Ming the Mechanic:
Matrix Reloaded

The NewsLog of Flemming Funch
 Matrix Reloaded2003-05-06 23:59
picture by Flemming Funch

The new matrix movie has premiere here soon. I'm definitely not alone in being excited about that. Paul Hughes on Planet P:
This article in Slate came out a few days ago and it sums up nicely what I always felt about the matrix after seeing the first film - in the matrix we can do anything. Since the late 1980's after probing in depth the potential of consciousness becoming software via nanotechnology and perhaps quantum computers, I have endeavored to visualize the future of reality enhanced by fully customized hyper-intelligent neurological circuits and synthaesthic hyper-sensory pathways. This potential is the primary theme of my book-in-progress. As this article points out Neo shows us the way:
"The real source of the fascination with The Matrix is that, despite all appearances, the movie is not a dystopia. Rather, it's a utopia, a geek paradise. The Matrix is a sci-fi John Hughes movie, in which a misfit learns that he's actually cool. (Think Harry Potter with guns.) At the software company where Keanu Reeves works, his boss might as well be the principal castigating Judd Nelson in The Breakfast Club when he says: "You have a problem with authority, Mr. Anderson. You believe that you are special. That somehow the rules do not apply to you. Obviously, you are mistaken." Of course, we learn that the oppressive Figure of Authority is the one who is mistaken. But instead of going to the prom, Keanu gets to pack heat, learn kung fu, wear a black trench coat and sunglasses, and, to top it off, he gets a hot, ass-kicking girlfriend who sports fetish wear. What kind of dystopia is this?"
Read on, more good stuff. Also, if you have broadband, go and see the animated short movie series Animatrix, outlining the history of the matrix.

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic]



7 May 2003 @ 07:10 by invictus : I can't wait...
To see that movie! The trailer for it is great. And I love the bit from the Slate article, LOL. Right on nail, it is.

I don't necessarily think we need "fully customized hyper-intelligent neurological circuits and synthaesthic hyper-sensory pathways" to realize our potentials. When I imagine futures that don't look grim or make me want to move to Triton, I've always thought that we'd be able to live in them with or without bio-nano-neuro-mechanical upgrades. If we don't get some OTHER things straight first, I don't know how much good those would really do us. It's the "human" things that determine HOW we use all the awesome gadgets, and those are a little out of whack. Like... those "fully customized hyper-intelligent neurological circuits and synthaesthic hyper-sensory pathways" could revolutionize our reality, but they are also the technology that would help make the Matrix (in a literal sense, direct from the movie) or something like it possible. And when I look at some of the people wielding the power right now, I get the feeling they'd have no qualms whatsoever about doing something like that. It's a question of where our focus is/should be. We just shouldn't get too "wired" before we get a little bit more sanity : ) . That's where my focus tends to be. Hmm... I may have wandered a bit from the original topic. Hee hee. I certainly don't have anything against the odd tech-toy. Thanks for the post, Ming.  

7 May 2003 @ 08:00 by catana : Love the Matrix
Can't wait to see Reloaded, but I agree with Andy. We spend too much time oohing and aahing over the possibilities of mentally augmented humans and way too little exploring how to use the brains we already have. Once technology is affordable, anyone can use it for any purpose. We have the ability right now to make sensible decisions, but we keep looking for the uber-mind that will do it for us.  

7 May 2003 @ 12:25 by invictus : Nope Paul...
I'm not saying that. I don't think the brakes should be slammed on technological development. Like you said, it probably wouldn't be possible. Even if it were, doing it would stifle creativity, and that is the LAST thing we need right now. I'm just saying that, for my part, I'm going to focus on the human side. That's where I'd put my money and time. Technology will develop, of course. It's just that, if I had to put the emphasis on one issue or the other, I would definitely focus on the first one. Perhaps I'd do that BECAUSE of the fact that technological development IS pretty much assured (for the immediate future, anyway). Our growth, in terms of sanity, ect., often seems all but assured. I think that's the side that needs the most deliberate care right now, so that as new technologies inevitably role along, we're less likely to abuse them. I like your approach; both issues most certainly have to be considered.  

