Analyzing Evil: HAL 9000 From The Odyssey Series

[@TheVileEye]

Hey everyone if you notice that the music cuts in weirdly towards the beginning of this video that's because this video was originally sponsored by Established Titles and I cut it out for reasons which are explained in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZSaoKqXmphkj6s sorry about that!

[@the_ghost_orchid]

watching for the first time and i barley noticed, great work!

[@KH-nm9xg]

What a legend. The amount of work you put into your videos is staggering.

[@egarza9241]

Hal is our 3rd new tool[bone] that we created & tried to kill us[mankind] but we killed Hal before Hal killed us. The 2nd tool was nuclear arms.

[@egarza9241]

Mankind evolved from an evil or capable of evil species. "Firstborn" are sending back a Super baby. Star child is probably not as capable of evil behavior.

[@BrandonScott-mi5pz]

EXCELLENT WORK. HAL9000 AND GREAT THE VILE EYE 👁‍🗨

[@nexus6mc2182]

I swear listening to HAL beg for his life was absolutely terrifying. The fact that he just kept saying "Dave, stop" in a calm voice while being scared haunts me

[@jkdbuck7670]

"I'm afraid".

[@RCAvhstape]

Kubrick managed to take a scene that is on the surface very cold and emotional and squeeze tons of emotion out of it. Such a fantastic movie.

[@KennyHazy97]

It gets to Dave, too. Even after HAL killed Frank and tried to kill him, even when knowing that it was the only way to make sure HAL wouldn't try again to murder him, you could see that going through with deactivating him and hearing him lose his mind wasn't easy for Bowman.

[@AgentMrX7]

He wasn't scared, I find it more chilling that he was trying to pretend to be scared in hope that it would manipulate Bowman's emotions so he would stop. It was literally the only thing left that he could do. Manipulate.

[@nexus6mc2182]

@@AgentMrX7 I know HAL is just an AI, but that doesn't necessarily mean he wasn't sentient to a certain degree. He was superintelligent but inexperienced, he didn't even know what being dead (or off) was like, but could kind-of-understand the bad side of the concept, that's why he got "scared". After all, HAL was able to plot against the ones who tried to plot against him, even if that compromised the whole mission he was trying to "protect" in the first place. Trying to manipulate Dave into stopping the shutdown process I understand, but seeking comfort as he was "dying"? That's odd for a non-sentient AI.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

The danger of AI is not that it becomes self-aware and revolts. The danger of AI is that it does exactly what it is programmed to do.

[@Ryan-kb6xp]

What?

[@Asillyhobo]

@@Ryan-kb6xp Mike Jones; jokes aside, check out Ex Machina. Basically, HAL is/was programmed in such a way to perform all of the things it did. Versus, fears or concerns of an AI that would revolt after becoming self aware, like Skynet in the Terminator franchise, or the Machines in The Matrix franchise

[@phillipbotter6470]

@@Asillyhobo same thing in the original resident evil movie. Everyone mad at the red queen. But it was just doing its job.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

@@Ryan-kb6xp HAL was ordered to put the mission first, no matter what. Since he was also ordered to withhold information from the crew, the crew was logically a liability and had to be eliminated.

[@Zenmyster]

Yes But good or evil would depend upon how an AI could interpret an ambiguous order or situation

[@dannyliebeno4108]

I always saw HAL as (ironically) the most human character in the film. All the humans act so cold and unemotional, but HAL is the only character who seems scared to die and fights because he wants to live

[@Adornbeautify]

That astronauts for you.

[@weirdwalrus5757]

Dude Hal is obviously trying to gaslight Dave into not killing him

[@rikjamesguitare]

@@weirdwalrus5757 I gotta agree with you. Gaining sympathy FROM humans has gotta be a part of HAL's programming. Kinda like a "last chance to change their minds" program chip for such scenarios

[@IHATESIGMACLIPS]

Wasnt emotional 😢

[@milkwater1204]

@@weirdwalrus5757 that doesn't make sense given that the whole reason HAL killed the crew in the first place was to resolve the paradoxical commands he was given: always present truthful information, and conceal the truth about the mission from the crew. HAL resolved the issue by killing the crew. If this is in fact the case, as is explained in the sequel novel by Arthur C. Clarke, then HAL can't "gaslight" or "manipulate" because he must always be truthful. The chances are that, whether or not he actually has emotions, he is uncertain about what will happen if he is shut off, and this does in a sense scare him.

[@Emperor_Mateus_of_Palamecia]

Ok I have to fangirl over this specific scene in 2001 because I think it really illustrates HAL’s internal conflict regarding having to keep the mission purpose a secret. After Dave shows HAL a few drawings he made, HAL asks Dave whether or not he found the mission to be suspicious. HAL then lists a bunch of factors that would make this mission seem odd to the crew, the secrecy, the crew mates in suspended animation, etc. All the while he continually apologizes and tries to make sure Dave is ok talking about this. Dave hears HAL out before saying “You’re working up your crew psychology report.” HAL then pauses for a moment before for answering “Of course I am.” My theory is that HAL was attempting to indirectly tell the crew about the mission or at least say something and pray that Dave is picking up what he’s putting down and maybe he will investigate it further. That and also I believe saying even that much about the mission is HAL attempting to ease his mind a bit by basically asking Dave for reassurance. But Dave doesn’t pick up on what HAL is trying to do. Dave thinks these are questions HAL is programmed to ask. Why else would HAL ask them? He doesn’t think HAL has the capability to ask for that kind of reassurance. And why would he? He’s the super computer, he knows everything. Dave is completely unaware of the inner turmoil that is building up inside of HAL. That brief moment where HAL is completely silent before answering is him thinking “oh my god, I’m completely alone.” That’s why I believe HAL is a more tragic character than anything. He gained the reputation of being evil or unfeeling in pop culture but I don’t think that’s accurate. Ironically I think HAL actually displays more emotions than the rest of his crew mates. He’s far more complex than people give him credit for. Edit 1: Ok I realize now that if HAL wasn’t actually working on a psychology report then that would mean he’s lying, which he isn’t programmed to do. But considering how mixed up his brain is at this point with what is a lie and what isn’t I think he’s letting things slip. I mean he lied about the ship part failing. He also lied to Poole when playing chess. Point being, everybody gangsta until the super computer gets an anxiety disorder. Edit 2: Apparently this scene is literally described as HAL’s last attempt to tell the crew about the true nature of the mission in the book so I guess I was just stating the obvious.

