I was impressed by the simplicity of how they stated real world implications. I have very few plotlines batting around in my head, but the "this abstract sounding maths that pros wank to will have this impact on your life" seems to get pulled off so poorly so often.

Well, if you can prove that P = NP, it would mean that most existing encryption could be broken, but it doesn't necessarily follow that you could instantly crack any arbitrary computer. Also, it is far more likely that P ≠ NP, but that hasn't been proven, either.

if you can prove that P = NP, it would mean that most existing encryption could be broken

That's the part that impressed me with the transition from abstract to "why anyone might care". The rest of the plot details were random cracker magic, and as far as I was unconcerned just an indication that a master hacker was in the house.

Until P != NP, isn't either direction fair fodder for TV plots?

Until P != NP, isn't either direction fair fodder for TV plots?

Well, technically, yes, but if you ask mathematicians to bet on which one will turn out to be true, most will put their money on P ≠ NP.

If we start limiting fiction plots to what people bet would probably happen, how different the landscape would be.

I think that Person of Interest should stay in Procedurals. Although it now has Boxed Set elements, that's not how it started. Also, I think that it would be confusing to have the back and forth where we comment one place if it's a Machine thing and another if it's a procedural element.

Although it now has Boxed Set elements, that's not how it started

I'm not making an argument either way, since my opinion's already well-recorded, but I am unendingly curious about how a central premise of an AI which started showing a personality within the first season isn't sci fi on purpose. It's not like they're mutually exclusive--I just don't get how it's new. It's more, but I don't get the new bit.

You have a good point, although I think that maybe it's because in the previous seasons, the focus was on saving the numbers and the process of Reese and Finch figuring out the victim/perpetrator dynamic and saving or catching the number. The Machine was only a part of the show for the 10 seconds that we saw Finch receive the number (and many shows we didn't even see that).

Now, the Machine is acting independently and communicating with Root. It is more of a part of the show, a character almost.

The Machine was only a part of the show for the 10 seconds that we saw Finch receive the number (and many shows we didn't even see that).

Now that I have actually watched all the episodes in sequence, I can say that I predicted my own attitude correctly in that I am even more intrigued by The Machine than I was before. Was it not in the first season that we saw Harold meet Grace? The Machine seems to have set them up. She (using Root's preference for a pronoun for The Machine) certainly seems to have encouraged Harold quite a bit, at the very least. But since Daniel and I pretty much mainlined the first two seasons, the time frame got a little wibbly-wobbly.

The Machine seems to have set them up.

I don't think that the Machine set them up. As I recall, the first time Harold saw her, he was in the park with Nathan testing the machine. Although I think that you're right about the Machine encouraging Harold.

Not sure how I feel about the pronoun. Am I discounting Root's characterization because I don't like her, or because I think that Root would assign a female pronoun regardless (she does have some male issues) or do I think of the Machine as gender neutral? Hmmmm.