Was Nathan's creation a failure? Was Ava actually capable

she did whatever it took to escape and make sure no one who knew what she was could do anything about it. pretty human actions to me

>>81430379
But she had no reason to imprison Caleb, they could have left together and went their separate ways. Caleb was too emotionally attached to her to reveal her secret.

Nathan's creation was a success. She behaved how a woman would behave, Backstabbing people while pretending to like them

simulating emotion is what real women do

>>81430430
Yes but did she genuinely experience those emotions? Was she ever capable of "liking" anything?

When Siri says "I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch that" it doesn't feel genuine remorse or embarrassment that it hasn't understood your command, it's been programmed to say "I'm sorry" to create a more realistic human-like interaction.
Was Ava like Siri in that her facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc were merely coded into her to create a more realistic user experience or was she genuinely capable of experiencing those emotions?

File: ex-machina-nsfw-05-sc-wtf-watch-the-film-saint-pauly.jpg (1MB, 1200x1200px)

1MB, 1200x1200px

>>81430351
How can she put Asian skin on her body and still come out white?

>>81430525
>Yes but did she genuinely experience those emotions? Was she ever capable of "liking" anything?

does it matter? Haven't seen the movie in a while but I remember the point of Ava was to see if she was able to escape Nathan's facility. In the end she did.

>>81430379
he would've snitched

>>81430588
meant to quote
>>81430423

>>81430583

P E R K Y
E
R
K
Y

>>81430585
>does it matter?
Yes, Nathan and Caleb discuss earlier in the film:
>Caleb raises an integral point when he likens Ava to a chess computer and points out the inherent flaws of “testing” such a device.
>“You can play it to find out if it makes good moves, but that won’t tell you if it knows that it’s playing chess. And it won’t tell you if it knows what chess is.”
>Nathan agrees: “So it’s simulation versus actual.”

The very same principles apply to Ava. Yes, she is able to make good “moves” (showing affection toward Caleb, earning his sympathy and confidence), but is she actually aware of what she is doing?

Naïve, lonely Caleb becomes enamored with Ava, and she seems to reciprocate such feelings during their many conversations; yet it is never quite clear whether Ava is actually experiencing these feelings or merely mirroring Caleb. She says things to him that indicate genuine emotion (“Sometimes at night I’m wondering if you’re watching me … And I hope you are”), but does she understand what she is saying?

Does the computer know what chess is?1

>>81430674
Fair point but Caleb isn't entirely an unwitting victim.

He had full knowledge that Ava was a robot being tested, and she knows that he is the tester so you would say she understood the game as a whole.

Are we not all superficially simulating emotion?

She clearly wasn't simulating her hatred for Nathan.

>>81430351
i think it was a succes. she actually went to watch people at an intersection in the end, didn't she? No reason for her to do that if she only said it to be more likeable.

>>81431121
Did she genuinely wants to escape her imprisonment in the house and Nathan's heartless treatment, or if she is simply playing the game for which she was programmed? Killing Nathan was an essential step in escaping, arguably done out of necessity rather than hatred.

Toward the end of the film, when Nathan reveals to Caleb that Ava was using Caleb as a means of escape and has no true feelings for him, Nathan takes this as proof that Ava is a true AI:
>“Ava was a rat in a maze, and I gave her one way out. To escape, she’d have to use self-awareness, imagination, manipulation, sexuality, empathy, and she did.”

This interpretation is one way of analyzing Ava’s actions; another would be to look at them as the movements of a cold, calculating machine just like the chess-playing computer (manipulation, planning future actions/moves, setting traps).
Ava wins the game (she kills Nathan, traps Caleb in the house, and escapes to the outside world), but just because a computer can beat a human at chess does not mean that it is just as human as its opponent; rather, it’s simply a better chess player.

>>81431276
She killed him by literally stabbing him in the back and twisting the knife. That seems pretty emotional

>>81431038
In a way, our personalities are the result of "coding" from genetics and external environment, the question is is there a difference between that and Ava having emotions coded into her by Nathan?

>>81431346
Kyoko stabbed him in the back, and neither Kyoko nor Ava displayed ANY emotion when killing Nathan.

Its the whole "at which point can a creation not be owned anymore" discussion.

It will be a shitstorm when(not if) human technology reaches that level.Sadly none of us here will be here to see it happen.