As I was saying, I have it on good nformation that Jarvis is dying or dead.
As I was saying, I have it on good nformation that Jarvis is dying or dead. I wonder how Devra will deal with the knowledge that she might be responsible for this.
Here's is todays question.
Here's is todays question. We have all been seeing the word Abaddon around. I am puzzled as to whether this is a reference to a place (synonym for Hades) or a person (Satan or Appylon)(sp). Or is it something else?
I think Devra Bogdanovich is on a mindset that collateral damage is acceptable in view of the her considering XM as an greater imminent danger to humanity. I would love to hear from her if this is correct.
ReplyDeleteIf Dr Bogdanovich has her way we should probably expect many deaths and no small number of other side effects as a result of the portal destabilization.
ReplyDeleteDevra Bogdanovich has no qualms about sending 1 of 5 anti-XM suppository test subjects to their grave. She considers Roland Jarvis to be an abomination and therefore will have no qualms about sending him to his grave.
ReplyDeleteHell, I'm pretty sure most resistance agents will throw a party, cheer her name, make her MVP, then promptly throw her under the bus and take credit for Roland Jarvis 's death.
She'll pretend to care for a bit, but it won't effect her plan of action. She was already OK with killing 1/5 of the worlds population.
ReplyDeleteAnd then Devra re-killed both Farlowe and Jarvis
ReplyDeleteLinda Besh we sure thought we did.
ReplyDeleteMike Wissinger people keep saying I'm dead...not dead just on the mend I hope.And she didn't kill me me 855 tried to if I remember.
ReplyDeleteA thought: Maybe Jarvis will become an XM-Zombie and will start converting people into members of his zombie faction?
ReplyDeleteHmmm... Brains...
She'll be fine, as she believes the original Jarvis to be dead already. That assumes she really believes what she's said.
ReplyDeleteHubert Farlowe and do you know what was the real reason for the kill order? Why not apperhand him? Why kill? Can you elaborate?
ReplyDeleteDevra Bogdanovich feels rather strongly that Roland Jarvis died soon after the escape from Niantic. She doesn't consider the Jarvis we know now as the same person.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Ada has to say about this. Klue S. Care to comment?
ReplyDeleteI wonder, is this only going to affect Jarvis and/or Ada/Klue? Or might her impending virus actually kill all of the sensitives?
ReplyDeleteSince this "vaccine" was rushed out, there's no correlation between the WHO is killed, and what their relation to XM might be. Those more....in tune may be more adversely affected?
If so, Devra herself may not be excluded from the coming sensitive-apocalypse....
Hubert Farlowe - Glad to hear you're still alive and kicking. If Dr Wright's reports are to be believed, though, it sounds like this is going to be more than a fleshwound. A lot of us are hoping you and others with similar conditions aren't bleeding out as a result of the portal virus.
ReplyDeleteJudging by how she dealt with Hank, I don't think she'll care much for her other Niantic Collaborators. She did conspire with Jarvis to run away from the lab as it was being locked down, so maybe there's some connection there we don't know about.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to believe Dr. Bogdanovich has some semblance of human empathy left in her, and she is willing to let her friend die in order to consider her crusade.
ReplyDeleteBut, based on how much she's changed in the last year, I'd harbor little hope for this. Instead, I'd more encouraged by the activation of all five artifacts released so far -- I'm excited to see their impact on the portal network's recovery.
Hubert Farlowe Does this mean you are no longer being strung around by Devra? Are you a freelance agent now?
ReplyDeleteEdgar Allan Wright After he was shot originally, was Roland Jarvis ever really alive again? I understand there was an entity claiming to be Jarvis, was it the entity that you now sense is dying or dead or could you perhaps be still sensing and realizing the death of Roland Jarvis, the man?
ReplyDeleteMultiple people can contribute to the death of a person. Any diminution of life that contributes to the ultimate loss of life can be grounds for a homicide charge.
ReplyDeleteI believe Devra's now too far gone to care. She wrote off Hank when he was in his time of need and she had no qualms stepping over the bodies of her unfortunate 20% who did not survive her vaccine.
She will probably treat Jarvis as another justified killing.
I've met Roland Jarvis in person and shook his hand, and had a chat where he thanked me and the bay area for our efforts in restoring him to life. He told me he was happy to be alive again, and to be breathing the air, and feeling the wonder of the world around him.
ReplyDeleteI guess a conspiracy theorist might argue that's a different Roland Jarvis than the man before, but the person in front of me was definitely a real man, with real thoughts and feelings.
How could you met someone returned from the grave die again, without learning everything you could about his journey? Every major religion of the world, most major philosophies -- this is one of THE most important questions about the human experience. And as a scientist...
Well, Bogdanovich isn't doing science anymore. She's like a Lysenko; she's in the ideology business.
If history has taught us anything martyrs can be even more dangerous once the martyrdom happened, as they can easily become a rallying point for a wide following that was divided would they were still alive.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Devra and the Resistance are better advised to mend fences and try and keep him alive?
Jarvis the fictional leader/artist/alien/zombie of the Enlightened? Or the actor? Really dying or just decided to pursue other acting opportunities?! So many unanswered questions!
ReplyDeleteThe Enlightened will continue to fight for progress, with or without Jarvis.
ReplyDeleteVery true Andrew. You might be able to kill a man (twice), but you cannot kill an idea --- particularly one whose time has come.
ReplyDeleteGiven what kept coming back isn't necessarily jarvis as such. .. she'll probably be pleased with the answer.
ReplyDeleteI think the most likely outcome is that Hank Johnson realized he was a simulacrum, and was not ready to come to terms with that truth -- and saw in Roland Jarvis a mirror of his own conditions.
ReplyDeleteI think it would be hard to deny cause and effect with the virus either. If I shut off the supply of oxygen to your room, you would deny; and to a man whose body was reconstructed with XM, something similar is happening.
Incidentally, it might not be happening if the Resistance had not stolen the immortality shard...
I mean, I guess I could say anybody is pure evil, but I'd expect a more concrete accusation first.
ReplyDeleteAlso, let's not forget hank was exposed to ADA-altered XM, what with the resistance winning the local anomaly in NYC.
We should have suspected something was wrong with that message from SETAI stating out glorious leader is alive and well. One does not spread propaganda if everything just fine..
ReplyDeleteSachith Maduranga Exactly. During the Cold War if the Soviet Premiere had not made a public appearance in some time Tass would announce that he "had a cold." It was almost always safe to assume that they were saying, "He is cold."
ReplyDeleteIt seems the outcome of Interitus had more dramatic consequences than were initially apparent. No wonder Jarvis was so freaked out - he was probably anticipating his own death due to the portal virus.
ReplyDeleteAlthough... if Jarvis's current form is a simulacrum or something similar, is it really fair to say that Devra killed him? Was the person brought back at the end of 13magnus even the original, unaltered Jarvis? We still don't know for sure.
Nobody stays dead when you're in the XM business.
ReplyDeleteHow many times must a man be killed... before he is truly dead?
ReplyDeleteYes, it would be fair to say Devra killed him: If you need some critical vitamin to live, and I steal that vitamin from you, it is still murder.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to return to my central point: Even if you believe the Roland Jarvis of now is in some way a better, more expanded person than he was before his transcendence to XM, the fact is that he is still at thinking, breathing man. Don't believe he's the original Roland Jarvis? Fine. But he's still a person, and it's still murder to starve him of something he needs to live.
Wait a minute... What??? Is there any proof ???
ReplyDeleteVictor Hardy the answer, my friend is blowing in the wind ...
ReplyDeleteContinuing your line of thought maybe this hints that the Shapers are actually AIs from the future.Maybe they are what Ada is destined to evolve to? Wouldn't it be ironic if we found out that Ada started by fighting her future self/selves and thus ended up being similar to them? A classic time loop.
ReplyDeleteUgh... This storyline has jumped the shark so hard I think it just one handed dunked on the 1992 Dream Team.
ReplyDeleteMalachi Megiddo won everything.
ReplyDelete/thread
I don't know that I would necessarily call Devra a murderer just yet.. Death in the medical field is not as simple as we tend to make it. For example there are different stages of death (clinical, biological, legal if I remember correctly.) A patient in sudden cardiac arrest (clinical death) without intervention will progress to legal death where no life saving attempts are to be performed by medical staff and they are pronounced. A patient going into cardiac arrest in a hospital where CPR or other interventions are not performed is not said to have been killed by a hospital staff member. Those people aren't murdered, they die. Oftentimes medical treatments are risky and sometimes result in death. Those people die, they aren't murdered. Admittedly sometimes investigations are performed to confirm that. A person on life support isn't murdered when taken off life support, they die.
ReplyDeleteJarvis was/is living on borrowed time and he knew that. He was 'nearly dead' before and XM became his life support in the form of simulacrum. I'm sorry that he mislead himself and many of you to believe that he was 'in fact very, very real' and that he was immortal. XM constructs are energy, we are energy, but these are not the same. I don't agree with all Devras actions but as a truth seeker I must say that turning off life support does not automatically equal murder, much like the Resistance capturing artifacts previously did not kill Hank Johnson. I understand there is a time to grieve but cooler heads must prevail and further investigation must be done.
Amanda Saunders Any diminution of life can be cause for homicide. If a person is taken off of life support while they are still alive and it is against their will, it can absolutely be murder. Even if it does not have the required intent to be murder, she could still be culpable for manslaughter, a lesser homicide charge.
ReplyDeleteHere Devra has done an affirmative act. She has sent out a virus to kill the portals and xm across the globe. She has done this with reckless disregard of the effects that this could have.
If she knew of an appreciable risk of death to anyone and proceeded while ignoring that risk, there is a legitimate argument that Devra is a murderer.
Melissa L. Murder versus say, collateral damage? It's fair to say she is involved in the circumstances surrounding his death but to what degree if at all he was human and to what degree he is dead remains to be seen.
ReplyDeleteAmanda Saunders A killing by collateral damage can be depraved heart murder or manslaughter depending on the details of his death.
ReplyDeleteSince she knows of the existence of xm based bodies through Farlowe, there is a strong argument that Devra would or should have been aware that her portal virus had an appreciable chance of harming other other XM based people such as Jarvis.
The details are definitely important but that does not prevent a legitimate argument that she could be a murderer. If he has died or will due to this virus, a basis exists for the murder interpretation.
Her belief that he is not human may not be persuasive since she was previously involved in Jarvis's death, should have the experience to know whether people could be harmed and knows from Farlowe that people can live with xm bodies.
Melissa L. I'm going to reach all the way out on that limb you reached for and ask, if "xm based bodies" can be assumed to be harmed by the portal virus, can we also assume carbon based lifeforms such as ourselves are harmed by decreasing the carbon output of factories?
ReplyDeleteAre solar farms responsible for murdering us? Does using wind energy provide a legitimate argument in favor of murder?
I'm sure you can see how ridiculous that is.
Malachi Megiddo We're talking about unilateral involuntary decay that spreads through the network unchecked. Your comparison makes no sense, this is not a voluntary decrease of factories.
ReplyDeleteA more accurate comparison would be if someone made a virus that dramatically increased all forms of carbon and then just dumped it in the water reservoir. As carbon based life forms, there is a definitely a chance that it could hurt someone. By recklessly throwing it into the water supply, you needlessly put people at risk and could be liable for for murder if you understood the potential risk but proceeded regardless.
Like wise if you know that people exist who are literally walking portals like Farlowe, then releasing a portal decay virus into the portal network could make you just as responsible if you threw something you believed could be a poison into the water supply.
Melissa L. So decreasing XM is murder against XM based beings but decreasing carbon isn't murder against carbon based beings. Why is there an arbitrary distinction? Your "more accurate comparison" is inherently flawed because you've created an arbitrary distinction between the two.
ReplyDeleteMalachi Megiddo Reading helps understanding I'm told. This is not a voluntary controlled decrease. It's involuntary uncontrolled decay. That's why its called the portal decay virus. If we had a carbon decay virus running around rampant it could definitely be a comparable situation.
ReplyDeleteVoluntary decrease of carbon emissions is a controlled process that does not present the danger of a global decay of all carbon. The portal decay virus is designed to decay portals worldwide. And Devra knows that people exist who are literally walking portals. If anyone of those people die based on Devra's virus that makes a legitimate argument for manslaughter or murder.