.
And if others do not have interest in it, it does not develop as fast as it
could.

My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that lasts for 100
years. Assuming that all previous arguments were accurate

JPM III

2005-07-11 04:25:51 UTC

Post by Profil1
And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one".
Though no evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

Yes, but I have a very hard time imagining a reload occuring and
the human world reloads to ~2000 and stays that way for a hundred
years.
Think about what has happend in our real world in 100 years.
Electricity, cars, airplanes, landing on the moon, sending probes
to mars, and so on. How do you get the human brain to accept a
development stagnation for 100 years?

If the brain is grown for few generation maybe with time it is not
as...active to realize that the evolution is standing still.
Plus, we do not know if it is in a complete stagnation or is it
moving but slower then usual.
With machines having control over units that proceed forward faster
than the simulation allows it to go there is no problem to eliminate
such a person. And if others do not have interest in it, it does not
develop as fast as it could.
My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that lasts for
100 years. Assuming that all previous arguments were accurate

That's what I've seen saying. It's not like they're actually playing with
time, because there is no actual year in the Matrix. It's whatever the
machines tell them it is. And to the extent that they have control of some
things that go on and can overwrite memories that don't need to be there...

Sandman

2005-07-11 05:46:03 UTC

Post by Profil1
And with this in some part i can't:). I think i'm that "one". Though
no evidence to think so imho it was just a rehash.

Yes, but I have a very hard time imagining a reload occuring and the
human world reloads to ~2000 and stays that way for a hundred years.
Think about what has happend in our real world in 100 years.
Electricity, cars, airplanes, landing on the moon, sending probes to
mars, and so on. How do you get the human brain to accept a
development stagnation for 100 years?

If the brain is grown for few generation maybe with time it is not
as...active to realize that the evolution is standing still.

Yeah, but how? You still need to have the humanity aware of the development
that HAS taken place for the latest centuries.

I don't know, it just seems like far more work for a brain
simulation/alteration software to keep changing the human mind. As Morpheus
tells Neo, Neo has always felt that there was something wrong with the world,
but that seems pretty unique to Neo, most people just go about their business.

Post by Profil1
Plus, we
do not know if it is in a complete stagnation or is it moving but
slower then usual.

Yeah, but keeping it 1999 for 100 years wouldn't just be "slower", it would
probbably mean that it would stand still.

Think about it - grandparents can't tell their kids that things were cheaper in
the old days. Fact is, there wouldn't be any "old days", since everything would
be exactly the same, or at least not change enough to make a historical
difference.

Post by Profil1
With machines having control over units that
proceed forward faster than the simulation allows it to go there is no
problem to eliminate such a person. And if others do not have interest
in it, it does not develop as fast as it could.
My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that lasts for
100 years. Assuming that all previous arguments were accurate

What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think about it, you live
your entire life and the speed of a computer isn't becoming faster than it did
during the 1990-1995 period (i.e. 50 years).

To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a big endevour
and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you want to envision it to
be 1990-2000 and that times just passes slower? Why not 1900-2000?

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-11 08:07:46 UTC

Post by Profil1
My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that lasts
for 100 years. Assuming that all previous arguments were accurate

What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think about it,
you live your entire life and the speed of a computer isn't becoming
faster than it did during the 1990-1995 period (i.e. 50 years).
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a big
endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you want
to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just passes slower? Why
not 1900-2000?

Because the way things change within the simulation is not based on the same
rate of change as we know it in the real world. The simulation is based on
late-20th century human civilization, and everything else is built around
it.

As far as humans inside the Matrix are concerned, their history is as true
as we believe ours is. But it isn't necessarily the same as ours.
Technology, medicine, and everything else will progress in completely
different ways since it's all virtual anyway. So there's no reason why
certain technologies couldn't just take longer to develop in the simulation
than they did for us in non-movie land.

Time isn't moving any slower. But the machines have a vested interest in
controlling their subjects, and that likely includes affecting the
"programs" that control the humans' simulated intellectual developments
within the Matrix.

Sandman

2005-07-11 12:00:13 UTC

Post by Profil1
My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that lasts
for 100 years. Assuming that all previous arguments were accurate

What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think about it,
you live your entire life and the speed of a computer isn't becoming
faster than it did during the 1990-1995 period (i.e. 50 years).
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a big
endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you want
to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just passes slower? Why
not 1900-2000?

Because the way things change within the simulation is not based on the same
rate of change as we know it in the real world.

BUt everythi8ng we know suggests that the machines doesn't alter the human mind
in order to have it accept the Matrix, but the other way around. They have been
altering the Matrix to make the human mind accept it. If it was easy enough for
them to just tweak each human mind to make it submissive, why even bother with
any simulation at all?

We have to assume that the Matrix is the *only* way the machines could trap the
humanity, and that the human mind need to keep thinking everything is normal.
With that in mind, it's easy to assume that tweaking the human mind to accept X
or Y isn't an option for the machines.

Post by JPM III
The simulation is based on late-20th century human civilization, and
everything else is built around it.
As far as humans inside the Matrix are concerned, their history is as true
as we believe ours is. But it isn't necessarily the same as ours.
Technology, medicine, and everything else will progress in completely
different ways since it's all virtual anyway.

No, I'd rather suggest that it isn't virtual in any other way than it's not
real. the knowledge and development is still being made by individuals.

Post by JPM III
So there's no reason why
certain technologies couldn't just take longer to develop in the simulation
than they did for us in non-movie land.

See above why I don't think that's a plausible interpretation.

Post by JPM III
Time isn't moving any slower. But the machines have a vested interest in
controlling their subjects, and that likely includes affecting the
"programs" that control the humans' simulated intellectual developments
within the Matrix.

I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human development.
Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the Matrix, and thus becoming a
threat to the machines, has anything to do with technology. I.e. human
technology advancing wouldn't necessarily pose a threat to the machines since
it wouldn't mean that we would find out that we are living in a dream world,
basically because no one is suspecting we are and no efforts would be done to
investigate it. And even if some were (like Neo) how do you use technology to
find out?

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-07-12 10:47:09 UTC

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human development.
Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the Matrix, and thus becoming a
threat to the machines, has anything to do with technology. I.e. human
technology advancing wouldn't necessarily pose a threat to the machines since
it wouldn't mean that we would find out that we are living in a dream world,
basically because no one is suspecting we are and no efforts would be done to
investigate it. And even if some were (like Neo) how do you use technology to
find out?

Imagine what will happen when people start cloning themseves? As You stated
in another post RSI "has been synchronized with his actual body " so the
machines would have to find (or make) an exact person to plug to the clone
body? Now that would be hard...So it's not that machines are endangered by
the technological development but it is just unhandy to them to let people
go forward to much.

Sandman

2005-07-12 12:03:03 UTC

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the Matrix,
and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything to do with
technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't necessarily pose
a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean that we would find
out that we are living in a dream world, basically because no one is
suspecting we are and no efforts would be done to investigate it. And
even if some were (like Neo) how do you use technology to find out?

Imagine what will happen when people start cloning themseves?

I don't have to. In the period of 1900-2000, that didn't occur in human
development so it would be logical to assume that the risk of it happening
would be small.

Post by Profil1
As You stated in another post RSI "has been synchronized with his
actual body " so the machines would have to find (or make) an exact
person to plug to the clone body? Now that would be hard...So it's not
that machines are endangered by the technological development but it
is just unhandy to them to let people go forward to much.

I'd say that the genetics of the RSI and the actual body is kept synchronized.
It would be the same as any new person being "born". Somehow the genetics from
host A and host B need to merge to create child C, when they have sex in the
matrix.