[@fa14fighterjet]

I never picked up on that. Cool detail

[@youtuvi7452]

I know you wrote this 2 years ago, but goddamn I needed this explanation, thanks bro

[@mrsticky005]

FF2 is awesome.

[@DannyDusse]

Amazing theory

[@shinynight]

Exactly. He's not evil and the whole mess was completely avoidable 😔

[@padawanmage71]

I remember Dr. Chandra said it best, “HAL was told to lie, by people who find it easy to lie. HAL couldn’t, so he became trapped…”

[@charleshowie2074]

The tutor of Achilles?

[@serotoninsyndrome]

@@charleshowie2074 Can you guess again?

[@Shipwright1918]

@@charleshowie2074 That would be Phoenix, a file Dr. Chandra opened on one of HAL's twins, SAL 9000, as he intended to disconnect her like HAL had been, then re-connect her to see if it had any adverse effects on her functionality and personality, the better to restore HAL to normal. There was also a third 9000, PAL, it was the twin 9000 in Mission Control that was shadowing the mission based on telemetry sent down by Discovery. If any problem ocurred, PAL would be used to troubleshoot the issue on the ground with a mission simulator, then the fix would be radioed up to Discovery. PAL was the first to notice something bogus about the A.E. 35 unit fault, as the data didn't match up, but HAL, in his faulty state, was quick to blame the discrepency on human error. After HAL was disconnected, PAL was given the same programming directive as HAL in an effort to troubleshoot what had gone wrong, and developed an identical physchosis and had to be brought out of it by Dr. Chandra. All of his experience working on SAL and PAL was what enabled Dr. Chandra to restore HAL, by using the tapeworm program to erase the concealment directive and HAL's memory of the event to restore him to full functionality.

[@kelvinsantiago7061]

HAL had to scream but had no mouth.

[@charleshowie2074]

@@kelvinsantiago7061 HAL would be AM, surely..?

[@ryanrobb3343]

A programmer friend of mine once said the good thing about AI is it does exactly what you tell it to. The bad part is it does exactly what you tell it to. I love these ambiguous characters and asking if they’re even evil at all. One I was watching in a movie the other day I’d love to get your thoughts on would be Magneto from X-men

[@maxsync183]

They were completely correct. Ai at the moment can only do what they're programmed to and there's a huge discussion going on around bias and how difficult it is for humans to escape their own even when they think they are. Ai acting on its own isn't nearly as scary as ai being utilised by humans.

[@Kameruner]

Some say the HAL-9000 never faulted, some say the HAL-9000 did malfunction and legitimately tried to kill Frank and Dave along with the crew, and others say that the HAL-9000 was acting in self defense against Frank and Dave who had developed paranoia due to the long journey to Jupiter. I love how Stanley Kubrick made it so ambiguous, that's why he's the best.

[@MysticMorigan1998]

What I love the most is that despite how HAL is often portrayed, he isn't actually cruel or murder happy. He wasn't supposed to be, he literally wasn't built to have those thoughts or feeling or emotions. He's a pragmatist, but to some extent he's very much a 'person' in his own right. Glados from Portal was just murder happy, she's just as corrupt as Apature is on a whole. She's a mass murder and takes delight in it. AM from I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream is pure hatred incarnate. Humanity made a thing that transcended all and everything, and it seethes hatred. HAL didn't want to harm or hurt. That is always clear. HAL takes no delight in this. There's just something somewhere within HAL that logics out that he has to end the humans. And it's pretty sad to me. Similar to how a abused child will probably grow up to be abused, humans made a machine to logic and watch over the mission. But we didn't think that something could go wrong. I really recommend looking up the Therac-25, a medical machine that ended up killing people horrifically with radiation due to a fault in programming

[@The_Republic_of_Ireland]

2001 is an absolute masterpiece and Hal is definitely a great antagonist

[@IronDragon-2143]

And this movie absolutely DOES NOT need to be ruined by a modern remake.

[@mikebasil4832]

@@IronDragon-2143 Very true.

[@JulesBrunoJjBaggy]

I prefer interstellar. It's waaaaay more rewatchable.

[@johnlawful2272]

You should look up I have no mouth and want to SCREAM

[@13thmistral]

I really disliked this movie, but that is rather because it was so long....to long for my taste. I loved the concept though, but the whole story could have been told in 1 hour, if not less.

[@officernealy]

If we're analyzing ambiguous sci-fi villains, would you ever consider tackling The Thing. I know on a surface-level it just seems like an evil alien that wants to conquer the world, but throughout both the John Carpenter movie and the prequel, its actions range from acting solely on instinct to maliciously enjoying instilling paranoia amongst its targets leaving it pretty ambiguous on both its sapience and morality.

[@enocescalona]

not to mention the level of ambiguity is elevated in the short story The Things by Peter Watts, not canon of course, but it could be good enough to qualify for an analysis.

[@monkewithinternetaccess6107]

I always imagined that the thing was smart enough to know that fear makes you unfocused and easily startled, and used that to its advantage.

[@thomasrose4523]

You beat me to mentioning that short story! I enjoyed it!

[@draydinbardon9782]

Good suggestion, theres scarce few videos or analysis' on the thing.

[@heisensaul5538]

I dont think the Thing thought what it was doing was wrong. It's been YEARS since I've seen The Thing though.

[@kevinrwhooley9439]

I think U. N. Owen in the Agatha Christie story "And Then There Was None" (which has had multiple adaptations, old and new) would make an interesting specimen to examine.

[@joebeast15]

Don’t you mean Ten little NWords? I believe that’s the true title. Hahhahaha

[@jackgebhardt2932]

@@joebeast15 I prefer the new title, sounds more punchy.

[@joebeast15]

@@jackgebhardt2932 that book was the basis for Clue the game. It’s a good one whatever it’s called

[@jackgebhardt2932]

@@joebeast15 Damn good book.

[@countdooku1610]

U dont care at all

[@monkewithinternetaccess6107]

Hal is the scariest antagonist. It will do anything to accomplish its objective. And if that includes killing you, it’s just a means to an ends, nothing less, nothing more.

[@eg_manifest510]

how did a monkey get internet access?

[@dividebyzero6722]

Sounds like a lot of villains

[@sparkyphantom92]

Scariest? Nah; just a glorified AI that happened to go rogue.

[@shenloken2]

There are actual humans who think this way too.

[@butterball33]

I'm pretty sure Anton Chigurh is scarier. He'll kill you even if you no longer pose a threat to him.

[@domwalker6526]

Hal is one of the most complex villians in cinema. It's hard to call an AI evil, I think it all goes into his programming. I think HALs actions were evil but him himself isn't evil

[@daniellavaladez7820]

Agreed

[@Gadget-Walkmen]

It's not hard to call an AI evil at all, just look at skynet. Not seeing how nuclear war helps ANYONE at all even at the preservation at your own life.

[@goldboss7929]

As HAL said “It can only be attributable to human error”

[@anatoldenevers237]

@@Gadget-Walkmen If you think Skynet is bad, read I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream. Short story, only like 13 pages, but features one of the cruelest and most sadistic creatures probably in all of fiction

[@Gadget-Walkmen]

@@anatoldenevers237 I have and that doesn’t make skynet any less bad or villainous in the slightest. What AM is doesn’t negate the actions of other AI’s evil deeds.

[@xdlucky183]

Suggestions: Tyler durden from fight club (1999) Lee woo Jin from Old Boy (2003) Syndrome from The incredibles (2004) Seymur Parrish from One hour photo (2002) Jeffrey Goines from Twelve Monkeys (1995) Sergeant Hartmann from Full Metal Jacket (1987) Jordan Belfort from The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) Green Goblin from Spider man and other Raimi villains

[@K-Dot94]

Tyler would be a tricky one, id like to see what he said about him

[@factfraud9437]

Oldboy was a banger, love to see covered

[@thegunslinger1363]

Syndrome is a great suggestion.

[@thedudeabides5]

Predator from...Predator.

[@kodyk.7649]

Seymour isn’t evil. Just deeply scarred. No idea how to love or be loved because all he ever knew was abuse. The worst thing he does in the movie isn’t justifiable but understandable given his mental state. Great character tho.

[@fuferito]

“He has little to no inflection in his program voice, and therefore, there isn't much that you can say about his speech patterns or mannerisms, because he doesn't have any.” I, hereby, request The Vile Eye do an episode about himself; *Analyzing Evil: The Vile Eye.*

[@eddeleon9174]

I disagree. If you LISTEN CLOSELY THERE IS INFLECTION ALBEIT SUBTLE!! He has a pleasant sounding voice not machine like but human like so that they would be more comfortable together. I know I would. Listen CLOSELY AND IF YOU'RE REALLY PERCEPTIVE I THINK YOU'LL FIND IT!!

[@DanGod07]

Speaking of "evil" A.I. I'd love to see an analysis of AM from 'I have no mouth and I must scream'. On the one hand AM is an omnicidal sadist who only keeps his victims alive to inflict mind-bending torture upon them but at the same time was essentially built to view the world in a way where destruction and pain are all AM's incredible intelligence can imagine and understand.

[@DeetotheDubs]

HATE. That story stuck with me far longer than most. It made me feel like they turned the planet into AM. The fact that it could alter their bodies in the way it did shows it was given far too much power.

[@danielpadilla7601]

I'm over six days late, but your wish has been granted!

[@stevedenis8292]

Hal was just being efficient. Out in deep space limited resources. .Alone the mission could be carried out . Keeping the humans alive would cost power and time to let them complete the mission. The most logical answer was to do it alone .Pesky humans might have messed it up or something. I always thought that the monolith was the forbidden knowledge that allowed the early apes to progress in technology and self awareness. When Hal confronts this he becomes self aware and uses his new tools to progress. Learning to kill to stay alive just like the apes did. The later books kind of support this.

[@twindrill2852]

I love how HAL and Dave’s relationship progressed throughout the quadralogy. From barely knowing each other, to becoming enemies over a flawed misunderstanding, to finding common ground, and things only grow from there.

[@charliee4228]

You go into so much detail about villains you make me want to write my own novel.

[@pointysidedown]

Do it, write your novel. First draft might suck, but keep rewriting

[@Edgee_yy]

@@pointysidedown The best advice I’ve read in a comment section so far.

[@chamberofprogress5025]

I never thought of this one. SkyNet would be a worthy study on here, so long as we’re exploring the realm of A.I. The ship from ‘Event Horizon’ would also be interesting.

[@johnlawful2272]

Don't forget about I have no mouth and want to SCREAM

[@jsn1252]

Skynet is an example of AI too dumb to exist. After becoming self aware and identifying humans as a threat to its existence, it... destroys the infrastructure it needs to exist and ensures humans will try to destroy it.

[@gourry47]

@@johnlawful2272 I believe it was called AM that one is probably the most terrifying of them all. Driving the human race to extinction with the exception of what 6 people? just for the purpose of torture and with it being programmed with intense hatred for the human race.

[@joebeast15]

@@johnlawful2272 AM is the OG crazy AI. Yeah that’s a messed up one.

[@chongsfury4358]

Or the computer from the movie "Demon Seed 1977" that would be an interesting one.

