Talk:HAL 9000/Archive 1

HAL 9000 and Frankenstein
Hello all. I have written an article which attempts to demonstrate the link between HAL 9000 and Frankenstein's monster. Specifically, it documents with frame enlargements and analysis Kubrick's borrowing of a scene from the 1931 film version of Frankenstein while relating it to broader themes in 2001. I think a summary of its findings may be a useful addition, but I hesitate to make any changes myself. For your consideration, it is found here:

[http://cineprism.wordpress.com/2007/12/11/kubrick%E2%80%99s-frankenstein-hal-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/ ] --EmpiresEvening (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

GLaDOS
Am I the only one who thinks GLaDOS of Portal was inspired by HAL 9000? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.5.199 (talk) 19:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not unlikely, Valve is given to giving nods and winks to various things in their games. GLaDOS is a much more malevolent character, though, from what we're told of her; HAL was basically driven to his acts by human idiocy.

HAL = IBM
For anybody who still believes that this was a coincidence, here's what Doug Trumbull had to say about IBM:

quote ''IBM was the original contractor for much of the computer interface design on the film. There were IBM logos designed for the film, and there were IBM design consultants working with Kubrick on the layout of the controls and computer screens. It was only when they found out that HAL was going to go apeshit and kill the whole crew that IBM pulled out of the project and all the logos came off.'' unquote

"even getting one of his characters to deny it in the sequel 2010 Odyssey Two"
 * That was from the book and not the movie 2010: The Year We Make Contact, right? I only read the book 2010 once, but have seen the movie 7 or 8 times and can't remember that statement form the film. --User:maveric149
 * Might well be the case, I haven't seen the film, but Dr Chandra definitely denies it in the book. If so, revise the article.  --Robert Merkel
 * Yeah, in the book, Dr Chandra says something like "I would have though that by now, any fool would know that HAL stands for Heuristic ALgorythm" (modulo thranslation, I don't have the original version). By the way, anyone knows the real name of Dr Chandra ? I recall his real name is longer, like Chandrasekhar or something... Rama 07:20, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Dr. Chandrasegrampilli, I believe, modulo spelling. Anville 15:23, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Dr. Sivasubramanian Chandrasegarampillai according to Wikipedia. However do you actually believe that this is really where the name HAL comes from ? Just look at most space programs: what is the probability of the name of the mission to have a nice-sounding acronym ? But it turns out that they're all nice and agreable. Why ? Because you choose the acronym before the name of the mission and then you make the name fit. Besides, Chandra's answer seems weird to me: too agressive for something (knowing about heuristic algorithms) which isn't that obvious.

"A similar alphabetic shift is behind the abbreviation WNT for Windows NT." Would somebody like to explain this? I don't get it - seems to be a fairly straightforward abbreviation, not an alphabetic shift. It certainly doesn't seem to be analogous to IBM->HAL. The equivalent would be XOU or VMS... GRAHAMUK 00:12, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * VMS is exactly right. Consider who developed VMS, and later developed Windows NT. -- Karada 00:21, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Okaaay.... that is not at all clear in this article. But I also think it's purely a coincidence, no? GRAHAMUK


 * No cooincidence. I have a friend who used to work with Dave Cutler (who wrote WinNT) when he worked in the VMS security group at Digital. Branciforte3241 06:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

In the sequel the existance of another is revealed? I thought it was in the first one too - didn't it fail to generate the same error? 207.189.98.44 22:29, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * That is correct. Both the book and the film, 2001, make it plain that there were several HAL 9000 models and that Mission Control had another one back on Earth which did not make the prediction about the Discovery's communications link failing in 24 hours. -- Derek Ross


 * That was SAL 9000. -- The Anome

"It should be noted, however, that if either Clarke or Kubrick admitted it is a play off of IBM, they could be charged with perjury in relation to the defamation lawsuit IBM attempted to bring concerning the name HAL."

