Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 02:08:38 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Devs (2020) - new Alex Garland show

Started by surreal, March 11, 2020, 09:15:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

NoSleep

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 11:27:32 AM
So, I still have two questions:

(1) Why did Stewart crash the box?

(2) Why can the simulation only be run up to the point at which Lily exercises apparent free will? (The bigger question being: on an entire planet, why is there only one example of free will during the period Devs is up and running? Is it because the only free will that mattered had to be exercised inside Devs? Why? In fact, why didn't a cat accidentally exercise free will instead? Wait a sec, is the universe human-centric?)

I think (2) are more limitations of the writing (and genre), just like the continuation of consciousness issue with teleporters, etc. Simulating a universe is probably absurd but makes for a good bit of speculative fiction.

It was something that Stewart remarked that led me to ponder on the "particular universe simulation" theory.

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 11:19:51 AM
That's one explanation but it's an explanation that relies on Forest's ideas being correct.

I think both (all?) were possible; Forest's plan was to follow one uncontaminated avenue exclusively.

olliebean

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 10:29:46 AM
Oh, yes, I did realise that. I thought NoSleep meant that the simulation continued from where the original consciousness ended. And it turns out he did mean that kind of continuation. The language is tricky in a discussion on this subject.

I don't think it did continue from where the original consciousness ended. I think it deviated from the original consciousness at some point before that, so that it never followed the particular set of circumstances that led to the original consciousness ending.

Puce Moment

Is the new simulation they are inhabiting something they can see and predict?

I keep having thoughts that Swanson played with his daughter in that field of grass, and then on their way home they are hit by an articulated lorry going 80mph.

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Alberon on May 29, 2020, 07:47:59 PM
I mentioned an old short story a bit upthead which does explore the concept of memory recording, copying and continuity of conciouness, or lack thereof. It's called The Phantom of Kansas by John Varley and was written way back in 1976. The author has put it up on his website.

https://varley.net/excerpt/the-phantom-of-kansas-full-text/

A similar thing is explored in the 60's Simulacron-3, which got made into the excellent German miniseries World on a Wire and the less good Cyberpunk film The Thirteenth Floor.

I think devs borrowed from this as well. The NSA (I think? some government agency anyway) woman wanting it to predict aggressors but also simulate trading scenarios, etc.

Alberon

Quote from: Puce Moment on May 30, 2020, 01:31:55 PM
Is the new simulation they are inhabiting something they can see and predict?

I keep having thoughts that Swanson played with his daughter in that field of grass, and then on their way home they are hit by an articulated lorry going 80mph.

In some universes they were. The final episode mostly focuses on one of the better universes, but since all possibilities are being simultaneously simulated there are a near infinity where Lily and Forest are back in a living hell.

Zetetic

No real idea what "continuity of consciousness" is or why it'd be a criterion for personal identity.

Although I am a human, and therefore undergo fairly massive discontinuities of consciousness on at least a daily basis[nb]Or if you prefer, I don't, on the basis that there's no way of identifying the creatures that exist before and after bouts of sleep as the same person.[/nb], so I might be biased.


Sin Agog

Quote from: Alberon on May 29, 2020, 07:47:59 PM
I mentioned an old short story a bit upthead which does explore the concept of memory recording, copying and continuity of conciouness, or lack thereof. It's called The Phantom of Kansas by John Varley and was written way back in 1976. The author has put it up on his website.

https://varley.net/excerpt/the-phantom-of-kansas-full-text/

I mostly know John Varley from the Gaea series about a bunch of astronauts who shag each other all the time on a living planetoid full of centaurs who each have two massive cocks.

NoSleep

Quote from: Zetetic on May 30, 2020, 01:57:44 PM
No real idea what "continuity of consciousness" is or why it'd be a criterion for personal identity.

Although I am a human, and therefore undergo fairly massive discontinuities of consciousness on at least a daily basis[nb]Or if you prefer, I don't, on the basis that there's no way of identifying the creatures that exist before and after bouts of sleep as the same person.[/nb], so I might be biased.