When cloning person A, you insert the genetics of him or her to fetus B, which
the machines need to do on "the other side" as well then, just as when they
impregante a host.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-13 15:57:44 UTC

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the
Matrix, and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything
to do with technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't
necessarily pose a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean
that we would find out that we are living in a dream world,
basically because no one is suspecting we are and no efforts
would be done to investigate it. And even if some were (like Neo)
how do you use technology to find out?

Imagine what will happen when people start cloning themseves?

I don't have to. In the period of 1900-2000, that didn't occur in
human development so it would be logical to assume that the risk of
it happening would be small.

But in one interval or another of the Matrix, it *could* happen. After all,
if the Matrix is getting more and more stable after the dissimilation of
each anomaly, then it stands to reason that some versions of the Matrix run
longer without a reload than others. 100 years, 120 years, 150 years? At
some point, enough time would pass that a human clone would be a much higher
risk, if not a plain likelihood, if scientific development isn't harnessed a
little bit.

Post by Profil1
As You stated in another post RSI "has been synchronized with his
actual body " so the machines would have to find (or make) an exact
person to plug to the clone body? Now that would be hard...So it's
not that machines are endangered by the technological development
but it is just unhandy to them to let people go forward to much.

I'd say that the genetics of the RSI and the actual body is kept
synchronized. It would be the same as any new person being "born".
Somehow the genetics from host A and host B need to merge to create
child C, when they have sex in the matrix.
When cloning person A, you insert the genetics of him or her to fetus
B, which the machines need to do on "the other side" as well then,
just as when they impregante a host.

In other words, any human attempt to clone other humans will always result
in failure. They can reproduce the shell of any human, but since they can't
duplicate the real-world body, there will never be a brain to control the
clone... so it will just be comatose. Maybe that's the machines' answer to
the problem: just never allow a cloned human to wake up, and they'll always
assume their attempts are a failure.

Sandman

2005-07-13 21:11:59 UTC

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the
Matrix, and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything
to do with technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't
necessarily pose a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean
that we would find out that we are living in a dream world,
basically because no one is suspecting we are and no efforts
would be done to investigate it. And even if some were (like Neo)
how do you use technology to find out?

Imagine what will happen when people start cloning themseves?

I don't have to. In the period of 1900-2000, that didn't occur in
human development so it would be logical to assume that the risk of
it happening would be small.

Sure, fair enough. I don't share your concern that a human clone would be a
problem for the machines, though.

Post by Profil1
As You stated in another post RSI "has been synchronized with his
actual body " so the machines would have to find (or make) an exact
person to plug to the clone body? Now that would be hard...So it's
not that machines are endangered by the technological development
but it is just unhandy to them to let people go forward to much.

I'd say that the genetics of the RSI and the actual body is kept
synchronized. It would be the same as any new person being "born".
Somehow the genetics from host A and host B need to merge to create
child C, when they have sex in the matrix.
When cloning person A, you insert the genetics of him or her to fetus
B, which the machines need to do on "the other side" as well then,
just as when they impregante a host.

In other words, any human attempt to clone other humans will always result
in failure.

Eh, no. As I just said, it's quite possible. Extracting and inserting DNA is
something the machines need to do on a daily basis.

Post by JPM III
They can reproduce the shell of any human, but since they can't
duplicate the real-world body, there will never be a brain to control the
clone...

Eh? The "body" of a person is formed by said persons DNA. I'll explain again:

Scenario A - actual reproduction (i.e. this is how humans get born).

Inside the Matrix:
Woman A falls in love with man B. They have sex. The simulation makes the
woman pregnant.

In the real world:
Eggs from host A is withdrawn and impregnated by sperm from host B

Result:
IN the Matrix, they give birth to a kid. In the real world, a fetus is
grown in a new pod and has genetics from both hosts.

Scenario B - someone is cloning a human

Inside the Matrix:
A scientist takes the DNA from man A and puts it in an egg of woman B,
totally removing the DNA from woman B.

In the real world:
The machines does the exact same thing with the DNA from host A and egg
from host B.

Result:
The baby born in the Matrix looks like its host and so does the real life
baby.

Post by JPM III
so it will just be comatose. Maybe that's the machines' answer to
the problem: just never allow a cloned human to wake up, and they'll always
assume their attempts are a failure.

Not necessary

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-13 15:53:44 UTC

Post by Profil1
My guess is that it would probably be 1990-2000 period that
lasts for 100 years. Assuming that all previous arguments were
accurate

What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think about
it, you live your entire life and the speed of a computer isn't
becoming faster than it did during the 1990-1995 period (i.e. 50
years).
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a
big endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do
you want to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just
passes slower? Why not 1900-2000?

Because the way things change within the simulation is not based on
the same rate of change as we know it in the real world.

BUt everythi8ng we know suggests that the machines doesn't alter the
human mind in order to have it accept the Matrix, but the other way
around.

Exactly, they alter the Matrix. They can easily alter any and all rules and
non-human actions they wish to slow the humans' "technological advancement"
(which is imaginary since it's within the system) and any other kinds of
advancement. The machines are in control of the entire world inside the
Matrix, so they could easily have engineered it in order to make the late
1990s world the "peak of human civilization", and just run the simulation
from a starting point using that civilization as a foundation, starting the
year-numbering for each interval of the Matrix in the early 2100's or
whatever to coincide with the last bit of real human history.

But the year in the real world is probably centuries later than that, if
there really have been five versions (numbered by emergence of the anomalic
one) plus the two failed versions of the Matrix before that solution was
stumbled upon.

Post by Sandman
They have been altering the Matrix to make the human mind
accept it. If it was easy enough for them to just tweak each human
mind to make it submissive, why even bother with any simulation at
all?

Because that requires too much power to go into every single mind at once.
That's the purpose of the simulation. But they can take specific minds and
fix them, move them around within the Matrix, and so on. What they did to
Neo during the interrogation in the first movie could be an example/hint of
this.

My suggestion is that the type of people more likely to innovate (scientists
and such) are the ones most likely to be curbed slightly by the ruling
interests of the Matrix.

Post by Sandman
We have to assume that the Matrix is the *only* way the machines
could trap the humanity, and that the human mind need to keep
thinking everything is normal. With that in mind, it's easy to assume
that tweaking the human mind to accept X or Y isn't an option for the
machines.

It's "only" the best way they've come up with so far, but not necessarily
the only way. And it certainly isn't perfect, as the events of the three
movies prove. Humans have the potential to escape it (but probably to their
own end -- as in their own extinction, because I don't see how they could
physically overpower the machines).

It's not a matter of tweaking minds to accept certain things, but instead
influencing them to accept them. Alter the results of experiments here and
there that cause the human mind to come to different conclusions, and
scientific progress can easily slow down. I would imagine that the machines
have the power to change all kinds of little things that will subtly affect
how people in the Matrix think or act about something without them ever
realizing it.

Post by JPM III
The simulation is based on late-20th century human civilization, and
everything else is built around it.
As far as humans inside the Matrix are concerned, their history is
as true as we believe ours is. But it isn't necessarily the same as
ours. Technology, medicine, and everything else will progress in
completely different ways since it's all virtual anyway.

No, I'd rather suggest that it isn't virtual in any other way than
it's not real. the knowledge and development is still being made by
individuals.

But it's at a completely different rate, and it's influenced by machine-run
programs governining their environment, rather than the humans simply ruling
their environment.

Of course, if you take real-world religion into account, maybe some god or
gods is/are running everything around us, influencing each of our decisions.
Either way, those gods don't have direct control of our thoughts, but they
could influence our decisions by having small effects on the things around
us.

Influence is not control, but it can be just as good or better if utilized
well.