No references elsewhere in the article to lawsuits. Anyone want to provide some details, or should this line just go since it's conjecture otherwise? -- 142.166.3.82 (talk) 18:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

My two bits is that it could be mentioned as an "urban legend", unless someone can dig up an actual reference, quoting Clarke, saying that he meant HAL to be related to IBM. There are numerous references that say otherwise. LonelyBeacon (talk) 18:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It's from Urbana!
Was NCSA active in any form when the book was written? The article on NCSA gives a founding year of 1986, but I wonder if something of note computer-wise must have been going on at UIUC much earlier. -- knoodelhed 07:18, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

-- The introduction is some what fractured, "He... He... He...", I will fix it, and you can discuss if my changes were an improvement. --ShaunMacPherson 16:50, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm surprised there's no reference in the article to HAL Communications Corp. in Urbana. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.118.253.68 (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Its from Urbana, because that's where the ILLIACs were built at UIUC, and they were the inspiration for the computer sinc eit was such an advanced computer university. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.220.203 (talk) 22:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Triple redundancy?
Removed from the article:


 * In the 2001 movie HAL features a design with triple redundancy, so that if one of the three modules fails the other two can outvote it. However, the formal study of fault-tolerant computing shows that such a vote-based sanity check will not actually protect against the failure of a single node in a three-node system like HAL. Thus the failure of only a single one of HAL's redundant modules would be sufficient to compromise the system, as apparently happened in the movie. It is not known whether Kubrick and Clarke were aware of this fact when they wrote the story.

Where in the movie does it say this? Where are the lines of dialogue? Cite, please. -- The Anome 19:16, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I second this objection, triple redundancy is never mentioned in the dialog, one might infer if from the design of the HAL's brain room, but it sure is a stretch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aajacksoniv (talk • contribs) 14:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, I probably haven't read the book in twenty years, I may have even actually saw the movie when it was in theatres, but it's coming back to me and I remember that too, that the book mentions that Hal was triple-redundant and a 2-out-of-3 vote would disable the third module. So I remember that part from the book myself. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 02:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * So it needs to be corrected, the item is in the book, not in the movie. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 02:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * While it may be technically true that a triply-redundant system is not fail safe, this s not the true source of HAL's malfunctions as a character in the plot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Argantael (talk • contribs) 04:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Wordplay
First of all, kudos for re-organizing the "wordplay" section.


 * In 2010: Odyssey Two, the character Dr. Chandra, HAL's creator, states that the name means "Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer". When Clarke devised this version of the name is unclear.

I may be completely mistaken, but I believe this acronym appears in the 2001 novel, soon after HAL is introduced. &mdash;Anville 16:17, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The wordplay part was removed:. I came to this page from 2001: A Space Odyssey, only to find the link HAL 9000 is now nonexistent. --Menchi 02:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I've corrected this link from 2001: A Space Odyssey and 2001: A Space Odyssey (novel). --Bruce1ee 11:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Fictional character?
In the intro HAL is refered to as a fictional character – should this not be fictional computer? --Bruce1ee 11:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I've changed the intro to read "fictional computer/character" (HAL was actually a bit of both). I've also added the year 2001 first appeared (which is important to show the context in which it appeared) and a new section "The future of computing". --Bruce1ee 13:16, 31 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Well yes, since HAL is fully conscious, he qualifies also as a character :p I wonder whether he votes. Rama 13:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

lol? in a article?
somebody should clean up that section.

--80.121.21.236 08:16, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * indeed. I have moved this to the talkpage, see what we can do with it... Rama 08:26, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

__________

While some of you may be aware that the HAL 9000 was a Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer, while the female version developed years later and used to test a complete shut down/start up simulation in the initial proceedure to insure that HAL could be brought back online by Dr. Chandra was a SAL 9000, Stochastically programmed ALgorithmic computer.

This is interesting as her architecture would not actually correctly emulate the HAL 9000, except as a macroroutine, and in which case, it was not necessary to shut her down to run the emulation of HAL.

---Heuristic- involving or serving as an aid to learning, discovery, or problem- solving by experimental and especially trial-and-error methods ; also : of or relating to exploratory problem-solving techniques that utilize self-educating techniques (as the evaluation of feedback) to improve performance 

---Stochistic- RANDOM; specifically : involving a random variable 2 : involving chance or probability : PROBABILISTIC 

Thus in Arthur Clarke's mind, the male was locked into a loop of error, based on his faith in his creator and so was terminated, and it took the female to provide a RIB (Release InhiBition) and so allow Dr. Chandra to bring HAL back to life.... lol

It is also interesting to note that the Holographic Isoplanar blocks of memory used as the core on the HAL contained a trillion trillion bytes of capacity, even by 1968 spectrographic film resolution technology... which of course, was not necessary. The use of pre-encoded Holography for the core, pretty well neutralizes the Heuristic potential of the computer.

