Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ?

[Claudio Daffra]

hi all

Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ?
He is trap in half real world and half matrix world.
but 'the man of train' has programmed this place differently from
matrix.
He 's programmed this place with his 'rules'.
so neo can't escape or control ... why ?

regards

claudio

[JPM III]

Post by Claudio Daffra
hi all
Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ?
He is trap in half real world and half matrix world.
but 'the man of train' has programmed this place differently from
matrix.
He 's programmed this place with his 'rules'.
so neo can't escape or control ... why ?

Because the Trainman's place isn't part of the Matrix. The code is obviously
much more secure, which is entirely within the realm of plausibility if you
consider that it's so much smaller than the Matrix. The Train Station
doesn't have to accommodate humanity and its flaws, therefore it is designed
to be much more secure and not allow the strengths of the anomaly (Neo) mean
anything.

(This explanation is not official or anything; just something close to my
understanding of it.)

[Gavin Smith]

Post by JPM III

Post by Claudio Daffra
hi all
Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ?
He is trap in half real world and half matrix world.
but 'the man of train' has programmed this place differently from
matrix.
He 's programmed this place with his 'rules'.
so neo can't escape or control ... why ?

Because the Trainman's place isn't part of the Matrix. The code is obviously
much more secure, which is entirely within the realm of plausibility if you
consider that it's so much smaller than the Matrix. The Train Station
doesn't have to accommodate humanity and its flaws, therefore it is designed
to be much more secure and not allow the strengths of the anomaly (Neo) mean
anything.

Although IMO Neo would have succeeded in overcoming the additional
security in time - as suggested by his contact with the Source, i,e his
vision of the tram lines.

Post by JPM III
(This explanation is not official or anything; just something close to my
understanding of it.)

What he said. :)

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III

Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ? He is trap in half
real world and half matrix world. but 'the man of train' has
programmed this place differently from matrix. He 's programmed
this place with his 'rules'. so neo can't escape or control ... why
?

Because the Trainman's place isn't part of the Matrix. The code is
obviously much more secure, which is entirely within the realm of
plausibility if you consider that it's so much smaller than the
Matrix. The Train Station doesn't have to accommodate humanity and
its flaws, therefore it is designed to be much more secure and not
allow the strengths of the anomaly (Neo) mean anything.

That doesn't make much sense. Mobile Ave. is most certainly meant to
accomodate humans since it is - just like the Matrix - developed with
the human mind in mind (heh) for perceiving it. We can assume that at
01 programs aren't actually walking around with RSI's to get the work
done, they are actually programs executing code in mainframes. How Neo
"sees" this in M3 sort of strengthens that, in that the human eye
would only see big industrial buildings, but with Neos vision, he can
see the environment with the sentience of the computers in it.

With that in mind, Mobile Ave is most certainly meant to accomodate
humans. I can't tell on how many levels you can "accomodate" humans
on, but even if this is a "light" version of the Matrix (i.e. it
doesn't have programs that govern wind, or time or things like that)
the code must be pretty much identical, or Neo would have made some
remark about it being different. If he couldn't see the code, hw
wouldn't have assumed that he could kick trainman's ass. But he did.
He assumed he could since he had no reason to believe he couldn't,
which implies that to Neo, and everyone else, Mobile Ave was identical
to the Matrix.

Which begs the question - why couldn't he kick Trainman's ass? Heck,
Neo (would have) kicked Seraphs ass even though his code most
certainly was different.

And I think it's a copout to claim that Trainman somehow could build a
system that resisted the Anomaly when the Architect could not. The
anomaly doesn't - as far as has been told - get his strength from the
matrix being very complex and having programs that govern pigeons and
trees - the things that could be claimed are missing from Mobile Ave.

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Why neo can't escape from the 'man of train' ? He is trap in half
real world and half matrix world. but 'the man of train' has
programmed this place differently from matrix. He 's programmed
this place with his 'rules'. so neo can't escape or control ... why
?

Because the Trainman's place isn't part of the Matrix. The code is
obviously much more secure, which is entirely within the realm of
plausibility if you consider that it's so much smaller than the
Matrix. The Train Station doesn't have to accommodate humanity and
its flaws, therefore it is designed to be much more secure and not
allow the strengths of the anomaly (Neo) mean anything.

That doesn't make much sense. Mobile Ave. is most certainly meant to
accomodate humans since it is - just like the Matrix - developed with
the human mind in mind (heh) for perceiving it. We can assume that at
01 programs aren't actually walking around with RSI's to get the work
done, they are actually programs executing code in mainframes. How Neo
"sees" this in M3 sort of strengthens that, in that the human eye
would only see big industrial buildings, but with Neos vision, he can
see the environment with the sentience of the computers in it.
With that in mind, Mobile Ave is most certainly meant to accomodate
humans. I can't tell on how many levels you can "accomodate" humans
on, but even if this is a "light" version of the Matrix (i.e. it
doesn't have programs that govern wind, or time or things like that)
the code must be pretty much identical, or Neo would have made some
remark about it being different. If he couldn't see the code, hw
wouldn't have assumed that he could kick trainman's ass. But he did.
He assumed he could since he had no reason to believe he couldn't,
which implies that to Neo, and everyone else, Mobile Ave was identical
to the Matrix.
Which begs the question - why couldn't he kick Trainman's ass? Heck,
Neo (would have) kicked Seraphs ass even though his code most
certainly was different.
And I think it's a copout to claim that Trainman somehow could build a
system that resisted the Anomaly when the Architect could not. The
anomaly doesn't - as far as has been told - get his strength from the
matrix being very complex and having programs that govern pigeons and
trees - the things that could be claimed are missing from Mobile Ave.

That's just it. The Trainman's system was isolated and perfect. Because it's
so small, it can crash and be rebuilt virtually any time. It doesn't
accommodate all of humanity and doesn't need to, and while the structure of
the code is the same, the rules are different.

I know I'm speaking ambiguously, because since the system is fictitious, I
definitely don't have any real explanations for how it would work. But
suffice it to say that the Trainman could safeguard his system much more
easily because, unlike the rest of Matrix, there is no problem with
"choice".

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III
That's just it. The Trainman's system was isolated and perfect.

It "was" nothing of the sort, as far as we know. All we know is that
it is his world, and down there, he is God.

Well, the Matrix is the architects world and in it, he is God, yet
that doesn't really bother Neo.

Post by JPM III
Because it's
so small, it can crash and be rebuilt virtually any time. It doesn't
accommodate all of humanity and doesn't need to, and while the structure of
the code is the same, the rules are different.

How? Perhaps you should have begun your statement with "Maybe it's
like this..."

Post by JPM III
I know I'm speaking ambiguously, because since the system is fictitious, I
definitely don't have any real explanations for how it would work. But
suffice it to say that the Trainman could safeguard his system much more
easily because, unlike the rest of Matrix, there is no problem with
"choice".

Choice is in the mind of the people that exist in a given virtual
reality, not a function of said environment. Neo didn't have less
capacity for "choice" in Mobile Ave than he had in the Matrix.

"Choice" is, as far as can be understood, only a factor in how the
Matrix connects to the human mind and fools it to believe that virtual
world really exists. It wouldn't seem to be an important fact for the
ones that hack the matrix and connect to it from a pirated signal.

As such, any lack of "choice compatibility" in MA would presumably be
irrelevant to Neo since his presence in Matrix/MA doesn't rely on
choice on any level.

1. Mobile Ave is connected to the Matrix

2. Neo can't hack MA, or at least not to the same degree.

3. Neo does not appear to be aware of that, which implies that MA,
to him, appears just as the Matrix to him

So, the only real explanation which I can find to Neo vs. Mobile Ave
is that it was just harder to hack, and in the time period he was
there, he failed to figure it out, which is contradictory to:

1. in M1, after Neo is shot, he awakens and just sees the code,
after which he "hacks" it fluently and "kills" Smith without
breaking a sweat, implying that he didn't actually need to "learn"
how to hack the Matrix, it just came to him.

2. In M2, when Smith is trying to take over his body, Neo "hacks"
that in just a couple of seconds and repels the attack.

3. In M2, Neo says "Upgrades" to the Agents, which presumably not only
fights Kung Fu better, but are harder to hack/read/whatever. Neo
adapts to this and makes minced meat of them in short order.

4. In M2, at the end, and in M3, he learns how to destroy physical
objects through the Matrix even though he isn't connected, something
he "learned" by being at the source.

Throughout the movies, we see Neo adapting to new conditions all the
time in the Matrix, yet as soon as he is in Mobile Ave, he can't do
anything of that.

All I can say is that the Architect should hire Trainman for coding
Matrix. :P

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
That's just it. The Trainman's system was isolated and perfect.

It "was" nothing of the sort, as far as we know. All we know is that
it is his world, and down there, he is God.
Well, the Matrix is the architects world and in it, he is God, yet
that doesn't really bother Neo.

Different system. Different rules. Different restrictions. Less capability
(no flexibility to accommodate humans or human choices), so more security.
It's an inverse proportionality common in real life and computer systems --
as security improves, freedoms decline.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because it's
so small, it can crash and be rebuilt virtually any time. It doesn't
accommodate all of humanity and doesn't need to, and while the structure of
the code is the same, the rules are different.

How? Perhaps you should have begun your statement with "Maybe it's
like this..."

Good lord, you still don't get it. Anything non-canonical is likely to be
speculation or creative interpretation. Take your pick or come up with some
other explanation, and if you don't like it, then ignore it. Or insult it,
whatever. It's what you do, I guess.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
I know I'm speaking ambiguously, because since the system is fictitious, I
definitely don't have any real explanations for how it would work. But
suffice it to say that the Trainman could safeguard his system much more
easily because, unlike the rest of Matrix, there is no problem with
"choice".

