Geek & Nerd Haven

Comment

Comment by Steph S. on May 8, 2013 at 4:30pm

Comment by Steph S. on May 8, 2013 at 4:27pm

Yes, I would agree Joseph. : )

Comment by Joseph P on May 8, 2013 at 4:22pm

I'm not for full-on political correctness, necessarily.  Orson Scott Card just tends to be one of the more flagrant examples for which a little cleanup is necessary, because ... well, he's a bigoted asshole.

Comment by Steph S. on May 8, 2013 at 4:19pm

I think they did alter Ender's Game to remove those problems Joseph. It is now politically Correct I would imagine. I would have to see the movie though to know for certain.

Comment by Joseph P on May 8, 2013 at 4:05pm

Well, yeah.  Technically, it's inserting and removing a zero, in an invalid manner.  However you want to label it.

Comment by Grinning Cat on May 8, 2013 at 2:22pm

I actually haven't read Ender's Game; don't know if I'll get around to it. Agreed that a movie gives an opportunity to "fix" details.

On the "1=2" proof, I think it's easier to explain the flaw not as "dividing zero by zero is undefined" (scary, forbidden) but like this:

1*0 = 2*0      but    1*42 =/= 2*42

The multiplication by zero hides the inequality of the other factors -- which can't happen when you multiply or divide by a nonzero number.

Comment by Joseph P on May 8, 2013 at 10:54am

Ah, I just pulled up the IMDB listing.  Looks like a lot of female extras and very minor characters.  Cool.

Comment by Joseph P on May 8, 2013 at 10:49am

Ender's Game looks awesome. Harrison Ford too.

You think they might have fixed the dynamic, putting in more than just the token Petra?  Just because Orson Scott Card is a sexist, homophobic bigot is no reason to maintain his skewed worldview in the movie.

The change to Major Gwen Anderson makes it look like they might have fixed a few of the thematic problems that are a result of Card's extreme Mormon views.  The major themes should be left intact, but a lot of the details can be adjusted.

Comment by Joseph P on May 8, 2013 at 10:38am

Yup, there's always a divide by zero hidden somewhere in those sorts of proofs.

Comment by James Yount on May 8, 2013 at 10:29am

Grinning Cat, it took me a bit to notice that it was dividing by zero.  

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• …
• 82
• Next ›
• Page