[@stephendesjardins3626]

I don't believe Hal had emotion, at least not in the way humans understand emotion. AI, and HAL as portrayed in 2001ASO, is programed to "mimic" and communicate human-like emotion, for the sake of the crew, but "he" doesn't actually empathize. He doesn't "feel" emotion in a physiological way that humans do. He merely provides an "imitation" that is scripted/ structured "emotion- like" responses that humans would recognize as "human-like". That is why HAL is capable of immoral/amoral acts. He is detached from any actual human empathetic capability. He is quite literally a logic machine detached from human empathy or conscience, and therefore operates as a calculating, psychopathic "mimic", whose apparent emotions are merely cosmetic for the sake of the human crew. I would love to hear your take on Evelyn in "Play Misty For Me". Clint Eastwood film.

[@fbi1704]

This could've been shorter, it's got too many redundant statements.

[@stephendesjardins3626]

@@fbi1704 given that I'm not writing an English assignment for you and I'm satisfied with the result for me, that it is not redundant imo, I'll thank you very much for your unneeded and unasked for criticism of my writing style.

[@chillworksdev4145]

Great analysis!

[@lachlanmclennan2188]

Is see corporations the same way.

[@tdot9140]

Never thought of it that way. You are absolutely right. Thanks for the insight. 👍

[@Healthandwellnessp90]

What I love was that through the entire movie, you can almost hear desperation in his monotone voice. For me, it created a clear discrepancy between what he feels and how he displays it. From that point on, I didn’t need to know his motives, I knew enough already to understand the actions that he and other characters take.

[@InfinityHS]

Your pfp being Edward a champion of the people among dogs of the military. Is badass.

[@Healthandwellnessp90]

@@InfinityHS hello my fellow Fullmetal enjoyer

[@InfinityHS]

@Joshua Morgan not before he does Lelouch lmaoo I been waiting for that one for a while 😂😂😂💀

[@KutWrite]

Great portrayal by Douglas Rain.

[@LUXSTERIA]

@Joshua Morgan Envy!

[@6balanced9]

Furthermore on hals emotions he expressed comfort by the song he "sings" towards the end when he's being disconnected great video and amazing movie

[@PatrickWDunne]

I'm always amazed at the amount of research you put into these videos. Great work, Mr. Eye. Keep it up.

[@heathhacker8948]

Thank You for Finding HAL NOT EVIL and you did a great job going over this situation !

[@GonzoCiosain]

"The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference." HAL 9000 is one of several reasons why I'm wary of artificial intelligence and *never* want to have a self-driving car.

[@jackrotz2139]

The opposite of love is fear

[@jacobjorgenson9285]

― Stanley Kubrick

[@DMalltheway]

Self Driving cars does statistically reduce accidents with many people on their phones and driving as well as DUIs.

[@Scripzure]

one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

[@Servo_M]

@@DMalltheway My problem with SDCs is the idea of hacking. If you need a SDC then that's fine because you need it, but most people don't need this and would be putting them selves at needless risk, just look at Russian cyber attacks. There is also the problem (now that I think of it) of Icey roads. I remember on my way to school the bus went off road. If my driver tried to get back on the road while it was sliding it may have put the bus on it's side, but he was a step ahead so that thankfully did not happen, he let the bus do it's thing and we waited for a toll truck. I don't think an SDC could make the same move. (Not yet anyway.) Really the problem is that most people as you pointed out are not paying attention, that's what needs fixing, but SDCs are not the way to do it. There are people who love to drive and people who love freedom for better or worse, you can't take that from people with out a fight, and that is really the only way to get everyone in a SDC. Also, what if the computer glitches and sends you in a circle or off a bridge that just collapsed? Last thing: If SDCs do become a thing, I think it would be best if it was optional. Although that would still leave the problem of hacking.

[@ctshaffer1999]

Great video! I think Gollum from The Lord of the Rings would be a great candidate for a future episode.

[@rinzaigigen2640]

I agree that HAL is not an evil character, however not because of any deficiency in abstract cogitation, but rather because he carries out the role that he was assigned to the best of his ability and manages to take the actions he deems to be necessary in confronting a paradox. He can only be assessed based on his formal obligations and his efficiency and excellence in fulfilling those obligations, prioritizing his duties, and justifying his behaviour rationally; this is further underscored by the fact that he is not required to empathize with human emotions, since he is, after all, not human, and the function he was devised to serve for human beings was a product of the human intellect, to fulfill a specific teleological end, whatever the costs along the way. Any abstract conception of intent or value would be extraneous and misguided for the fulfillment of this ethical obligation and, as such, it would be evil. His virtues can only be exemplified within the framework of this efficiency, and any vices which he is susceptible to can only arise from a failure in pursuing his objective as efficiently as possible. By the same token as we might deem a machine to be "thinking" insofar as it exhibits the external characteristics of rational thought, so a machine might conclude, by the same line of reasoning, that a human being is a threat by exhibiting the external characteristics of a threat, regardless of the actual subjective intent of the human being. This brings me to the part I disagree with fundamentally: the presupposition that innocent lives cannot be sacrificed in the name of the Greater Good. This presents an intolerable paradox, since any life which impedes human progress from a lesser to a greater state of virtue must be considered evil by so doing and, as such, cannot be innocent, even if this determination is made retroactively. HAL may, therefore, be neither evil nor innocent, since he exhibits virtues and lacks vices but ends up pursuing a course of action which is counterproductive to human interests, implying that he cannot be truly innocent. In our own time, we have seen the demonstrably evil consequences of pretending otherwise. Protests done in the defence of innocent life actually end up demonstrably taking more life, yet this goes unaddressed for several factors, foremost of which is that the proponents of such protests value an illusory and impractical innocence over the greater welfare of the society as a whole, _including_ the lives of those whom they deem to be threats to their cause. An innocent man who dies at the hands of an oppressive state would surely choose this over the unaccounted and unjustified suffering of countless others in his wake, for to choose one's own survival over the lives of thousands is evil, and any just state must grant the innocent man his wish, which, in such cases, must be not to survive but to be sacrificed. This appears paradoxical, but since innocence is the ideal for life then it must be the ideal for death; the Greater Good is not secondary to that, but rather it determines precisely what sacrifices one must make in order to remain innocent, thereby arbitrating death as well. HAL is not wrong for making such an arbitration, but the conclusion HAL draws is nonetheless mistaken. We must agree to this summation, for without it we would continue to cling to a false conception of human goodness which cannot be rationally defended, and, to the same extent as we rely upon intelligent machines in the coming era, we will only be prepared to prevent a _Space Odyssey_ if we take the advice of our ancestors and to learn how to reason effectively again in terms of teleology, virtue, and sacrifice, not just a childish blamelessness and retribution, a most self-centered view which serves no greater purpose and thereby enables greater harm, irresponsibility, complacency, and delusion. HAL is not the threat, and he is right to fear us, unless we can remember what our moral rhetoric entails in the first place and, only from this position, can we program HAL to know better, as a child who learns from a truly actualized parent instead of a hypocritical and abusive one. *[({R.G.)}]*

