Forum: Rants
Topic: the sun
started by: j1mmy

Posted by j1mmy on May 24 2000,14:01
Fuck the sun! It mocks me with its photonic rays! I curse the sun!

------------------
< j1mmy >


Posted by incubus on May 24 2000,14:05
The worst thing about the sun is it tells you that you really should be logging off and going to bed ...

Didn't Mr. Burns have some idea about blocking out the sun ... ?

------------------
-- incubus
As I chase the leaves like the words I never find ...


Posted by Kolben on May 24 2000,14:06
I like the sun...it makes my flowers grow??

NO! The sun is annoying...I can only go out in daylight when using sunblock. And not for very long at a time. But at night...it's time to suck!?!


Posted by aventari on May 24 2000,16:40
since the beginning of time man has yearned to destroy the sun!
Posted by Hellraiser on May 24 2000,18:17
We all knew that

Well marc, better luck next time in getting all you wanted to say in one post.

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.


Posted by Anztac on May 24 2000,22:01
The sun. HA! I mock it, from my basement. It thinks it can give everyone skin cancer, well not me! I only come out at night.

------------------
~Anztac - The guy who had the really long sig (formerly Kriegman)

"I am easily driven into a flying rage by blithering idiots"
-cr0bar [The god of this domain]


Posted by Ansible on May 24 2000,23:06
AHHHHHHHH! FULLBRIGHT!
Posted by marc c on May 25 2000,05:09
I hate the sun... it's sole purpose is to annoy me by creating glare on seemingly every screen in my house.

------------------
-marcc
< lmao.cjb.net - funny pictures >.

[This message has been edited by marc c (edited May 24, 2000).]


Posted by Hellraiser on May 25 2000,05:34
Might that not be the solar purpose?

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.


Posted by Lizzy on May 25 2000,05:55
Marc's trying to hide the fact the he edited his post!
Posted by Wolfguard on May 25 2000,08:17
The sun would not be so bad if it did not cause my skin to bubble so.

------------------
The gene pool has no life guard, support the GPPTF (Gene Pool Purification Task Force)


Posted by Kuros on May 25 2000,09:39
just be glad you have the sun, its constant rain + gloom over here
Posted by L0rD MiNi0N on May 25 2000,12:08
WTF is this sun rant for? Really....do you have nothing better to do then create some weak ass rant about the sun? I can't believe I would have to even write this.
Posted by JimmyTheHandless on May 28 2000,01:41
WHY THE FUCK DOES OUR SUN HAVE TO BE SO GODDAMNED BIG? WERE ONLY A COUPLE DAMN MILES FROM IT ON ASTRONOMICAL TERMS SO WHY THE HELL DOES IT HAVE TO BE LIKE 9000000 TIMES BIGGER THAN US? 2 WOULD HAVE WORKED! GOD! WHEN HE SAID LET THERE BE LIGHT HE WASNT FUCKING JOKING!

------------------
raise your hand if you like orange soda.


Posted by Lizzy on May 28 2000,01:46
Because if it weren't so big and far away, those badtard Russians and Chinese would team up to destroy the sun, and fuck the earth over more than they have already.
Posted by Kolben on May 28 2000,03:21
LOL, why are you americans so damn afraid of russians?? Try reading a book about communism, and you'll see that once it's established and everyone agrees about it, the world would be a beautyful place to be. Not saying that I'm a communist, but you are judging it way too fast because of some lameass dictators...

About the sun: Size matters not, uh, uh...


Posted by Lizzy on May 28 2000,03:31
I didn't say anything about communism, just Russia. It's cold, and it sucks, they tried to oppress Europe after WW2 and stuff like that.
Posted by Kolben on May 28 2000,03:41
Sorry about the communism thing. (I've always wanted to ask an american about it).

Well...Russia whooped hitlers ass...I love them for it! And about the opressing Europe thing. There's more to it than that. Hitler slaughtered half countries, and Russia was actually providing help...in they're wierd kind of way, but they did. They're not mean!

But there is cold as hell...like Canada...Why not hate them too?


Posted by Happyfish on May 28 2000,03:46
Forgive me for going almost totally off topic..
This reminds me of an argument I was having at work...
In the Matrix...the whole thing with the robots using humans as batteries - that would never work. The energy has to come form somewhere and the only energy input that the earth has is from the sun (except for nuclear energy)...so the idea of having humans as a source of energy - not going to work - a human body does not in any way create energy...makes for a nice movie though.
KICK ASS movie actually...

