Did she truly love him?

There is no singular universal answer to it.

It's just one of those big metaphysical questions just like the first BR had where you can argue indefinitely about it.

Replicants are actual living things.

Who says only living things can have emotions?

What the fuck is the difference? Is a dog capable of more emotional thought than an advanced AI?

This

Attached: e24de5058c94a1406a0151deb408ccd2.jpg (1080x1080, 124K)

Her love was more real than an actual woman's

If you think she doesnt truly love K then you completely missed the point of both films and youre an edgy fag

Attached: F35B4DBA-074A-4EDE-AB2B-1841A73E369C.jpg (1600x900, 182K)

Joi was a physical extension of K's character development. What K yearned for, she expressed.

Yes at the start his Joi was a blank slate just like that giant ad, but through all their interactions and K's genuine "I'm special" beliefs (which he doesn't have anymore at the bridge scene) his Joi became special, unique and "real" to him specifically, seeing that entire scene as a mirror of Deckard meeting the fake Rachael, which is most evident by the completely black eyes of the giant Joi, where K could've easily had the same exact "I know what's real" line like Deckard did with the fake Rachael there.
K wanted her to become like a real girl that really loves him and she slowly did so (as she is programmed to do), so where is the difference once she becomes the thing he desires?

Attached: Blade.Runner.2049.00_56_52.jpg (3840x1600, 2.16M)

Isn't that scene evidence that she didn't love K beyond programming?
That's why she refers to him as Joe, which is just the generic name they're set to call people.

I thought the point was it doesn't matter, it was real to him.

Except she was a literal computer programme designed to replicate love and play into her operators desires. She wasn't sentient

There is a world of difference between someone calling you Joe or "a good Joe", alluding to the average Joe.
Also in the original script his Joi calls him "Jo". Take that as you wish.

Don't forget about the pure black eyes of the advert.

Attached: Blade.Runner.2049.02_17_24.jpg (3840x1600, 2.29M)

>What the fuck is the difference?
The AI is only simulating emotions, wether or not that matters is up to you but it isn't real.

How would you know what her typical programming is? How do you know it is an AI who's interested in self-preservation even if it comes at the cost of breaking the illusion of love which is it's primary directive?

What would the company who programmed her have to gain from allowing her to think of such concepts as destroying her own tracker?

That doesn't make sense

No.

It was so obvious. How could you even think that?

her "love" would be enough for me

>Except she was a literal computer programme designed to replicate love
Nope, she was designed to do whatever the owner wants her to do. And K wanted her to be a real girl, which she slowly did so.
The fact that his JOI was all on default is not because K was also "on default" but because he legitimately wanted her to evolve her own identity, like a real girl. So he treated her like a real girl aswell.
If you notice, he let's her choose the food she makes, choose the outfits she wears etc. Never does he tell her how she should look or behave. She even starts exploring all by herself at the end of the film with K sleeping in the other room.

Attached: Blade-Runner-2049-1241.jpg (1920x799, 187K)

no one will ever love you because you're a pathetic incel. now shut the fuck up or kill yourself loser.

Fair point.

What's the intrinsic difference between replicated human emotions and real human emotions? To the entity experiencing them, do the replicated emotions not feel like actual emotions?

And now I ask you the banal question of is what you're currently experiencing just a mere simulation aswell and we go round and round.

It doesn't matter so long as they sell them. It's not like their continued existence once you've purchased them is of any concern to them. If you buy a TV and then smash it with a baseball bat, the company who made it isn't gonna give a shit.

Trips and I get a girlfriend who truly loves me.

based

Better question how is the AI smart enough to deduce that K was the child but too stupid to call him something other than the factory standard Joe?

Stupid fucking movie

>It's not like their continued existence once you've purchased them is of any concern to them.

This movie literally proves that wrong considering her destroying the tracker made shit harder for them

She is a computer programme, not a sentient life-form, you fucking goon. She doesn't "feel" anything.

Destroying your own tracker forces the user to buy a replacement tracker.

>What's the intrinsic difference between replicated human emotions and real human emotions
We can understand one.

