Directive 4's weird 'explosion' makes no sense

Directive 4 wouldn't be 'uninstalled' or 'destroyed' just because Richard is fired. Also, someone isn't fired just because the boss STATES they are fired. For them to ACTUALLY be fired, there's paperwork to be done, there's a 'corporate ritual' of clearing their workplace and the 'two weeks notice' stuff that completes the 'firing' process, plus, of course, the 'being escorted out of the premises'-ritual.

Even putting all that aside, why would the 'Directive 4', which is clearly just text-based, have such a graphical, visual 'explosion' of the TEXT, accompanied by a weird sound effect? Did they program it that way, and even if so, why do we not see the pixels that comprise the text animate instead of the text just being 'visually morphed with higher resolution and proper anti-aliasing' and all that?

Who created that sound effect and thought it's necessary, if in any case Directive 4 is first applicable, but then suddenly isn't anymore?

Wouldn't it be more logical for the flashing 'Directive 4' text (which shouldn't even be flashing, because there's no attempt to arrest anyone, so why is it flashing, but not shutting down the robot? Not that it shut down the robot even when it was applicable previously) to simply disappear and stop flashing?

Why would it ever just 'explode dramatically with a weird sound effect' like that? In-Universe, what kind of sense does that make?

It's like some nerd specifically programmed not only the explosion animation in there, but also created, installed and synchronized this sound effect to the animation in the remote case that Robocop would be in a situation where 'Directive 4' is ALMOST applicable, so he gets a 'flashing text warning' about impending 'Directive 4 violation', but also, where that situation changes so it's no longer applicable.

Wow, talk about thinking about EVERYthing and preparing for every detail and contingency! Why is a greedy, cold, power- and money-hungry corporation this creative and prepares for this kind of possibilities with this kind of meticulous level of detail? What would they have lost if they simply hadn't done this, but instead, made the text disappear?

Also, is there an A.I. working in conjunction with the human brain? (If so, why need the human brain?)

I mean, WHAT controls what directives are there, whether they are displayed or not and so on? Clearly SOMETHING in the system can read the visual and auditory input, analyse it, then make proper adjustments to the HUD, or it wouldn't be able to react to the visuals by always displaying the correct directives.

This level of A.I. is impressive, as it can not only see and hear everything, but also pretty much 'understand' every nuance of everything it sees and hears to the point where it can make an INSTANT decision to remove the 'Directive 4' from being active.

The same corporation that couldn't even make a robot see whether someone is unarmed or not (ED-209 scene), suddenly can create an A.I. with that level of sophistication, where it can not only understand a colloquial term 'fired', understand who 'you' means in this situation, understand that 'D1ck' means 'Richard', understand which Richard it means, be confident of all of this and more, and then react lightning-fast by deactivating 'Directive 4'.

That's quite a leap in A.I. tech.. and it doesn't quite make sense.

We could say it's Murphy that 'understands' all this, but that presents a problem. If all it takes is for Murphy to 'understand' something, then why couldn't he just control 'Directive 4' by just 'understanding' things deliberately a certain way? Obviously Murphy can't control this 'Directive' stuff, so something else has to process all this information and do it superfast.

Wouldn't it have been logical for the 'Directive 4' to still remain active even after the audience knows it 'technically shouldn't', in the same vein that ED-209 still thought the man was armed, after audience knew he was unarmed?

Movies just don't make sense, and there's no real reason for it, other than writers are not particularly intelligent or good at what they do.