As I recall, Keating told the boys when things went too far in the auditorium that "sucking all the marrow out of life doesn't mean choking on the bone". What he was saying to them was yes, seize the day - but don't lose sight of reality or consequences as you do it. There is a balance to be had. Seizing the day at the expense or harm of others is not acceptable. We cannot do whatever we want to do to please ourselves without considering the cost. In the end, Neil wasn't willing/able to pay the cost, i.e. standing up to his father.

Ok, I'll bite. I've watched this film many, many times. I would have to say that Neil is ultimately responsible for the choices he made. Keating did encourage the boys to follow their dreams (much to the chagrin of their parents, who put them in the expensive and exclusive school for boys in order to help them get into the best colleges and beyond to be doctors, lawyers, etc.)

However, in this life we are all responsible ultimately for our choices. In situations like this one where it is a youth and has a tragic end, the parents especially are looking to blame someone else for their failings. They destroyed Neil's will by taking away the one thing he loved to do more than anything. He didn't feel he had any other choice but to take his own life because his life wasn't his anyway. Mr. Keating and acting made Neil realize that possibly more quickly than he would have otherwise, but Neil had no other choice - either be a slave to his father for another 10 years probably, or choose to take his life - and that's what he chose.

I had a friend who committed suicide in HS and his parents were on a rampage trying to find someone to blame or lash out on. It didn't take long for me to figure out how circumstances he was in would lead him to it.

In the end Mr. Keating may have encouraged Neil to explore his romantic/poetic/creative side, but he didn't type a fake letter for him, or lie about quitting, etc... Neil made that bed. Keating was just a scapegoat in the end. He tried to tell Neil to talk to his father, not lie to him. He encouraged Neil to do the right thing at the time. I don't think Keating was a good fit for the school, actually - the only reason he came back there was for sentimental reasons, I suppose. And, Keating would have been better off as a Drama/English teacher where he could expose the kids to that kind of creative thought and expression. His biggest mistake was thinking he could teach those concepts at Helton with impunity.

There is a good chance that some destructive group will develop AI that is hostile to humans, to use as a weapon. It is then that I fear AI. Because if it's made in man's image, it's going to be violent, greedy, and out for itself from the start. Man created God, and that pretty much sums up the bible god.

There's also a possibility that AI will see humans as a virus, threatening the planet. They would be correct on that front too, and might seek to eliminate us for the good of the planet they inhabit.

I know these topics I raise have been debated before ad-infinatum, but since you asked....

The biggest problem that I see with this line of tech is that it could be used to take advantage of grieving people at their most vulnerable. There is a real danger in this from companies who profit off grief and death. But I think the most disconcerting thing about the tech is that it's going to get so good that it would be easy for a living person to become dependent on it. Addictive in the extreme. Can you imagine losing your wife or long-time girlfriend, and then having a digital representation to console you after their death? I'm not sure if in your grieving state you would even care that it's fake. You would just go to it, because it's better than the void they left behind for you in their death.

Now that I've gone and said the scary part out loud, the advantages to this tech are also very inviting. Having a "digital encyclopedia" of a person for future generations is absolutely incredible. Archiving our lives through interviews is a great idea, especially for those not prone to talking much about themselves. I would absolutely love to get to know my great grandmother more - she was a pioneer and an amazing woman. We have a book about her put together by family, but not much else.

One other aspect is that the digital self is only as good as the original self keeps it up to date. Old entries from someone that only get seen 10-20 years after they die are not a realistic picture of that person if they stopped or slowed updating in later years of their life.

All in all, I think the advantages could outweigh the disadvantages - but strict boundaries and guardrails need to be in place along with the tech so that people in their worst moments aren't taken for a ride.