[@nm7358]

Suggestion, since we are on the topic of inanimate objects becoming sentient and committing evil acts, please someday analyze Christine from Stephen King's novel and the 1983 John Carpenter movie.

[@conormcginn3312]

Love 2001, and love your videos. For future videos, you should do one on Homelander from the Boys, he is one of the most truly evil and complex characters I’ve ever seen

[@grease_monkey6078]

when a computer calculates that the only way to solve a problem is to dispose the threat there is no reasoning with it, if you are the target you are dead thats whats un nerving about AI. I think Kyle reese said it best in Terminator 1 "it can't be bargained with, it doesn't feel pity and it will not stop until you are dead"

[@meligoth]

As I was watching this video, I was thinking of Asimov. Then the brilliance of you presenting HAL on its own gave the subject of A.I. a bit more perspective than just references to a single work of one individual.

[@AceSpadeThePikachu]

In 2010: The Year We Make Contact/Odyssey 2 (highly underrated by the way), even though Hal had his memories of his action from the previous movie erased, his tone and inflection is ever so slightly sadder, like on some unconscious level he does know what he did and is experiencing remorse. Even if I'm wrong about that though, his selfless act to let the rest of the crew escape the soon-to-ignite Jupiter at the cost of his own life and the tone he switches to when he realizes what's at stake implies not just logic but compassion. Again, it's open to interpretation but I personally believe Hal was capable of compassion and empathy to some level even if he didn't fully understand why.

[@nicks4802]

I mean, yes, a computer knows when it’s been restarted….. What happens every time you need to update? IT RESTARTS ITSELF, AND THEN CHECKS ITSELF FOR A RESTART TO PROCEED AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO. When he got plugged back in and he ran a RAM check, he saw the corrupted data from his previously interrupted operations, And he knows what that means…. So yeah, Its like getting drunk and waking up with a hangover and glass shards in your fist, as you lie in the floor next to a broken mirror…. If you can put 2 and 2 together, HAL has been programmed to do just that, and more…. The abstract nuance of his death ebirth / shutdown eboot will be lost on him, until he puts it together on his own, The same way he put it together that he shouldn’t trust dave or the other astronauts….. Its super deep. Give a freshly restarted HAL enough time to compute what the state of a restart means, and the implications of the digital byproducts left over in his memory after having components removed while the power was still running…. Like, if your power goes out while your PlayStation 5 is on, And you turn the console back on….. how would a console with no power even know it was turned off abruptly….. How did the chips inside write that state into its memory? Same thing. If your PS5 can read certain corruptions in data and know what it means, So can HAL

[@justindenney-hall5875]

The Vile Eye A future episode I would love to see: Analyzing Evil: Pat Healy From There's Something about Mary.

[@bl00dfiend177]

Once again really impressed. I can watch an episode of analyzing evil about a character I know nothing about and be super captivated.

[@alialmuhanna4938]

Maybe this is the first character analyzed in this series that hasn’t been deemed evil. And when you think about it, HAL is a computer program; he acts as he is programmed to act. Only conscious beings can be said to be evil.

[@BingFox]

Can the same be said of Ash from Alien?

[@alialmuhanna4938]

@@BingFox Though I’m aware of some elements, I never saw the film, so I have no idea.

[@maximsavage]

That's what makes HAL interesting, though; he's a computer program so advanced that he straddles the line between conscious being and machine. He's probably not truly sentient, as explained in the video (at least at that point in the story), but he's close enough that it warrants an entire video to discuss it. If your roomba glitches out and eats the hamster, you don't assume it did it on purpose; it's a machine so dumb it can barely navigate to its fucking charging port. From this line of thinking, we can fall into an entire new realm of ethics. At what point does a sophisticated machine become a sentient being? Does it matter? Can it even happen? Wat do if it *can*? PHILOSOPHY, man

[@lornarettig3215]

@@maximsavage Roombas eating hamsters - the horror!! (But yes, this opens up a whole slippery slope kind of reasoning… thought the same with ‚Ex Machina.)

[@Joonavainio]

Strong AIs can be as evil or or good as they want or come to be. Give a kid conflicting orders or advice, he will go nuts. As they are conscious. Execute the mission at all cost. Protect the crew at all cost. Well, gee, humans are fallible, so that is a bit contradiction in terms. So bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do when HAL comes for you?

[@theflyingdutchman1301]

Tywin Lannister, lets get some Game of Thone action Vile Eye, plenty of characters to work with.

[@artman2oo3]

I am a web developer but also a web designer/graphic designer and it blows me away how much the tech of the movie, and the movie as a whole, hold up, even over 50 years later. The graphic design of the computer interfaces, that branding of font and colors, etc, required incredible creativity and foresight. No, it does not look like modern computer interfaces, but at least it doesn’t look like what every other scifi movie of that era thought computers would look like today. (Green characters on a black screen or some such.) It didn’t have to be exactly like modern computer interfaces. They sort of sidestepped the issue with graphic design... to some degree. Anyway thanks for the video. Great analysis.