Choice is in the mind of the people that exist in a given virtual
reality, not a function of said environment. Neo didn't have less
capacity for "choice" in Mobile Ave than he had in the Matrix.

Not so. The Architect acknowledged, although not with the specific details,
that the current version of the Matrix (unlike the "perfect" versions
described by Agent Smith in the first film) is coded to partially depend on
human choice. The system can run without it, yes, but without accommodating
for and isolating the anomalies (Neo being the one we're concerned with in
this instance), the system would eventually crash when the anomalic code
spreads to other parts of the system.

Neo is effectively a virus whose code spreads to Smith upon their
interaction, which then causes/allows Smith to break the rules and
effectively become the viral software we see in the second and third movies.

Post by Sandman
"Choice" is, as far as can be understood, only a factor in how the
Matrix connects to the human mind and fools it to believe that virtual
world really exists. It wouldn't seem to be an important fact for the
ones that hack the matrix and connect to it from a pirated signal.

Interesting.

It seems to me that choice is mostly, but not entirely, understood by the
machines. The machines can predict every response in almost every situation,
but the system isn't perfect. Once in a while, a human choice defies the
machines' logic, and that's what keeps the system imperfect and allows the
anomaly to exist.

Post by Sandman
As such, any lack of "choice compatibility" in MA would presumably be
irrelevant to Neo since his presence in Matrix/MA doesn't rely on
choice on any level.
1. Mobile Ave is connected to the Matrix
2. Neo can't hack MA, or at least not to the same degree.
3. Neo does not appear to be aware of that, which implies that MA,
to him, appears just as the Matrix to him
So, the only real explanation which I can find to Neo vs. Mobile Ave
is that it was just harder to hack, and in the time period he was

I agree, but without something conclusive, I don't see it as contradictory.
Also, this goes back to Mobil Avenue being structured in exactly the same
way as the Matrix, but... well, maybe it's the difference between read-only
and write modes? Just a thought.

Post by Sandman
1. in M1, after Neo is shot, he awakens and just sees the code,
after which he "hacks" it fluently and "kills" Smith without
breaking a sweat, implying that he didn't actually need to "learn"
how to hack the Matrix, it just came to him.
2. In M2, when Smith is trying to take over his body, Neo "hacks"
that in just a couple of seconds and repels the attack.
3. In M2, Neo says "Upgrades" to the Agents, which presumably not only
fights Kung Fu better, but are harder to hack/read/whatever. Neo
adapts to this and makes minced meat of them in short order.
4. In M2, at the end, and in M3, he learns how to destroy physical
objects through the Matrix even though he isn't connected, something
he "learned" by being at the source.
Throughout the movies, we see Neo adapting to new conditions all the
time in the Matrix, yet as soon as he is in Mobile Ave, he can't do
anything of that.
All I can say is that the Architect should hire Trainman for coding
Matrix. :P

I think there's a considerable difference. Mobil Avenue connects to the
Matrix, but it is isolated from it. The Oracle specifically says it is
"between your world and ours". All I can say is that the system is simply
more secure there.

The best analogy I can use to try to understand it is: write and read-only
attributes.

[Sandman]

Post by Sandman
It "was" nothing of the sort, as far as we know. All we know is that
it is his world, and down there, he is God.
Well, the Matrix is the architects world and in it, he is God, yet
that doesn't really bother Neo.

[I think it's a] Different system. [I think it has] Different rules.
[I think is has ] Different restrictions. [I think it has] Less capability
(no flexibility to accommodate humans or human choices), so [I think] more
security. It's an inverse proportionality common in real life and
computer systems -- as security improves, freedoms decline.

Yeah, I know you think that - but that's not anything we've shown in
*any way* onscreen. Any attempt to explain events on screen is by
using references to other events onscreen, not making up wild
assumptions. They don't lead anywhere but to "Yeah, interesting
thought, but anyway..."

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because it's
so small, it can crash and be rebuilt virtually any time. It doesn't
accommodate all of humanity and doesn't need to, and while the structure of
the code is the same, the rules are different.

How? Perhaps you should have begun your statement with "Maybe it's
like this..."

Good lord, you still don't get it. Anything non-canonical is likely to be
speculation or creative interpretation. Take your pick or come up with some
other explanation, and if you don't like it, then ignore it. Or insult it,
whatever. It's what you do, I guess.

Actually, it's what you do. But you keep trying to *tell* me how it
is, when you have no clue. It's all about your wording, Paul. What's
the point of speculating anything with you when you present everything
as if they were facts?

Post by Sandman
Choice is in the mind of the people that exist in a given virtual
reality, not a function of said environment. Neo didn't have less
capacity for "choice" in Mobile Ave than he had in the Matrix.

Not so. The Architect acknowledged, although not with the specific details,
that the current version of the Matrix (unlike the "perfect" versions
described by Agent Smith in the first film) is coded to partially depend on
human choice.

Yes, in the way humans are *connected* to the Matrix, and how they are
*fooled*. This has nothing to do with the ones that hack the Matrix
since they can't be fooled.

Neo is effectively a virus whose code spreads to Smith upon their
interaction, which then causes/allows Smith to break the rules and
effectively become the viral software we see in the second and third movies.

I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Post by Sandman
"Choice" is, as far as can be understood, only a factor in how the
Matrix connects to the human mind and fools it to believe that virtual
world really exists. It wouldn't seem to be an important fact for the
ones that hack the matrix and connect to it from a pirated signal.

Interesting.
It seems to me that choice is mostly, but not entirely, understood by the
machines. The machines can predict every response in almost every situation,
but the system isn't perfect. Once in a while, a human choice defies the
machines' logic, and that's what keeps the system imperfect and allows the
anomaly to exist.

...which all happens inside the farms where people are fooled to
believe in the Matrix. This has nothing to do with Neo, once he is
hacking the Matrix. No degree of "choice" is needed for him to be able
to interact inside the Matrix, since the software doesn't have to
trick his mind that this is the real world.

Post by Sandman
As such, any lack of "choice compatibility" in MA would presumably be
irrelevant to Neo since his presence in Matrix/MA doesn't rely on
choice on any level.
1. Mobile Ave is connected to the Matrix
2. Neo can't hack MA, or at least not to the same degree.
3. Neo does not appear to be aware of that, which implies that MA,
to him, appears just as the Matrix to him
So, the only real explanation which I can find to Neo vs. Mobile Ave
is that it was just harder to hack, and in the time period he was

I agree, but without something conclusive, I don't see it as contradictory.
Also, this goes back to Mobil Avenue being structured in exactly the same
way as the Matrix, but... well, maybe it's the difference between read-only
and write modes? Just a thought.

Again, such a simple thing could be used by the Architect to protect
against Neo, but isn't.

Post by Sandman
1. in M1, after Neo is shot, he awakens and just sees the code,
after which he "hacks" it fluently and "kills" Smith without
breaking a sweat, implying that he didn't actually need to "learn"
how to hack the Matrix, it just came to him.
2. In M2, when Smith is trying to take over his body, Neo "hacks"
that in just a couple of seconds and repels the attack.
3. In M2, Neo says "Upgrades" to the Agents, which presumably not only
fights Kung Fu better, but are harder to hack/read/whatever. Neo
adapts to this and makes minced meat of them in short order.
4. In M2, at the end, and in M3, he learns how to destroy physical
objects through the Matrix even though he isn't connected, something
he "learned" by being at the source.
Throughout the movies, we see Neo adapting to new conditions all the
time in the Matrix, yet as soon as he is in Mobile Ave, he can't do
anything of that.
All I can say is that the Architect should hire Trainman for coding
Matrix. :P

I think there's a considerable difference. Mobil Avenue connects to the
Matrix, but it is isolated from it.

You don't know that. What deegree of "isolation" do you _think_ there
is?

The Oracle specifically says it is
"between your world and ours".

Exactly, that's not a problem.

All I can say is that the system is simply
more secure there.

Well, at least you think it is. We see nothing that suggest that Neo
failed to do anything there because there was more security.

The best analogy I can use to try to understand it is: write and read-only
attributes.

Think about it this way - any speculated reason you can think of - ask
yourself, why isn't the Architect also using the same mechanism in the
Matrix to protect not only from the One, but from hacking altogether?

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by Sandman
It "was" nothing of the sort, as far as we know. All we know is that
it is his world, and down there, he is God.
Well, the Matrix is the architects world and in it, he is God, yet
that doesn't really bother Neo.

[I think it's a] Different system. [I think it has] Different rules.
[I think is has ] Different restrictions. [I think it has] Less capability
(no flexibility to accommodate humans or human choices), so [I think] more
security. It's an inverse proportionality common in real life and
computer systems -- as security improves, freedoms decline.

Yeah, I know you think that - but that's not anything we've shown in
*any way* onscreen. Any attempt to explain events on screen is by
using references to other events onscreen, not making up wild
assumptions. They don't lead anywhere but to "Yeah, interesting
thought, but anyway..."

Specific director/writer commentary (verbal and written in the script) also
contributes. I know the difference between "canon" and speculative material,
and I know the difference between my wild assumptions and the Wachowski's
story. There is a lot of room for speculation, but I think some of the
specifics go beyond what you allow. There are some things never said or seen
on screen that are still part of the fictitious Matrix world.

Post by Sandman

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because it's
so small, it can crash and be rebuilt virtually any time. It doesn't
accommodate all of humanity and doesn't need to, and while the
structure
of
the code is the same, the rules are different.