Post by JPM III
So there's no reason why
certain technologies couldn't just take longer to develop in the
simulation than they did for us in non-movie land.

See above why I don't think that's a plausible interpretation.

Post by JPM III
Time isn't moving any slower. But the machines have a vested
interest in controlling their subjects, and that likely includes
affecting the "programs" that control the humans' simulated
intellectual developments within the Matrix.

I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the Matrix,
and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything to do with
technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't necessarily pose
a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean that we would find
out that we are living in a dream world, basically because no one is
suspecting we are and no efforts would be done to investigate it. And
even if some were (like Neo) how do you use technology to find out?

It all boils down to an electronic system -- complicated though it may be --
so there is a way. In theory. Which is neither provable or disprovable,
since we have no way to test it... because it's all fiction anyway. :)

Sandman

2005-07-13 22:00:04 UTC

Post by Sandman
What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think about
it, you live your entire life and the speed of a computer isn't
becoming faster than it did during the 1990-1995 period (i.e. 50
years).
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a
big endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do
you want to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just
passes slower? Why not 1900-2000?

Because the way things change within the simulation is not based on
the same rate of change as we know it in the real world.

BUt everythi8ng we know suggests that the machines doesn't alter the
human mind in order to have it accept the Matrix, but the other way
around.

No, limiting human development would mean limit human ideas, which means
limiting the human mind. The Matrix simulates an environment. It doesn't
simulate houses and computers. Those are items built by humans from the
resources given by the machine via the Matrix - or at least as far as we know.

Either way, I don't see the point in limiting human development. Why?

Because that requires too much power to go into every single mind at once.

But that's pretty much what you need in order to limit each humans capabilities
when it comes to ideas and development.

Post by JPM III
My suggestion is that the type of people more likely to innovate (scientists
and such) are the ones most likely to be curbed slightly by the ruling
interests of the Matrix.

But that doesn't make sense - thousands of history-altering ideas wasn't
discovered by scientists in a lab. And how DO you target "every scientist in
the population"? I wouldn't know - do you keep a database around with all their
job titles? I don't think the machine have that kind of registry over the
people in the matrix, or no one would be able to slip away.

Whatever the difference is...?

Post by JPM III
Alter the results of experiments here and
there that cause the human mind to come to different conclusions, and
scientific progress can easily slow down. I would imagine that the machines
have the power to change all kinds of little things that will subtly affect
how people in the Matrix think or act about something without them ever
realizing it.

Fair enough. Now do it to ~6 billion people all at once, all the time.

Post by Sandman
No, I'd rather suggest that it isn't virtual in any other way than
it's not real. the knowledge and development is still being made by
individuals.

But it's at a completely different rate,

How? How do you get humans to, eh, "think slower" without tinkering with their
brains in a major sense?

Post by JPM III
and it's influenced by machine-run
programs governining their environment, rather than the humans simply ruling
their environment.

How do outer control of the environment limit my capacity for new ideas?

Post by JPM III
Of course, if you take real-world religion into account, maybe some god or
gods is/are running everything around us, influencing each of our decisions.

But gods don't do that. The religion does, which usually is a series of
preachings in a book written by men.

Post by JPM III
Either way, those gods don't have direct control of our thoughts, but they
could influence our decisions by having small effects on the things around
us.

Such as? Burning bushes?

Post by JPM III
Influence is not control, but it can be just as good or better if utilized
well.

Right, but how do you influence the entire brainthrust of human kind to NOT
figure out item X?

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the Matrix,
and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything to do with
technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't necessarily pose
a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean that we would find
out that we are living in a dream world, basically because no one is
suspecting we are and no efforts would be done to investigate it. And
even if some were (like Neo) how do you use technology to find out?

It all boils down to an electronic system -- complicated though it may be --
so there is a way.

But the electronic system that is the Matrix isn't something we can interact
with or manipulate until we have first exited the Matrix, which technology
can't provide. I.e. you can't hack the Matrix from the inside using just
technology since all technology is built from the rules of the simulation. You
can't telnet into 01 from your laptop inside the Matrix. Furthermore, you
couldn't "discover" the Matrix from inside the Matrix using nothing but
technology.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-14 11:59:15 UTC

Post by Sandman
What about music styles? Fashion? Movies? Computers? Think
about it, you live your entire life and the speed of a
computer isn't becoming faster than it did during the
1990-1995 period (i.e. 50 years).
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems
like a big endevour and just not worth it. And for what
reason? Why do you want to envision it to be 1990-2000 and
that times just passes slower? Why not 1900-2000?

Because the way things change within the simulation is not
based on the same rate of change as we know it in the real
world.

BUt everythi8ng we know suggests that the machines doesn't alter
the human mind in order to have it accept the Matrix, but the
other way around.

No, limiting human development would mean limit human ideas, which
means limiting the human mind. The Matrix simulates an environment.
It doesn't simulate houses and computers. Those are items built by
humans from the resources given by the machine via the Matrix - or at
least as far as we know.
Either way, I don't see the point in limiting human development. Why?

Because too much thinking "outside the box" might cause more of them to
realize there's life outside the Matrix. Not necessarily by any means, but
if technology continues to develop and improve, then eventually it will
reach limits beyond what the Matrix is capable of simulating. Of course,
such limits are only theoretical, so there's really no telling.

I guess the question is how malleable the system really is, or how far ahead
into a simulated human history the machines really planned. Can their system
handle the future of human scientific and technological development? Are
their constructs to support whatever they develop next? The logical answer
wants to be yes, but I'm sure there are limits... and of course the system
adapts as the humans do, so it's really just a matter of both sides keeping
pace with each other, just as our world keeps pace with out developments.

Because that requires too much power to go into every single mind at once.

But that's pretty much what you need in order to limit each humans
capabilities when it comes to ideas and development.

Post by JPM III
My suggestion is that the type of people more likely to innovate
(scientists and such) are the ones most likely to be curbed
slightly by the ruling interests of the Matrix.

But that doesn't make sense - thousands of history-altering ideas
wasn't discovered by scientists in a lab. And how DO you target
"every scientist in the population"? I wouldn't know - do you keep a
database around with all their job titles? I don't think the machine
have that kind of registry over the people in the matrix, or no one
would be able to slip away.

It's not a matter of targeting any one in particular. It's a matter of
having programs running subtly in the background that come to the forefront
only when called upon. Sort of like the Agents who come out to play only
when something is misbehaving, only more subtle. Because there is nothing
unordinary about someone doing their own thing, but the system has a vested
interest in discouraging some of it.

Well, maybe. I'll be the first to admit that this is all just extrapolative
speculation.

Post by Sandman
We have to assume that the Matrix is the *only* way the machines
could trap the humanity, and that the human mind need to keep
thinking everything is normal. With that in mind, it's easy to
assume that tweaking the human mind to accept X or Y isn't an
option for the machines.

Whatever the difference is...?

The difference is the machines aren't actually *changing* the minds. The
minds are making their own decisions. The machines are subtly altering the
environment around them in the tiniest of ways to influence the decision
they want. But the humans still have to make up their own damn minds. "The
problem is choice."

Post by JPM III
Alter the results of experiments here and
there that cause the human mind to come to different conclusions,
and scientific progress can easily slow down. I would imagine that
the machines have the power to change all kinds of little things
that will subtly affect how people in the Matrix think or act about
something without them ever realizing it.

Fair enough. Now do it to ~6 billion people all at once, all the time.

It's not targeting anyone in particular, so there's no need for that. It's
just one of the system's many defense mechanisms.

Post by Sandman
No, I'd rather suggest that it isn't virtual in any other way than
it's not real. the knowledge and development is still being made
by individuals.