The me that decides I mustn't drink alcohol anymore is a different me to the one that picks up a couple of beers while I'm down the shops. But they do meet up and argue their point occasionally, so I count that as continuity.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 11:01:50 AM
It's why he was was so committed to simulating the exact universe he existed in (determinism) as opposed to allowing the multiple universes into Devs; to have power over this particular universe. The simulation becomes that universe.

I've been thinking about this and it was never really mentioned what Forest hoped to do once he had successfully simulated the 'correct' Amaya. It was just to prove the point that he was absolutely powerless to do anything differently the day Amaya died. He wasn't trying to create a new universe.

Hence, I still don't understand why Stewart crashed the box.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 11:44:49 AM
I think (2) are more limitations of the writing (and genre), just like the continuation of consciousness issue with teleporters, etc. Simulating a universe is probably absurd but makes for a good bit of speculative fiction.

I disagree. Internal consistency is everything.

QuoteIt was something that Stewart remarked that led me to ponder on the "particular universe simulation" theory.

What was that?

QuoteI think both (all?) were possible; Forest's plan was to follow one uncontaminated avenue exclusively.

But the within the scope set out by the story, Forest's plan was impossible. In fact, he didn't just plan to follow one avenue; he believed only one avenue existed.

Alberon

The brain never switches off. When you go to sleep your conscious level changes, but your mind is always on. Whether you're truly the same person year on year or even hour on hour is open to debate, BUT there is always continuity from one version of you to the next.

If a copy of your mind is taken and played into a clone, or simulated, in a large floating computer, there's a distinct break. The new you is not directly connected to the old you.

On a tangent to whether the you of five years ago is the you now the cells of your body are constantly being replaced. The arms you have now are definitely not the arms you had ten years ago. That doesn't apply to brain cells but are the atoms replaced of each cell over time? And if so, while there is continuity, are you the same person.

This idea has puzzled people for a long time.

QuoteThe ship of Theseus, also known as Theseus' paradox, is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object. The paradox is most notably recorded by Plutarch in Life of Theseus from the late first century.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: Alberon on May 30, 2020, 04:52:22 PM
The brain never switches off. When you go to sleep your conscious level changes, but your mind is always on. Whether you're truly the same person year on year or even hour on hour is open to debate, BUT there is always continuity from one version of you to the next.

If a copy of your mind is taken and played into a clone, or simulated, in a large floating computer, there's a distinct break. The new you is not directly connected to the old you.

On a tangent to whether the you of five years ago is the you now the cells of your body are constantly being replaced. The arms you have now are definitely not the arms you had ten years ago. That doesn't apply to brain cells but are the atoms replaced of each cell over time? And if so, while there is continuity, are you the same person.

This idea has puzzled people for a long time.

The argument against what you are saying is that the teleporter represents the continuity between the versions of you. It makes no difference if your atoms are swapped out one at a time or all at once. Ageing is just extremely slow teleportation :-)

NoSleep

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 04:50:39 PM
I disagree. Internal consistency is everything.

So every great sci-fi is based on completely plausible science? No. Sci-Fi is about saying, "what if?" and exploring ideas in many cases.

QuoteWhat was that?

He mentioned the "simulation within the simulation" at one point; it was almost an aside.

QuoteBut the within the scope set out by the story, Forest's plan was impossible. In fact, he didn't just plan to follow one avenue; he believed only one avenue existed.

I'm not sure he did, but he had a fixed goal in mind that could be explored within the possibility of "infinite universes". Seemed more like indoctrination; especially how he expelled the team member that explored outside the confines of his experiment. They could take it anywhere but he wanted it to go to the one place he desired.

Alberon

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 04:54:03 PM
The argument against what you are saying is that the teleporter represents the continuity between the versions of you. It makes no difference if your atoms are swapped out one at a time or all at once. Ageing is just extremely slow teleportation :-)

I think it does make a difference. Swapping all the atoms at once is no different than producing a copy.

I've been trying to find a link to an idea that suggests a way continuity can be maintained. It's something to do with a technological Singularity, quantum entanglement and resurrection in the future. It's often dismissed as the Rapture of the Nerds, and probably is.

Alberon

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 05:20:03 PM
Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 04:50:39 PM
I disagree. Internal consistency is everything.

So every great sci-fi is based on completely plausible science? No. Sci-Fi is about saying, "what if?" and exploring ideas in many cases.

I think what he's saying is different from what you think. Good SF, indeed good fiction in general, is internally consistant. No matter how mad the initial concept the author can't just change the rules of the world arbitrarily to fit what he or she wants to do. You can have insane, impossible scenarios, but the key is internal consistancy.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: Alberon on May 30, 2020, 05:21:41 PM
I think it does make a difference. Swapping all the atoms at once is no different than producing a copy.

Yes, but I can't think what difference that makes. If you copy everything exactly, then all the atoms that hold every thought the person had at the time will also be copied, and therefore the copy will continue it's 'consciousness' at the point the original was destroyed. Which is continuity, right?

Quote from: Alberon on May 30, 2020, 05:26:33 PM
I think what he's saying is different from what you think. Good SF, indeed good fiction in general, is internally consistant. No matter how mad the initial concept the author can't just change the rules of the world arbitrarily to fit what he or she wants to do. You can have insane, impossible scenarios, but the key is internal consistancy.

Thanks, yes, that's exactly what I meant.

NoSleep

There is consistency in the story if you accept that the experiment is designed to track the actually unfolding universe rather than possibilities; it doesn't matter what other billion little things are going on out of our view. It turns out otherwise, but that doesn't mean Forest is "wrong", although he might be (morally?) wrong about about pursuing the particular line he wanted to follow.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 05:20:03 PM
He mentioned the "simulation within the simulation" at one point; it was almost an aside.

Oh, yes, right. I mentioned that upthread. There is no indication that the simulation within the simulation would become the 'real' universe and there's no reason I can think of that it would be. At best, it could be argued that it raises the question about how we know that the universe we're presented with at the start of the series is the 'original' either.

QuoteI'm not sure he did, but he had a fixed goal in mind that could be explored within the possibility of "infinite universes". Seemed more like indoctrination; especially how he expelled the team member that explored outside the confines of his experiment. They could take it anywhere but he wanted it to go to the one place he desired.

That's not quite correct. He didn't believe in infinite universes therefore in his framework there could only be one path through history.

NoSleep

As I just said, he didn't believe the words he was saying; they were delivered (thanks to Nick Offerman's good acting) in such a way that they sounded doctrinarian rather than his sincerely held belief. He may have been trying to convince himself above all others.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 05:44:27 PM
There is consistency in the story if you accept that the experiment is designed to track the actually unfolding universe rather than possibilities; it doesn't matter what other billion little things are going on out of our view. It turns out otherwise, but that doesn't mean Forest is "wrong", although he might be (morally?) wrong about about pursuing the particular line he wanted to follow.

Hmm. I don't think that's right. The experiment was at least initially set up to prove that Forest was not responsible for Amaya's death because causality wouldn't allow it to be any other way.

However, it is true that he does appear to shift his position a bit when the multiverse theory yields practical advantages. The argument then becomes 'Yeah, but it's not really her if one hair is different, is it?'. Perhaps that's why I'm not convinced the story is internally consistent.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 05:49:27 PM
As I just said, he didn't believe the words he was saying; they were delivered (thanks to Nick Offerman's good acting) in such a way that they sounded doctrinarian rather than his sincerely held belief. He may have been trying to convince himself above all others.

He's clearly aware of many worlds theory even if he doesn't believe it, it's true.

NoSleep

So is ambiguity off the fictional menu?

Johnny Yesno

#142
Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 06:00:52 PM
So is ambiguity off the fictional menu?

Within the realm of the story, Forest was wrong. There's no reason to think that the simulation becomes this universe.

Actually, I'm getting lost off here. You are saying that Forest hoped that the simulation would become this (or our or the real) universe but with Amaya still alive, right? Or are you saying that the simulated universe where Amaya is alive would become another universe with as much 'realness' (struggling for terms here) as our universe.

I think Garland was implying nested universes on to infinity rather than some kind of mobius strip of universes.

Sorry for all the late edits. Lots of thoughts keep occurring.

olliebean

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on May 30, 2020, 05:41:48 PM
Yes, but I can't think what difference that makes. If you copy everything exactly, then all the atoms that hold every thought the person had at the time will also be copied, and therefore the copy will continue it's 'consciousness' at the point the original was destroyed. Which is continuity, right?