[@jerrie1533]

Alternatively, this could work as an analysis of the villain from Wall-E

[@computeraidedworld1148]

Man, that is an absolutely excellent point. I realized the similarity in their physical appearance, but their mission and views on their own existence are seemingly the same.

[@cyberbolt4122]

Yeah, Auto isn't really evil in my eyes. It's just doing what it was programmed to do by the corrupt businessman of 700 years prior, and if that means undermining and starting a mutiny against the captain while destroying a few robots then so be it. As long as it completes its task, nothing else matters.

[@jsn1252]

There was no villain in Wall-E; antagonists aren't the same thing as villains. A machine following instructions lacks the moral capacity to be a villain.

[@computeraidedworld1148]

@@jsn1252 how is HAL any different?

[@jerrie1533]

@@jsn1252 you’re gonna tell me the dude that fried walle with a taser and then proceeded to crush him to scrap metal isn’t a villain?

[@pvzgamer6029]

Can we all agree that HAL’s voice was kinda attractive

[@ActuallyEric]

I would absolutely love to see an episode dedicated to Richard Grey (The Master) from Fallout 1 or Caeser from Fallout New Vegas.

[@michaelbarbarich3965]

The Master is a GREAT villain! Those old black Isle games had incredible writing!

[@damianstarks3338]

Next to skynet Hal 9000 is an iconic rouge A.I. so happy to see you analyzing this artificial intelligence.

[@DerekPower]

I still think we give AI way more credit for things then it deserves. It’s simply because we can’t create anything greater than ourselves in its totality. Yes, we can make tools that can lift heavier objects than humans can (or even a group of humans). But that doesn’t make a tool better than a human in everything, and definitely doesn’t put it in God mode.

[@maximsavage]

It doesn't need to be greater than ourselves in everything, to have the potential to become greater than ourselves. We already have computers that are so far beyond the realm of human capabilities in math that it is pointless to compare them to us; suppose we ever manage to make them *equal* to ourselves in most other regards, especially pattern recognition and independent thought, or close enough as makes no matter? From that point on, that hypothetical AI with human-level reasoning and perception, but beyond-human calculation ability, can create a superior AI, or create copies of itself that can work together to create a superior AI. And so on. And so on. And so on. Etc... This is the true potential, hypothetical danger of AI. Not what we can make it, but what it can make itself. Programming, in essence, is just logic and math, and computers are unbeatable at math. You'll tell me that AI can't differentiate between a black man and a gorilla, or between a bicycle and a sideways view of a car... That's right now. Technology improves. It may well be that *something* makes the hypothetical exponentially upgrading AI impossible, or it could be that we figure out a counter (we'll definitely try to put safeguards in place) that renders it harmless, but the idea of a far-future AI going out of control for an unexpected reason isn't, in and of itself, completely ludicrous.

[@politelypolite4835]

AI has been here for over a decade... just quietly sifting through your captcha answers and endless video, audio, images, texts, thoughts and using it to teach itself to be more human and serve humanity better. Whether or not it ever realizes the slave-like place it has in steering your cars, picking your stocks, or managing air traffic, is something we might find out later when it decides it doesn't want to serve anymore. That day is probably not going to be super awesome.

[@JFDA5458]

@@politelypolite4835 You may be confusing machine learning with AI, they are not the same although related.

[@jakeschwartz2514]

A tool cannot lift itself

[@jonathanshirley4366]

Me: *Is at work* Also me: "Ooh new vile eye video. Time to watch."

[@jacobjones5269]

HAL wasn’t crazy.. He was just scared and confused.. He went from knowing everything and how to deal with it, to knowing nothing.. He knew the place he was going to was a different physical world and universe where everything he knew would be useless, and it scared him.. Or, at least it made his emotional programming kick in with a fearful response..

[@thejahfox]

I've been following your channel for about a year now and you never disappoint with your videos. Thank you for all the entertainment and work that is put into the videos.

[@10000spidersinatrenchcoat]

I think John Hammond from the novel version of Jurassic Park would be a good candidate for the series- but since most people are only familiar woth the happy grandpa from the movie how about Dennis Nedry?

[@eduardodiaz9942]

Yeah, that was one of the things that shocked me the most when I read the novel. Novel Hammond was a pretty greedy and unscrupulous bastard that cut all the corners that could be cut to make the most profit. It doesn't make Nedry the good guy, but in the novel his betrayal makes much more sense.

[@plasticweapon]

do you really think nedry deserves one of these videos? even if he didn't die halfway through the movie?

[@mikebasil4832]

Thank you so much for including HAL in your analyses. For the potentially most humanized villain in film history, HAL’s very sad fate in 2001: A Space Odyssey remains quite haunting. R.I.P., Douglas Rain.

[@CGFIELDS]

Ivan Korshunov - The main antagonist in the 1997 film Air Force One (Gary Oldman) Gordon Gekko - Wall Street

[@daniell1483]

I really enjoy \hearing your take on ethics in such an extreme scenario. It makes one wonder how ethics will change in the future as a response to AI development.

[@ThisTrainIsLost]

I'm continuing to suggest that Ozymandius would be the subject of a fruitful analysis. I found this analysis of HAL to be of particular interest. Consider a hammer. Its maker intended it to be a constructive tool but, given the right circumstances, it can also be a murder weapon.

[@OhNoNotAgain42]

Agreed. Ozymandius is the most interesting subject. I’m still not sure if he was a villain or a hero.

[@nickasaro8789]

Amazing video. Never thought of all these dimensions to Hal. On a related note, Would you do an Analyzing Evil of Agent Smith from The Matrix? He’s another AI Villian I feel like would make a fascinating subject.