In today's world (2005), all those memory blocks would compress down to less than the size of a DVD, be 1/2 inch thick, be made of lithium nobate or other Chinese Crystal and maintain write/RW capacity of over 50 trillion bytes! In other words, HAL could be implimented in a standard desksize computer case. SAL, who will be a Quantum Computer, will be even smaller. --J.D.


 * I've moved more discussion text by 71.37.1.193 from the article to here. --Bruce1ee 09:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

__________

While some of you may be aware that the HAL 9000 was a Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer, while the female version developed years later and used to test a complete shut down/start up simulation in the initial proceedure to insure that HAL could be brought back online by Dr. Chandra was a SAL 9000, Stochastically programmed ALgorithmic computer.

This is interesting as her architecture would not actually correctly emulate the HAL 9000, except as a macroroutine, and in which case, it was not necessary to shut her down to run the emulation of HAL.

---Heuristic- involving or serving as an aid to learning, discovery, or problem- solving by experimental and especially trial-and-error methods ; also : of or relating to exploratory problem-solving techniques that utilize self-educating techniques (as the evaluation of feedback) to improve performance 

---Stochistic- RANDOM; specifically : involving a random variable 2 : involving chance or probability : PROBABILISTIC 

Thus in Arthur Clarke's mind, the male was locked into a loop of error, based on his faith in his creator and so was terminated, and it took the female to provide a RIB (Release InhiBition) and so allow Dr. Chandra to bring HAL back to life.... lol  ---Dr. Jon. Dark

__________

__________

It is also interesting to note that the Holographic Isoplanar blocks of memory used as the core on the HAL contained a trillion trillion bytes of capacity, even by 1968 spectrographic film resolution technology... which of course, was not necessary. The use of pre-encoded Holography for the core, pretty well neutralizes the Heuristic potential of the computer.

In today's world (2005), all those memory blocks would compress down to less than the size of a DVD, be 1/2 inch thick, be made of lithium nobate or other Chinese Crystal and maintain write/RW capacity of over 50 trillion bytes! Here is a Holographic processing cell of 3 meg. tesselations x 9 matix layers deep.  In other words, HAL could be implimented in a standard desksize computer case. SAL, who will be a Quantum Computer, will be even smaller.- Dr. Jon Dark

Quote
I really think the famous and memorable quote "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that." ought to be mentioned in the article... I'm just not sure exactly where it would fit best. It's in the 2001: A Space Odyssey G Clark 21:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Size and ubiquitousity of computers
I am a but unhappy with this part:
 * The film's creators felt that as computers got more powerful, they would get bigger and bigger. HAL occupies much of the living area on Discovery and nowhere are there any desktop computers, laptops, PDAs or even digital watches.


 * HAL is not larger than the first computers; "as computers got more powerful, they would get bigger and bigger" leaves the impression that HAL is bigger than anything that ever lived, but I think that it would not be huge compared to, say, ENIAC.
 * There are actually computers basically everywhere, when you look at the interiors of the moon shuttle, typically. On Discovery, there are terminals to HAL everywhere as well.

An now for something completely different: Anyone compared the image below with the HAL9000 logo featured on the cameras ? :) Rama 09:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

A Few Things

 * I think in the trivia section, there isn't much real trivia there. Most of it is parodies of HAL.  Care Bears? Dexter's Lab?  They aren't really notable in my mind.  Maybe we should keep only a few nice parodies.
 * How about moving HAL's French name to trivia?
 * In the opening, it says "In the 2001 film, HAL is depicted...". I think it's worded poorly; it makes it seem as if the movie came out in 2001.  How about just "In the film, HAL is depicted..."?

Cited References
The little blurb about the pod being in Star Wars Episode I can't possibly be true can it? I thought it was a well known fact that Kubrick had all props and sets from 2001 destroyed. Also I've looked at the scene mentioned and I see no such pod, so I'm going to delete this for the time being. Penarestel 04:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a depiction of the pod in the scene where Liam Neeson and Watto walk through the junkyard. Whether this is a prop that was recreated, or CGI is something I can't answer, but it is absolutely there in the background. LonelyBeacon 11:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Computer chess history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL9000#The_future_of_computing

This section implies that a full chess program was a fantasy in 1968 but that is completely false. The first full chess playing programs came out in the fifties.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_%28programming%29#Chronology_of_computer_chess

I don't feel like editing it but I thought I'd point it out...