Posted by Kolben on May 28 2000,03:51
HappyFish...Yeah...your right. I've been thinking about that too...kinda ruins the plot doesn't it? I like first half of the movie...the rest is all in sl0m0 and weird to look at
Posted by Happyfish on May 28 2000,03:54

oh...and Kolben. I'm Canadian, and it's really not that cold here (for a few months out of the year anyway). Actually, I live as far south as northern California.
Posted by masher on May 28 2000,07:30
humans are hot right?

about 37 celcius if my memory serves me correctly.

Its this heat that they tap into.


Posted by Kolben on May 28 2000,08:05
Masher:

Humans is hot because humans consume food. We theoretically burn the food, which makes us hot. Our food-source is plants or comes from plants, because that's what the animals we eat eat (Eehh! Think about that one :)). The sun is what makes them grow. It serves as a powerplant, for the biological reactions inside the plant. The reactions wouldn't occur without the heat (and light) from the sun. You can however fake the sun with an other source of energy, but as all our energy sources is collected from the sun (which is the only energy source in the solar system) that actually only means a redirection of energy.

So...once all the plants on the Earth is consumed/transformed into energy there's is basically no energy left on the earth, which means that the closest source of energy is the sun. But as humans covered the sky (or whatever) they blocked the source, which means that no energy is available...

Hope it is understandable. It's a bit like Gibbs energy system if you have taken chemistry classes


Posted by cr0bar on May 28 2000,13:41
UnLESS they figure out hydrogen fusion, in which one gallon of ocean water would power your civilization for quite some time....

"Combined with an advanced form of fusion, the machines had all the energy they would ever need......."

Yah, I know it all comes down to BS.

------------------
"Everyone's favorite implement for any task"
------------------


Posted by Lizzy on May 28 2000,16:43
Kolben, instead of eating animals that eat plants, the humans were fed with liquified humans. Then it just turns into a big cycle, half are used to feed the humans, and half to be used on whatever those robots wanted.
Posted by Happyfish on May 29 2000,00:33
Sure, Lizzy, but where does the energy in that cycle come from? That cycle can't last too long...
I forgot about the 'advanced form of fusion' though that just sounds like the writers are trying make the idea workable. If the robots did have fusion, they wouldn't need humans ...except for morbid fasination and control...
Posted by Kolben on May 29 2000,01:35
Lizzy:
In physics we're told that a closed system containing an amount of energy will always have that energy in some form. Then your cycle would be possible, but as the Earth isn't a closed system it isn't. Lots of energy is released out to space. This means that in the cycle, there will be a loss of energy, and it wouldn't go very far.

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited May 28, 2000).]


Posted by Lizzy on May 29 2000,01:43
The machines made it a closed system(?)!
Posted by Kolben on May 29 2000,03:56
No They use the energy for mevoment and stuff, which generates heat because of the friction. This heat they can't collect and is therefore a loss
Posted by Kuros on May 30 2000,07:54
You r all forgetting that originally life didn't use light but chemicals - hydrothermal plumes, pitch black there - still life. Possible solution to the matrix problem
Posted by incubus on May 30 2000,11:26
But it all comes down to the sun ... why are the thermal plumes hot?

Then again you could say they are hot due to nuclear reactions in the earth's core. Ho hum.

And on the river flows ...

------------------
-- incubus
As I chase the leaves like the words I never find ...


Posted by xaustinx on May 31 2000,01:02
i want to eat the sun
Posted by Happyfish on May 31 2000,01:35
Might as well say, yeah, I forgot about thermal activity...stupid me.
Okay, the only sources of energy the earth has is the SUN, thermal, and nuclear.
I think I am correct now..human bodies don't make energy...done...I no longer am a part of this thread... Suck it down.

(why didn't the robots use animals? or breed ppl that didn't have brains? THE ROBOTS ARE EVIL!)

[This message has been edited by Happyfish (edited May 30, 2000).]


Posted by Kolben on May 31 2000,02:39
Yup, they've got sick twisted CPU's!

The fususion thing would be a solution, but they'd still run out of water, eh sometime...if they didn't get out to space...

To get energy from a chemical reaction the reaction has to be spontanious, or a decrease in Delta G. Chemicals, only react spontaniously when they have energy output as the result. This again means releasing they're internal energy.

This means that you can't make the reaction go backwards unless you put the same amount of energy or more into it. And eventually you would run out of reaktive chemicals.

The same principle for the planet core. It won't be hot forever, if the sun doesn't shine....

