Timeline for Why does the Terminator (T-800) have a HUD?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feb 17, 2019 at 11:00 | vote | accept | Nras | ||
Oct 1, 2014 at 22:24 | comment | added | Mazura | The CPU from the first terminator is what they modeled the new tech from. "Things we would of never thought of...", more boot-strap paradoxes. You may be thinking of the conversation between Dyson and his wife, in the deleted scenes. | |
Oct 1, 2014 at 15:06 | history | edited | user62707 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added some thoughts to clarify my post in relation to some comments made regarding it.
|
Sep 29, 2014 at 7:03 | comment | added | Nras | @Lakey, yes, you are right with what I asked. I thought it was clear that i was not looking for the answer, that this is done so the audience receives information on what the terminator is doing by writing "Obviously this is done so the viewer notices what the Terminator is doing at that times, but [...]". To your other comment: i totally agree, the datafeed analyzed will most likeley not be processed into an image and then again read from that image to be further processed. | |
Sep 28, 2014 at 7:44 | comment | added | GreenAsJade | FWIW, I couldn't bring myself to upvote this answer, because it is three different answers and I only agree with one of them :( | |
Sep 28, 2014 at 0:53 | comment | added | Lakey | While #3 is most likely, #2 does raise an interesting point. Helper processors could very well be analyzing raw images and extracting useful information to feed to the primary processor. However, the means by which they relay this information would probably not be graphically. It would make no sense for the helper processors to analyze an image and extract useful information, only to put that information back into graphical form and send it to the primary processor, which then must analyze the graphics in order to re-extract said useful information. | |
Sep 28, 2014 at 0:43 | comment | added | Lakey | @nras, no you didn't ask "for" an in-universe answer. You asked "if" there was an in-universe answer. Thaddeus was simply trying to explain the most likely answer to your question, which is: no, the HUD is just a visual cue for the audience, as there are only very poorly contrived reasons why a computer would need to display information to itself. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 21:39 | comment | added | Mazura | @Xantec Possible response: Yes/no. Or what? Go away. Please come back later. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 19:32 | comment | added | Xantec | @Richard Yea, I'm rewatching it now and noticing that. But the first time we see it isn't until the Terminator is already chasing Sarah. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 19:13 | comment | added | Valorum | @Xantec - You do still see a HUD though; terminator.wikia.com/wiki/File:Decibel_overload.jpg | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 18:37 | comment | added | Xantec | @Thaddeus The first movie got along okay without showing us a HUD for the most part. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 18:30 | comment | added | Nras | I kind of disagree with your point 2). Surely information is passed around within the different processes runing in the Terminator. But the proccesses will not communicate over visual input in that HUD-like domain, right? Maybe it was done like this for the developers in order to verify what information is passed (and made the information humanly readable). | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 18:28 | comment | added | Nras | @Thaddeus yes I am aware of that and stated it in my question. I explicitely asked for an in-universe explanation. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 17:59 | comment | added | Thaddeus Howze | Since it would be difficult to explain why a machine self-narrates for the audience, the simplest concession would be a "HUD" for the viewers to read and interpret the actions of the machine. Imagine the movie without the HUD and you can see its actions would be difficult to interpret and confirm which is what the viewer wants to be able to do. | |
Sep 27, 2014 at 17:56 | history | answered | user62707 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |