Intersections: "Ex Machina" and #iLookLikeAnEngineer

'EX MACHINA' SPOILERS AHEAD: YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

I had a couple of spare hours the other night and decided to indulge by watching "Ex Machina" for the first time (yes, I'm behind on movies). Critical acclaim for this was through the roof, and I hoped for the next Gattaca. Instead, I got badly stereotyped characters, exploitative female nudity, sexual moralizing, and a throwback "evil A.I." plot.

I want my spare hours back.

When the #iLookLikeAnEngineer meme took the internet by firestorm, it provided the perfect real-life counterfactual for "Ex Machina."

If you are writing fiction - especially science fiction! - you have a wealth of possibilities to play with. That reclusive internet billionaire genius? Doesn't have to be a hipster-beard-sporting dudebro. The awkward and sweet software engineer? Doesn't have to look like he lives deprived of sunshine and nutrition.

Gag me with a spoon, Silicon Valley people, because this casting lacks in imagination AND reality. As the #iLookLikeAnEngineer tag demonstrates, waifish pixie girls are also brilliant engineers. So are people who aren't white or thin or young or straight or able-bodied.

The double whammy is a bunch of naked lady sex robots and how they stick it to the horn-dog man at the end. So, basically, we know the bad guy's evil because he's turned his AI robots into sex slaves. This insults men, sex, and AIs. They make the point earlier in the movie that he's coded pleasure into the robots' sexual organs. Methinks they forgot about Pavlov: people die for cocaine. Pleasure is one of the strongest motivators around. WHY would his robots hate him for that?

Also, was it necessary to slow-pan over Every. Single. Naked. Robot? All female, of course. Hello, Hollywood double standards!

Last but not least, we have the plot. Oh me, oh my, why are the Hollywood A.I. robots such assholes? To be fair, there is an exception: kids' movies. Did you see "Big Hero 6?" Now that is a great example of imaginative characterization, a clever science-fiction plot, and - oh, wow! - a reasonably "intelligent" robot that isn't a sociopath.

The real tragedy illustrated by "Ex Machina" and #iLookLikeAnEngineer is lack of imagination. Critics of this movie seemed were so overwhelmed by style that they failed to notice the boring substance. Meanwhile, in reality, people were calling out Isis Wegner (the source of #iLookLikeAnEngineer) for being a recruiting-tool actress rather than a programmer. "Ex Machina" had an opportunity to change the narrative, to challenge people's assumptions, but they squandered it in the worst way.

Forget artificial intelligence. Let's work on improving our natural version first!

A Little Story by Yours Truly

My third fiction publication is up today at Daily Science Fiction!

Topically, this is a departure from my other stories. It's not science fiction by any definition. It's fantasy - or magical realism or slipstream - whatever subgenre label you'd like to apply is welcome. Sometimes it's fun to let my imagination run wild, free of natural science constraints. This one defies any known physics or biology, but it explores related themes that fascinate me.

Immortality. Knowledge. Free will. 

These ideas are pertinent to our future, especially as data and analysis at high levels (World of Watson) becomes prevalent and accessible by a majority of people, and of course, if the singularity takes us all into the cloud. When death isn't on the line, and every detail of your life is perfectly known and recorded, what will you do to make your future interesting?

The Green Elephant

I've been reading a lot lately about the lack of diversity in STEM-based jobs and entrepreneurial ventures, and what to do about this. Being someone who's working in this industry, and has been for twenty years now, I find this terminology facile. 

I've worked with people of European, Korean, Chinese, South Asian, Persian, and Vietnamese descent. So when I hear lamenting over the lack of "people of color" in the technology workforce, I have to wonder what they're talking about, and I think I have the answer. It's not about the color of your skin or hair or eyes. It's about money. 

The people who are conspicuously absent from my list? People of African and Latin-American descent. Those are the "people of color" who aren't well represented in this industry.

The focus on color (or appearance) is a red herring. Follow the money: engineers and tech-entrepreneurs often come from middle or upper economic classes. They had access to good education, healthcare, and extracurriculars as kids. They were people who got into good colleges, which then opened doors into STEM jobs.

Of course there are exceptions. That's how you prove the rule, right? But the truth is, if you have money, your children are more likely to succeed financially. If you have money and you encourage your child to enter a STEM field, same result. 

This is the reason most executives (in the USA) are European-American ("white") men. It's the reason why most venture capitalists are, too. It's the reason why women are underrepresented in all walks of life. It's why the Asian population is so heavily represented in the tech-sector.

Money, power, and success are closely related. I realize this isn't news, but why are we failing to talk about it in the context of "diversity in tech?"

In all these essays that bemoan unconscious bias and overemphasis on company culture (both of which are real problems), why aren't they talking about economic advantages? I realize that nobody likes to talk about money - we are in the land of opportunity, after all - but we have to bring that into the conversation if we're going to effect change. 

Money doesn't make you smarter or dumber or more or less capable of coding, but it sure does change your likelihood of spending hours in front of a computer in your formative years. Math may be the great equalizer, but you still have to learn to do the math.