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited May 30, 2000).]


Posted by Kuros on May 31 2000,11:46
quote:
Originally posted by Kolben:

The same principle for the planet core. It won't be hot forever, if the sun doesn't shine....


Now just what has the sun shining, got to do with the planets core -besides which all power sources are finite.

Before someone suggests black holes or any other idea of that approach, do your research blacks holes are now thought to be finite(Hawking), though I am not sure about the Kashmir Effect.


Posted by Kolben on May 31 2000,13:46
Kur0s: Tell ME why the planet core will be hot forever...what makes it heat up?...and where does the heat go? And don't tell me fusion crap...because that's a finite resource, though it's very large. And black holes has nothing to do with nothing!
Posted by xaustinx on Jun. 01 2000,01:15
i want to eat the sun
Posted by Kuros on Jun. 01 2000,10:45
you missed the point, all power sources are finite - I agree - read the post again. As for the core thing, it being hot is not dependant on the sun shining now is it !! Think before writing !!!!!

Black holes were thought as a way of harnessing EM forces to generate unlimited power. Anyway, enough of this


Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 01 2000,11:15
The core of the earth is kept hot by
Heat and pressure and tidal forces (gravitational tides)so it does need the sun to stay hot(well not the sun but the gravity the sun produces). (God I'm a geek)
A black hole could be used as a power source as long as you had stuff to feed it. Black holes emit Heat, light (from stuff dying above the event horizon), hard radiation (x-rays, gamma rays)
Now, if you had a Quantum black hole (black hole with the diameter of a single atom) you could use this as a power source. (Groan, I have reached new heights of geekdom with this post)
This is still a finite source of energy because sooner or later you could feed the entire universe to it.

------------------
The gene pool has no life guard, support the GPPTF (Gene Pool Purification Task Force)
< http://www.geocities.com/jgoeke610/ >
Past and future pr0n star :)


Posted by Observer on Jun. 01 2000,12:48
That is of course if you subscribe to the belief that the Universe is finite. Just my 2 rupees on the matter. I like where this discussion is going. Keep it up!
Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 01 2000,12:54
depends on the what made it. if you go with the big bang then it is finite. atleast the amount of matter is.

------------------
The gene pool has no life guard, support the GPPTF (Gene Pool Purification Task Force)
< http://www.geocities.com/jgoeke610/ >
Past and future pr0n star :)


Posted by adeadlyintegral on Jun. 01 2000,18:56
even if all energy sources are finite, finite numbers can get really big :-) i mean it's good to plan for the future and all, but a few billion years is just asking for a headache... out of curiosity one of you black hole people: i read a sci-fi book once where a loony scientist dropped a quantum singularity through the surface of mars and eventually it consumed mars (took about a year)... would that actually happen? cause then it would suck if a lil black hole flew in and hit, i dunno the sun or china or somethin =D
Posted by xaustinx on Jun. 01 2000,19:43
i dunno if i can comprehende something not being infinte.. i mean i can look at too objects as say hey those are almost equal.. but no matter how hard i try i cant look at a horizin line, or into a camcorder hooked into the tv and then pointed at the tv, and see that blue screen as infinity... *shrug* mebbe that's just me.. and prolly none of u care..
Posted by Nero on Jun. 01 2000,21:08
actually knowing the origin of the universe would, it seems, be the first step in knowing if it was infinite. as long as someone is taking the copenhagen interpretation, the many worlds theory, or one of the other five (I think) major ideas of creation we can't possibly agree if the universe is infinite or not, we can only agree that it's expanding (red shift). then you gotta ask where's it going to expand to? until it's so far apart that energy flow ceases, or will it shrink back in to start all over again. so really we want to know if hell is going to freeze over or if we'll die in a fiery inferno of colliding matter. heh heh. i hope i confused everyone that read this. i'm totally lost.

as for destroying the sun. i put some thought into this one day in physics. lecture about particle/wave duality so i think about going to arizona to one of the military aircraft graveyards to try to find enough parts to build an old sidewinder missile. i'd need something like a sidewinder B because it had such shitty heat sensing devices that it would frequently lock onto the sun. if we can pull the sensors we have cheap guidance for whatever we want to send at the sun. from there i was thinking about building an enormous trebuchet that could fling the guidance package out into space. there'd have to be propulsion. this is where i broke down. i thought about putting a drunk on a stationary bike and putting a bottle of scotch out in front of him, but that doesn't seem viable. but i'm thinking that if the warhead is a thirsty four year old that it would eventually drive the sun to suicide(can i have a drink? [two seconds later] can i have a drink? [two seconds later] i'm thirsy. etc), but that's hazy too. the lecture ended about this point.


Posted by xaustinx on Jun. 01 2000,23:39
what about 1 unit/molecule/particle/etc... of anti matter.. wouldn't that do it?

quote:
Originally posted by Nero:
as for destroying the sun. i put some thought into this one day in physics. lecture about particle/wave duality so i think about going to arizona to one of the military aircraft graveyards to try to find enough parts to build an old sidewinder missile. i'd need something like a sidewinder B because it had such shitty heat sensing devices that it would frequently lock onto the sun. if we can pull the sensors we have cheap guidance for whatever we want to send at the sun. from there i was thinking about building an enormous trebuchet that could fling the guidance package out into space. there'd have to be propulsion. this is where i broke down. i thought about putting a drunk on a stationary bike and putting a bottle of scotch out in front of him, but that doesn't seem viable. but i'm thinking that if the warhead is a thirsty four year old that it would eventually drive the sun to suicide(can i have a drink? [two seconds later] can i have a drink? [two seconds later] i'm thirsy. etc), but that's hazy too. the lecture ended about this point.


Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 02 2000,07:39
E=MC^2
That is the limit on the amount of energy you can get from a single particle be it matter or antimatter.

adeadlyintegral: I remember that story. Its a larry niven short. Think it took like 100 years because of the size of the hole. Something that is the size of an atom can only grab so much matter per orbit. The other reason this worked was it was moving slow enough to be captured by the mars gravity well.(well worked math wise)

------------------
The gene pool has no life guard, support the GPPTF (Gene Pool Purification Task Force)
< http://www.geocities.com/jgoeke610/ >
Past and future pr0n star :)


Posted by kuros- on Jun. 03 2000,09:30
now I'm not going to be sucked into an argument about this but :

The big bang is now debatable about the start of the uni, newscientist.com for starters.

The quantum singularity through the surface of mars would actually take a matter of months if it truely happened, try checking past issues at sciam.com

As for destroying the Sun, the quantum singularity within a missile would do it, once the missile burns up, the singularity would carry on through the centre of the sun, passing straight through it might consume enough matter to cause some kind of disruption at the core (something to do MF) according to a friend at CERN, this is also one of the prevailing process theories of super nova explosions (to be tested by Hubble's Infra-red successor in 2007).

On a different note, the proposed upgrade to Hubble still being planned means it can actualy see extrasolar planets around there suns.


Posted by Slicer on Jun. 03 2000,12:15
2 Short Things.

1. I think the reason the machines in the matrix used humans could be some sort of hardcoded programming. I think its somewhere in Asimov's books, but robots are not supposed to harm their creators, humans.
By storing humans in vats and leeching energy from them, they are fulfilling this directive, and also gaining energy for themselves.
2. Couldn't the fusion they had support the humans? I know its not possible now, but some wierd sort of energy conversion to sustain our lives might work. Also, you guys are so concerned about the finiteness of energy, but think about it, there are not that many machines, and fusing molecules just on earth could keep them going for a very long time.

Slicer


Posted by adeadlyintegral on Jun. 03 2000,14:13
Nah they couldn't have been following asimov's three rules cause the 1st was to never harm humans and the 2nd was to follow any order that a human gave them(i think)... which woulda made the entire matrix prison thing real simple the first time a human asked the robots to end it... they also tryed to kill poor little neo several times :-(
Posted by Happyfish on Jun. 03 2000,15:20
They weren't really killing Neo..
The robots weren't really there..neither was Neo..

1.A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm.

2.A robot must obey orders given to him by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.


Posted by TonyDennis on Jun. 03 2000,15:55
i leik pie
Posted by adeadlyintegral on Jun. 03 2000,18:58
well whether he was there or not if they killed him while he was in the matrix he'd be pretty dead and because of what the agents did, so unless they had developed some incredibly advanced form of rationalization and evading guilt =D they couldn't have done those agently things and obeyed the three laws... well the third sure one but none of the others
Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 03 2000,20:12
I felt i had to speak. You people all suck ass. ITS A FUCKING MOVIE. Yes, it is an incredibly good movie. and yet let me reiterate - ITS A FUCKING MOVIE. The reason that so many star trek people seem like such geeks is because of this, they dont accept that its fucking fiction, or that, yes, ITS A FUCKING MOVIE. Dont disect it, then its no fun. If you had known at the beginning of teh fist time you saw it what the matrix was, would it have been nearly as cool? NO. I would conclude with the simple fact that - ITS A FUCKING MOVIE!!!!!

'nuff said


Posted by TonyDennis on Jun. 03 2000,21:28
w00t!

-Tony


Posted by adeadlyintegral on Jun. 03 2000,21:45
I'm having fun.
Posted by Cyrino on Jun. 04 2000,02:45
You also have to realize that there is always some scientific backing in science fiction. Example: in Star Trek, there area actual theories about the whole "folding fo space" or "subspace" and the authors of these stories are using the theories to extrapolate possible outcomes of putting these theroies into action.

Also, for the most part, the people that are anti-Star Trek, are the people that don't understand it.

------------------
They have cats in the future?


Posted by j1mmy on Jun. 04 2000,05:40
quote:
Originally posted by Happyfish:
They weren't really killing Neo..
The robots weren't really there..neither was Neo..

1.A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm.

2.A robot must obey orders given to him by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.



Posted by j1mmy on Jun. 04 2000,05:40
quote:
Originally posted by Happyfish:
They weren't really killing Neo..
The robots weren't really there..neither was Neo..

1.A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm.

2.A robot must obey orders given to him by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.


Err ... I don't remember posting this.

[This message has been edited by j1mmy (edited June 03, 2000).]


Posted by Happyfish on Jun. 04 2000,07:03
Fuck the sun! It mocks me with its photonic rays! I curse the sun!

For a thread that started out with the above, this is lasting waaaay too long...please stop posting here, thanks..

[This message has been edited by Happyfish (edited June 04, 2000).]


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 04 2000,07:41
It doesnt matter if it makes sense, all that matters is if its a good movie. The fact that you have disected it thusfar shows not only that youre all geeks with little to no social lives, but that you also dont have a true apreciation of the emotional storyline. Its not about if the human fusion would actually work, its about trying to free the human race from oppression. Ok, i have to wrap this up, britney spears is looking at me from this banner and its creeping me out.
Posted by Kolben on Jun. 04 2000,11:31
Well...I'll post here as long as the thread isn't dead :-) As long as people is posting stuff in it...

Sithiee, it's a bit lame to just go out and tell people that they shouldn't talk bad about a movie because you like it. The plot of the movie isn't new. It's been told soooo many times in soooo many movies/books/whatever. And the facts that it's too far out physically doesn't make it better. The acting suxx too, but noone has brought that up yet. What makes the movie good is the humor and the tech stuff. That kung fu scene left my jaw hanging by the floor for a long time after the movie was over. But other than that the movie is just another piece in the dusty collection of b-movies.

People is making the movie more than it is... In my oppinion the story basically sux0rs. If yours is different it's fine with me. Just don't tell me what to say or feel about the movie. Because I'll say what I mean and not what you've heard in some latenight review on the tv.


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 04 2000,14:24
I didnt say dont talk bad about, as far as im concerned, you can say just about whatever the fuck you want to about. Im saying that when you disect the physics of a movie down to the point where you were, you take all the fun out of it. If you look at it, every movie has faults, there arent any that dont, but that doesnt mean you needa talk about them. The more you disect a movie, the more you suck the fun out of watching it. Its just bad form
Posted by Kolben on Jun. 04 2000,15:10
I don't agree with you there...It's the same thing as saying don't talk about the bad parts of the movie, because that would ruin it. And it's not just a little detail in the movie we're talking about. It's the whole plot that's build up on wrong terms. And that sucks. Sorry if it hurts your feelings, but it does!
Posted by TeKno on Jun. 04 2000,15:35
I think the best Humies vs Robots war I saw was Terminator 2. Sure it was all Arnie being 'Come and get me!' but I think the plot behind the thing was real good and if you ever read the book for T2, it shit all over the movie.

------------------
Why is Techno better than Alternative?

Because Techno = Technology and if you dont move with the Technology you get left behind.

Then again, you may enjoy your alternative lifestyle :)


Posted by Kolben on Jun. 04 2000,17:42
Sure it's a good movie, but for some people it just doesn't work. If they had said in a long time ago galaxy far far away where man equals duracell, we'll have a story that doesn't confict with everything we know. I hate when writers makes movies and haven't got a clue about what they're talking about. Like in lot's of movies where they're using chemical terms. I'm a chemist soon and I laugh at them because they seem fucking brainless when saying it out loud.

And why the hell should we stop and accept people making shitty movie-scripts? It's like saying feed me shit, and I'll learn to like it.

Star Trek is actually made by some physics guy, and have actually stuff in it that could be real. I don't believe in pervert robots!


Posted by Nero on Jun. 04 2000,18:12
the matrix is one of the oldest stories of all time. it's a sci-fi version of plato's allegory of the caves. the people that only see their reality, the person(s) that escape that reality, the attempt of the original reality to destroy the escapees for trying to tell them what they don't see. it makes much more sense if you know the allegory...

as for plots being told over and over again, didn't shakespeare say that there are only four basic plots? power, lust, revenge, and (i think) patriotism. or something like the seven deadly sins (go kevin spacey) minus gluttony, sloth, and, wrath?

------------------
"Sorry for the inconvenience." God's last words to the universe in the final book of *the* trilogy.


Posted by Slicer on Jun. 04 2000,20:01
The Matrix had quite a few good elements, I'd say its my second favorite movie, after Fight Club. BTW, someone should get a thread going on debate about that movie.

My favorite things in the Matrix:
1. The Kung Fu Fighting. Duh.
2. The Gun Fights.
3. The Big Rack of Guns.
4. The Bitchin Helicopter Gun
5. Cool Graphics of robots and stuff from the 'desert of the real world'
6. All the awesome quotes

The last item is by far the best part. Before I run any race in track, me and my friend joke about there being no spoon, or no race, or whatever. And don't forget the red pill, or the white rabbit. So many cool lines, so little time...

That's all folks...

Slicer


Posted by Slicer on Jun. 04 2000,20:04
One more thing - what is THE Trilogy? It's not star wars, I'm think hitchhiker's guide? Help me out here...
Slicer...
...
Dot dot dot's are fun...
Posted by Slicer on Jun. 04 2000,20:11
This will teach me to be brief, third post in a row

Everything is all the same plot, its just variations. There are only so many things that get our attention, and its just a matter of putting in twists and combining these things in different ways.

Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet was actually a newer version of an ancient Roman story, Piramus and Thisbe (sp definitely). And the Aeneid, supposedly Rome's finest work? Ripped almost entirely from The Odyssey and The Iliad. Nothing changes, just rearranges...

Korn, I believe.

Slicer

_____________________________________________
Ignorance is Bliss.


Posted by Slicer on Jun. 04 2000,20:56
Number 4!

To whomever was bashing us for overanalyzing the Matrix:

It's not so much that we're analyzing the matrix, we're just using it is a jumping off point for discussing artifial intelligence, sentience, nuclear fusion, the universe, etc. The matrix has provided the topic, and now the debate seems to have strayed. We are intelligent people who have a lot of views and theories that average people wouldnt understand, so we come here, and when an opportunity to speak about what has been festering in our heads arises, we take advantage of it.

Slicer

_____________________________________________
Slacker Extraordinaire


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 04 2000,22:58
Star Wars is THE trilogy, if you dont count phantom menace....although thats an interesting movie...the first time i saw it, i was blown away, thinking it was really awesome...and every time i see it, i like it less and less, im now in the disliking it...but its still quite a phenomenon.

Kolben, i challenge you to come up with a storyline that could replace all the problems you see with the matrix, and still have as good a movie. I really doubt you can, and untill you can, you shouldnt talk about the problems with other peoples work, its not your place. Id say that applies to everything though - untill you can outdo someone's work, its not your place to criticize it.


Posted by Slicer on Jun. 04 2000,23:09
Sith!@#$ (cant spell it), I'm gonna disagree with you on both counts. First of all, I highly doubt God appeared in star wars and apologized for something, which was what i was referring to in someone's sig. Secondly, without criticism we wouldnt get anywhere. There's this nifty phrase we've come up with, it's called constructive criticism... Believe it or not (this phrase should be acronymized into BION, dontcha think?) it works even if your not as good as the criticized person. Thats why the whole two heads is better than one idea works. Even if the second head is dumb, it can still help the first with things it might not have thought of. Wow, that was like talking to a 2-year old.

Slicer
_____________________________________________
Mother said I shouldnt talk to strange people. I guess I shouldnt talk to myself anymore...


Posted by Happyfish on Jun. 05 2000,02:17
quote:
Originally posted by Slicer:
The Matrix had quite a few good elements, I'd say its my second favorite movie, after Fight Club

Wow. Someone else that likes Fight Club. I'd have to say that the Matrix was better, but Fight Club would be my second choice for the best movie of last year. So many people I've talked to hated it. I don't really like Brad Pitt but I thought he kicked ass in that movie..and I thought it had an awesome plot. Apparently the book is FAR better. I should pick it up sometime. Someone start a thread...Fight Club: good or bad?


Posted by Kolben on Jun. 05 2000,04:39
Sithiee...your way of thinking here is really bugging me! I'm not a writer. People that writes the stuff are paid to do it. It's they're job. It'll be easy to top them, NOT. You say this mean I can't criticize a movie. Who are you? Jesus??

I think you are is just plain ignorant. You are taking too much extacy. I WILL criticize the fuck out of stuff I don't like. And I think it's quite funny that some people can be the way that you are. You must contain alot of anger, since you can't say your true oppinion about anything bad stuff without having to lie.

This is the rants section, and it's about oppinions (usually bad) about stuff people don't like. It's like saying that j1mmy shouldn't criticize the sun, because he can't build a better one! Go live on the moon where everybody can't bother you...

My favorite movie of all times is "The Last Boyscout". "From Dusk Till Dawn" and "Desperado" is close though.


Posted by Kolben on Jun. 05 2000,06:55
The story in matrix has a problem and I'm saying it out loud. I even told what I thought was wrong about it. I paid for the movie and I felt that there was something wrong with it. That's what I'm saying. I'm not the writer who get's paid so why the fuck should I be the one finding the solutions? I see a movie to be entertained, and I expect it to be good. When I see a bad movie I paid for it annoys me, and I don't really care what the solutions are. Fact is that it was a bad experience, and that I could have used my money elsewhere. I won't try to make the movie better, or solve it's problems. That's not my job. That's the producers job, before it hits the big screen. And what good would it do to solve the problems either. The movie will still be the same.

This discussion is too lameass stupid, because I actually know what you mean, but I really don't care, because I've got another point of view. And you can't change that...So stop bitching about people saying what the mean, without thinking about solving the worlds problems while doing it. I'm a chemist and my job is to synthesize chemicals. Not to be a politician, not to be a writer, not to be a car manufacturer.

If someone came up to me and said "this fuckin' compound is crap" about the thing he has paid me to do, I'd analyse it and make it better. I don't expect the poor guy to come up with a solution to the problem, because he's probably not educated to do so. Like when I pay for something and it doesn't work, I'll say "it doesn't work, fix it, or give me my money back". I won't expect people to demand that I come up with a way to fix it...that's just stupid. Then I could have made it myself from the start. In my oppinion your oppinion is stupid!

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited June 05, 2000).]


Posted by Hellraiser on Jun. 05 2000,07:20
Just so you know Kolben, it's fiction; it's not supposed to be perfect. And the writers/producers did a pretty damn good job of entertaining 99.9\% of the people who saw the movie.

Every movie I have ever seen has had holes in it, but if it's entertaining, it's done its job.

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.


Posted by Kolben on Jun. 05 2000,10:27
...Never said the movie was bad Only that it contains bad elements...I think the movie is good as a whole. Just like I think SW 4+5+6 r0x0rs, though Mark Hamil is/was a lam0r when it comes to acting. I'm just not allowed to say so, because that pisses off Sithiee

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited June 05, 2000).]


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 05 2000,14:24
you say he was a lam0r. why do you say that?...back up what you say with proof...youve done it again...you say "he was a lam0r" not "he was a lam0r, because when he was fighting darth vader it didnt look real". the simple truth is, you always have opinions that are based on your perception of the fact. if your just making stuff up with out any fact to base it on, you do not have a valid argument whatsoever
Posted by Slicer on Jun. 05 2000,15:47
3 really quick things:
1. Nero, tell me what the quotation and the trilogy in your sig are from.

2. You really can't define bad acting. It's kind of intuitive.

3. I have started a Fight Club vs. Matrix Thread

Slicer
_____________________________________________
Don't talk about Fight Club...


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 05 2000,17:45
no, its not the same, youre suggesting that their story has holes, but you yourself havent got an inkling of an idea what they should do to make the story work, im not saying you have to rewrite the script, but a part of constructive criticism is coming up with examples of how to improve things. for example, if i build a car, and it breaks, if you say "your car it dumb, it doesnt work" thats just stupid. if you say "your car is dumb, heres an idea to make it better" then your being constructive. all your writings up there are just saying "the matrix wouldnt work" not "the matrix wouldnt work, but it would work if this happened"...thats a big difference
Posted by Nero on Jun. 05 2000,18:23
i go to work for eight hours and i miss all this! that's it, i'm quitting work just so i can stay on the detnet forum all time. i wish.

maybe THE trilogy is star wars, but *the* trilogy, i.e. the one that isn't on lunch boxes and underwear (four and six year old brothers, it's there, trust me), is written by a guy named douglas, not george. i like stars wars, but i much prefer the sacrcasm and irony of ford prefect.

