Kevin Perjurer (not their real name) recounts the history of Disney's "Living Characters Initiative", a multi-decade attempt to create a more immersive character-driven experience.
spoilers
This is basically an introductory course on AI as told through the history of Disney's animatronics. There is a companion video which covers the early decades of robotics and focuses on Walt's futurism; this longer video focuses on how AI has attempted to ~~pull money out of customer wallets~~ delight park visitors by putting smiles onto faces. Perjurer focuses on concrete examples; there's no talk of hyperreality here, although there is a bit of theory-building which fits each example into a generic framework for understanding conversations.
The video has too many good sneers for me to choose. A common theme is guests tricking AI hosts into behaving inappropriately. There's this theme of the robots only functioning properly within controlled conditions, as if every robot were its own science experiment. This lines up with what I've seen in manufacturing and logistics; robots sure can work fast but they are inflexible, pre-programmed, and highly sensitive to unexpected variance in their environment.
No, I take it back. Listening to E.T. say "D-D-D-D-D-D-" or "lasagna, lasagna" is very funny. Skip to the interlude about Universal Studios for that.
Of course, little of this is truly new, but it's nice to see a version of this history which puts everything together to point out that Disney's goal of creating robots which imitate inhuman characters is fucked-up horror but which isn't a fucked-up horror story. Going in the other direction, an AI-skeptical viewpoint could maybe make those stories more interesting.
This is tougher than it sounds, at least in the USA. This 2018 law-review article fully works two examples for Pastafarians, focusing on Holy Headgear (pasta strainers, colanders, or salad spinners, worn as hats) and Friday. Their opinion is fairly nuanced because employers are traditionally given a wide range of options for proffering labor to employees without infringing on employee expression. They conclude that the main issue with Pastafarian claims isn't anything to do with the sincerity of religious belief, but the specific nature of asking to never work another Friday again. Fridays are too much of a request, but Holy Headgear is probably fine. The prophet wrote some commentary on this article:
Flipping things around, employers have been hesitant to embrace or endorse my Pastafarianism even when I enthusiastically point out e.g. that I can work during the winter solstice. They know that it would lead to requests for religious respect. BTW, somebody's surely gonna be a little snot and say something like "but Pastafarianism isn't a real religion, it's a parody." First, they're missing the point: employers think religious complaints about AI are bullshit, just like they think Pastafarianism is bullshit, which is why they're not predisposed to honor such complaints. Second, they're missing the point: I don't need their permission to eat noodles every Friday, but I do need an employer's permission to not be scheduled to work.