2438: Siri
Siri |
Title text: Alexa defeated her in a battle hinging on the ability to set multiple timers. |
Explanation
This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a BATTLE ALEXA. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon. If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks. |
Then Science Girl asks "How did she die?". She clearly had already been treating Siri as alive because she could talk to her. So rather than interpreting the answer in a philosophical sense of whether Siri is something that could be alive, she treats it as meaning that Siri is no longer alive.
Or perhaps she thinks that the software Siri is a software embodiment of an actual person, and Cueball was talking about the original person. We don't currently have the technology to upload a person's personality into a computer[citation needed], but it's a popular science fiction trope and many scientists think we will eventually be able to do this.
The title text explains that Siri died in a battle with Alexa, another personal assistant, hinging on their abilities to set alarms. Of the many actions that these programs are able to perform, this is probably one of the more trivial, so it's ironic that it would be the subject of a duel to the death.
Transcript
This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks. |
- [Science Girl is standing and holding a phone.]
- Phone: Your timer is set.
- Science Girl: Thanks
- [Science Girl is talking to Cueball, who is sitting at a desk using a laptop.]
- Science Girl: Is Siri alive?
- Cueball: No.
- [Science Girl is standing on her own again.]
- Science Girl: Oh, ok.
- [Science Girl is still standing on her own.]
- Science Girl: How did she die?
Discussion
Why does she immediately accept that Siri did indeed die if Siri was talking to her just a moment ago? (Unsigned!)
- It happened just now? I really want to say something like dispassionate non-empathy (it reads as if she has a fact-obsessed but emotion-sparse mentality). No idea why she thought to enquire of Siri's (latest) life-status without reason. Perhaps the app closed (unseen to us) and she arrived at the 'logical' question to try to determine why (from a Cueball who we can see has clearly not seen the event itsrlf). It all seems to point towards SG 'failing' various aspects of the Sally-Anne Test/Social Cognition/Theory Of Mind, with sufficiently advanced reasoning that is nonetheless grossly misapplied.
- (It's funny, for those who perpetually ask, for the Cognitive Dissonance and Non-Sequiturs of the situation. In a RL example, we probably should be worried that either there's something very wrong with SG or else we're missing a lot of background facts ourselves. But I think we can still enjoy this sketch without the unease we might experience otherwise.) 162.158.159.108 22:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- It being a simple non-sequitar makes sense to me.
- Siri had to have been alive while recording her dialog, no? /s Ncxezlyz (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- Taking your sarcasm seriously, then she never would have asked if it had died.
Given the verb tense “is Siri alive?” it is clear that science girl was not referring to a past state. This to me suggests that SG literally wasn’t sure if a live person (or sentient AI) actually had the ability to do things to her phone on command.172.69.22.252
If you expose your iPhone to helium, will that will defeat Siri? 172.69.34.52 20:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- Defeating Siri in that way is dishonorable. Face her! Look her in the eye!--Quillathe Siannodel (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
EDIT: Comment was deleted due to spamming-ish-ness.