7 May 2003 @ 12:28 by catana : Speaking for myself
Paul, I don't think technological development could be stopped, even if anyone wanted to. Even concerning technologies which will have unknowable consequences for the future, I would advise only caution rather than some of the hysterical luddism that is a freqent response. What I was directing my comment at is the lack of balance--a fascination with technology, much of which doesn't exist and may never exist, at the expense of becoming more knowledgeable about what does exist, an underused brain. My impression is that Andy was saying the same thing, but I'll have to let him speak for himself.  

7 May 2003 @ 12:39 by catana : Beat me to it, Andy
Stifling technology would certainly stifle creativity. I'm fascinated by any technology that has the potential for enlarging what it means to be human. That includes genetic manipulation, though there are certainly many dangers on that path. Doesn't some of the fear of such technologies come from a rigid concept of what it does mean to be human? Why should our evolution stop where we are right now?  

7 May 2003 @ 13:02 by invictus : Yeah Catana...
Definitely. Using various technologies to "evolve" is a truly fascinating prospect (that is often a subject on Ming's log, so I'd imagine he knows quite a bit in that area). Down the road that'll most likely be the only way for us to survive. My worries come from that fact that we seem to abuse the technology we have now quite a bit, and I'd like to work on the underlying problem. Not to the absolute exclusion of new technologies (some may even help in addressing that problem); just as a priority. The rigid concept of humanity is one of the big sanity issues our culture has, I think. The idea that what we have/are now is the last, best, unimprovable, divinely mandated way for humans to exist is completely insane. I'd add that I think changes in that arena should be a matter of choice, not technological "obligation" ("well, we have it, so I guess we absolutely must use it, even if we don't like it and it's destructive... all in the name of painful but necessary 'progress'") or force. Exactly as you said above; caution and consideration of the consequences. And the knowledge that evolution is flexible; the "next step" isn't set in stone. It's what we chose to make workable, as long as it's not something that destroys us or our planet. AND making sure that no one like John Ashcroft has much say in how amazing new technologies are put to use. ; )  

7 May 2003 @ 13:26 by catana : Right on!
Abuse of technology, which means, as far as I'm concerned, its use by the powers that be, for the advancement of power, capital accumulation, etc. The other underlying problem is that science and technology aren't a part of any school curriculum, so the public is swayed more by the mass media spin than by reasoned consideration of the facts. So, my two platforms are changing education, and giving people more control over their lives and the technologies that impact them.  

10 May 2003 @ 15:53 by quidnovi : The divine Prakriti :-)
"I don't necessarily think we need 'fully customized hyper-intelligent neurological circuits and synthaesthic hyper-sensory pathways' to realize our potentials."---Invictus

Neither do I, Andy. Last time I logged into the Matrix it was called the Maya and the name of the game was "Life on Earth" (or is it?)


20 Dec 2014 @ 02:35 by Thais @ : IktrkzHFmxGn
thanks for posting this, siu wah... this is vince, by the way, ah leung's feirnd.:Dyou've got an email i can reach you at? I had completed a book translation that i hope you could have a look and maybe proof-read for me... the book's called "The Society of the Spectacle."my email is thee.spectacles@gmail.comthanks.Vince  

23 Dec 2014 @ 19:47 by MaSum @ : poOfOSgENcyrEy
thanks for posting this, siu wah... this is vince, by the way, ah leung's freind.:Dyou've got an email i can reach you at? I had completed a book translation that i hope you could have a look and maybe proof-read for me... the book's called "The Society of the Spectacle."my email is thee.spectacles@gmail.comthanks.Vince  

29 Apr 2016 @ 05:41 by Margie @ : DlAkFKVnuKp
Yup, that'll do it. You have my apiopceatirn.  

Other stories in
2012-01-01 00:20: New year wish
2009-10-27 23:59: Compassion Exercise
2009-10-26 23:48: The power of appreciation
2008-02-21 13:04: A Samurai’s Creed
2008-02-20 15:38: Experiencing
2007-11-07 00:50: Say what you feel
2007-11-06 23:38: Steve Habib Rose
2007-06-21 19:16: How does one have a blogversation?
2007-06-20 21:53: Self-portraits
2007-06-15 16:26: Life instructions

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic] [PermaLink]? 

Link to this article as: http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-000773.htm
Main Page: ming.tv