Did Joi actually love him?

Or was she just following her programming with pretend emotions. Consider these scenes:

1. When Autismo brings her outside for the first time, she claims enthusiastically she loves him so much. He gets pissed and insists she doesn't have to say so, as it's evidently a stock phrase.
2. When they start believing he might Deckardt's son, she makes a point of giving a name like a real human would: she names him 'Joe'. Later, Autismo walks in front of a commercial for VR waifus and the hologram tells him 'he looks like an honest Joe', leaving him distraught.

Yes, 2D waifus cannot love you. That's the point.
And 3DPDs are your worst enemy.

It's almost as if this noir cyberpunk world reminds you of something. If only we knew what that all means.

Deckard and K's plotlines parallel each other e.g 'I know what's real'. Essentially, what K went through with Joi is what Deckard went through with Rachel, with some added Christian symbolism added. 'Honest Joe' is a direct parallel for Rachel's 'Don't you love me?' they're essentially reset versions of both character's love interests, and don't share the experiences that lent both the Replicant and the AI a sense of identity (Rachel learning she was an experiment, Joi wanting to put herself at risk to be more human).

The question is left ambiguous, but the answer for both Deckard and K is essentially 'yes' - Deckard's Rachel loved him, just as K's Joi did, and neither of them will be satisfied with well-made copies. Deckard goes 'her eyes were green', and K just walks away.

to the program they were 100% real. She was willing to die just to keep K safe. Nothing else really matters.

But that's only way she was able to communicate.
He meant she don't have to say that because he already knew that. He wasn't pissed.

What's wrong with her jaw?

Binding

You can even argue that all emotions are pretend in humans, as they are just electrical reactions.

Humans (and everything in the universe, for that matter) are programmed. Do not mistake that for a permanent hard wiring, though. It comes down, at the moment, to the question of enfleshment.

But there's a reason neural networks, based on human brains, stand heads above other programming methods atm.

women aren't capable of loving in the same way as men are. no matter how much they claim to love you, there's always some part of them that's willing to drop you for a better man if the opportunity arrives.

Well user, all humans have the capacity to sin. Women are in between men and children emotionally. A good woman is one who doesn’t betray. A bad woman betrays.

But that would be readjusting a brimmed hat.

Not really, you can be a Deist and come to the same conclusion.

I suppose a Deist, but not a Christian one. “God is Love” is a formative statement, but if love is just electrical impulses then God is reduced to them as well. God’s commands to love become pointless.

Electrical impulses are God

Like the internet?

Yes

Machines don't have a sense of self preservation. Presumably the JOIs are programmed to learn which behaviours are most pleasing to their users. The fantasy that she was a real girl, unique and willing to die for him is what was pleasing for K.

Are 3D girls capable of love? I think that's the more interesting question.

They do love alphas.

3D girls worship their bf like a god. Bear in mind how most Humans view god and you see the problem. You are the source of all problems, and if you ask for things in return, you’re a tyrant. God gave us women so we’d experience the same shitty love he gets from us.

Good thing God has his angels, and we have our waifus, then

Why do most humans have a hard time understanding the concept of God?

Is it lack of developing abstract thinking? Is it just easier for them to project their own lives onto God and make him Daddy, rather than try to scratch the veil of an absolute, more human than human, realm?

God has always revealed himself as a Father. The problem is people want Daddy to do everything for them, but then give them total freedom. What they want is an omnipotent servant.

And that is what women want from their boyfriends or husbands. Once you understand this, you understand women totally. Everything they do makes sense. Dykes are just woman-fedora tippers. The desire to cuck is the desire to denigrate their god, and after enough time they abandon him because what good is a god who is beneath you?

It's like the old genie-thing. You can't wish for someone to love you.


That's a modern phenomena user.

There's a difference between father and Father

Nobody questions maternal love, and it is a program. So we either over-value love, or we have some bias against the idea of being programmable because it sounds like it can be easily changed, like an option in a menu. But if its inherent to her code, she would not exist without it, her existence is based on loving, its just as romantic as biologic love.

I swear you could splice that segment in the last part of Drive and no one would know the difference.

apparently biological autism grants shit taste

The Drive song is 4 dimensional, I can listen to it to no end.

Who gives a shit. Seriously it's a mediocre flick.

user, you're nowhere near baseline.

INTERLINKED

user that shit is so cringe

>>>/reddit/

Fucking pleb. Get off this board and go back to Holla Forums.

CELLS.

Rachel's emotions were very real, she just hadn't explored them before she met Rick. She even gets upset and cries when he starts heavily implying that she's a replicant based on Tyrell's niece and not a real person.

How did Tyrell know about his nephew showing his benus to the niece anyway?