The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has brought forth a myriad of ethical questions, particularly concerning AI relationships as portrayed in media. "My Wife Has No Emotion" serves as a compelling case study to explore these concerns. The anime delves into the complexities of emotional relationships between humans and robots, raising significant issues primarily centered on consent and the nature of companionship. AI entities lack consciousness and free will, challenging the authenticity of their participation in relationships and questioning whether true consent is possible. This dynamic also prompts ethical considerations about creating beings solely to fulfill human desires, potentially leading to a decline in human-to-human interactions and fostering isolation. The societal implications are profound, as traditional concepts of love, built on mutual understanding and emotional depth, might be redefined by the artificial nature of AI relationships. Moreover, the authenticity of emotions simulated by AI blurs the lines between reality and simulation, forcing us to reconsider our perceptions of genuine emotional connections. "My Wife Has No Emotion" highlights the need for ongoing ethical dialogue as we integrate AI into personal lives, urging careful evaluation of the impact on our understanding of love, companionship, and the essence of human connection.

Artificial Intelligence has already caused changes in the way we conduct our lives. Will it change the way we make and perceive art? It has been predicted, for example, that AI will replace many jobs in the film industry. AI has been used in many types of writing and "artwork" already: legal and business documents, advertising, students’ assignments …
What is your definition of art? Can something created by AI be called art? How would AI affect the creation and appreciation of the arts, especially visual and verbal arts? Would anyone want to explore this topic, philosophically and prophetically?

"The Death of the Author" is the title of an essay literary critic and theorist Roland Barthes.

The term itself has been argued to mean that the work should be judged wholly on its own merits despite problematic origins. But, was that the intent of the framework or is it a post hoc justification for supporting creators (and thus their creations) who would otherwise be maligned?

With regards to fandom, how much can be said to be justified under this framework and as consumers should there be a limit to where and how this framework is used as a defense?

DON’T LOOK UP was a controversial satire on the climate problem, and while every political satire is bound to divide audiences– this one made a large mistake. It wasn’t just a satire, it was a call to action. It was a combination of the greatest forces in entertainment, telling you, the average moviegoer, that we need to solve this problem. Perhaps if the film had given a portion of not all proceeds to climate action, there would be a legitimate attempt at change. However, because of its lack of self-awareness and enormous star-power, whether or you liked the film, nothing is going to change.

Other films have successfully navigated this fine line of educating vs enlisting (Wag the Dog, 1997 comes to mind) but for a giant industry with enough money to solve world hunger to shake their finger at an audience made up of working class moviegoers is both ignorant and somewhat classist.

Makoto Shinkai frequently employs the motif of rain in his films to convey a range of symbolic meanings, enhancing both narrative and emotional depth. In "The Garden of Words," rain symbolizes refuge and emotional healing as the protagonists, Takao and Yukari, find solace in their rainy morning meetings. The shifting rainfall mirrors their evolving relationship and personal growth. In "Weathering With You," incessant rain in Tokyo represents the uncertainties and challenges faced by Hina and Hodaka, with Hina’s weather-controlling ability highlighting humanity’s complex relationship with nature. The rain in this film explores themes of sacrifice, connection, and environmental impact, reflecting the characters’ emotional highs and lows. Across Shinkai’s works, rain signifies emotional depth, illustrating feelings of longing, melancholy, and hope. This recurring motif invites viewers to reflect on their own emotional experiences, making the narratives more relatable and immersive. Shinkai’s use of rain as a symbolic element captures the ephemeral nature of emotions and the beauty of fleeting moments, blending visual artistry with profound storytelling.

The topic taker should analyze the requirements of some trophy lists to beat games on the "Hard" Difficulty and/or unlock special items or extra difficulties in the game. Examples that come to mind are Final Fantasy Remake and Rebirth, Kingdom Hearts III, DOOM, and the God of War series. The topic taker is free to include other games to the list that they may know about–the list serves as a jumping off point to get the topic taker started. The topic taker should consider the following for their article as well:

– Is completing a game on Hard Mode enjoyable?

– Is requiring finishing a game on a Hard mode restrictive or prohibitive in any way?

– If someone chooses to play at difficulties other than hard mode, does that mean they are more or less of a gamer in the eyes of the game’s community?

– Should Hard Mode be a requirement for getting certain items or cutscenes or trophies, or should that content be available regardless of the difficulty?

The topic taker should address these points with research and examples from the games they choose that is relevant to the points. If desired, the topic taker can look at the psychological research done on this subject and how it affects players’ self esteem, if the research exists.

Replayability is a measurement of how much fun a game is to play over and over again – how much new content there will be on each playthrough, how much you can vary your playstyle, how many different endings or paths the different quests/stories have for you to explore each time. It is something it is generally considered good for a game to have, especially in certain genres. Many players want to be able to play their favourite games again and again, but with enough variation that it is never boring.

However, replayability is something that cannot be (and isn’t) pursued in every game. Many story focused games are not particularly replayable, as their goal is to focus on telling one very good or in-depth story – and to focus on replayability could take away from that. There is also the fact that to make a game very replayable takes a lot of time and effort to code and design all the different playstyles/endings/quests etc. This is time and effort that may be needed elsewhere or would possibly be better spent polishing the main game. Not everyone plays again and again after all, so is it really so crucial to ensure that every single playthrough is entirely unique?

This article would delve into the concept of replayability, exploring whether it is truly important for games to be infinitely replayable or more important to create a good experience the first time round.

Recently, a lot of books have been making it onto the infamous banned books list in America, due to containing such themes as "strong female leader" in the case of Wizard of Oz, "racism", especially with children’s books that tend to point to the systemic nature of racism in America, and of course, "sexuality and gender" that basically gets slapped on anything that even remotely hints at an LGBTQ relationship or gender expression outside of the cisgender spectrum. Most of these entries to the ever-growing ban list seem to be coming from conservative areas. It might be good to take a small sample of the banned book list from the past 2 years or so and see how it would compare to, say a European banned books list, if the idea of a banned books list isn’t something that is wholly limited to America in the first place, and see if there are any overlapping topics between the lists to see what trends might exist cross-culturally.

If this cross-examination is not possible, the topic taker could instead talk about whether or not book bans should exist, and the reasons why they do, and could choose to take a few selections from the banned books list and make an argument as to whether or not the themes presented in the literature truly merit a spot on a banned books list.

Banned Books list for America: (link)