How? Perhaps you should have begun your statement with "Maybe it's
like this..."

Good lord, you still don't get it. Anything non-canonical is likely to be
speculation or creative interpretation. Take your pick or come up with some
other explanation, and if you don't like it, then ignore it. Or insult it,
whatever. It's what you do, I guess.

Actually, it's what you do. But you keep trying to *tell* me how it
is, when you have no clue. It's all about your wording, Paul. What's
the point of speculating anything with you when you present everything
as if they were facts?

If it's just my *wording* and you know what I mean (as does everyone else),
then the problem obviously isn't on my end.

I don't present my speculations as fact. I do write declarative sentences,
but I also clarify, when I think it's necessary, that it's just speculative
(obviously you think it's necessary more often than I do, but I think the
people reading this group are intelligent enough to know the difference --
after all, you're the only one who seems to notice or even care).

Besides, adding "I think" before every speculative thought would be
monotonous and silly. If you want to do that, you go right ahead. I'm going
to focus on what I actually think, though, and just clarify what is or isn't
factual or speculative when someone can't tell the difference. But, so far,
no one has had a problem telling the difference. (You pitch a fit about it,
but you obviously know the difference between fact and speculation, so
what's the point of this discussion, again?)

Post by Sandman

Post by Sandman
Choice is in the mind of the people that exist in a given virtual
reality, not a function of said environment. Neo didn't have less
capacity for "choice" in Mobile Ave than he had in the Matrix.

Not so. The Architect acknowledged, although not with the specific details,
that the current version of the Matrix (unlike the "perfect" versions
described by Agent Smith in the first film) is coded to partially depend on
human choice.

Yes, in the way humans are *connected* to the Matrix, and how they are
*fooled*. This has nothing to do with the ones that hack the Matrix
since they can't be fooled.

What makes a hacker impervious to being outwitted?

Post by Sandman

Neo is effectively a virus whose code spreads to Smith upon their
interaction, which then causes/allows Smith to break the rules and
effectively become the viral software we see in the second and third movies.

I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Post by Sandman
"Choice" is, as far as can be understood, only a factor in how the
Matrix connects to the human mind and fools it to believe that virtual
world really exists. It wouldn't seem to be an important fact for the
ones that hack the matrix and connect to it from a pirated signal.

Interesting.
It seems to me that choice is mostly, but not entirely, understood by the
machines. The machines can predict every response in almost every situation,
but the system isn't perfect. Once in a while, a human choice defies the
machines' logic, and that's what keeps the system imperfect and allows the
anomaly to exist.

...which all happens inside the farms where people are fooled to
believe in the Matrix. This has nothing to do with Neo, once he is
hacking the Matrix. No degree of "choice" is needed for him to be able
to interact inside the Matrix, since the software doesn't have to
trick his mind that this is the real world.

Perhaps I should ask you what you think the anomaly actually is (or could
be), in terms of its origin during each cycle/reload of the Matrix. What
does the code Neo carries that the Architect so badly wants returned to the
Source represent? What is it?

Post by Sandman

Post by Sandman
As such, any lack of "choice compatibility" in MA would presumably be
irrelevant to Neo since his presence in Matrix/MA doesn't rely on
choice on any level.
1. Mobile Ave is connected to the Matrix
2. Neo can't hack MA, or at least not to the same degree.
3. Neo does not appear to be aware of that, which implies that MA,
to him, appears just as the Matrix to him
So, the only real explanation which I can find to Neo vs. Mobile Ave
is that it was just harder to hack, and in the time period he was

I agree, but without something conclusive, I don't see it as
contradictory.
Also, this goes back to Mobil Avenue being structured in exactly the same
way as the Matrix, but... well, maybe it's the difference between read-only
and write modes? Just a thought.

Again, such a simple thing could be used by the Architect to protect
against Neo, but isn't.

The Architect is a program, part of the machines' world, and is programmed
to allow Neo to do what Neo must do in order to preserve the Matrix, but
perhaps only up to a certain point. (Maybe if Neo had tried to attack the
Architect, the Architect could have flexxed his Matrixy muscles, but at
least as far as we could see, he didn't have to.)

The point is that the Matrix *needs* Neo, which sets up a paradox -- the
problem is choice for the machines too, except as programmed automotons,
there is no choice, only conditional tests. If ... then ... else ... etc.

Humans aren't much different, except as analog mentally functioning within a
digital system, there must be *some* incongruences. What those are, we can
never know for sure. We can only...... speculate.

Post by Sandman

Post by Sandman
Throughout the movies, we see Neo adapting to new conditions all the
time in the Matrix, yet as soon as he is in Mobile Ave, he can't do
anything of that.
All I can say is that the Architect should hire Trainman for coding
Matrix. :P

I think there's a considerable difference. Mobil Avenue connects to the
Matrix, but it is isolated from it.

You don't know that. What deegree of "isolation" do you _think_ there
is?

The Oracle specifically says it is
"between your world and ours".

Exactly, that's not a problem.

All I can say is that the system is simply
more secure there.

Well, at least you think it is. We see nothing that suggest that Neo
failed to do anything there because there was more security.

Last I checked, he failed to get on the train because he lacked permission.

You're speculating that Mobil Avenue is the same as the Matrix. I also
presume you're somewhat familiar with various types of computer systems and
a little about virtual environments, and you understand what I'm saying
about the difference between structural code and security/permissions
attributes. Is it feasible to you that the Matrix and Mobil Avenue can be
structurally and syntactically coded the same (so as to fool Neo into
believing he can hack through Mobil Avenue), but that he simply doesn't have
the same access in Mobil Avenue as he does in the rest of the Matrix, since
it's actually (apparently, possibly) a separate system? Or at least a more
restricted part of it...

Post by Sandman

The best analogy I can use to try to understand it is: write and read-only
attributes.

Think about it this way - any speculated reason you can think of - ask
yourself, why isn't the Architect also using the same mechanism in the
Matrix to protect not only from the One, but from hacking altogether?

Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing. We don't know how
exactly, but the emergence of the anomaly is effectually what triggers the
system's reload. It's a necessary function in the Architect's Matrix.

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Yeah, I know you think that - but that's not anything we've shown in
*any way* onscreen. Any attempt to explain events on screen is by
using references to other events onscreen, not making up wild
assumptions. They don't lead anywhere but to "Yeah, interesting
thought, but anyway..."

Specific director/writer commentary (verbal and written in the script) also
contributes.

So quote them. I know that your memory isn't very good, so I really
can't take your word for it.

Post by JPM III
I know the difference between "canon" and speculative material,
and I know the difference between my wild assumptions and the Wachowski's
story. There is a lot of room for speculation, but I think some of the
specifics go beyond what you allow. There are some things never said or seen
on screen that are still part of the fictitious Matrix world.

Such as? Surely you're not trying to apply this to Mobil Ave?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Actually, it's what you do. But you keep trying to *tell* me how it
is, when you have no clue. It's all about your wording, Paul. What's
the point of speculating anything with you when you present everything
as if they were facts?

If it's just my *wording* and you know what I mean (as does everyone else),
then the problem obviously isn't on my end.

Of course it is - whatever do you mean? I don't choose your words, you
do.

Post by JPM III
I don't present my speculations as fact. I do write declarative sentences,
but I also clarify, when I think it's necessary, that it's just speculative
(obviously you think it's necessary more often than I do, but I think the
people reading this group are intelligent enough to know the difference --
after all, you're the only one who seems to notice or even care).

You and I are the only ones here, Paul. :P

Post by JPM III
Besides, adding "I think" before every speculative thought would be
monotonous and silly.

So you don't do it at all?

Post by JPM III
If you want to do that, you go right ahead.

Actually, I am. I am very catios about stating things as fact and
always use words such as "assuming that...", or "presumably he
would..." and "It's fair to assume that..." when I am speculating.

Post by JPM III
I'm going
to focus on what I actually think, though, and just clarify what is or isn't
factual or speculative when someone can't tell the difference.

Which is why I am telling you that you're writing to other people, not
yourself.

Post by JPM III
But, so far,
no one has had a problem telling the difference.

How would you know? You may actually appear to be a knowledgable guy
to some people and they be led to believe that you actually know what
you're talking about when you claim things as fact high and low. I
know for a fact that you have no idea whatsoever if what you say is
true or not, and call you on it - other people might actually believe
you, which is even worse.

Post by JPM III
(You pitch a fit about it,
but you obviously know the difference between fact and speculation, so
what's the point of this discussion, again?)

To educate you in proper discussion manner.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Yes, in the way humans are *connected* to the Matrix, and how they are
*fooled*. This has nothing to do with the ones that hack the Matrix
since they can't be fooled.

What makes a hacker impervious to being outwitted?

What?? A hacker presence in the Matrix isn't dependant on whether his
mind is fooled to believe that the Matrix is the real world. He knows
it isn't. He allows the Matrix to enter his mind in spite of him
knowing that it isn't the real world.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
"Choice" is, as far as can be understood, only a factor in how the
Matrix connects to the human mind and fools it to believe that virtual
world really exists. It wouldn't seem to be an important fact for the
ones that hack the matrix and connect to it from a pirated signal.

Interesting.
It seems to me that choice is mostly, but not entirely, understood by the
machines. The machines can predict every response in almost every situation,
but the system isn't perfect. Once in a while, a human choice defies the
machines' logic, and that's what keeps the system imperfect and allows the
anomaly to exist.

...which all happens inside the farms where people are fooled to
believe in the Matrix. This has nothing to do with Neo, once he is
hacking the Matrix. No degree of "choice" is needed for him to be able
to interact inside the Matrix, since the software doesn't have to
trick his mind that this is the real world.

