|
CelticPredator posted:The wachowski sisters or the wachowski’s You don’t use an apostrophe to make things plural 
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
pocket pool posted:The plot of which was lifted almost entirely from some book. It wasn’t but don’t let not even knowing what book you’re referring to slow you down
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
Old as poo poo and still hasn’t seen Bound, wth
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
Shiroc posted:Sex for egg trans people can also be really uncomfortable and weird. I think that's less of a discussion of theme of the movie (since its so limited) but more of stating why the Wachowski's might not have really thought about it and when it does come up its all kind of off. They made bound before the matrix, I don’t think the sisters W were uncomfortable or awkward writing, filming, or thinking about sex pre transition
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:The cost of imprisonment far exceeds the profits of selling inmate-bottled hand sanitizer or what have you. Nevertheless, we do it, because our way of life depends on it to the extent that only revolutionary violence could make us stop. This is a mistake. There are no costs - the "costs" are subsidized by money spent into existence by a sovereign state. The profits are gleaned by an entirely separate, private capital entity to the one paying the costs, and the payer has no interest in profit for itself. This is like arguing that a weapons factory can't be profitable because the military budget is really high.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:There are material costs in terms of raw material, construction, food, security, electronics, bureaucracy, and so on which vastly exceed the costs of soap bottled or t-shirts sewn. That is irrelevant. Lots of industries are based on unsustainable or economically inviable models absent context. Profit isn't derived at the societal level. Again, by this logic weapons manufacture isn't profitable. In many cases, this logic renders petroleum an unprofitable industry. The extraction of profit from prisons is mostly not from enforced labor, but enforced consumption. Vendors get a monopoly to sell food or soap or whatever to the prison and population and extract economic rents from that monopoly. Your conception of profit here is really weird.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2021 17:11
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:Yeah, or, orrrr maybe it's somewhere in the middle and there are multiple countries and an entire planet's worth of matrix but most of the areas are incorrect or generic, and that's a deliberate choice of the creative team. Big cities are accurately named but inaccurately mapped, some cities are just "The City", chunks of the globe are probably just missing, everything's been created from scratch by machines to mimic a human being's habitat. It's a giant, world-sized zoo for humans after all. It's not one big city, but there is one big city. There are also other cities and other countries. 35% of matrix residents are named dwigt rortugal
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Before Resurrections came out, it was only Morpheus who explicitly compared humans to batteries. The machines conceded that imprisoning humans in a matrix fulfilled a survival need for the machine civilization but didn't elaborate as to what else was going on. That means the reality could have been the "using human brains as CPUs" explanation from the original script, the generation of some sort of esoteric luxury or speculation market for the machines themselves, or something even stranger. Feeding agricultural products to cows and then eating those cows is a net resource loss because you're only getting about 10% of the energy you're delivering back, but it is profitable because people will pay for burgers. I'm not going to get into much detail here but this is an extremely common misconception about animal husbandry. Meat is not a net energy loss vs the food fed to animals to produce the food, because you cannot digest grass or hay or sorghum silage etc productively. Animal husbandry is an adaption to convert lands unfit for the production of subsistence or cash crops into usable calories and resources even if at a comparatively low level to fertile land. Even in our current economy, food animals are mostly raised on foods unfit for human consumption but that are either grown on land that would otherwise be unproductive or produced as a byproduct of agriculture for human consumption (or biodesiel or whatever).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 05:31
|
|
|
checkplease posted:There’s also the thing that with growing meat demand you have cattle raisers clearing rainforests in Brazil to grow more feed. Ferrinus posted:To what extent is it a myth that meat-heavy American food production is wasteful compared to a layout that invests in fewer livestock and more plant products? I've definitely absorbed the idea that decreasing the proportion of our agricultural product that eventually becomes burgers would be more efficient and environmentally sound, but maybe I've been misinformed or am just misremembering something? The problem is it would be better just not to raise so much of the crops used to feed them. You can't use west texas semi arid flatlands or burnt down amazonia to raise human food crops (or not very effectively). But you also don't have to put those lands under production, using whatever fertilizers and fuel needed to do so and producing the various by products of actually raising the animals etc. It would definitely be more environmentally sound to raise and eat less meat but it's not because you could be eating their feed or their feed land could be used to produce like...rice or something. In this sense meat production is very "efficient" because it means you can convert otherwise less useful land or unusable calories into foodstuffs, but it's not necessary for us (as it would have been for many past societies that needed those extra calories/food variety) and the knock on consequences are pretty lovely.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
Trollologist posted:Where are we getting this idea that there's billions of people in the matrix? Isn't the population mostly just in megacity? Smith says there are “billions” of people and there’s no discernible reason for him to lie or be wrong. In the script for reloaded he specified 6.5 billion but it didn’t make the movie
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2022 05:08
|
|