Not from the point of view of the original.

NoSleep

I think he wanted to convince himself that there was no other possibility than what led to her death.

I'm not sure why he or Lily were planted back in the simulation with foreknowledge, other than to change what happened in both cases (for what reason was that even required?). Was he not going to have her boyfriends murdered all over again? Previously Forest had acquiesced in those murders to fulfil what had been determined but knowing that it all faded away at the point of Lily's death. That's the problem; why can't they see beyond that moment? Does nothing exist after then? Has that now changed?


Johnny Yesno

#145
Quote from: olliebean on May 30, 2020, 06:23:25 PM
Not from the point of view of the original.

Well, therein lies the philosophical conundrum: what would happen if the teleport went wrong and failed to destroy the original individual? Which is the legitimate copy? Should they both survive? Which one gets to live the original person's life, go back to their spouse, kids, etc.?

Edit: actually, your point was about continuity:

In which case, the original enters the teleport and expects to arrive at the destination. Their last experience would be the 'leaving' stage which is entirely within the experience of continuity. The next experience that that specific configuration of atoms, with all its stored memories, experiences is 'arrival'. Of course, that raises the question of whether knowledge that this is actually creation and destruction changes anything.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 06:26:28 PM
I think he wanted to convince himself that there was no other possibility than what led to her death.

Yes. I'm not sure there's much material difference between believing and wanting to believe, though.

QuoteI'm not sure why he or Lily were planted back in the simulation with foreknowledge, other than to change what happened in both cases (for what reason was that even required?).

He did explain in quite woolly terms but basically he seemed to think that they'd both appreciate what they had more if they knew how things had previously been. Wrong again! (in Lily's case).

QuoteWas he not going to have her boyfriends murdered all over again? Previously Forest had acquiesced in those murders to fulfil what had been determined but knowing that it all faded away at the point of Lily's death. That's the problem; why can't they see beyond that moment? Does nothing exist after then? Has that now changed?

I think everything was supposed to be different. No murders, none of that bad stuff. I'm still struggling to see the logic behind the prediction barrier other than everything was deterministic up until that point and then it was free will after Lily's action. As I say, not altogether internally consistent.

NoSleep

But we see Forest reunited with his wife and child which means he's gone back further than Lily, who has started two days back. They have been placed where they have, presumably, by Forest's chief scientist and girlfriend (he was only an entrepreneur with a "dream"). This new Devs is not the dream of a man driven by the death of his daughter but has been created anyway. But Lily's boyfriend, presumably, is going to do exactly what he did before, which led to his death (but maybe not this time). The question is why Devs even needs to exist anymore?

Noodle Lizard

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 08:33:18 PM
But we see Forest reunited with his wife and child which means he's gone back further than Lily, who has started two days back. They have been placed where they have, presumably, by Forest's chief scientist and girlfriend (he was only an entrepreneur with a "dream").

I don't think the idea is that they were "dropped in" at a specific point. We're just seeing their consciousness (at least the one we see throughout the main timeline of the show) reintegrated into the simulation, which includes essentially infinite different layers and "versions" of themselves. So the Lily we see in the ending sequence wasn't just dropped in at that point - that version of her was also born, grew up, got her job etc. - but something about those final two days triggered a memory or some kind of recollection from the consciousness that experienced everything we saw throughout the show.

Same with Forest - it's not that he was dropped any further back than Lily and suddenly woke up to find his wife and daughter were still there, it's that each version of them in each layer of the simulation now has awareness of the "main timeline" of events - triggered, in Lily's case at least, by the point where things started to diverge. In the show, for narrative reasons, it's the beginning of the show, but realistically it could have been triggered by any number of things. Like deja vu, I'd imagine.

Johnny Yesno

That's how I see it too, Noodle Lizard.

Quote from: NoSleep on May 30, 2020, 08:33:18 PM
The question is why Devs even needs to exist anymore?

To run the simulation.

Why it would need to exist within the simulation is another matter. I'll have to go back and check, but I think that Devs was absent from the field Lily in which and Forest were standing.