Pictures in Article
How is it that among the pitures in the article, there isn't one of a close-up on HAL's eye? Seems like that's what people visualize when thinking of HAL 9000.

I agree. I'd put it in, but it's getting late, and I'm tired. Maybe in a few days...--Planetary 05:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I can't find a good image. I don't own the actual film, so I can't take a screenshot, and the others I found aren't exactly as in the movie. If somone else has it perhaps they could?--Planetary 04:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * A bit of a late message, but I put it in before.--Planetary 03:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

HAL 90,000
I accidently reverted Andy12090's edit because I thought I'd made a typo. Does anyone have a copy of Odyssey Two handy? Was it the HAL 10,000 or the HAL 90,000? (DrZarkov 22:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC))
 * I have read the book. It is HAL 10,000. Andy120290 00:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

questionable prediction
''When the film 2001 was first screened in 1968, the year 2001 was a long way away and a computer like HAL seemed quite plausible at the time. In the mid-1960s computer scientists were generally optimistic that within a generation or two we would have machines that could pass the Turing test.''

I'm not sure that this is true. Till the early 80s, computer scientists believed that the problems with single layer neural nets would extend to multi-layer neural nets. In the early 80s (IIRC) it was discovered that multi-layer neural nets could work around the limitations inherant in single layer neural nets, serving as a crucial breakthrough in the field of pattern recognition. Someone who understands the field better may want to rewrite that section, or else provide a source for the stated optimism.

Correction to Popular Culture Section
The last portion of text claims that the HAL 9000 blew up because of Insanity Prawn Boy, it was in fact because of Dave from Eurythmics who had messed around with HAL's memory, causing it to malfunction and blow up.

Also, do we really need to know about a Weebl cartoon when talking about HAL?

One other small correction. The article states that Wintermute cannot directly kill human beings. Thats false as Wintermute took direct control of a microlight when Case was being lead out of Straylight by the Turing officers and he killed the Turing officers with the microlight. 209.218.94.130 (talk) 21:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Scale of HAL 9000
In a footnote on page 2-4 of the text "Physics for Future Presidents," the author argues that the size of HAL is a "fundamental oversight" since light travels about 1 foot per nanosecond, and computers do calculations in cycles of on the order of billionths of seconds (given present technology; presumably an artificially intelligent system would be even faster). This entails that computers must be small, and the author argues that making HAL's "core" large enough for a human to walk into is nonsensical. http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/Physics10/PffP.html --babbage 05:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, that's why its called fiction. Next thing you know, someone will say the Monolith wasn't really full of stars!--Planetary 05:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hehe, true enough -- artistic license and all that. I'm just wondering if it's worth a mention in the article. --babbage 20:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I doubt it. The main 2001 article mentions what the movie got right about the future, and what it got wrong.--Planetary 02:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Fairchild-Curtis
The article states: "This Fairchild-Curtis wide angle lens was not used as the eye in the Hal 9000 prop seen in film, because this Fairchild-Curtis wide angle lens is about 8" in diameter, while the Hal 9000 prop eye is about 3" in diameter." I'm not sure if this is correct - few years ago someone was selling one of the actual 2001 HAL's eye props on eBay. It consisted of the familiar panel and logo as seen in the film and a Fairchild-Curtis lens as the eye. It sold for I forget how many digits. I wish I saved that page. (I did save the page offering one of the helmets from 2001 for sale though!) JanPB 05:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, just found in some old notes: it sold for $120,000 on eBay. JanPB 05:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Accent
In the article: "Though HAL is never visualised as a single entity, he is portrayed with a smooth Indian accent,"

Indian? Is someone having a giraffe here? I'm no accent expert, but I have known enough people from India to know that HAL 9000 isn't one of them. 86.150.14.233 14:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe this is in referral to the fact that Dr. Chandra in the novels is indian, not surprising given Arthur C. Clarkes deference to that area. SAL 9000 I believe is also listed as having the same accent due to her being around Dr. Chandra for so long a period. It has been some time since I have read the novels but I find it confusing because I do remember that Dr. Chandra worked hard to hide the fact that he was indian. This would infer that he did not have an accent and would therefore make it difficult for someone to pick up an accent from him.76.16.137.193 04:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

French SAL
I removed this paragraph regarding the French version of 2010: In the French edition of the movie 2010: Odyssey Two'', SAL 9000 sports the voice of a young woman, quickly answering Dr. Chandra in the dialogue. This, much more than the original movie, gives the feeling of an artificial person responding to her creator with blind, immediate obedience.''

