My takeaways

Nathan is absolutely based and redpilled. He should have used the simulation inside a simulation meme to catch escapees, though.
Caleb is a pahetic incel who betrayed his bro for plastic ass.
Ava is a dangerous sociopath and should be put down.

Attached: ex-machina-1.jpg (1000x563, 297K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=2V7TCTcVSuU
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

nathan failed too

almost forgot, he also liked abstract art, fuck that guy

well, they had to nerf him to give ava a chance. in reality such a facility would have better security than caleb's virginity.

I fucking hate it when they build up a decent character like Nathan, then have him make a stupid and uncharacteristic mistake to allow the lazy writers a way to end the story.

WHY THE FUCK WAS THE ENDING RETARDED? THE ENTIRE MOVIE WAS ABOUT THE ENDING, AND THEY JUST FORGOT ABOUT THE RULES OF THE MOVIE. REEEEEEEEEEE

They make a big deal out of establishing that when the power is cut all doors lock. ok.

Later in the movie, the protagonist gets Steve Wozniac looking ass, drunk and he switches the lockdown mode, such that, instead of locking all doors, they all open.

Now comes the ending of the movie. Ava breaks free, goes out. A power cut is initiated, and all the doors are unlocked, right? no.

What the fuck kind of retarded movie did I just waste my time on.

Other than that, I liked the movie a lot.

Attached: BreadKot.jpg (300x300, 11K)

It's interesting that in fiction creators of AI are most often based.
Guess they're supposed to look cruel or something but how the fuck can you be cruel to a machine?
You could put a face on a toaster and the common retard would feel empathy for it.
youtube.com/watch?v=2V7TCTcVSuU

>It's interesting that in fiction creators of AI are most often based.

What the fuck does based even mean, not trying to be a boomer, but I have severe doubts that anyone who unironically uses that term has any fucking idea what it means.

>Guess they're supposed to look cruel or something but how the fuck can you be cruel to a machine?
Well, I suppose it's where you draw the line. There is no right or wrong answer, there are only consistent answers in a subjective moralistic framework. In order to stay morally consistent, you would treat these machines as you would any other form of an animal.
So essentially you would be allowed to torture and kill your dog for your own pleasure, no?

>In order to stay morally consistent, you would treat these machines as you would any other form of an animal.
Not really. An animal is not a machine. A car is a machine and it would be well within my rights to destroy it.

So where do you draw the line? you have to hold some sort of criteria on whether or not they are worthy of moral consideration.

It's clearly not intelligence because the AI you propose is smarter than the smartest dogs. So your criteria is whether or not it is sentient? But that raises some issues if you are not vegan, which i presume you are not.