Perhaps I should ask you what you think the anomaly actually is (or could
be), in terms of its origin during each cycle/reload of the Matrix. What
does the code Neo carries that the Architect so badly wants returned to the
Source represent? What is it?

It's a arbitrary choice of words to describe the conflict in the
movies. It's like the force in star wars. No one can explain how it
works since it's based on fiction.

What the anomaly is or isn't is irrelevant in this discussion anyway,
where we're talking about whether choice is needed or not needed to
keep a matrix-like system secure. I say it's irrelevant since Neo's
(or any other hackers) presence in any system was never about choice
after they were awaken.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
As such, any lack of "choice compatibility" in MA would presumably be
irrelevant to Neo since his presence in Matrix/MA doesn't rely on
choice on any level.
1. Mobile Ave is connected to the Matrix
2. Neo can't hack MA, or at least not to the same degree.
3. Neo does not appear to be aware of that, which implies that MA,
to him, appears just as the Matrix to him
So, the only real explanation which I can find to Neo vs. Mobile Ave
is that it was just harder to hack, and in the time period he was

I agree, but without something conclusive, I don't see it as contradictory.
Also, this goes back to Mobil Avenue being structured in exactly the same
way as the Matrix, but... well, maybe it's the difference between read-only
and write modes? Just a thought.

Again, such a simple thing could be used by the Architect to protect
against Neo, but isn't.

The Architect is a program, part of the machines' world, and is programmed
to allow Neo to do what Neo must do in order to preserve the Matrix, but
perhaps only up to a certain point.

What??? The Architect isn't in any way "programmed to allow [the
Anomaly] to do what it must do". What gave you that idea? The
Architect outright states that he wants to get rid of the anomaly.

Post by JPM III
The point is that the Matrix *needs* Neo

Why?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Well, at least you think it is. We see nothing that suggest that Neo
failed to do anything there because there was more security.

Last I checked, he failed to get on the train because he lacked permission.

Where did you "check" to obtain that information?

Post by JPM III
You're speculating that Mobil Avenue is the same as the Matrix.

In such a way that Neo can't tell them apart. And Neo continually sees
the code of the Matrix.

Post by JPM III
I also
presume you're somewhat familiar with various types of computer systems and
a little about virtual environments, and you understand what I'm saying
about the difference between structural code and security/permissions
attributes. Is it feasible to you that the Matrix and Mobil Avenue can be
structurally and syntactically coded the same (so as to fool Neo into
believing he can hack through Mobil Avenue), but that he simply doesn't have
the same access in Mobil Avenue as he does in the rest of the Matrix, since
it's actually (apparently, possibly) a separate system? Or at least a more
restricted part of it...

Which is fine, if it weren't for the fact that the Architect would
have used the same restrictions in the Matrix if it were possible.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
The best analogy I can use to try to understand it is: write and read-only
attributes.

Think about it this way - any speculated reason you can think of - ask
yourself, why isn't the Architect also using the same mechanism in the
Matrix to protect not only from the One, but from hacking altogether?

Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Post by JPM III
We don't know how
exactly, but the emergence of the anomaly is effectually what triggers the
system's reload. It's a necessary function in the Architect's Matrix.

If it were a function, it wouldn't be an anomaly, Paul. The anomaly is
the result of a "remainder of an unbalanced equation". The anomaly is
the result of Oracles way of interacting with the human mind.

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Yeah, I know you think that - but that's not anything we've shown in
*any way* onscreen. Any attempt to explain events on screen is by
using references to other events onscreen, not making up wild
assumptions. They don't lead anywhere but to "Yeah, interesting
thought, but anyway..."

Specific director/writer commentary (verbal and written in the script) also
contributes.

So quote them. I know that your memory isn't very good, so I really
can't take your word for it.

It's not that. I just don't bother memorizing director commentaries of all
things, because there are more useful things to remember. When/if I
hear/read something relevant and feel like quoting from it, I will. :)

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
I don't present my speculations as fact. I do write declarative sentences,
but I also clarify, when I think it's necessary, that it's just speculative
(obviously you think it's necessary more often than I do, but I think the
people reading this group are intelligent enough to know the
difference --
after all, you're the only one who seems to notice or even care).

You and I are the only ones here, Paul. :P

Heh.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Besides, adding "I think" before every speculative thought would be
monotonous and silly.

So you don't do it at all?

I do it when I'm talking to someone who doesn't already know the difference.
You know the difference, and as you said, we're the only ones here. Why
insult your intelligence by clarifying little details that need no
clarification?

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
If you want to do that, you go right ahead.

Actually, I am. I am very catios about stating things as fact and
always use words such as "assuming that...", or "presumably he
would..." and "It's fair to assume that..." when I am speculating.

I am too... with things important in my real life. But discussions of The
Matrix, while fun, aren't that important to me beyond the entertainment
value and comradery due to common interests. So I'm not quite as cautious
about distinguishing all facts and speculations until someone displays a
lack of understanding of what I just said. Usually, there's no problem,
because it's clear enough regardless of how much room for error I've left.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
I'm going
to focus on what I actually think, though, and just clarify what is or isn't
factual or speculative when someone can't tell the difference.

Which is why I am telling you that you're writing to other people, not
yourself.

Just to you, Jonas. :)

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
But, so far,
no one has had a problem telling the difference.

How would you know? You may actually appear to be a knowledgable guy
to some people and they be led to believe that you actually know what
you're talking about when you claim things as fact high and low. I
know for a fact that you have no idea whatsoever if what you say is
true or not, and call you on it - other people might actually believe
you, which is even worse.

I'm a Socratic. I know that I know nothing. I just simply enjoy the
discussions, that's all. I'm here to spread the ideas, not tell people who's
right and who's wrong. Everyone is allowed to have their own thoughts about
things, and they don't have to agree with me.

However, when it comes to how *I* interpret the story, *I* am not wrong,
because I am accurately representing *my* interpretation. Maybe I miss a
detail you caught or took something a different way, but that doesn't
matter -- because what I got from the film is still what it is, and that's
what I share.

So maybe you should separate what I write from what the Wachowskis wrote,
because they aren't the same. They are artists; I'm just a fan.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
(You pitch a fit about it,
but you obviously know the difference between fact and speculation, so
what's the point of this discussion, again?)

To educate you in proper discussion manner.

According to your beliefs. I, on the other hand, think you have MUCH to
learn. That is to say, where I come from, your "manner" leaves much to be
desired.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Yes, in the way humans are *connected* to the Matrix, and how they are
*fooled*. This has nothing to do with the ones that hack the Matrix
since they can't be fooled.

What makes a hacker impervious to being outwitted?

What?? A hacker presence in the Matrix isn't dependant on whether his
mind is fooled to believe that the Matrix is the real world. He knows
it isn't. He allows the Matrix to enter his mind in spite of him
knowing that it isn't the real world.

So what happened to Neo when he was taken to Mobil Avenue? Did he allow
that? Was he aware that the system wasn't exactly the same?

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Perhaps I should ask you what you think the anomaly actually is (or could
be), in terms of its origin during each cycle/reload of the Matrix. What
does the code Neo carries that the Architect so badly wants returned to the
Source represent? What is it?

It's a arbitrary choice of words to describe the conflict in the
movies. It's like the force in star wars. No one can explain how it
works since it's based on fiction.

Ah, see that's where we differ. Fiction can be explained, even if it's still
just a fictitious explanation.

Also, do you deny the Episode I "midichlorians" stuff? As far as I'm
concerned, that was an explanation and it was canonical. Even if it was a
cop-out.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
The Architect is a program, part of the machines' world, and is programmed
to allow Neo to do what Neo must do in order to preserve the Matrix, but
perhaps only up to a certain point.

What??? The Architect isn't in any way "programmed to allow [the
Anomaly] to do what it must do". What gave you that idea? The
Architect outright states that he wants to get rid of the anomaly.

Good point. My point, though, is that the Architect is a machine/program,
and as such he is subject to the causal rules of his existence. And, yes, he
wants to get rid of the anomaly, but he also shares that the Oracle helped
build the current Matrix that depends on the anomaly. So, as such, the
anomaly must do what it must do, and the Architect must allow it to happen.

However, unlike humans, the Architect has no objective choice in the matter.
The Architect is a machine and simply responds in much the same way that the
Merovingian ambiguously describes in his speech about causality.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
The point is that the Matrix *needs* Neo

Why?

Because it's built to. Read the dialog of the Architect and the Oracle some
more.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Well, at least you think it is. We see nothing that suggest that Neo
failed to do anything there because there was more security.

Last I checked, he failed to get on the train because he lacked permission.

Where did you "check" to obtain that information?

Um, the movie. Neo lacked the Trainman's permission to board the train, so
Neo was unable to board the train.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
You're speculating that Mobil Avenue is the same as the Matrix.

In such a way that Neo can't tell them apart. And Neo continually sees
the code of the Matrix.

In that Neo can't tell them apart, I agree. But the reason is because the
code that determines the virtual visual environment as Neo sees it is still
the same. It's still Matrix code. But they're not the same system.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
I also
presume you're somewhat familiar with various types of computer systems and
a little about virtual environments, and you understand what I'm saying
about the difference between structural code and security/permissions
attributes. Is it feasible to you that the Matrix and Mobil Avenue can be
structurally and syntactically coded the same (so as to fool Neo into
believing he can hack through Mobil Avenue), but that he simply doesn't have
the same access in Mobil Avenue as he does in the rest of the Matrix, since
it's actually (apparently, possibly) a separate system? Or at least a more
restricted part of it...