This looks to be original research or non-NPOV in implying that the French version is somehow more "correct". My personal opinion, at least based on the orignal film, was that HAL never answered quickly, and rather thought throught things. Candice Bergan's SAL acted similarly. I would certainly not say that the French version is "less correct" or "less authentic", but I think the assertion being made would constitute something of original research. LonelyBeacon 11:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

French phrases usually have more syllables than English ones. So in English movies dubbed into French, the French lines are usually spoken more quickly than usual and with earlier timing to fit the speech into that line's "screen time". Thus, the difference in pacing of dialogue observed in the French version is probably artificial. HAL especially, and SAL by connection, was usually portrayed as having a rather slow, thoughtful, and calming speech, which fits his role in the story as the character charged with the care of the ship and its crew, both physically and psychologically. Had the film been shot in French with the same characterization in mind, SAL's lines would have been spoken more slowly and taken more screen time. Argantael (talk) 22:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Argantael

HAL and Logitech Webcam
There was references to the HAL in a Logitech Orbit Webcam. Apparently, the webcam resembled the HAL. Anarchy 228 01:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hal's inherent contradictions
Why didn't the programmers deduce that there might be a logic-conflict and work around it: something along the lines of "up to date xx/xx/xx pursue the following course of action: from that date, pursue this course of action" - and tell the astronauts that once they reached Jupiter/Saturn (depending upon film or book), that one of several options would be pursued, depending upon which of several sets of local conditions were found (there not having been probes sent to the locality before)? Jackiespeel (talk) 21:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

While HAL is described as technically being software and the computer he runs on, he is specifically developed both in the world of the novel and as a literary character, as a conceptually, mechanically, and psychologically advanced entity with personality. The technology underlying the mental construction of HAL is apparently some sort of Heuristic ALgorithm operating on an artificial neural network. This means HAL as an entity or personality was not as directly programmed as expert systems are in contemporary computers - his underlying construction and development have a quality that is not entirely deterministic, which is what gives him the flexibility to learn and grow as much as he does.

Thus, a major aspect of HAL, his personality, is essentially not just "hardwired" or simply and directly programmable. Note that Dr. Chandra is referred to as an instructor, not a programmer. Thus it seems as if much of HAL's knowledge is acquired through a top-down, higher level method of perception, and not through bottom-up, lower levels of programming. For example, a human child learns that 2+2 = 4, and more abstract maths especially, in this top down fashion. You can't program arithmetic or calculus into a person from their genes - you have to teach them through their mind.

HAL's personality is meant to interact with humans in as human-like a fashion as possible, and in order to interact with the complexities of human personalities, he must, to a certain extent, have and display them himself. It is at this higher level of abstraction, which seems to be the level at which HAL understands many of his mission directives, including and especially the concealment of vital mission data and directives from the crew he is otherwised charged with caring for, that HAL experiences mental difficulties in prioritizing events and actions.

In a wider literary sense, the HAL character is very intelligent, but very naive, and in a sense, very innocent, and very unable to understand certain human logical inconsistencies, especially lying. This leads HAL to become mentally unstable and take many actions, including killing the crew, that are problematic. Argantael (talk) 21:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC) Argantael

Is HAL a Computer?
The depiction of the HAL 9000 (Heuristically programmed Algorithmic Computer) in 2001 remains one of the films most eerie elements. For their description of artificial intelligence, Kubrick and Clarke only had the terminology and of the mid-1960s. At that time the prevailing concept expected Artificial Intelligence (AI) to be a programmed computer. Thus the term computer, with all its implications of it being a machine, occurs repeatedly. In the last 40 years no true AI has emerged. Todays corresponding term would be strong AI, Kubrick and Clarke's use of mid-1960s terminology obscures the fact that the film and novel authors constructed an AI that is unmistakably strong, that is, capable of "general intelligent action." How this would have been achieved Kubrick and Clarke left as an extrapolation. Clarke provides a little extrapolation in the novel:

"Probably no one would ever know this: it did not matter. In the 1980's Minsky and Good had shown how neural networks could be generated automatically -- self-replicated-- in accordance with an arbitrary learning program. Artificial brains could be grown by a process strikingly analogous to the development of the human brain. In any given case, the precise details would never be known, and even if they were, they would be millions of times too complex for human understanding." A. C. Clarke (2001: A Space Odyssey, ROC edition, trade paper back, 2005, bottom page 92 - top page 93 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aajacksoniv (talk • contribs) 02:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC) --128.157.160.13 (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