But it's at a completely different rate,

How? How do you get humans to, eh, "think slower" without tinkering
with their brains in a major sense?

Post by JPM III
and it's influenced by machine-run
programs governining their environment, rather than the humans
simply ruling their environment.

How do outer control of the environment limit my capacity for new ideas?

It's not so much the idea, as the ability to test it. The machines control
the environment, not the human minds. And after all, significant parts of a
person's personality and other psychological traits are products of that
environment (with nature and genetics only supplying a foundation), so it
makes sense that the machines have a great deal of influence on the kinds of
ideas you'll have throughout your life. Not control by any means, and new
ideas will still be plentiful, but the influence is there.

All I'm saying is the machines *could* harness development. I'm not saying
they do. There's no proof of that. You need to let loose a little and accept
fictitious speculation as just that -- speculation.

Post by JPM III
Of course, if you take real-world religion into account, maybe some
god or gods is/are running everything around us, influencing each
of our decisions.

But gods don't do that. The religion does, which usually is a series
of preachings in a book written by men.

That's one theory. No one has ever proven that gods don't do that. No one
has ever proven that gods do. That's not the point. The point is the concept
is basically the same.

Post by JPM III
Either way, those gods don't have direct control of our thoughts,
but they could influence our decisions by having small effects on
the things around us.

Such as? Burning bushes?

Or buildings, or people, or volcanoes. Whatever. It's their system. They can
do what they want with it.

Post by JPM III
Influence is not control, but it can be just as good or better if
utilized well.

Right, but how do you influence the entire brainthrust of human kind
to NOT figure out item X?

How does a simulation for six billion human minds work in the first place?
Use your imagination. If they can make the whole Matrix work, running a few
safeguard programs to preserve its integrity does not seem like such a
difficult thing.

Post by Sandman
I don't see why the machines would have a need to control human
development. Nothing seems to suggest that being aware of the
Matrix, and thus becoming a threat to the machines, has anything
to do with technology. I.e. human technology advancing wouldn't
necessarily pose a threat to the machines since it wouldn't mean
that we would find out that we are living in a dream world,
basically because no one is suspecting we are and no efforts
would be done to investigate it. And even if some were (like Neo)
how do you use technology to find out?

It all boils down to an electronic system -- complicated though it
may be -- so there is a way.

But the electronic system that is the Matrix isn't something we can
interact with or manipulate until we have first exited the Matrix,
which technology can't provide. I.e. you can't hack the Matrix from
the inside using just technology since all technology is built from
the rules of the simulation. You can't telnet into 01 from your
laptop inside the Matrix. Furthermore, you couldn't "discover" the
Matrix from inside the Matrix using nothing but technology.

...in theory. The signal is there, and since I don't believe in perfection,
I'm quite sure there is a way to get to it. Humans lack the technology to do
it on their own, as you suggest, but that doesn't make it impossible. Just
highly improbable -- and a perfect example of something that the machines
would have various safeguards running to prevent humans from discovering
"using nothing but technology".

Sandman

2005-07-14 13:03:35 UTC

Post by Sandman
No, limiting human development would mean limit human ideas, which
means limiting the human mind. The Matrix simulates an environment.
It doesn't simulate houses and computers. Those are items built by
humans from the resources given by the machine via the Matrix - or at
least as far as we know.
Either way, I don't see the point in limiting human development. Why?

Because too much thinking "outside the box" might cause more of them to
realize there's life outside the Matrix.

Now you're really talking about limiting actual *thoughts*.

Post by JPM III
Not necessarily by any means, but
if technology continues to develop and improve, then eventually it will
reach limits beyond what the Matrix is capable of simulating.

You can't just speculate that it will without building a case scenario how such
a thing would actually be done.

Post by JPM III
I guess the question is how malleable the system really is, or how far ahead
into a simulated human history the machines really planned. Can their system
handle the future of human scientific and technological development? Are
their constructs to support whatever they develop next? The logical answer
wants to be yes, but I'm sure there are limits... and of course the system
adapts as the humans do, so it's really just a matter of both sides keeping
pace with each other, just as our world keeps pace with out developments.

We *know* what happened. Human developed AI robots, that were treated badly,
and rebelled. There is no reason why the Matrix wouldn't be able to simulate
this progression if the simulation went far enough.

Post by JPM III
and it's influenced by machine-run
programs governining their environment, rather than the humans
simply ruling their environment.

How do outer control of the environment limit my capacity for new ideas?

This doesn't make any sense at all. If I am a programmer and I am developing an
A.I project (which could be one of the fields that might be considered
'sensitive' to the machines in your scenario). How do the environment (as in,
the simulated reality that is the Matrix) limit my programming?

Post by JPM III
All I'm saying is the machines *could* harness development.

You are speculating on conditions of the Matrix. I am trying to fit your
speculation into a rational explanation of how they work together with what we
know. I am not disagreeing with you, I am questioning the theory.

Post by Sandman
Right, but how do you influence the entire brainthrust of human kind
to NOT figure out item X?

How does a simulation for six billion human minds work in the first place?

That we know. The simulation doesn't do anything for six billion human minds.
It just simulates the laws of nature and physics and then a program interacts
with every single human mind to present him or her to that simulation. For
instance, the Matrix could just simulate a large grass plain, some water, rock
and all the basic elements. Then insert a couple of thousand humans into the
simulation and just let them go about their business. The simulation doesn't
need to do anything more than that. After a couple of hundreds or thousands
years, there will be millions of people and big cities, that human built using
the basic elements that the Matrix provides.

Post by JPM III
Use your imagination. If they can make the whole Matrix work, running a few
safeguard programs to preserve its integrity does not seem like such a
difficult thing.

Running the simulation is a huge project, no question about that. But as far as
we know, the simulation doesn't actually do anything to the human mind, and the
human mind just goes about its business when it's being fed the electrical
signals it's supposed to be fed.

Humans have a way of noticing (in different levels admittedly) when their mind
isn't workign correctly. Just a little bit of alcohol and we feel drunk and
sense that their is something wrong with the way we use our mind.

Post by JPM III
It all boils down to an electronic system -- complicated though it
may be -- so there is a way.

But the electronic system that is the Matrix isn't something we can
interact with or manipulate until we have first exited the Matrix,
which technology can't provide. I.e. you can't hack the Matrix from
the inside using just technology since all technology is built from
the rules of the simulation. You can't telnet into 01 from your
laptop inside the Matrix. Furthermore, you couldn't "discover" the
Matrix from inside the Matrix using nothing but technology.

...in theory. The signal is there, and since I don't believe in perfection,
I'm quite sure there is a way to get to it.

What do you mean by "the signal"??

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-08-20 05:39:55 UTC

Post by Sandman
No, limiting human development would mean limit human ideas, which
means limiting the human mind. The Matrix simulates an
environment. It doesn't simulate houses and computers. Those are
items built by humans from the resources given by the machine via
the Matrix - or at least as far as we know.
Either way, I don't see the point in limiting human development. Why?

Because too much thinking "outside the box" might cause more of
them to realize there's life outside the Matrix.

Now you're really talking about limiting actual *thoughts*.

Post by JPM III
Not necessarily by any means, but
if technology continues to develop and improve, then eventually it
will reach limits beyond what the Matrix is capable of simulating.

You can't just speculate that it will without building a case
scenario how such a thing would actually be done.

Sure I can. I'm just spewing ideas. I have no responsibility for supporting
them in any way, since I'm not actually creating a story out of them. I'm
just suggesting what could be bits and pieces of a larger story. But they
don't have to be. They're just ideas.