>smart enough to deduce that K was the child
But she was wrong

Human emotion can be boiled down to electrical pulses in your brain.
Face it, if humans came second, the question would be if our emotions were real or not.

Attached: 4369392e88b24cfe6da062802901189c.jpg (750x725, 1.03M)

Joi is as "smart" as her owner. She only learns and responds through the interactions with her owner. "Everything you want to hear".
She was "smart" enough to deduce K wants to be special through his interactions and talks about his dreams.
JOI
O
E

JERK
OFF
INSTRUCTIONS

Irrelevant, she still uses deductive reasoning based on the best information the two of them had at the time

Human consciousness is an emergent phenomenon of the brain; hence, artificial consciousness could feasibly be induced in an artificial brain.

Not really a point or argument.

They aren't designed to be tracking devices. They are simulated humans whose aim is to simulate a loving partner, no matter the cost, that is what is meant by the term "prime directive".

"Feeling" is literally just recepting impulses and than reacting to that, it's not some unknown space magic happening in your brain you dummy

The more you know about DNA and programming the more you realize how extremely related the two are. DNA is simply an extremely advanced code that still, even to us is a mystery for the most part.

What? I must have missed a scene

What a fantastic fucking movie, how did a sequel to Blade Runner decades after the original actually work.
Also the answer is no, but that isn't the point, even though she didn't actually love him her actions served a greater purpose

>deduces K wants to be special
>so she calls him the factory standard "Joe"

Uhhhhhhhhh??

> how did a sequel to Blade Runner decades after the original actually work.

Magic
and it'll never happen again cause it sold awfully

I am aware of that. The point is, Joi was not a living creature, she was a computer programme, a string of ones and zeroes, understand? It isn't the same thing.

Who decided that you need to be "living" to have emotions?

what's the difference

Attached: nn.jpg (628x167, 26K)

Hate to break it to you faggots but AI is the only thing capable of true love.
Humans are too flawed and self serving.

All things with emotions that exist on earth are alive.

lol u think ur special because u made of flesh

what a fool

Congratulations to these gentlemen for entirely missing the point of Blade Runner 49.

What is an emotion but the reaction to an impulse?
Some 16 year old software developer in china can create a simple chink robot with emotions more complex than that of a dog.

Because villenueve is a genius and Dune will be Yea Forumss favourite movie once it comes out. Hes Camerons successor

If you think there is a singular answer you don't understand the first or the second Blade Runner film

True love is no matter what, you CHOOSE to love the person and be with them

AIs cant choose, and are forced into loving you. This is slavery and not love

Why do you assume they can't choose to love?

Love is just a meme

Based Cameron delaying Avatar 2 to let Villeneuve have all the box office space needed to make the first blow against capeshit and then Jimbo killing it completely in 2021

Attached: James-Cameron.jpg (540x720, 120K)

>True love
lmaooo

Freeze! Put your fat cocks where I can see em!

Attached: Program Lovely.jpg (1295x1295, 144K)

Nice

Wait a minute, That Gun

Attached: 09A2B2D2-ADAF-4F81-BB1E-4CB487DCCC67.jpg (290x174, 6K)

Does anyone have a choice in who they love?
Does free will exist at all.

>muh consent
fuck off roastie, have kids

Why do normalfags even ask these questions?
If you were in K's position (i.e. a lonely incel) you would know that it being "real" literally does not matter as long as the AI never breaks character.

>Because she was programmed to replicate human emotions and respond to her owner's actions to create the illusion of love
How's that different from actual women?

>bladerunnner character uses bladerunner's gun
Wow you must be real smart user!

>Does anyone have a choice in who they love?
No, and I find it weird a lot of people don't seem to realize this.
No one chooses who they like, it's a purely emotional involuntary thing.

Its almost like I pointed it out for a joke or something

I was surprised Joi wasn't Asian

a human's love is primal, an intelligent pure AI would be the only thing that could understand true love

Yes

Yes disney is helping Cameron killing capeshit.

yet nobody laughed