Which is fine, if it weren't for the fact that the Architect would
have used the same restrictions in the Matrix if it were possible.

I disagree. The Matrix needs to be open for the hacking for various reasons.
For one thing, it allows the anomaly to do what it does, which is a
necessary step to develop itself before returning to the Source. How all
this happens? Well, I don't know...

Maybe the Architect would do it that way if the anomaly weren't so
important, but it is.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
The best analogy I can use to try to understand it is: write and read-only
attributes.

Think about it this way - any speculated reason you can think of - ask
yourself, why isn't the Architect also using the same mechanism in the
Matrix to protect not only from the One, but from hacking altogether?

Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
We don't know how
exactly, but the emergence of the anomaly is effectually what triggers the
system's reload. It's a necessary function in the Architect's Matrix.

If it were a function, it wouldn't be an anomaly, Paul. The anomaly is
the result of a "remainder of an unbalanced equation". The anomaly is
the result of Oracles way of interacting with the human mind.

And, as such, it is a function ... resulting from her involvement. They are
machines, and no matter how the Architect describes the anomaly, it still is
a functioning part of the system.

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Specific director/writer commentary (verbal and written in the
script) also contributes.

So quote them. I know that your memory isn't very good, so I really
can't take your word for it.

It's not that. I just don't bother memorizing director commentaries
of all things, because there are more useful things to remember.
When/if I hear/read something relevant and feel like quoting from
it, I will. :)

So MA being more secure isn't something you've heard in the
"director/write commentary"?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Besides, adding "I think" before every speculative thought would be
monotonous and silly.

So you don't do it at all?

I do it when I'm talking to someone who doesn't already know the difference.
You know the difference, and as you said, we're the only ones here. Why
insult your intelligence by clarifying little details that need no
clarification?

It's a matter of attitude, Paul. I know you don't know jack shit about
all the absolute claims you make - I am only constantly pointing it
out to you in an effort to make you realize that you don't know eeven
though you make absolute claims.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
If you want to do that, you go right ahead.

Actually, I am. I am very catios about stating things as fact and
always use words such as "assuming that...", or "presumably he
would..." and "It's fair to assume that..." when I am speculating.

I am too...

No, you do not.

Post by JPM III
with things important in my real life. But discussions of The
Matrix, while fun, aren't that important to me beyond the entertainment
value and comradery due to common interests.

I.e. you can't be bothered to seem like a reasonable guy in this group
- I knew that of course.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
How would you know? You may actually appear to be a knowledgable guy
to some people and they be led to believe that you actually know what
you're talking about when you claim things as fact high and low. I
know for a fact that you have no idea whatsoever if what you say is
true or not, and call you on it - other people might actually believe
you, which is even worse.

I'm a Socratic. I know that I know nothing. I just simply enjoy the
discussions, that's all. I'm here to spread the ideas, not tell people who's
right and who's wrong.

But *that's what you do* even so. That's my point. You make claim X
and then when I call you on it you say "Oh, I didn't mean it be be a
claim even though I explicitly stated it as such, plus, I can't be
bothered with being reasonable anyway"

Post by JPM III
However, when it comes to how *I* interpret the story, *I* am not wrong,
because I am accurately representing *my* interpretation.

No, you're not. You're stating claims. You're not stating
interpretations. That's your problem.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
(You pitch a fit about it,
but you obviously know the difference between fact and speculation, so
what's the point of this discussion, again?)

To educate you in proper discussion manner.

According to your beliefs. I, on the other hand, think you have MUCH to
learn. That is to say, where I come from, your "manner" leaves much to be
desired.

Hey, you're the teenager troll here, not I.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
What?? A hacker presence in the Matrix isn't dependant on whether his
mind is fooled to believe that the Matrix is the real world. He knows
it isn't. He allows the Matrix to enter his mind in spite of him
knowing that it isn't the real world.

So what happened to Neo when he was taken to Mobil Avenue? Did he allow
that? Was he aware that the system wasn't exactly the same?

Are you now suggesting that choice *IS* a factor in MA and MA has
fooled Neos mind that it's the real world? What are you getting at?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
It's a arbitrary choice of words to describe the conflict in the
movies. It's like the force in star wars. No one can explain how it
works since it's based on fiction.

Ah, see that's where we differ. Fiction can be explained, even if it's still
just a fictitious explanation.

Fiction can be explained by the author, not the audience.

Post by JPM III
Also, do you deny the Episode I "midichlorians" stuff? As far as I'm
concerned, that was an explanation and it was canonical. Even if it was a
cop-out.

Midichlorians didn't explain the force, it explained how a Jedi is
connected to the force, not what "the force" is. Midichlorians was a
way to make force-sensitivity measurable.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
What??? The Architect isn't in any way "programmed to allow [the
Anomaly] to do what it must do". What gave you that idea? The
Architect outright states that he wants to get rid of the anomaly.

Good point. My point, though, is that the Architect is a machine/program,
and as such he is subject to the causal rules of his existence. And, yes, he
wants to get rid of the anomaly, but he also shares that the Oracle helped
build the current Matrix that depends on the anomaly.

No - *in which the anomaly is a result* Not *depends* upon.

Post by JPM III
So, as such, the
anomaly must do what it must do, and the Architect must allow it to happen.

The anomaly, being Neo in this case, doesn't have a "todo list" of
things to do as an anomaly magically sent to him. The architect wants
the code of the anomaly (presumably the code that constitutes the
connection between the matrix and the anomalies mind) carry and that's
all. With that code, he can further refine the Matrix to make it more
safe against future anomalies.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
The point is that the Matrix *needs* Neo

Why?

Because it's built to.

No it doesn't.

Post by JPM III
Read the dialog of the Architect and the Oracle some more.

I've done so many times. Quote something. It seems you are again
takings things just from your memory, and we know how many times I
have had to correct your "memory" before, so...

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Last I checked, he failed to get on the train because he lacked permission.

Where did you "check" to obtain that information?

Um, the movie. Neo lacked the Trainman's permission to board the train, so
Neo was unable to board the train.

So, "lacked permission" meant "he was slapped by Trainman", not
permission as in read/write which you begun by saying?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
In such a way that Neo can't tell them apart. And Neo continually sees
the code of the Matrix.

In that Neo can't tell them apart, I agree. But the reason is because the
code that determines the virtual visual environment as Neo sees it is still
the same. It's still Matrix code. But they're not the same system.

...or so you think. Neo seems to have no problems detecting
differences in the code from inside the matrix, especially when
they're at Merovingians.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
Which is fine, if it weren't for the fact that the Architect would
have used the same restrictions in the Matrix if it were possible.

I disagree. The Matrix needs to be open for the hacking for various reasons.

No it doesn't *need* to.

Post by JPM III
For one thing, it allows the anomaly to do what it does, which is a
necessary step to develop itself before returning to the Source.

That's not something you can conclude after seeing the movies.

Post by JPM III
Maybe the Architect would do it that way if the anomaly weren't so
important, but it is.

The architect wants a perfect system, to make it better he wants the
code from the anomaly. That's all there is. To obtain the code, he
doesn't have to allow the anomaly to do anything but to give up the
code.

If that was true, no Agents would ever hunt for the anomaly.

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

I.e. you have no idea?

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman
If it were a function, it wouldn't be an anomaly, Paul. The anomaly is
the result of a "remainder of an unbalanced equation". The anomaly is
the result of Oracles way of interacting with the human mind.

And, as such, it is a function

No, it is *not*.

[JPM III]

You misunderstand many fundamental things about the arguments I make. As
such, it is not pertinent for my part in this conversation to continue.

[Phoenix]

Post by JPM III
You misunderstand many fundamental things about the arguments I make. As
such, it is not pertinent for my part in this conversation to continue.

Hi guys,

Is there anything left about the Matrix trilogy you haven't argued about?
Maybe we should bring up the discussion about fries with mayonaise ;-)

I'm just wondering how you are doing. I'm okay, have lost 25 pounds and
look gorgeous :-)

Phoenix

[JPM III]

Post by Phoenix
Hi guys,
Is there anything left about the Matrix trilogy you haven't argued about?

Perhaps you should be careful not to ask questions you don't want answers
to! You'd be surprised what else we could find to argue about... except that
I'm growing tired of it again.

Post by Phoenix
I'm just wondering how you are doing. I'm okay, have lost 25 pounds and
look gorgeous :-)

Yay! I'm happy for you.

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III
Perhaps you should be careful not to ask questions you don't want answers
to! You'd be surprised what else we could find to argue about... except that
I'm growing tired of it again.

So why are you doing it?? That's just stupid, Paul.

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Perhaps you should be careful not to ask questions you don't want answers
to! You'd be surprised what else we could find to argue about... except that
I'm growing tired of it again.

So why are you doing it?? That's just stupid, Paul.

Because I choose to. It's stupid for you not to understand that.

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Perhaps you should be careful not to ask questions you don't want answers
to! You'd be surprised what else we could find to argue about... except that
I'm growing tired of it again.

So why are you doing it?? That's just stupid, Paul.

Because I choose to.

You choose to be a ignorant teenager troll? That implies you can
choose not to. I think that would be a better choice.

You've been here for some years and you're still acting like the
usenet newbie you were when you came here.

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Perhaps you should be careful not to ask questions you don't want answers
to! You'd be surprised what else we could find to argue about...
except
that
I'm growing tired of it again.

So why are you doing it?? That's just stupid, Paul.

Because I choose to.

You choose to be a ignorant teenager troll? That implies you can
choose not to. I think that would be a better choice.
You've been here for some years and you're still acting like the
usenet newbie you were when you came here.