Post by JPM III
It's not so much the idea, as the ability to test it. The machines
control the environment, not the human minds. And after all,
significant parts of a person's personality and other psychological
traits are products of that environment (with nature and genetics
only supplying a foundation), so it makes sense that the machines
have a great deal of influence on the kinds of ideas you'll have
throughout your life. Not control by any means, and new ideas will
still be plentiful, but the influence is there.

This doesn't make any sense at all. If I am a programmer and I am
developing an A.I project (which could be one of the fields that
might be considered 'sensitive' to the machines in your scenario).
How do the environment (as in, the simulated reality that is the
Matrix) limit my programming?

It doesn't. That's not what I said. I said the students have unlimited
programming power, which allows them considerable influence on human minds
attached to the system. But they do not necessarily *control* those minds,
because they are still presented with the problem that makes or breaks the
system: choice.

Post by JPM III
All I'm saying is the machines *could* harness development.

You are speculating on conditions of the Matrix. I am trying to fit
your speculation into a rational explanation of how they work
together with what we know. I am not disagreeing with you, I am
questioning the theory.

Good. Solid skepticism is healthy. I'm attempting to make sense of it
according to your logic, but since I don't always know what you're asking,
it isn't always easy. :P

Post by JPM III
Use your imagination. If they can make the whole Matrix work,
running a few safeguard programs to preserve its integrity does not
seem like such a difficult thing.

Good, we seem to agree on that. That's what I was explaining above -- the
machines' manufactured environment is what the humans react to, therefore
the humans are considerably influenced (which counts as "some measure of
control") by the machines' programming, but not completely controlled.
Because humans still choose how they respond to the stimuli, and the
machines have not completely figured out how human choice works.

Post by JPM III
It all boils down to an electronic system -- complicated though
it may be -- so there is a way.

But the electronic system that is the Matrix isn't something we
can interact with or manipulate until we have first exited the
Matrix, which technology can't provide. I.e. you can't hack the
Matrix from the inside using just technology since all technology
is built from the rules of the simulation. You can't telnet into
01 from your laptop inside the Matrix. Furthermore, you couldn't
"discover" the Matrix from inside the Matrix using nothing but
technology.

...in theory. The signal is there, and since I don't believe in
perfection, I'm quite sure there is a way to get to it.

What do you mean by "the signal"??

I suppose I mean the Matrix code. If you're inside the system, it's there,
and since Neo can see it, it is possible that humans within the system could
discover it using supercomputer technology. Possibility does not equal
plausibility, of course.

Profil1

2005-07-12 10:43:45 UTC

Post by Sandman
Yeah, but keeping it 1999 for 100 years wouldn't just be "slower", it would
probbably mean that it would stand still.
Think about it - grandparents can't tell their kids that things were cheaper in
the old days. Fact is, there wouldn't be any "old days", since everything would
be exactly the same, or at least not change enough to make a historical
difference.

Who assumed that through that 100 years prices...

...styles, fashion or movies will change? They will, that is almost sure.
But as it comes to PC they will but with a limited range since in comes to
technology.

Post by Sandman
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a big endevour
and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you want to envision it to
be 1990-2000 and that times just passes slower? Why not 1900-2000?

Since JPM kinda convinced me to hi theory i I think is may be right.
And as i'm thinking when the machines would like to recreate 1900-2000 we
would have I WW, II WW etc.
But all we get is Mega City...wtf is that? It does not look like a part of
our 2000. For me it means that the world in Matrix is going on it's own
tracks. So it is possible the technology to develop slower and etc. just as
machines want it to be. Plus considerong the "peak of our civilization" and
the fact that I could never imagine how things would skip to 1900(car
mechanic is my favourite example:) ). And the change made by machines to the
whole system would be to great. Well, at least I think so;)

Sandman

2005-07-12 11:57:20 UTC

Post by Sandman
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a big
endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you want
to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just passes slower? Why
not 1900-2000?

Since JPM kinda convinced me to hi theory i I think is may be right.
And as i'm thinking when the machines would like to recreate 1900-2000
we would have I WW, II WW etc.

Why? I mean, WWI and WWII was created by individuals, which wouldn't be present
for the next cycle. We would have wars, no doubt about it, but Hitler wouldn't
be reborn for every reload.

Post by Profil1
But all we get is Mega City...wtf is that?

I don't know - what do you mean by it? I kind of get the feeling you mean that
in the Matrix, everyone lives in one big city. We know that's not true, so?

Post by Profil1
It does not look like a part of our 2000.

Because it isn't.

Post by Profil1
For me it means that the world in Matrix is going on it's own tracks.

Yes, of course.

Post by Profil1
So it is possible the technology to develop slower and etc. just as
machines want it to be.

POssible? Sure. Necessary? I can't see why.

Post by Profil1
Plus considerong the "peak of our civilization" and the fact that I
could never imagine how things would skip to 1900(car mechanic is my
favourite example:) ). And the change made by machines to the whole
system would be to great. Well, at least I think so;)

Why? Consider when you buy a new computer from Dell, it gets delivered in
fabric state, which is very basic. As time goes you load newer version of
applications and new applications entirely on it. When an error occurs, you can
use the recovery disk from Dell that puts the computer in the exact same state
when it left the factory. Imagine that disc containing a 1900-era world and all
the alterations are made by humans, not the machines. This would mean that it
would be EASIER to go back to 1900 than to try to recreate the entire human
development cycle for the last 100 years.

Heck, for all we know, the Matrix is just a set of rules like gravity and other
natural laws and a set of natural resources. Technology like computers is what
we humans have built from those resources.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-13 16:10:16 UTC

Post by Sandman
Consider when you buy a new computer from Dell, it gets
delivered in fabric state, which is very basic. As time goes you load
newer version of applications and new applications entirely on it.
When an error occurs, you can use the recovery disk from Dell that
puts the computer in the exact same state when it left the factory.
Imagine that disc containing a 1900-era world and all the alterations
are made by humans, not the machines. This would mean that it would
be EASIER to go back to 1900 than to try to recreate the entire human
development cycle for the last 100 years.

But the reload is more like a reboot after a system upgrade or patch.
They're not reverting back to an original state -- they're upgrading and
refreshing system resources after the system had become a bit unstable, so
it can run for another cycle.

I consider each version or interval of the Matrix to be analogous to
computer uptime. Every time you start up a computer, it runs great for a
while, but over time it gradually develops a few errors, becomes less
stable, and eventually it will need a reload. That reload doesn't erase all
data though; it just reinvigorates the system to handle it more effectively.

The Matrix is no different, except its reload process is much smoother.
Which makes sense, given the technological superiority they would have
several centuries from now compared to what we have now.

I wonder if they install more RAM with each reload. :)

Sandman

2005-07-13 21:48:00 UTC

The emergence of the anomaly is the result of the interaction between the
Matrix and the human mind, where the Oracle created the function of a choice.
We know that the Matrix wasn't always late 20th century, but for all we know,
when a reload occurs, that particular function is all that is being updated,
not the entire Matrix.

Post by JPM III
I consider each version or interval of the Matrix to be analogous to
computer uptime. Every time you start up a computer, it runs great for a
while, but over time it gradually develops a few errors, becomes less
stable, and eventually it will need a reload.

That's because you use Windows. :P

Post by JPM III
That reload doesn't erase all
data though; it just reinvigorates the system to handle it more effectively.

Well, I think it's better to think of it as you're a application developer on
windows and is developing a program to talk to a serial device of some sort -
let's say a digital camera. You develop your program and for each version it
gets more stable and the interaction is more solid. Sure, you use Windows APIs
and resources, but the primary part of the interaction is your application. You
discover that when the application has been running for some time it start to
leak memory and become unstable and eventually crash.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-07-14 12:01:15 UTC

Post by JPM III
I consider each version or interval of the Matrix to be analogous to
computer uptime. Every time you start up a computer, it runs great
for a while, but over time it gradually develops a few errors,
becomes less stable, and eventually it will need a reload.