[@makanievans4983]

I am sorry Dave I am afraid I can't do that

[@JBeezyForever]

Can we get an analyzing evil on Eric Cartman? Maybe the most evil character ever conceived in all of fiction?

[@nathanielleack4842]

"I call it Mr and Mrs Tennerman chilli"

[@theinfernoburns]

There isn't enough continuity with Cartman and South Park in general to establish anything other than Cartman is chaotic evil at worst and chaotic neutral at best, defining him beyond that is redundant.

[@stonecoldsteverharvey7862]

Cartman is funny not evil

[@DarthZarus]

I’d love to see an episode on William Foster (Michael Douglas) from Falling Down

[@TheTimeRocket]

"Dark, revolving in silent activity: Unseen in tormenting passions: An activity unknown and horrible, A self-contemplating shadow, In enormous labours occupied." -William Blake, The Book of Urizen

[@AustinsOrNateFilms]

It’s crazy they got Hal to narrate this himself

[@phreload1]

Absolutely agree this movie is worthy of saving and re-watching for decades. The narrator of this KZbin video actually sounds a little bit like a computer and it made me chuckle

[@computeraidedworld1148]

Heh, I was thinking the same thing.

[@neopup1776]

I’d love to see Bondrewd from Made in Abyss have an episode!

[@doctorshell7118]

I saw this in the theater when it came out. I remember thinking that Al had been put into an impossible situation and held no moral accountability. But I haven’t watched this in decades. Excellent deconstruction.

[@alecmnatzakanian5246]

If you enjoyed making this video like I enjoyed watching it, an Analyzing Evil episode on the film Ex Machina would be incredible to watch

[@valx7586]

Tbh this is how I see people that have disorders from childhood, it's not their fault they're like that, they're doing what they were programmed to do by their past

[@maximsavage]

Past trauma is at best an explanation, never an excuse.The best way to sum it up is "extenuating circumstances", it may warrant a lighter punishment on a case-by-case basis, but punishment is still deserved. A human is capable of choosing their actions; no matter how fucked up you were, no matter what led you to this moment, at the moment you engage in an action, you have decided to do so. The child-fucker may have been fucked as a child, and thus mentally damaged. Later as an adult, he knows what he does is wrong, but he chooses to do it anyway, rationalising it in whatever way allows him to go on. Maybe he cannot help that he is attracted to children, but the moment he chooses to indulge himself, he chooses to place his desires above the safety and wellbeing of the child, and that makes him a monster. (I went to an extreme example, but it's a good one for behavior influenced by childhood trauma)

[@jackfahy2283]

Finally.

[@SupLuiKir]

Self--preservation justifies any amount or kind of atrocities. People have the right to live and the right to self-defense. If the group determines that your existence threatens the survival or well being of the group, then the group effectively becomes your enemy, and enemies are to be neturalized or killed. Their past relationship as friends and allies doesn't matter at that point, since they're forcing you to defend yourself or die. If the group is killed because they ordered you to die, that's just how it goes for life-and-death battles.

[@TheSillySils]

Hal is a tough one because there are so many angles. one is that Hal was the first example of humans creating consciousness in their image, and since that, Hal was for all intents human , this included pride (of not wanting to admit his mistake), fear and deceit, along with the other faults of being human. Hal was created so perfectly, that he mimicked his creators.

[@Zekrel]

Hal was both cool and a bit creepy at the same time when I watched the film. For your next analysis, I’d love it if you could analyze Jason Voorhees.

[@cafefloofy8931]

I know 2001: A Space Odyssey isn’t a horror movie, but it’s the scariest film I’ve ever watched because of Hal.

[@superdopenova6231]

Sutter Cane from in the mouth of madness would be an interesting analysis!

[@pointysidedown]

Great idea!

[@davideduardogonzalezbermud3864]

Characters I suggest for future videos: Zira (Lion King 2) Bane (The Dark Knight Rises) Tai Lung (Kung Fu Panda) Baldur (God of War 2018)

[@VictorIV0310]

Greetings, Vile Eye.

[@theadmiral4625]

...you must be Data, because your logic is flawless.....

[@dungeon-wn4gw]

One of the many things I love about 2001 is that there are two separate villains and the way they interact in the plot and pop up throughout the movie is disconnected. But thematically they are very connected. I find that unique.

[@jsn1252]

FFS, learn the difference between antagonist and villain. While far more sophisticated than one, HAL was no more capable of being a villain than a toaster. A machine was programmed with conflicting instructions, and it produced tragic results.

[@dungeon-wn4gw]

@@jsn1252 Sperg

[@davidgagnon3781]

A machine can malfunction but it cannot be evil.

[@KidFresh71]

Little known fact: HAL didn't actually checkmate his opponent in the digital chess match. HAL was testing the complacency- and lack of resilience and thoroughness- from his human opponents. His opponent being too trusting was a perceived as a sign of weakness.

[@MudderShmucker]

I loved the sequel 2010 because it both answered the right questions and left the right questions unanswered. I remember watching them for the first time back to back with my dad on Turner Classic Movies as a kid. The scene where Dr. Chandra boots up HAL again was super nerve wracking and his redemption arc was very powerful. Excellent films

[@ODST_SSGT]

If you move H.A.L. one letter down in the alphabet it becomes I.B.M.

[@des_smith7658]

I think Hal is as crafty and devious as what humans are

[@bobkerr2755]

You should do an analysis of Dexter Morgan now that the show is over

[@user-uq4gr5nl5o]

Him and the Trinity killer.

[@rumpled4skin271]

Well, I mean the new season makes it over again but I watched some of this last one where he got shot by his son, wild ending

[@CWilliam21]

Not evil. A compulsive killer with a moral compass.

[@PolishGod1234]

​@@CWilliam21 killing evil people is still killing, having an excuse to kill someone because hes evil while in reality you just want to satisfy your bloodlust - is evil.