The problem with you is that you think YOUR WAY is the correct way, and you
accept nothing else.

I arrived here in 2003, maybe late 2002. I have been on usenet since 1995. I
don't want to read your presumptuous, ignorant drivel again. And unless you
attempt to get around being blocked, then I won't.

Enjoy your self-righteous ignorance. I'm finished with you.

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III
The problem with you is that you think YOUR WAY is the correct way, and you
accept nothing else.
I arrived here in 2003, maybe late 2002. I have been on usenet since 1995. I
don't want to read your presumptuous, ignorant drivel again. And unless you
attempt to get around being blocked, then I won't.
Enjoy your self-righteous ignorance. I'm finished with you.

At last!

[Sandman]

Post by JPM III
You misunderstand many fundamental things about the arguments I make.

I nailed them perfectly, which is why you try to ignore it. That's
what you always do.

[JPM III]

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
You misunderstand many fundamental things about the arguments I make.

I nailed them perfectly, which is why you try to ignore it. That's
what you always do.

Wrong. But I'm tired of you. Good bye.

[Quick]

Post by Sandman
You and I are the only ones here, Paul. :P

Heh.

Your both wrong on that point. :-P

-Q

[John Coxon]

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

I must concur here, this can be considered as canon and any arguments
around it are completely pointless since it is said in the Matrix that
Neo and Agent Smith are both part of the inherent programming of the
Matrix, caused by the factor of choice. The architect said so in Reloaded.
--
John Coxon
ZZ9 Secretary - http://www.zz9.org/

"You should _really_ get a son and call him Ford! Really! Not only would
he be called Ford which is cool in any case, but Ford Knox? I can't stop
myself from laughing!" - Kaare (afdaniain)

LiveJournal: http://johncoxon.livejournal.com/
Missing footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemowiki.pl?ISFN

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

I must concur here, this can be considered as canon and any arguments
around it are completely pointless since it is said in the Matrix that
Neo and Agent Smith are both part of the inherent programming of the
Matrix, caused by the factor of choice. The architect said so in Reloaded.

Actually, he said no such thing. Not only did the Architect not
mention Smith at all in that conversation, what he said was that the
anomaly is the result of an unbalanced equation.

It's pretty simple really. If it was a function of the program, it
wouldn't be an anomaly. It's like saying that the spellchecker in Word
is an anomaly. It isn't.

But Neo isn't a function. He isn't designed or created. He is the
result of Oracles way to make the Matrix connect to the human brain.

[John Coxon]

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

I must concur here, this can be considered as canon and any arguments
around it are completely pointless since it is said in the Matrix that
Neo and Agent Smith are both part of the inherent programming of the
Matrix, caused by the factor of choice. The architect said so in Reloaded.

Actually, he said no such thing. Not only did the Architect not
mention Smith at all in that conversation, what he said was that the
anomaly is the result of an unbalanced equation.
It's pretty simple really. If it was a function of the program, it
wouldn't be an anomaly. It's like saying that the spellchecker in Word
is an anomaly. It isn't.
But Neo isn't a function. He isn't designed or created. He is the
result of Oracles way to make the Matrix connect to the human brain.

He is not designed or created, per se, but the anomaly must exist
because of the coding of the Matrix, and so it is not beyond a measure
of control. Hence the Architect bringing Neo, inexorably, to him.

All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
I must concur here, this can be considered as canon and any arguments
around it are completely pointless since it is said in the Matrix that
Neo and Agent Smith are both part of the inherent programming of the
Matrix, caused by the factor of choice. The architect said so in Reloaded.

Actually, he said no such thing. Not only did the Architect not
mention Smith at all in that conversation, what he said was that the
anomaly is the result of an unbalanced equation.
It's pretty simple really. If it was a function of the program, it
wouldn't be an anomaly. It's like saying that the spellchecker in Word
is an anomaly. It isn't.
But Neo isn't a function. He isn't designed or created. He is the
result of Oracles way to make the Matrix connect to the human brain.

He is not designed or created, per se, but the anomaly must exist
because of the coding of the Matrix, and so it is not beyond a measure
of control. Hence the Architect bringing Neo, inexorably, to him.

But having control over an anomaly doesn't equate the anomaly to being
a function, or necessary.

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith,
not Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that
each anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the
Matrix is in is irrelevant to the anomaly.

The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence
the reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as
always. The prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect
and for him to use that code to improve the matrix.

[John Coxon]

Post by Sandman
But having control over an anomaly doesn't equate the anomaly to being
a function, or necessary.

It isn't necessary in as many words, but it will be created by the
function of choice, as the Architect says at the end of the second film.

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith,
not Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that
each anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the
Matrix is in is irrelevant to the anomaly.

When Neo reaches the source his code and Smith's are assimilated on his
terms, balancing the equation. The Architect wanted that to happen on
*his* terms at the end of Reloaded, which is why the anomaly is
necessary - to eliminate the Smith equivalent which is the result of the
anomaly and comes around with each new Matrix.

Post by Sandman
The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence
the reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as
always. The prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect
and for him to use that code to improve the matrix.

I see no evidence in the films to even begin to suggest that the
Architect has improved the Matrix since the introduction of choice.
--
John Coxon
ZZ9 Secretary - http://www.zz9.org/

"<Atob> Jesus died so that people didn't have to be ceremonially knived.
<JohnC> ...for other things too, though.
<Atob> But mostly that." - #afda

LiveJournal: http://johncoxon.livejournal.com/
Missing footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemowiki.pl?ISFN

[JPM III]

Post by John Coxon

But having control over an anomaly doesn't equate the anomaly to being a
function, or necessary.

It isn't necessary in as many words, but it will be created by the
function of choice, as the Architect says at the end of the second film.

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith, not
Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that each
anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the Matrix is in
is irrelevant to the anomaly.

When Neo reaches the source his code and Smith's are assimilated on his
terms, balancing the equation. The Architect wanted that to happen on
*his* terms at the end of Reloaded, which is why the anomaly is
necessary - to eliminate the Smith equivalent which is the result of the
anomaly and comes around with each new Matrix.

Right. Before Smith interacts with Neo, he is simply an "agent" of the
system. After their interaction, Smith is affected by Neo and therefore a
function of the anomaly. This makes more sense when you consider how the
Oracle describes Smith to Neo as "you, your opposite".

At that point, Smith had become the other side of the unbalanced equation,
but as Smith says in Reloaded, "he know what he had to do ... but didn't" --
be broke the rules because he had become part of the anomaly. The problem,
as the Architect put it, was choice, and Smith now had a choice to defy the
rules of the system, which he elected to do.

This is where the manipulation of Neo and Smith by the Oracle was most
important -- she is the one who said just what everyone needed to hear in
order to create the inevitable result. As the Architect described her, she
is the "intuitive program" who understood the human mind -- human choice --
well enough to manipulate them into their final positions.

The Architect expressed his displeasure about relying on the Oracle, because
according to his logic, he is far superior. It makes sense: logic always
seems superior, but logic doesn't solve the problem -- intuition does.

Post by John Coxon

The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence the
reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as always. The
prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect and for him to
use that code to improve the matrix.

I see no evidence in the films to even begin to suggest that the Architect
has improved the Matrix since the introduction of choice.

Only in the sense that he -- maybe -- uses each anomaly to reload the
system, allowing it to survive another cycle.

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
But having control over an anomaly doesn't equate the anomaly to being
a function, or necessary.

It isn't necessary in as many words, but it will be created by the
function of choice, as the Architect says at the end of the second film.

It's a result of that, yes. Not "created" by it. "Creation" is
purposely in this context. "Side effect" would be a better word.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith,
not Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that
each anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the
Matrix is in is irrelevant to the anomaly.

When Neo reaches the source his code and Smith's are assimilated on his
terms, balancing the equation.

But this happened only with Neo, as far as we know, and is not proper
procedure for the anomaly. Smith taking over the Matrix is not part of
the "prophecy" or the anomaly. Neo turned out to be a very special
anomaly, and that in itself had some interesting results. But none of
that was by design or intentional or even under control.

Post by John Coxon
The Architect wanted that to happen on
*his* terms at the end of Reloaded, which is why the anomaly is
necessary - to eliminate the Smith equivalent which is the result of the
anomaly and comes around with each new Matrix.

This is *pure* speculation on your part. Are you really claiming that
an agent is "mixed" with by the one on each reload and the Smith thing
wasn't at all unexpected? Either way, there is absolutely no support
for this.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence
the reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as
always. The prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect
and for him to use that code to improve the matrix.

I see no evidence in the films to even begin to suggest that the
Architect has improved the Matrix since the introduction of choice.

"You are the eventuality of an anomaly which despite my sincerest
efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a
harmony of mathematical precision."

It's clear that he's trying to eliminate the anomaly. I'd say it's
safe to assume that:

"The function of the One is now to return to the source allowing a
temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the
prime program"

means that the Architect wants to use the code to improve the Matrix.

[John Coxon]

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
But having control over an anomaly doesn't equate the anomaly to being
a function, or necessary.

It isn't necessary in as many words, but it will be created by the
function of choice, as the Architect says at the end of the second film.

It's a result of that, yes. Not "created" by it. "Creation" is
purposely in this context. "Side effect" would be a better word.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith,
not Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that
each anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the
Matrix is in is irrelevant to the anomaly.

When Neo reaches the source his code and Smith's are assimilated on his
terms, balancing the equation.