That's because you use Windows. :P

I also use about four other operating systems. Being aware of the most
popular one isn't a crime, you know. :-P

Post by JPM III
That reload doesn't erase all
data though; it just reinvigorates the system to handle it more effectively.

Well, I think it's better to think of it as you're a application
developer on windows and is developing a program to talk to a serial
device of some sort - let's say a digital camera. You develop your
program and for each version it gets more stable and the interaction
is more solid. Sure, you use Windows APIs and resources, but the
primary part of the interaction is your application. You discover
that when the application has been running for some time it start to
leak memory and become unstable and eventually crash.

I wasn't going to get that complicated. But, fair enough. That's basically
the line of thought I was working with. I was just using a simpler analogy
and explanation.

Sandman

2005-07-14 13:06:28 UTC

Post by Sandman
Well, I think it's better to think of it as you're a application
developer on windows and is developing a program to talk to a serial
device of some sort - let's say a digital camera. You develop your
program and for each version it gets more stable and the interaction
is more solid. Sure, you use Windows APIs and resources, but the
primary part of the interaction is your application. You discover
that when the application has been running for some time it start to
leak memory and become unstable and eventually crash.

I wasn't going to get that complicated. But, fair enough. That's basically
the line of thought I was working with. I was just using a simpler analogy
and explanation.

Well, you analogy dealt with the *system*, and mine with *an application*. I
thought they were pretty different.

As far as we know, the Matrix simulation is working flawlessly, it's the
interaction process to the human mind that isn't yet perfect.

--
Sandman[.net]

JPM III

2005-08-20 05:40:22 UTC

Post by Sandman
Well, I think it's better to think of it as you're a application
developer on windows and is developing a program to talk to a
serial device of some sort - let's say a digital camera. You
develop your program and for each version it gets more stable and
the interaction is more solid. Sure, you use Windows APIs and
resources, but the primary part of the interaction is your
application. You discover that when the application has been
running for some time it start to leak memory and become unstable
and eventually crash.

I wasn't going to get that complicated. But, fair enough. That's
basically the line of thought I was working with. I was just using
a simpler analogy and explanation.

Well, you analogy dealt with the *system*, and mine with *an
application*. I thought they were pretty different.
As far as we know, the Matrix simulation is working flawlessly, it's
the interaction process to the human mind that isn't yet perfect.

With this, I agree.

JPM III

2005-07-13 16:01:31 UTC

Post by Sandman
Yeah, but keeping it 1999 for 100 years wouldn't just be "slower",
it would probbably mean that it would stand still.
Think about it - grandparents can't tell their kids that things
were cheaper in the old days. Fact is, there wouldn't be any "old
days", since everything would be exactly the same, or at least not
change enough to make a historical difference.

Who assumed that through that 100 years prices...

...styles, fashion or movies will change? They will, that is almost
sure. But as it comes to PC they will but with a limited range since
in comes to technology.

Post by Sandman
To keep the human mind so constrained for ideas just seems like a
big endevour and just not worth it. And for what reason? Why do you
want to envision it to be 1990-2000 and that times just passes
slower? Why not 1900-2000?

Since JPM kinda convinced me to hi theory i I think is may be right.
And as i'm thinking when the machines would like to recreate
1900-2000 we would have I WW, II WW etc.
But all we get is Mega City...wtf is that? It does not look like a
part of our 2000. For me it means that the world in Matrix is going
on it's own tracks. So it is possible the technology to develop
slower and etc. just as machines want it to be. Plus considerong the
"peak of our civilization" and the fact that I could never imagine
how things would skip to 1900(car mechanic is my favourite example:)
). And the change made by machines to the whole system would be to
great. Well, at least I think so;)

Yeah, it seems to me that they reload the system in its current state, and
the adjustments take place very subtly. They dont' rehash the entire thing.
They have controls and influences established to prevent technology inside
the Matrix from going too far too fast, and the machines think they've
anticipated everything. And as long as the humans don't do anything they
haven't anticipated, the machines will have programs running in the Matrix
to influence their behavior. Not directly control them, just influence them.
Which is just so they can control their real bodies in the real world.

But at some point, something they didn't anticipate will happen, and they
will either succeed in patching the system or they won't. But at some point,
they won't.

Everything that has a beginning has an end. :)

JPM III

2005-06-26 02:01:39 UTC

Post by Profil1
...and i can't recall we had salve this out(or we did and my memory
sucks:]).
The thing with the Reload - so, it's running, running, running, The
One goes into the source, click, Reload - what happens?
It's year 2000, I'm an average Joe, driving to work and click...what
happens??
Considering the option without Smith taking over.
Did we get to an agreement on that or something?

It is never explicitly stated, so it can only be speculated.

My favorite idea is that the Matrix world is designed simply to be an
emulation of late 20th century human world. To the extent that the machines
have control, I'm sure they engineer the reload such that their crop of
humans have no knowledge of their lives before the reload.

After all, in theory, a mind can be re-inserted into the Matrix and have no
knowledge of their lives outside of the Matrix or their previous lives in
the Matrix. This makes sense, when you consider that there is a mechanism to
prevent people from remembering their interactions with agents (or when
agents take over their shells in the Matrix).

Profil1

2005-06-26 22:13:50 UTC

Post by JPM III
It is never explicitly stated, so it can only be speculated.
My favorite idea is that the Matrix world is designed simply to be an
emulation of late 20th century human world. To the extent that the machines
have control, I'm sure they engineer the reload such that their crop of
humans have no knowledge of their lives before the reload.

Same here but that's not all...i need deeper analysis:)

Post by JPM III
After all, in theory, a mind can be re-inserted into the Matrix and have no
knowledge of their lives outside of the Matrix or their previous lives in
the Matrix. This makes sense, when you consider that there is a mechanism to
prevent people from remembering their interactions with agents (or when
agents take over their shells in the Matrix).

Ok, true but... deeper:)

So You think/speculate that after 100 years(like somebody in the real world
said - Morpheus maybe - so long no seen Matrix) or so it flips 100 years
back? Cause that's bothering me. Technically it is possible - The One
reaches the source and flip, it goes to 1900...But that's shit load of work
to re-configure the whole Matrix (technology level etc) plus everybodys mind
which would be possibly even harder. Or by saying "emulation of late 20th
century" You meant that Matrix is being rebooted for example every 20 years
not to be troubled with what i say sec ago?
But when thinking about it, dunno what to think about "red pills". Hell of a
s surprise now and then:).

Still a mystery...I think i'll have to hunt down the W. brothers:) or anyone
here will give his explanation that will satisfy me:)

JPM III

2005-06-27 05:37:41 UTC

Post by JPM III
It is never explicitly stated, so it can only be speculated.
My favorite idea is that the Matrix world is designed simply to be
an emulation of late 20th century human world. To the extent that
the machines have control, I'm sure they engineer the reload such
that their crop of humans have no knowledge of their lives before
the reload.

Same here but that's not all...i need deeper analysis:)

Post by JPM III
After all, in theory, a mind can be re-inserted into the Matrix and
have no knowledge of their lives outside of the Matrix or their
previous lives in the Matrix. This makes sense, when you consider
that there is a mechanism to prevent people from remembering their
interactions with agents (or when agents take over their shells in
the Matrix).