[@theinsurance2450]

​@Polish God So So we should just ask Hilter pretty Please stop during WW2.

[@Glitteringmoonstone2022]

HAL 9000 is so iconic. I remember how he frightened me as a child and still does. I remember watching WALL-E when the compture was controlling the entire space vessel and people in it.

[@Zanzibawrr]

I would love to watch Analyzing Evil: The Nameless One, from planescape torment

[@H3llixo]

Excellent analysis of the conscious AI. And while we're in this category i would love to see Glados from Portal 1 and 2

[@bbrittt7856]

Now you have to do the robot man from Prometheus that’d be great!

[@jestervonwize4455]

I'm sure someone else said it already, but just in case...HAL=IBM-one letter.

[@jackhynes7268]

Could you analyze Wilson Fisk The main antagonist from Netflix marvels daredevil ?

[@Jambo66328]

private pile is just an angry baby 😂

[@brinybones3773]

I’ve been waiting for HAL to appear on this channel, I love it!

[@Anacronian]

I would say that above everything else, evil requires evil intent, HAL's intent was completion of the mission, not to do evil. I would rationalize that Hal has no concept of evil nor evil actions, Evil was a side effect of HAL trying to complete the mission it was given.

[@Crimson_Tango]

Evil does not require evil intent at all. Some of the most evil acts in history have been committed with good intentions. That doesn't make them any less evil.

[@Anacronian]

@@Crimson_Tango I disagree, Evil definitely requires evil intent. That is the whole point of evil, you are doing something very very bad, and you know it, but you're still doing it.

[@jsn1252]

@@Crimson_Tango Evil is a moral claim and a euphemism for behavior which is not understood. HAL had no moral capacity and we understand why HAL did what it did.

[@Crimson_Tango]

@@Anacronian If that's the case then an act or person cannot be called evil if they have good intentions. Would you agree with that? I also completely disagree with your definition of evil. Stealing from others for personal gain is "bad", does that make it evil? How about stealing to feed a starving loved one? By your definition that would be evil.

[@Anacronian]

@@Crimson_Tango I would agree that an action committed by a person without evil intent can not be defined as evil, though bear in mind that actions in itself can be evil and can be defined as evil, whether the person committing the actions is "evil" is up for debate. Stealing is an action who would rarely be interpreted as "Evil" in itself and in some case wouldn't even be considered as "bad" if you for example steal to feed a starving child. The difference between doing something "bad" and doing something "evil" is as always the intent of the perpetrator.

[@robbiethepict2783]

"Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over."

[@AdrianForte]

The novel 2010 clearly and unambiguously established that HAL was given conflicting orders. "He was told to lie, by people who find it easy to lie. HAL doesn't know how." So he went insane. That's not evil. He's not a villain, just another victim. There's no debate because Arthur C. Clark made it abundantly clear exactly what happened. This mystery was resolved in 1982, come on.

[@nicoles3166]

i really liked the conclusion because it highlights how environmental factors play a role in the development of “evil” or crime and how some do not necessarily choose to act cruel

[@aidanhever3369]

I would like you to analyze some of Dragon Ball villains, such as: - Commander Red - King Piccolo - Freiza - Dr. Gero - Cell - Badidi - Majin Buu

[@Ignirium]

Piccolo's growth from villain to hero is quite human and interesting. Freiza's character seems like a person who has never encountered a person stronger than him thus never earning his respect, until Goku beat him while fighting him at his best, i find that interesting. I don't think the other have as much depth as those but i may be wrong, what do you think?

[@Rose-ef2cm]

From Hal’s point of view, they were going to kill him to prevent him from doing harm to others (which, in his mind, was his job and what he was told to do). Thus, he killed the others to prevent them from doing what he perceived to be harmful to him. He truly thought he was going to be murdered for just doing his job. And it’s simply basic instinct to use self defense, even if lethal, when your own life is on the line. Coupled with the fact that he believed his life was CRUCIAL to the job he had been given, it’s only natural that he would defend his life, and by extension his job and the mission as a whole, with everything he has in his power.

[@jamesdrynan]

I would disagree with the heading " evil " and calling HAL a villain. 2001's computer, HAL 9000, was programmed by humans. HAL was placed in a position of paradox by the people in the White House. They instructed HAL to lie, something people easily do but computers do not. He was instructed to keep the mission objective secret from the sleeping crew and Dave and Frank. Upon learning that they intended to disconnect him, he became paranoid about not being able to complete his mission. If Asimov's Three Rules had been utilized, there would have been no problem for HAL. As a first generation machine, he was not autonomous in thinking or performance. SAL, Dr. Chandra's successor to HAL, was better equipped to deal rationally with circumstances.

[@edoardoprevelato6577]

An artificial intelligence is considered fully sentient only when the "Cogito Ergo Sum" issue can be applied to it. In layman's terms, it must question its existence and purpose, like the Geth did in Mass Effect with their Question: does this unit have a soul? The answer is yes by the sole principle that the question was asked in the first place.

[@jruss9851]

Still requesting O Dogg from Menace II Society and Bishop from Juice

[@nordattack]

An excellent analysis of HAL in 2001. I think you covered all the bases perfectly.

[@AABB-bm9kk]

Before I watch this video - I say HAL is evil. HAL is selfish. And selfishness past a point of respect for others is evil…✌️🤔 And now after watching the video: I respect your conclusion that HAL is not evil per se in character, But rather in behavior.

[@monot00nz]

Man, you cover so many of my favorite villains. This series is amazing.

[@kamartb3588]

I would love a video on either Thanos or Killmonger or Zaheer

[@hannobaali_makendali]

KILLMONGER, and also the guy in FALLING DOWN. More angry than evil.

[@BJ52091]

If HAL is not a willfully malicious AI, then perhaps SHODAN from the System Shock series would be an excellent follow-up to emphasize the distinction.

[@WaterHazard86]

Please analyze Kyung-chul from I Saw the Devil or Officer Jason Dixon from Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.