SAL
The main article implies that SAL 9000 was HAL's twin on Earth (in the film), but that is never documented in the film or in Clarke's novel. In fact in the novel Clarke mentions there are two backup HALs available for doing simulation checks. Do we know when SAL 9000 was created? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aajacksoniv (talk • contribs) 02:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I just re-read chapter three of 2010, entitled SAL. This is the only mention of SAL in the entire book.  There is no mention as to when SAL was activated.  The closest it comes is Dr. Chandra querying: You have operated continuously, have you not, since you were first switched on?  The actual action (minus the recollections which introduce Chandra) is very similar to the film.  I too have found it curious that people assume that SAL was HAL's twin on Earth during the Discovery mission.  I've read 2001, 2010, seen both films, and read The Lost Worlds of 2001, and there is no reference to this being factual. LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is the passage in 2001: A Space Odyssey, chapter 24:

"Hello, X-ray-Delta-One-this is Mission Control. We have completed the analysis of your AE-35 difficulty, and both our Hal Nine Thousands are in agreement. The report you gave in your transmission two-one-four-six of a second failure prediction confirms the diagnosis. "As we suspected the fault does not lie in the AE-35 unit,....." So, the Discovery HAL has at least two ground siblings... and neither of them is named SAL.


 * I've put a dubious tag to the statement. It seems it is wrong. --arny (talk) 13:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I am going to see if I can rewrite this or delete it if that is not possible.  If anyone finds a source identifying SAL as HAL's twin in 2001, then it should be restored and referenced. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I have shortened the section about sibling computers in the 2001 story, based on the above quotations. I hope it reads a little better. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

(1) In chapter 3 of 2010 SAL is mentioned explicitly as being HAL's twin. (Tho Clarke ,in 2010, does not say 'she' is his ONLY twin.) (2)The novel 2001 never says, never calls out the word SAL, in fact in the only mention of Earth bound HAL's, the only name used is HAL, in the novel two HAL's , see above (There could have been even more). (3)In the film no SAL is mentioned.

This leads me to think that Clarke was not too careful about the 'twin' reference in chapter 3, SAL could have been HAL's twin but 'she' seems to have been isolated from her other 'twins' in the mission control investigation. This causes a confusion with both the novel 2001 and the film 2001.

Clark must have watched the film, or even had a copy of the continuity script... because, as we know, he re-tooled the whole narrative of 2010 to fit the film. In fact there are passages of the film dialog straight from the movie unto 2010's pages.

It's really hard to know what Clarke had in mind, is SAL, who is now 9 years more 'evolved' than HAL his true 'twin'? Or was 'she' at one time and now ....just how much does she differ from the Discovery HAL? Kind of disappointing that Clarke did not use or develop the SAL character more in 2010. In fact the revived HAL has less to say and do in 2010, except for the spectacular 'boost' maneuver given to the Leonov. --aajacksoniv 19:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Twin' implies two and no more. Therefore, if SAL is indeed HAL's twin, 'she' is the only other one, otherwise they'd be triplets. Personally, given the quote above from the text of 2001, I'd say triplets is the more accurate description. Hey, Sir Arthur wrote a lot of words over the years, and revisited the 'universe' of 2001-2010-2061-3001 several times. A continuity error or two is to be expected.  &yen;  Jacky Tar  08:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean about twins. Well the explicit evidence is that SAL is never a name or term used on the novel version of 2001, and the film narrative never mentions a SAL. We are only left with that statement in 2010 cited above. Clarke never elucidates what a 'twin' 9000 series is, like I said even if SAL were created at the same time as HAL (and the other HALs!) 'she' would surely have 'evolved' in years since the Discovery HAL 'lobotomy'. I can't speak for 2061 since I found it so bad I never finished it, and thus never read 3001. But I am guessing SAL never shows up again?--aajacksoniv (talk) 22:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The future of computing (HAL is not a laptop or notebook)
A common objection to HAL's brain room is its size, granted solid state electronics may have made HAL's 'brain' smaller, but HAL is not a 'computer' in the sense they we know it today. One of the biggest problems the film had to deal with was being confined to the language of the 1960's. Kubrick and Clarke really only had the term 'computer' to use. It could be the term 'program' or 'programmed' is used only once in the film in association with HAL. HAL is an AI and we still have no idea what physically such an entity would look like. For an extensive discussion of this see The Legacy of HAL as referenced in the main article:
 * HAL's Legacy, on-line ebook (mostly full-text) of the printed version edited by David G. Stork, MIT Press, 1997, ISBN 0-262-69211-2, a collection of essays on HAL —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aajacksoniv (talk • contribs) 03:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If HAL isn't a computer, then what is the AI running in? I would agree that 'he' is not a (single) computer; far more likely 'he' is a massive parallel processing computer.  &yen;  Jacky Tar  08:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

