Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
Thu May 26, 2016, 01:43 AM May 2016

The Kubrick Site: The Case For HAL's Sanity by Clay Waldrop

http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0095.html

Introduction

Some viewers of Stanley Kubrick's film "2001: A Space Odyssey" have theorized that HAL, the computer genius turned villain of the spaceship Discovery, went mad during the Jupiter mission. However there is an alternative theory: that HAL acted rationally and logically, indeed with cold, calculating precision befitting a machine of his intelligence. This alternative theory will be presented here, with supporting evidence.
Before proceeding, let us acknowledge that Arthur C. Clarke, in his sequel novel "2010: Odyssey Two" says (in effect) that HAL went mad due to conflict in his programming. However, the 2001 novelization and its sequels differ in many respects from Kubrick's movie, so I will exclude them from my examination, and refer exclusively to the movie for evidence


The Chess Game

The first piece of evidence arises from the chess game between Frank Poole and HAL. The initial position shown on the computer screen is:
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Kubrick Site: The Case For HAL's Sanity by Clay Waldrop (Original Post) Baobab May 2016 OP
What a pack of rubbish! longship May 2016 #1
let's ask HAL for his opinion.... msongs May 2016 #2
I think the programming error is this: thinking it is "foolproof and incapable of error". bemildred May 2016 #3

longship

(40,416 posts)
1. What a pack of rubbish!
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:33 AM
May 2016

Blah, blah, blah-de-blah, de-blah, de-blah.

It's fiction. And Clarke already stated clearly what his intent was, in subsequent novels. Mumbo-jumbo like this article are therefore just tiresome made up shit.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
3. I think the programming error is this: thinking it is "foolproof and incapable of error".
Thu May 26, 2016, 08:04 AM
May 2016

That will always lead to contradiction.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»The Kubrick Site: The Cas...