But this happened only with Neo, as far as we know, and is not proper
procedure for the anomaly. Smith taking over the Matrix is not part of
the "prophecy" or the anomaly. Neo turned out to be a very special
anomaly, and that in itself had some interesting results. But none of
that was by design or intentional or even under control.

This is because all the previous anomalies have chosen to allow the
Architect to reboot the Matrix in his white room rather than to reenter
the Matrix and try and save humanity themselves, so the events which
happen past that time would not have ever happened before. Neo, whilst
not beyond a measure of control, chooses the option he's not meant to
choose, and this means we see what happens when things are left to continue.

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
The Architect wanted that to happen on
*his* terms at the end of Reloaded, which is why the anomaly is
necessary - to eliminate the Smith equivalent which is the result of the
anomaly and comes around with each new Matrix.

This is *pure* speculation on your part. Are you really claiming that
an agent is "mixed" with by the one on each reload and the Smith thing
wasn't at all unexpected? Either way, there is absolutely no support
for this.

There has to be an opposite side of the equation, the equation trying to
balance itself. You can't not have an opposite side of the equation,
since the Oracle explains the Architect's purpose is to "balance the
equation". When Neo asks her for hers, she says, "to unbalance it."

Thus, we must say there are always two halves to the equation for her to
make sense.

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence
the reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as
always. The prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect
and for him to use that code to improve the matrix.

I see no evidence in the films to even begin to suggest that the
Architect has improved the Matrix since the introduction of choice.

"You are the eventuality of an anomaly which despite my sincerest
efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a
harmony of mathematical precision."
It's clear that he's trying to eliminate the anomaly. I'd say it's
"The function of the One is now to return to the source allowing a
temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the
prime program"
means that the Architect wants to use the code to improve the Matrix.

Meaning he wants to reboot the Matrix using the code as there is
evidence for him having done in the past, more a harddisk reset than
anything else. There is no indication that the Matrix has improved since
the first One, and so it's an unwarranted assumption to assume it has
been improved.
--
John Coxon
ZZ9 Secretary - http://www.zz9.org/

"OMFG!!!!
D00D!! 1 j|_|$t red thiz book, The HITchi|<er's Guild or something liek
that, and in it FORD is not blak!!!!!

Oh, wait, you wanted a NON-aol response? my apologies." - Gaz (afdaniain)

LiveJournal: http://johncoxon.livejournal.com/
Missing footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemowiki.pl?ISFN

[JPM III]

To appease the killfiled troll:

Most of my words likely only represent my personal interpretation, but drawn
entirely from the various Matrix works overseen by the Wachowski Brothers.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere
in the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as
planned. As soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown
into chaos.

Except it isn't. The Matrix is "thrown into chaos" because of Smith,
not Neo. Not because of the anomaly. Unless you want to argue that each
anomaly "converts" an agent into what Smith is the chaos the Matrix is
in is irrelevant to the anomaly.

When Neo reaches the source his code and Smith's are assimilated on his
terms, balancing the equation.

But this happened only with Neo, as far as we know, and is not proper
procedure for the anomaly. Smith taking over the Matrix is not part of
the "prophecy" or the anomaly. Neo turned out to be a very special
anomaly, and that in itself had some interesting results. But none of
that was by design or intentional or even under control.

This is because all the previous anomalies have chosen to allow the
Architect to reboot the Matrix in his white room rather than to reenter
the Matrix and try and save humanity themselves, so the events which
happen past that time would not have ever happened before. Neo, whilst
not beyond a measure of control, chooses the option he's not meant to
choose, and this means we see what happens when things are left to continue.

More to the point: Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made. Neo is one of those humans, an anomaly like the previous ones,
but not the same man as any of the previous ones by any means.

The functions of the Matrix and of the anomaly are still the same, but with
a different carrier and different "players" (humans) in the virtual world,
the chronology doesn't follow the same pattern of events. It's simply the
reload routine inherent in the programming of the Matrix that happens
exactly as before.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon
The Architect wanted that to happen on *his* terms at the end of
Reloaded, which is why the anomaly is necessary - to eliminate the Smith
equivalent which is the result of the anomaly and comes around with each
new Matrix.

This is *pure* speculation on your part. Are you really claiming that an
agent is "mixed" with by the one on each reload and the Smith thing
wasn't at all unexpected? Either way, there is absolutely no support for
this.

There has to be an opposite side of the equation, the equation trying to
balance itself. You can't not have an opposite side of the equation,
since the Oracle explains the Architect's purpose is to "balance the
equation". When Neo asks her for hers, she says, "to unbalance it."

I have a different theory about this.

I see the Oracle's "unbalanc[ing]" of the equation as a disruption of the
Architect's "perfect" system, rather than simply a part of it. The Architect
had something that functioned logically, but didn't hold up. The intuitive
program he speaks of in Reloaded (the Oracle) realized the flaw of logical
perfection in a human world, and thus she manipulated the system in whatever
way she did to insert the anomaly. (How? I don't know. We just know that she
did, because the Architect pretty much says so in his Reloaded spiel.)

Someone might then ask why the Architect acknowledges an "unbalanced
equation", as if it's HIS unbalanced equation.

It is clear from the Architect's speech that nothing about his logic is
unbalanced or imperfect. He acknowledges that the anomaly was not his
creation or his idea, and his words reveal that he doesn't care for it
tainting his system all that much. His words about the purpose of the
anomaly are simply stated as what Neo is intended to be there to do. When he
answers Neo's question ("Why am I here?"), he is specifically telling Neo
his purpose, not the origin of the code he carries or why it is attacked to
him. That is, had Neo asked "why me" instead, he would have gotten a very
different answer.

Post by John Coxon
Thus, we must say there are always two halves to the equation for her to
make sense.

For every action, there is equal and opposite reaction. It seems to me that
the anomaly in the Matrix is presented in such a way as to be a leftover
remainder at first, with no opposite. Only when it reacts with the system
can the anomaly's negative or opposite come about.

The reason?

Mathematically, an "equation" is balanced only if both sides are equal. If a
remainder is involved, then it only exists on ONE SIDE of the equation.
Think of a division equation in which the dividend is not a multiple of the
divisor. One side has the dividend and divisor, and the other side has the
quotient and some remainder. A remainder is only the last bit of excess
information on one side of an equation.

So when an anomaly first develops, it has no opposite. But as it interacts
with the system, both the anomaly (as human) and the system (as interactive
environment) evolve according to their interaction. This is simply how any
evolution takes place: some being interacting with some environment.

But the Matrix is special because it is specifically designed for the
occurrence and correction/deletion/whatever of this anomaly, hence after a
certain time of analyzing the problem, a solution is divised in which the
anomaly can be cancelled out. (I'm using a mathematical analogy here, since
that's how the Architect operates.)

The events of this chronology manifest visually within the Matrix, which are
much easier to see or understand than the mathematical operations of a
computer system. But, really, it's all a computer system, and that's what it
boils down to.

[Gavin Smith]

Post by JPM III
Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made.

... "Well, not exactly" is self-referencing: Smith is saying that the
difference is Smith, surely?

[JPM III]

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III
Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made.

... "Well, not exactly" is self-referencing: Smith is saying that the
difference is Smith, surely?

Neo is different too.

As are all the people in Zion.

The ingredients are subtly different each time, but they're always the same
types: humans, machines, and an anomaly to bring the two together in just
that special way. :)

[Gavin Smith]

Post by JPM III

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III
Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made.

... "Well, not exactly" is self-referencing: Smith is saying that the
difference is Smith, surely?

Neo is different too.
As are all the people in Zion.
The ingredients are subtly different each time, but they're always the same
types: humans, machines, and an anomaly to bring the two together in just
that special way. :)

I appreciate all that on a larger scale - but Smith's ego, and his
self-satisfied smile when he says the line, suggests that he considers
himself the difference, surely?

[JPM III]

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III
Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made.

... "Well, not exactly" is self-referencing: Smith is saying that the
difference is Smith, surely?

Neo is different too.
As are all the people in Zion.
The ingredients are subtly different each time, but they're always the same
types: humans, machines, and an anomaly to bring the two together in just
that special way. :)

I appreciate all that on a larger scale - but Smith's ego, and his
self-satisfied smile when he says the line, suggests that he considers
himself the difference, surely?

To some extent, sure. But as an isolated program -- a rogue one, at that --
his sight would be quite limited. Like humans, his experience or accumulated
memory should be the result of where he's been, what he's seen, and what
information has been given to him.

As a program, he may be behaving entirely differently than in the past. Or
maybe his replicating behavior is exactly what he's always done, or what
some other program has always done at this point in the process.

But I think it's all a result of Neo being different from the other
anomalies (as almost every program interacting with him recognizes at some
point). Smith gets to experience a bit of ego because, after his experience
with Neo, he can break the rules and achieve some virtual form of
self-satisfaction as he gains more power.

But, really, Smith's differences are only an effect, not the cause. The
anomaly inherent in the system are what caused Smith to be different.

[Sandman]

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III

Post by Gavin Smith

Post by JPM III
Smith states that it's "happening exactly as before",
indicating that the system's various functions preceding the end of a cycle
are in place. The other Smith's clarification -- "well, not exactly" --
simply acknowledges that it's a new cycle with new humans and new choices
being made.

... "Well, not exactly" is self-referencing: Smith is saying that the
difference is Smith, surely?

Neo is different too.
As are all the people in Zion.
The ingredients are subtly different each time, but they're always the same
types: humans, machines, and an anomaly to bring the two together in just
that special way. :)

I appreciate all that on a larger scale - but Smith's ego, and his
self-satisfied smile when he says the line, suggests that he considers
himself the difference, surely?