HAL is apparently a solid state 'strong AI'. The Legacy of HAL, mentioned above, states that we are no where near an AI like HAL, even here in 2010!--aajacksoniv (talk) 22:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Is it Chandra?
There is no mention of Dr. Chandra in the first film. Actually, while shutting down, HAL mentions his constructor's name (unfortunately I forgot it), but it was not Chandra.

I don't recall he was mentioned in the book either, but maybe I forgot that. Therefore, I've marked the statement dubious for now. --arny (talk) 14:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As I recall, HAL mentions his instructor, not ''constructor". In 2010, Floyd specifically says that Chandra built HAL. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, Chandra created him - which was the reason he was placed on the mission in 2010.79.66.107.140 (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I've read this series of books - 2001, 2010, 2061, 3001 - and I forget which one they mention it in, but Dr. Chandra's full name is given in one of them, and it is as listed in the article. Argantael (talk) 22:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Argantael

I believe in the original film HAL claims to have been constructed by "Professor Langley". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.204.156.10 (talk) 17:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

--- Ablonus (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC) Yes and no! In the book at the end of chapter 28, In Vacuum, HAL says, "My first instructor was Dr. Chandra ... he taught me to sing a song."

In the film HAL says, "My instructor was Mr. Langley and he taught me to sing a song." Note the title was Mr, not Professor. Ablonus (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC) ---

I've updated the reference in the main page after checking book and movie. Maybe someone would like to check it for format etc. One small infelicity: whether to describe Chandra/Langley as first instructor or just instructor. Check my comment above for the difference. Ablonus (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

"B-Class Film"?
This article is categorized under "B-Class Film articles", but I wouldn't really agree that "2001" is a B-movie... Or maybe I've mixed up the meaning of the B-class phrase used here? --arny (talk) 14:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The article is rated "B" ..... articles are rated based on how well they are written and sourced: stub, start, C, B, Good Article (GA), A, Feature Article. I see your confusion though with a "B-Film". LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistencies
This article seems to pick and choose as to whether or not it is about the books or the films. Please fix this. Phantom Hoover (not signed in) 18:34, 8 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.136.211 (talk)

Resident evil
Red Queen and White Queen - should be mentioned in the popular culture section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.203.67 (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

K.I.T.T. vs. HAL9000
Has anyone ever noticed the similarity between HAL and KITT from Knight Rider? It has always reminded me a lot of HAL because no matter how aggressively you speak to it, its voice will always stay calm. I would even claim KITT to have been inspired by HAL. (in reality: its author, of course) -andy 92.229.240.179 (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Viz. Apollo 13 air-to-ground transcript
The transcript shows the short "Hal" exchange at 00 11 20 33 (page 46) and the beginning of the crisis at 02 07 55 20 (page 160), i.e., almost two full days later (the time is coded as day-of-mission-from-zero hour minute second). This is indeed "before disaster struck" but not so close in time as to make it particularly interesting. (Also, the crisis had nothing to do with a computer malfunction.) The fact that the exchange was captured in a transcript does not make it notable. --71.174.159.87 (talk) 09:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The Prop Lens
The article frustratingly skips over the exact model of prop lens used to depict HAL's eye in the film. It identifies the lens that Kubrick used for HAL's point-of-view shots, but doesn't mention the prop. This chap seems to have identified the correct lens although he doesn't indicate what it is, beyond that it's an early Nikon. These men convincingly argue that it's a mid-60s Nikon 8mm fisheye, although the text around the end of the lens isn't quite the same. Is there a more formal source somewhere? It would be unfortunate to have to write "according to Supershotgun24, who has 5,400 posts on a message board, Kubrick used a Nikon 8mm fisheye lens as the eye of HAL". -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)