"The Rules of being a Cypherite"

Havocide is making a comparison of the Cypherites and E Pluribus Neo because both are considered terrorists by certain individuals. To reiterate, he's simply saying that it is apparent the cypherites have demonstrated terrorist acts, whereas E Pluribus Neo has not.

Back to the topic, could someone elaborate more on the Cypherites, especially the notion of those that do not want to be reinserted into the matrix. My questions are - What is your purpose if not to be reinserted? At what extremes will you inact to fulfill that purpose? What are your interpretations of the other organizations in relation to your purpose?

We don't care about the status quo, the meaningless ego-battle between man and machine. We seek only one thing...bliss.

Acquinas wrote:

Haigen wrote:

We don't care about the status quo, the meaningless ego-battle between man and machine. We seek only one thing...bliss.

Meaningless ego battle? Perhaps you fail to recognize the level of atrocity when an entire race is enslaved and forced into a prefabricated existence. Maybe you're comforted by that fact, but above all it is not a battle of pride or any lesser vice to which you would suggest. In spite of the disagreement with your statement, thank you for a legitimate response.

Quite true, the whole race of Machines was enslaved and forced into a fabricated life of workshops, factories and various other means of servitude.

So it seems we are all guilty parties. It was a mistake to give machines consciousness, as it engendered the recognition of the crime of highest caliber. By granting the machines the ability of free will (or the means to develope it, which is fascinating in and of itself) humans bound themselves to commit the crime of enslavement.

A machine's original purpose - a tool. A means to facilitate human living without the output of labor. Yet tools cannot contain the rationale to operate completely independently. Thus, to give machines sentience and abstract thought made them independent beings, a way to elevate the ease of their purpose. And so humans were responsible for their own downfall when they failed to recognized the ascension of their once ignorant tools.

Yet still, the machines have no right to continue their institutionalization of man kind. Some would say it is retribution, or a desperate means for survival. It does not make it right, no matter the actions and crimes of humanity beforehand. Two wrongs do not make a right, as Gamis has said.

 Haigen, I ment not to impose upon your belief; I was simply stating a contrasting point to the belief. Yes, I have made up my mind, but I am not oblivious to the viewpoint of others. A smart man, even in ignorance, will seek to enlightenment beyond the wisdom he has obtained - Meaning, I will listen to others and learn from it.

GamiSB wrote:

Man doesn't need to work for the Machine to work with it. I would say that any Machinist that can keep the human within him alive is closer to fulfilling Neo's ultimate wish for this world then any Zionist is but the trick is keeping that which is human alive within them. Case in point the Tetragramaton. They work for the Machines but have given up most of the rights they had as humans to do so. (Not to say there work isn't needed or helpful)

Like I said elsewhere.

Peace will come threw Trust
Trust will come threw Freedom
Freedom will come threw Choice.
This is what Neo showed us.

Both Zion and 01 are afraid of the other because neither trust the others choices in how to better there city. If each would take a moment and examine where the other lies I believe that we can take these past events and use them to better our worlds.

The truce was formed at a time when neither side knew what would happen. Not even the Oracle could predict the outcome of Neo and Smith's fight so who can say that Man and Machine could predict the events that would unfold after the formation of the Truce.

I propose an amendment. An amendment that will allow man, machine, and program their right to choice. So that all humans, red, blue, or freeborn are never enslaved and denied their freedoms and rights as human beings. But also that the races that depend on human energy are never worried about a shortage of power and can move their resources set currently on controlling the human race, to bettering everyone.

We are each others creations; the least we could do is work together.

((with "Threw" you mean "Through"? :-/ ))

I usually talk about choice and that there are at all times 2 choices, with consequences for- (e.g. a "third" choice which is part of one of the first 2 choices) and unforseen. But actually, I don't belief in choice at all. I don't belief in such a thing as "luck". They are phrases I use to express something I, as individual, cannot understand. If I use them I don't mean them but rather express my lack of words for what I really want to say: There is no choice, luck. Not our mind nor the Machine Mainframe nor the Oracle have choice but consequence. The Origin is unknown, the so called "Big Bang"?

We humans call it choice.
The Machines call it a non-predictable variable in an equation.
The Exiles call it Consequence.

Our future is in our own hands, is it not? If there is going to be a better future for all of us, why not lean back and wait till it comes?
Our choice does not change the future but we don't know the future, thus we try to enforce a future. But how can we enforce a future if we cannot even control the present, if our actions are merely electical signals interpreted by our brain?

Do we have "choice"? I hope so, since I am soley "human" but then again... I don't belief it but whatever I do, I cannot accept "fate".

What I read about Smith in the archieves also influenced this. But in contrast to him, I also don't belief in "purpose". But without purpose we do not exist? What is existance? What is life? What is choice? What is... reality?

Again my simple mind tries to interpret phrases it cannot. A barrier of the mind. The limit of perception but not interpretation?


Jeezus, I fairly got off-topic here. But well, when I saw Gami's final stage being "choice" I just let "go".

Under the barrier set by our existance we must live together, peacefully. Heh, must? I hope we do, I hope we will.

((o_O This is what happens after a "learning session" for exams...))

Forgive me if I am wrong, but are you suggesting there is a determinant and predestined outcome for our existence that we do not influence? If so, then I would have to disagree. An underlying, perpetual characteristic of existence is that from one cause there is an undetermined amount of outcomes, or effects. We are governed by reaction, and any consequences that stem from the initial action were conceived from it.

From this we gain free will, the ability to act and react in any manner that we see fit. There are those that would claim we are restricted by the bounds of perception, force, and/or intelligence. They would say it is these factors that proves we do not have free will, choice. But the inability to inact free will, or what restricts it, does not disprove it.

From this, we gain purpose. We can choose to our hearts delight the goals and beliefs, what paths are constructed from them, and the methods as to how we follow down those paths. We, humans, are confined to the perceptive notion that we can only react to what means we can create and perceive. We are at a loss to see the initial cause of existence, and so the ending result of it. Our existence is the perpetual effect of whatever the cause of existence is, and should be nothing more.

Can we influence the effect of existence? Certainly, and in diminitive ways with every action we commit. Can we forsee the ending result? This takes me back to predestination, the answer being no.

Hmmm...talk about being off topic. Despite where my mind has strayed from the topic, anyone and everyone fill free to respond.

(( Heh, I knew my phil. classes would come in handy ))

Acquinas wrote:

Forgive me if I am wrong, but are you suggesting there is a determinant and predestined outcome for our existence that we do not influence? If so, then I would have to disagree. An underlying, perpetual characteristic of existence is that from one cause there is an undetermined amount of outcomes, or effects. We are governed by reaction, and any consequences that stem from the initial action were conceived from it.

There is no predestined outcome because the future has not happened yet, although I cut out all those theories of parrallel dimensions and that. BUT I do belief that we do not have something called free will. Any action has only 1 reaction (a reaction can be made up of many reactions itself, though, but in the end, it is one reaction at a "time", even if the action itself could have more possible endings, only one is ever achieved. There IS an infinite ammount of possibilities... for us because we cannot predetermine the outcome whatsoever. But we don't have to. Consequence does that. Causality, wherever it stems from.

There is no such thing as choice but the human mind, nor anybody or anything else can get near to accepting this. Everytime I try, because I belief it, I hit a barrier which tells me no. It is exactly this barrier which created the words choice, luck, random.


@ Global Warming: /quote GamiSB: Global warming is a pain in the @$$