Timeline for Can a Terminator be bargained with?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 20, 2023 at 0:33 | answer | added | jmoreno | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 20, 2023 at 0:32 | answer | added | Robbie Goodwin | timeline score: -1 | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 21:01 | answer | added | Ruslan Oblov | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 15:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSciFi/status/1616088105991213056 | ||
| Jan 19, 2023 at 10:37 | comment | added | LogicDictates | Define what you mean by "modified." As I said, 'Carl' was never reprogrammed, so it wasn't modified in that sense. If you consider it modified in the sense that it grew beyond its original programming as a result of the learning capabilities inherent to its CPU, then yes, it was modified, but the T-800 in the first film had the same learning capabilities and would have evolved in much the same way, given time. In fact, it was already learning and growing in the first film; it just wasn't as far along the learning curve as 'Carl.' | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 10:27 | comment | added | releseabe | @LogicDictates: The question is about the T-800 that Kyle was talking about, not one that has been modified. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 10:26 | comment | added | LogicDictates | That said, I have added evidence pertaining directly to the T-800 in the first film to my answer below. And if you're only specifically interested in whether it's possible to bargain or reason with a T-800 before it's had time to evolve and grow beyond it's original programming, then I think you should edit your question to add that stipulation, because that's a much more specific question than what you asked originally, and it's still more specific than even what the current version of your question is asking. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 10:24 | comment | added | LogicDictates | @releseabe - Regarding the edit you made to your question, the Terminator in the first, second, fifth and sixth films are all the same model: T-800s. You could argue that the one in T2 and 'Pops' from Genisys were reprogrammed by humans, and are therefore suspect as examples, but 'Carl' was never reprogrammed. He just naturally evolved over time, because of the same "learning computer" installed in both its skull and the T-800 from the first film. Therefore, 'Carl' is a valid indicator of the kind of behaviour the T-800 from the first film was capable of, given sufficient learning time. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 9:34 | comment | added | vsz | @releseabe : As I said, he kills him to eliminate a witness (and kills her shortly before, to take her place). But he doesn't kill them at their first interaction, doesn't even threaten them, he acts friendly. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 9:24 | comment | added | releseabe | @Moo: If he is in their presence, sure, violence is his go to if they resist, probably a pretty effective method. But he had someone on the phone and they offered John's location for money, maybe he would wire transfer funds if that was the fastest the way. Not sure about the T-800, so I am asking. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 9:21 | comment | added | releseabe | @vsz and then he kills them, by and by. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 9:14 | comment | added | vsz | @Moo : that kill in T2 happens to eliminate a witness. The T-1000 interacted with civilians many times, even including earlier conversations with the foster parents, when it didn't kill anyone. It even managed to be friendly enough with the foster parents at the beginning, to persuade them into providing information voluntarily . | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 7:11 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 19, 2023 at 2:27 | comment | added | Moo | @releseabe once it becomes obvious the person he is interacting with has or may have information or a value, the terminator acts violently - if you try and demand something in return, they will turn to violence. In T2, the T-1000 kills someone for merely being in the background while they are engaging with the target over the phone - thats a much lower threshold than extracting information. Also, torture isnt necessarily "fun", its a means to an end - gathering of information or forcing an action. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 0:26 | answer | added | LogicDictates | timeline score: 21 | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 0:02 | comment | added | releseabe | @Moo: in the second movie, when it makes its arm into a needle-sharp appendage, it is clear he understands torture. He may be a model who could even offer cash for information. It is clear that even the Arnold version does not kill for fun; he interacts with many people whom he does not kill. | |
| Jan 19, 2023 at 0:00 | history | edited | releseabe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
clarification
|
| Jan 18, 2023 at 23:42 | comment | added | lucasbachmann | There has been an awful lot of terminators with various levels of sophisticated behavior see for example terminator.fandom.com/wiki/Myron_Stark | |
| Jan 18, 2023 at 23:33 | comment | added | Moo | Given the comment in T2 about Terminators having "detailed files on human anatomy", Im betting torture is well within their repertoire... | |
| S Jan 18, 2023 at 23:28 | history | suggested | knightwatch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Removed redundant statement; Fixed title
|
| Jan 18, 2023 at 23:20 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 18, 2023 at 23:28 | |||||
| Jan 18, 2023 at 23:10 | history | asked | releseabe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |