The morals would either be entirely human in nature, or if as would be likely for the military, then sociopathic in nature. And the Rabbit seemed like neither of these to me. For these same reasons, I think we can rule out an actual human genius. Vernor Vinge seems to point in a few possible directions for clues on the identity of Rabbit.
The strongest is the one first suggested, that Rabbit is an AI program. The strongest evidence for this view is the very fact that Alfred Vaz ridicules the idea, given that he is in the process of deceiving these same intelligence colleagues. Vaz seems to know what Rabbit is. For one, Rabbit notes that he had left behind so many clues including the carrot greens as to his identity, and Vaz confirms this in Chapter 32, when he is convinced that Rabbit was the Next Very Bad Thing due, in part, to the carrot greens left in his office network in Mumbai.
However, Vaz does mention that the minds behind Rabbit had been reduced to ignorance after the revocation attack, and it is not clear that these minds are Rabbit's creators or Rabbit itself. Rabbit may be DHS. This is a weak argument, but in Chapter 33, Bob Gu, Jr. At one point, she says "Heh. We'll figure it out. A network attack on a bio-prepped victim - that's a technology that's way to interesting to ignore. Rabbit is some kind of ego-level AI program. I had a sharp sense of deja vu when comparing the following statements:.
That moment was such a reliable source of inspiration There in the labile freshness of new consciousness, answers would drift into view. For hard problems, he was like lesser beings; he had to sleep on the question. Then in the morning, the old intuition would deliver remarkable insights.
Could Rabbit have been "born" or at least instantiated when Robert regains his self-awareness or as Robert said, his "marbles"? There is precedent for this view in Vinge's other novels. I think Mr. Rabbit is created by Alice, during the mind training collapse - and he uses her family, in particular grandpa, to break free of the purpose she designed him for. I think if you work in anti-terrorism, its way more useful to have "childish" true AI then the socio-pathic AI. Should one escape, its limitations allow for easier capture.
In the s, the Whitlam government abolished the "White Australia Policy and launched the Racial Discrimination Act, which made racial discrimination illegal. The speaker has written this essay in descriptive, comprehensive terms which convey to the audience how special and remarkable her mother was, and to share some of her teachings with the rest of the world.
Parbury, ; Lippman, Every country has its own unique stories regarding races and how it treated the Indigenous peoples of the land. The movie Rabbit Proof Fence told one such story. Yet, conservative historian and journalist — Keith Windschuttle — had published articles and books in contemplation of denying the accuracy of the film and the.
This was unexpected discovery for us and at the same time for Errol when dolly refuses to go with Errol even though she loves him. Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. Discovery Essay by Timothy Harfield, y12 Composers show how confronting and meaningful discoveries can be through how their characters and settings of their works are depicted. I agree with this statement, because the discoveries made within a text by the audience are there to piece together the picture of which is the texts underlying motive.
Both of these texts display themes of discrimination and assimilation towards aboriginals, giving us the chance to discover and understand their struggles. Discoveries can be both confronting and meaningful. Now, we can't blame him exactly—it is pretty cool to see robots fighting while digitally made to look like different fantasy creatures. But it does show that Rabbit is a little distractible. He's also just kind of childish, as Braun's analysts note.
For instance, when he wrecks Alfred's plans to take over the world via mind control, Rabbit responds to the victory with:. We're not saying that Rabbit is wrong to be proud of beating Alfred at this moment. We're only saying that someone who thinks "I won.
I mean, we saved mankind" clearly shows what he cares most about—and it's not mankind. And why should Rabbit care about mankind—especially if Rabbit's real identity is as an artificial intelligence program that is roaming free in the interwebs.
In fact, Rabbit cares so little about mankind that, when he discovers Alfred's secret, his next idea is "how do I get me some of that? This is Rabbit again being childish and self-centered.
Though we'll confess: the idea of mind control technology does sound fun—as long we're the ones using it. If you were a super-powerful artificial intelligence, able to manipulate people, and always showing off, would you choose to look like a rabbit? We wouldn't we'd be an eagle riding a lightning bolt, yeah! I didn't see any implication that free software was a problem, as long as it runs on top of the SHE.
In fact, the certificate system probably makes it possible for the GPL to be self-enforcing. And I won't touch the question of whether that would be a good idea. Which, you'll note, can be turned into a chainsaw. Nothing in the book implied that it was a child-safe chainsaw.
Yeah, I think that's it. FTaFH and SS reminded me, in tone, of Tunc Blumenthal's description of his experience of the near-singularity, just before his accident. Sure there is some adolescent angst, but also a kind of euphoria over what lies ahead. What is the difference? I think you have it. Vinge sees this bifurcation in the road. Down one leg you have a rapid progression to the singularity via a nearly unconstrained personal and economic freedom.
Down the other leg you have terrorists and governments contributing to a positive feedback loop of increased centralization of power. In the latter case, the story isn't in the center as far as an anarchist like Vinge is concerned. The story is at the periphery where minor players are largely ignored and can operate without immediately drawing the attentions of the big guys.
The RE world is far from perfect, but given the conditions it's pretty close to optimal. I would be very surprised if Vinge, a member of the Free Software Foundation with libertarian roots, would be in favor of SHE, which is, after all, a massive DRM scheme combined with unstoppable govenment snooping, and would consider it "optimal". Not, however, entirely sure -- if you want to make a case that the "rigid control or mass death" viewpoint is a bias of the book's government operatives, go for it.
I am quite sure that Vinge is quite sure that the Emergency sucks rocks. If the Bush administration hasn't subjected you to searches without a warrant, it's for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because you're an American. Rainbows End: Who was the Rabbit?
Damien Neil. Reply to author. Report message as abuse. Show original message. Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message. What, no discussion of Rainbows End yet? David Dyer-Bennet. Hal Canary. Will in New Haven. Tapio Erola. Hardy Hestert. Mark Atwood. Brion K. Glenn Dowdy. Andrew Plotkin. Wim Lewis. Michael Grosberg. David Goldfarb.
0コメント