Ok, true but... deeper:)
So You think/speculate that after 100 years(like somebody in the real
world said - Morpheus maybe - so long no seen Matrix) or so it flips
100 years back? Cause that's bothering me. Technically it is possible
- The One reaches the source and flip, it goes to 1900...But that's
shit load of work to re-configure the whole Matrix (technology level
etc) plus everybodys mind which would be possibly even harder. Or by
saying "emulation of late 20th century" You meant that Matrix is
being rebooted for example every 20 years not to be troubled with
what i say sec ago?
But when thinking about it, dunno what to think about "red pills".
Hell of a s surprise now and then:).
Still a mystery...I think i'll have to hunt down the W. brothers:) or
anyone here will give his explanation that will satisfy me:)

1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The technology
difference of anything before would be too different. Also, I'm guessing
there's some sort of limit to what kind of technology will be developed
within the Matrix, based in part on the type of programs running within the
Matrix to control the humans via constant subtle influence.

It doesn't matter what year the people in the Matrix think it is. All of it
is controlled by whatever programs the machines are running to control them.

Profil1

2005-06-27 11:30:18 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The technology
difference of anything before would be too different. Also, I'm guessing
there's some sort of limit to what kind of technology will be developed
within the Matrix, based in part on the type of programs running within the
Matrix to control the humans via constant subtle influence.
It doesn't matter what year the people in the Matrix think it is. All of it
is controlled by whatever programs the machines are running to control them.

Wouldn't this be problematic for the free ones? Cause their task, in some
way is to find the one, tho they do not know that in the same way the
machines do. Plus they would know about such thing. I know it is not
mentioned in any way but considering the importance of it i thnk it would if
it had been like that.

JPM III

2005-06-28 06:52:05 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The
technology difference of anything before would be too different.
Also, I'm guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of
technology will be developed within the Matrix, based in part on
the type of programs running within the Matrix to control the
humans via constant subtle influence.
It doesn't matter what year the people in the Matrix think it is.
All of it is controlled by whatever programs the machines are
running to control them.

Wouldn't this be problematic for the free ones? Cause their task, in
some way is to find the one, tho they do not know that in the same
way the machines do. Plus they would know about such thing. I know it
is not mentioned in any way but considering the importance of it i
thnk it would if it had been like that.

We only know what they think the year is. We have no idea what 1980 inside
the Matrix looked like to them. Like I said in my other post, it doesn't
matter what the actual number of the year is, it's the human technology
within the simulation that doesn't escape the late-20th century model.

I wasn't trying to say that the Matrix cycles every years or that it's
younger than Morpheus and others say it is. I was just saying that the level
of human knowledge within the Matrix is confined to what the machines allow
them to know (based on late 20th century human world) and what the freed
minds add to the mix.

Profil1

2005-06-28 07:24:46 UTC

Post by JPM III
We only know what they think the year is. We have no idea what 1980 inside
the Matrix looked like to them. Like I said in my other post, it doesn't
matter what the actual number of the year is, it's the human technology
within the simulation that doesn't escape the late-20th century model.
I wasn't trying to say that the Matrix cycles every years or that it's
younger than Morpheus and others say it is. I was just saying that the level
of human knowledge within the Matrix is confined to what the machines allow
them to know (based on late 20th century human world) and what the freed
minds add to the mix.

Oooh, in that way. Hmmm, possible, true. Though it sucks to have Pentium 2
for example for 40 years:).
OTOH it would be reasonable when considering genetical made human(in The
Matrix). It would be problematic for the machines to get a baby that will
grow up like it is expected to grow inside.

JPM III

2005-06-28 16:56:50 UTC

Post by JPM III
We only know what they think the year is. We have no idea what 1980
inside the Matrix looked like to them. Like I said in my other
post, it doesn't matter what the actual number of the year is, it's
the human technology within the simulation that doesn't escape the
late-20th century model.
I wasn't trying to say that the Matrix cycles every years or that
it's younger than Morpheus and others say it is. I was just saying
that the level of human knowledge within the Matrix is confined to
what the machines allow them to know (based on late 20th century
human world) and what the freed minds add to the mix.

Oooh, in that way. Hmmm, possible, true. Though it sucks to have
Pentium 2 for example for 40 years:).
OTOH it would be reasonable when considering genetical made human(in
The Matrix). It would be problematic for the machines to get a baby
that will grow up like it is expected to grow inside.

I think the babies inside the Matrix are probably programs, and those raised
outside the Matrix are given learning programs until their minds are
developed well enough to insert them into the Matrix.

Actually, you just raised a very interesting point. How are babies connected
to the Matrix? And at what age? And how problematic is that? We could have a
long, speculative conversation on that alone.

Profil1

2005-06-29 06:57:05 UTC

Post by JPM III
I think the babies inside the Matrix are probably programs, and those raised
outside the Matrix are given learning programs until their minds are
developed well enough to insert them into the Matrix.
Actually, you just raised a very interesting point. How are babies connected
to the Matrix? And at what age? And how problematic is that? We could have a
long, speculative conversation on that alone.

Wasn't there a picture of a baby being liquefied in M1?
I ain't no pediatrist but it look pretty young:) (though a refresh of a
trilogy would be usefull).

JPM III

2005-07-01 14:53:47 UTC

Post by JPM III
I think the babies inside the Matrix are probably programs, and
those raised outside the Matrix are given learning programs until
their minds are developed well enough to insert them into the
Matrix.
Actually, you just raised a very interesting point. How are babies
connected to the Matrix? And at what age? And how problematic is
that? We could have a long, speculative conversation on that alone.

Wasn't there a picture of a baby being liquefied in M1?
I ain't no pediatrist but it look pretty young:) (though a refresh of
a trilogy would be usefull).

No, the baby was being fed the liquified remains of others who had died.

Profil1

2005-07-02 11:36:32 UTC

Post by JPM III
No, the baby was being fed the liquified remains of others who had died.

Wrong word:).
I wanted to say that the child was bing plugged in and it's pod was being
filled with goo.
And it was a young one. So probably thay are being connected at the start i
think. Other interesting thing is that this child had no plugs, the tubes(?)
were plugged directly in the skin. So that means that thay have to be in
some way disconnected form the Matrix for those plugs to be put it.

JPM III

2005-07-03 18:37:23 UTC

Post by JPM III
No, the baby was being fed the liquified remains of others who had died.

Wrong word:).
I wanted to say that the child was bing plugged in and it's pod was
being filled with goo.
And it was a young one. So probably thay are being connected at the
start i think. Other interesting thing is that this child had no
plugs, the tubes(?) were plugged directly in the skin. So that means
that thay have to be in some way disconnected form the Matrix for
those plugs to be put it.

Right, they're not connected at birth, at least not entirely. Their bodies
are prepped for the Matrix, and when they're mentally capable they're
plugged into the system.

But have you noticed how we never saw a single kid in the Matrix, except in
the Animatrix?

Profil1

2005-07-03 20:11:40 UTC

Post by JPM III
Right, they're not connected at birth, at least not entirely. Their bodies
are prepped for the Matrix, and when they're mentally capable they're
plugged into the system.
But have you noticed how we never saw a single kid in the Matrix, except in
the Animatrix?

Like I said i haven't seen it in a while but if You say so that probably is
like that :).

Why is it like that? I have no idea. I think that W.B. just did not show
them cause of lack of baby scenes.
It would be hard to plug children at a certain age and then to place the
memories to all the adults.
OTOH the aliens from Forgotten should take lesson from them(if that would be
how it's done:) ).

Btw. You meant the child in Second Reneissance(?) - the one that is playing
in the snow?
Or is there any younger? And there are also comic books - i'll have to
dig'em up to check it:).