Well, not to Paul - to him it's the key to the entire plot. :)

[Quick]

Post by Sandman
Well, not to Paul - to him it's the key to the entire plot. :)

The real plot behind the Matrix has escaped everyone so far...

And that is - Neo represents the remainder of Pi:
http://3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592.com/

or, for short:
http://youmustchoose.com/

Well, not really. But, I'm making as much sense as you guys are. :-P

-Q

(-;

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
But this happened only with Neo, as far as we know, and is not proper
procedure for the anomaly. Smith taking over the Matrix is not part of
the "prophecy" or the anomaly. Neo turned out to be a very special
anomaly, and that in itself had some interesting results. But none of
that was by design or intentional or even under control.

This is because all the previous anomalies have chosen to allow the
Architect to reboot the Matrix in his white room rather than to reenter
the Matrix and try and save humanity themselves, so the events which
happen past that time would not have ever happened before.

Which is irrelevant, since the events that led to Smith taking over
the Matrix started long before Neo ever visited the Architect.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
This is *pure* speculation on your part. Are you really claiming that
an agent is "mixed" with by the one on each reload and the Smith thing
wasn't at all unexpected? Either way, there is absolutely no support
for this.

There has to be an opposite side of the equation

No, there is nothing in the movies that says that "there has to be an
opposite side of the equation". You don't even know what "the
equation" in that sentence means or what it is in reference to.

Post by John Coxon
the equation trying to balance itself.

You're only regurgitating the words from the Oracle - a person that
isn't really known of speaking in direct and clear terms.

Post by John Coxon
You can't not have an opposite side of the equation,
since the Oracle explains the Architect's purpose is to "balance the
equation". When Neo asks her for hers, she says, "to unbalance it."

Figuratively speaking. The Architect wants order, she wants less order
(I'm avoiding the word chaos here). It's not like they're sitting at
each end of an table with an actual "equation" in front of them with
one trying to "balance it" and the other doing the opposite.

Post by John Coxon
Thus, we must say there are always two halves to the equation for her to
make sense.

Listen, this is the Oracle. Nothing she ever said has made much sense,
or explained very much. It's not like you can take her words at face
value and try to draw any kind of conclusions from them.

And, since you're obviously not claiming that every version of the
Matrix has had an agent gone rogue, it's irrelevant anyway.

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
The Architect wants the code from Neo to build a better Matrix, hence
the reload. If Neo never got there the Matrix would continue as
always. The prophecy only exists to bring the anomaly to the Architect
and for him to use that code to improve the matrix.

I see no evidence in the films to even begin to suggest that the
Architect has improved the Matrix since the introduction of choice.

"You are the eventuality of an anomaly which despite my sincerest
efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a
harmony of mathematical precision."
It's clear that he's trying to eliminate the anomaly. I'd say it's
"The function of the One is now to return to the source allowing a
temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the
prime program"
means that the Architect wants to use the code to improve the Matrix.

Meaning he wants to reboot the Matrix using the code as there is
evidence for him having done in the past, more a harddisk reset than
anything else. There is no indication that the Matrix has improved since
the first One, and so it's an unwarranted assumption to assume it has
been improved.

So, despite his sincerest efforts, he has not only not been able to
eliminate it, he has not been able to make any progress what so ever?
Either way, you're right. It's just an assumption. But it's an
irrelevant assumption.

[JPM III]

Post by John Coxon

Post by JPM III

Post by Sandman

Post by JPM III
Because the Matrix NEEDS Neo to do what he's doing.

What gives you that wild idea?

Every single word about it in all three movies.

I must concur here, this can be considered as canon and any arguments
around it are completely pointless since it is said in the Matrix that
Neo and Agent Smith are both part of the inherent programming of the
Matrix, caused by the factor of choice. The architect said so in Reloaded.

Actually, he said no such thing. Not only did the Architect not mention
Smith at all in that conversation, what he said was that the anomaly is
the result of an unbalanced equation.
It's pretty simple really. If it was a function of the program, it
wouldn't be an anomaly. It's like saying that the spellchecker in Word is
an anomaly. It isn't.
But Neo isn't a function. He isn't designed or created. He is the result
of Oracles way to make the Matrix connect to the human brain.

He is not designed or created, per se, but the anomaly must exist because
of the coding of the Matrix, and so it is not beyond a measure of control.
Hence the Architect bringing Neo, inexorably, to him.
All his speech makes it quite clear that for the Matrix to persevere in
the way it does, "the function of the One" must continue as planned. As
soon as Neo makes the 'wrong' choice the Matrix is thrown into chaos.

Exactly, except... it isn't even the "wrong" choice, per se, but simply a
less probable one. But, as you paraphrased the architect, it was "not beyond
some measure of control".

The Architect's choice of words there -- "some measure" -- indicate that Neo
cannot be wholly controlled, hence the problem of choice... The Matrix must
in part rely on human choice, and since Neo carries significant weight as
the anomaly, his choice is a much greater problem for the system if he
chooses not to follow the best-case scenario that the Architect has lain
before him.

[John Coxon]

Post by Sandman
I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Having said that, by the time that Artificial Intelligence is this
advanced, we don't know if virii would start to choose their targets in
order to spread more effectively. Maybe Smith is choosing targets
strategically at first in order to gain a stranglehold and then mop the
rest of the mess up - it does not seem illogical to suggest that future
viral software may be able to do this.

It may frighten you. It certainly scares the willies out of me.
--
John Coxon
ZZ9 Secretary - http://www.zz9.org/

"You should _really_ get a son and call him Ford! Really! Not only would
he be called Ford which is cool in any case, but Ford Knox? I can't stop
myself from laughing!" - Kaare (afdaniain)

LiveJournal: http://johncoxon.livejournal.com/
Missing footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemowiki.pl?ISFN

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Having said that, by the time that Artificial Intelligence is this
advanced, we don't know if virii would start to choose their targets in
order to spread more effectively.

But then it has evolved away from what the word "virus" defines, and
needs a new word to define the propagation.

I'd say that Smith is a program that copies it's code to the RSI's of
humans but stays connected to the original program at all times. This
means that there is still only one smith, only thousands of
input/ouput devices for that program, to use an analogy.

Post by John Coxon
It may frighten you. It certainly scares the willies out of me.

It's only a movie, you know .)

[John Coxon]

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Having said that, by the time that Artificial Intelligence is this
advanced, we don't know if virii would start to choose their targets in
order to spread more effectively.

But then it has evolved away from what the word "virus" defines, and
needs a new word to define the propagation.

Fish evolved past what the word originally meant, but are still called
fish. I would hazard a guess that humans will still be called humans
even if we do evolve into better beings. I think the word virus will be
attributed to malicious software programs for a long time, mainly
because the general public think of a virus as anything malicious which
attacks a computer.

[Sandman]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman
I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over
people, something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he
copies his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a
program that automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm
quite sure each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice
and by action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's
misplaced to use terms from todays computers to explain events in
Matrix.

Having said that, by the time that Artificial Intelligence is this
advanced, we don't know if virii would start to choose their targets in
order to spread more effectively.

But then it has evolved away from what the word "virus" defines, and
needs a new word to define the propagation.

Fish evolved past what the word originally meant, but are still called
fish.

Eh?? Ok, what fish is called fish but doesn't adhere to the definition
of fish?

"a limbless cold-blooded vertebrate animal with gills and fins
and living wholly in water"

Post by John Coxon
I would hazard a guess that humans will still be called humans
even if we do evolve into better beings.

human being
"a man, woman, or child of the species Homo sapiens,
distinguished from other animals by superior mental
development, power of articulate speech, and upright
stance.

The keyword is "homo sapiens". As long as humans are homo sapiens,
they word "human" can be used to define it.

Post by John Coxon
I think the word virus will be attributed to malicious software
programs for a long time, mainly because the general public think of
a virus as anything malicious which attacks a computer.

Or trojan, or spyware, or malware, or whatever. But these are all
words that define dumb software that has a set of programming and
relies on the host to have a set of functions to propagate.

"Virus" is something solitary and preprogrammed.

This is what you snipped:

I'd say that Smith is a program that copies it's code to the RSI's of
humans but stays connected to the original program at all times. This
means that there is still only one smith, only thousands of
input/ouput devices for that program, to use an analogy.

[JPM III]

Post by John Coxon

Post by Sandman

Post by John Coxon

I don't see any "viral software" in M3, I see Smith taking over people,
something Agents can do - but he doesn't do it temporarily, he copies
his code to the RSI (or something like that). A virus is a program that
automatically propagates without manual interaction. I'm quite sure
each instance of Smith copies himself to a person by choice and by
action, not automatically. My point is that I think it's misplaced to
use terms from todays computers to explain events in Matrix.

Having said that, by the time that Artificial Intelligence is this
advanced, we don't know if virii would start to choose their targets in
order to spread more effectively.

But then it has evolved away from what the word "virus" defines, and
needs a new word to define the propagation.

Fish evolved past what the word originally meant, but are still called
fish. I would hazard a guess that humans will still be called humans even
if we do evolve into better beings. I think the word virus will be
attributed to malicious software programs for a long time, mainly because
the general public think of a virus as anything malicious which attacks a
computer.

Exactly. That's simple etymology. Sometimes nature changes faster than
language; sometimes language changes faster than nature. Sometimes we use
the same word to describe a great many similar things; sometimes we use many
different words to describe the subtlest variations of essentially the same
thing.

If something evolves beyond the term originally used to define it, then one
of two things will happen: either the term itself will evolve to represent
the evolved object, or the language (or its speakers) will evolve and create
a new term to represent the evolved object, treated as something new.