------------------
"Sorry for the inconvenience." God's last words to the universe in the final book of *the* trilogy.


Posted by Sithiee on Jun. 05 2000,21:26
Slicer, you can point out where its bad, you can say "That acting there was not believable as a human being" etc. you can pinpoint places where its bad, and if you make a little attempt, you can say why. Of course mark hamill cant get a decent part now because everyone sees him as luke. though he did rock in wing commander, damn shame about the movie though
Posted by Kolben on Jun. 06 2000,04:46
Sithiee...Did I do it again? I believe this is the first time. In this forum I've almost always told why I think the stuff is bad...BUT THAT'S NOT THE SAME AS SOLVING THE FUCKING PROBLEM, that you say I should. And I didn't think that I had to tell you why I think Mark Hamils acting (Mark Hamil-acting) sucks. It's right that it's an intuitive oppinion, but if you think his acting in sw was good you must be blind and def. What can i say...an example (I don't wanna go through the 3 movies, because it's gonna take me all day) could be "NOOOOOO! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!". Sucks!

I am not continuing this discussion, unless you come up with some very good argument about why I HAVE to come up with solutions about everything. And don't give me "that would make the world better" because it wouldn't. We'd have lowlevel cheapass stuff, because people didn't want to complaint about stuff, because they should come up with solutions. Constructive critisism my ass! That was what you told a 5th grade as a way of getting them to stop kicking eachothers asses or when you have to teamwork with people. And I'm not planning on making a movie. This is about responsibility, and I'm not responsible for making up solutions for crappy movies. So why should I do that?? And it still wouldn't change the movie. It would still be the same. You live in a fantasy world, and you're really pissing me off, changing the subject without commenting my prev. comment other than this fullscale attack about how stupid I am not explaining why MH's acting sucked. Mark Hamil doesn't convince me. My oppinion is "he sucks" and that's final. I can't explain to you why, because it doesn't come down to just this one thing you say. And even if it did I'm not supposed to point it out. I used it as a comparance. I didn't use it to start a new discussion about SW. And if you didn't understand that, you're a fucking lam0r. So stop bitching about it. And if you've read this thread you would have seen that HappyFish started the argument and I responded to it, AND TOLD WHY IT WAS WRONG. So what is the AGAIN thing??? To use you own way of saying it.

You are a lam0r, because when you said that I didn't back my words up, you didn't either. You only told the one side of it. The one where I did it (again?).

I don't have to say why I do stuff all the time! Do I? lam0r!!!

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited June 06, 2000).]


Posted by Hellraiser on Jun. 06 2000,09:29
Sorry Kolben, but you gotta back up what you say. If you don't at least explain yourself reasonably so we can see where you're coming from, we'll have to discount your views as merely irrational beliefs/opinions/attitudes. Everyone has these, but they have no place in intellectual discussion unless you back them up with corroborating evidence.

------------------
Just your generic meaningless signature. Mix with 2 quarts water and stir till evenly coated.


Posted by Kolben on Jun. 06 2000,10:34
Off course Hellraiser! It's not like I'm just bitching stuff without telling what's wrong. But it can get too much. With some things it's just not nescesarry. Like if you say "Rotten eggs smells bad". Sithiee wants me to say "rotten eggs smells bad, because its rotting process is releasing severe amounts of hydrogensufide, which when enters my nose starts a chemical reaction, that's processed further up to my brain that feels like something shouldn't be that way". It's just too much! One of Sithiees prev. posts said that I had to tell why Mark Hamill acting is bad. No I don't have to do that. It's one of those things that's too much. The fact in my post before that was that I think that a movie can be good even though it contains bad elements. It wasn't a new discussion about StarWars. The StarWars part was only an example, that only showed that I believe that Mark Hamills acting is bad. It was an oppinion nothing more. I don't care what your oppinion is, and I didn't want to discuss it. Some things are just too much!!

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited June 06, 2000).]


Posted by adeadlyintegral on Jun. 06 2000,13:38
This is an intellectual discussion? I thought it was a rant which started on the idea that the sun sucked and then just ran off into random topics for no good reason.
Powered by Ikonboard 3.1.4 © 2006 Ikonboard