JPM III

2005-07-04 02:04:00 UTC

Post by JPM III
Right, they're not connected at birth, at least not entirely. Their
bodies are prepped for the Matrix, and when they're mentally
capable they're plugged into the system.
But have you noticed how we never saw a single kid in the Matrix,
except in the Animatrix?

Like I said i haven't seen it in a while but if You say so that
probably is like that :).
Why is it like that? I have no idea. I think that W.B. just did not
show them cause of lack of baby scenes.
It would be hard to plug children at a certain age and then to place
the memories to all the adults.
OTOH the aliens from Forgotten should take lesson from them(if that
would be how it's done:) ).
Btw. You meant the child in Second Reneissance(?) - the one that is
playing in the snow?
Or is there any younger? And there are also comic books - i'll have to
dig'em up to check it:).

The kids in "Beyond" who were toying with gravity...

The kids in school in "The Kid"...

Hell, even the lemur/monkey-looking creature was plugged into the system in
"Matriculated", so it seems to me that my whole theory about mental
capabilities isn't accurate.

So I should restate my theory entirely to say: The Machines have a
near-complete understanding of the brain, and they can connect anyone to the
Matrix at any age. But, of course, they probably have to allow some time for
the body to develop, so there's room for all the plugs!

Sandman

2005-06-27 13:38:30 UTC

Post by Profil1
So You think/speculate that after 100 years(like somebody in the real
world said - Morpheus maybe - so long no seen Matrix) or so it flips
100 years back? Cause that's bothering me. Technically it is possible
- The One reaches the source and flip, it goes to 1900...But that's
shit load of work to re-configure the whole Matrix (technology level
etc) plus everybodys mind which would be possibly even harder. Or by
saying "emulation of late 20th century" You meant that Matrix is
being rebooted for example every 20 years not to be troubled with
what i say sec ago? But when thinking about it, dunno what to think
about "red pills". Hell of a s surprise now and then:).
Still a mystery...I think i'll have to hunt down the W. brothers:) or
anyone here will give his explanation that will satisfy me:)

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of some untold
reason.

There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back civilization to
1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given the fact that we are
explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100 years, and that Zion is destroyed
and rebuilt with every reload.

--
Sandman[.net]

Profil1

2005-06-27 21:35:14 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The technology
difference of anything before would be too different. Also, I'm
guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of technology will be
developed within the Matrix, based in part on the type of programs
running within the Matrix to control the humans via constant subtle
influence.

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of some untold
reason.
There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back civilization to
1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given the fact that we are
explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100 years, and that Zion is destroyed
and rebuilt with every reload.

I think that is what he chose to be his part of the theory so I have to
respect it.
I can't agree or disagree cause i have no idea how the things considering
this problem look like.
I can ust dissagree and that's it. On the other hand he did not say "hey
Prof You dumb twat, You are wrong and I'm right." So there is no point in
picking on words.

Plus You said it would still be 2000 in another post(or You did not say that
it would not) and You state here that "every reason to believe it WOULD" and
if I'm understanding it correctly You want to say that it is highly probable
to be so. So or i'm not getting something or why the sudden change of mind?

JPM III

2005-06-28 04:30:24 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The
technology difference of anything before would be too different.
Also, I'm guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of
technology will be developed within the Matrix, based in part on
the type of programs running within the Matrix to control the
humans via constant subtle influence.

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of
some untold reason.
There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back
civilization to 1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given
the fact that we are explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100
years, and that Zion is destroyed and rebuilt with every reload.

I think that is what he chose to be his part of the theory so I have
to respect it.
I can't agree or disagree cause i have no idea how the things
considering this problem look like.
I can ust dissagree and that's it. On the other hand he did not say
"hey Prof You dumb twat, You are wrong and I'm right." So there is no
point in picking on words.
Plus You said it would still be 2000 in another post(or You did not
say that it would not) and You state here that "every reason to
believe it WOULD" and if I'm understanding it correctly You want to
say that it is highly probable to be so. So or i'm not getting
something or why the sudden change of mind?

But since there are no reasons at all, since the Wachowskis left that part
of the story undefined, then "every reason" is the same thing as "no
reason".

Sandman

2005-06-28 05:38:32 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The
technology difference of anything before would be too different.
Also, I'm guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of
technology will be developed within the Matrix, based in part on
the type of programs running within the Matrix to control the
humans via constant subtle influence.

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of
some untold reason.
There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back
civilization to 1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given
the fact that we are explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100
years, and that Zion is destroyed and rebuilt with every reload.

I think that is what he chose to be his part of the theory so I have
to respect it. I can't agree or disagree cause i have no idea how the
things considering this problem look like. I can ust dissagree and
that's it. On the other hand he did not say "hey Prof You dumb twat,
You are wrong and I'm right." So there is no point in picking on
words.
Plus You said it would still be 2000 in another post(or You did not
say that it would not) and You state here that "every reason to
believe it WOULD" and if I'm understanding it correctly You want to
say that it is highly probable to be so. So or i'm not getting
something or why the sudden change of mind?

But since there are no reasons at all, since the Wachowskis left that
part of the story undefined, then "every reason" is the same thing as
"no reason".

Which only holds true if you haven't actually seen the movies, in which it is
explicitly stated that men have been free for one hundred years. And if the
year in the Matrix is ~2000, then that means it started out in ~1900.

It's just math, Paul.

--
Sandman[.net]

Sandman

2005-06-28 05:37:11 UTC

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The
technology difference of anything before would be too different.
Also, I'm guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of
technology will be developed within the Matrix, based in part on the
type of programs running within the Matrix to control the humans via
constant subtle influence.

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of
some untold reason.
There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back
civilization to 1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given the
fact that we are explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100 years,
and that Zion is destroyed and rebuilt with every reload.

Paul just has aa hard time expressing himself.

Post by Profil1
Plus You said it would still be 2000 in another post(or You did not
say that it would not) and You state here that "every reason to
believe it WOULD" and if I'm understanding it correctly You want to
say that it is highly probable to be so. So or i'm not getting
something or why the sudden change of mind?

Nah, you asked if it would still be 2000, and I replied "why not?". I took it
that your question was "would it still be late 20'th century". I didn't really
think about the implications in Reloaded that would lead to it being logically
1900-2000 cycles at the time, but rather just agreed that it would probably
reload the "peak of human civilization" which is "the late 20'th century". :)

--
Sandman[.net]

rblezer

2005-07-07 23:19:01 UTC

i think, that in the matrix every day is the same as any other. Nothing ever
happens, nothing ever changes.
they'r just :"living out their lives, obliviuos" ( a. smith)
So the matrix gets corrupted by a virus (smith) and the virus scanner (neo)
couter acts this. On completion the machines reset the matrix, and we are
back to square one. If you would be in the matrix, you could'nt tell before
and after the reboot apart.it's like playing a game agian after playing it
all the way to completion, and then start at it from the beginning.
The zionists can not tell you how old the matrix is, because they simpley
can't know.
The matrix was designed to be the late 19th centuri, and wil stay that way,
no mater how often it get rebooted.

richard blezer.

Post by JPM III
1900 wouldn't happen. At the earliest, maybe the 1980s. The
technology difference of anything before would be too different.
Also, I'm guessing there's some sort of limit to what kind of
technology will be developed within the Matrix, based in part on the
type of programs running within the Matrix to control the humans via
constant subtle influence.

And here Paul has concluded that 1900 "wouldn't happen" because of
some untold reason.
There is no reason to believe that a reload WOULDN'T bring back
civilization to 1900, but every reason to believe it WOULD, given the
fact that we are explicitly told that Zion has existed for 100 years,
and that Zion is destroyed and rebuilt with every reload.

Paul just has aa hard time expressing himself.

Sandman

2005-07-09 12:10:05 UTC