what did I think of devs?
>>198561786Needlessly drawn out, should have been fewer episodes, but still very good
>>198561786Main actress trying to do an American accent was grating throughout the entire series. It hindered her acting substantially. Nick Offerman did a surprisingly good job playing a heartbroken man with a God complex that sees the world as through the lens of hard determinism.
>>198561786Female lead was terrible. Premise was interesting, but the climactic payoff was easy and cheap. Disappointing overall.
>>198561786Really good visuals and soundtrack, very good chilling, eerie atmosphereToo long and the ending was bad
>>198562059we're supposed to believe this is a young boy and not a fertile woman with a great ass ready for breeding
>>198562097That was before he transitioned.
>>198562050Garland likes using her but she sucks
>>198561786You enjoyed it because you're not a pedantic contrarian no-life.
>>198561786they used a quantum computer which by-defintion relies upon the many worlds theory to try to prove that many worlds isnt correct. look, i'm not one of those people who complain that the numbers on star trek doors is inconsistent, but this isn't a minor scientific nitpick, its core to the central storyline and its nonsensical. Might as well make the world magic-based, replace the computer with a genie and be done with it.
>>198562969No one cares, nerd.
It was too clichee'd for my taste. Stopped watching around episode 6.
>>198561786Are you watching the Cap-O reviews?They're mostly on the ball, but this last ep they slipped hard on Crust Man's motivations. Literally arguing that his motives were unclear right over the scene where he defines his exact motivation for everything he's doing (including murder). He just literally says it:Any timeline that posits that my daughter is "still living" or "was just one of ten million that died in the same way" will be denied any validation within the parameters I dictate for the use of my technology.This means he is determined to set a set of user-boundaries fort anybody who wants to use it. There will be a "Prime Timeline" where his daughter was unique, died but was HIS daughter*. And all others will be considered invalid under pain of having your use of the tech be blocked (presumably he will be seeking to leverage governmental and institutional contracts to obey these directives by building in an auto-destruct mechanism if it's violated), even though the kid proved that the many-universes model returned better data that could easily be collated into a near-perfect picture of our timeline.*This is why he specifically uses "If it's not Our Jesus, then it's not My Daughter" as his choke point. And "one hair difference" being enough for him to stamp out it's legitimacy.Usually these stories are about le grieving husband/father etc going back in time to avert disaster and loss, but this one is stating that THAT is impossible. And the only way to "honor" that lost child or wife is to make sure (in this new world of time travel/viewing/influencing becoming a thing) that they don't get "lost in the multiverse" of branching timelines. So no-one can normalize the idea that losing a child is "not as bad a thing as it used to be" if you can just fire up this time-viewer tech and observe "your daughter" growing up, getting married etc in an alt timeline. This is specifically what he's fighting against (to the point of killing his workers).
>>1985634302/2The Cap-O guys are arguing that he doesn't explicitly state this, but he does, in that exact scene, but also it's demonstrating that he holds an unbreakable attitude that "there will be no discussion on this subject", because to even discuss the idea is to start to normalize it (that each person is just an instance in the multi-verse and not really a singular person or being anymore). I think he only cracks and says as much as he does in this particular crux scene bc he doesn't want to have to kill the kid, and gives him that small explanation, maybe in the hopes he'll understand and respect it some day (and not violate it.)Now, the kid can obviously go off and be able to sell his innovation (this BS sound-filtering algo he cooked up in an afternoon) to the highest bidder/DARPA. But Crust Man will either have him killed like the others, or try to leverage his control of the core tech to prevent/booby trap any external filtering methods like the kid created. But I think we saw Crust Man show his softer side there for a moment. He broke, a little, from his resolve because he was talking to a child in that moment (the rest of them being there was incidental, but he used the moment to drill ho,me the warning into the others).But the fundamental thrust of the whole series is this question of the veracity of your own timeline. Not the Terminator type of thing where there's a question of whether you saved your own home timeline from the horrors but merely created a new branch. You never saved anybody, only created a new branch where similar people never got Skynet.It's properly conceived SciFi, that's even addressing extant tropes in the time-manipulation genre as well as doing it's own thing. But it's still executed mostly-retardedly, like all the shit with the girl pretending to be a schizo.
>>198563430>Cap-oWHO?
>>198563689Capital-O Opinions. Thy just released an ep 5 (?) review after a few years wait. I figured OP must have been reminded that this show even existed bc of that.It's a show barely anyone watched even when it first came out and has next to zero half-life beyond that. Only Garland making Civil War may have given it the extra bump.But by and large the show itself isn't really worth watching, it's more of a lolcow piece in how poorly most of it is executed.It just has this one central idea that's fairly unique and strangely, something that barely if ever gets mentioned in time-travel hypotheticals.ie: Marty McFly just disappears mysteriously, forever in BTTF from his home timeline's perspective and thereafter he only travels to different branches of the multiverse, never to return to his real home. In essence he only ever improves his own fortunes, not those of his true family.
>>198563912>But by and large the show itself isn't really worth watching, it's more of a lolcow piece in how poorly most of it is executedWhat a weird thing to say in the age of capeshit
So many words for such a meh show.
>>198562097>ith a great ass ready for breedingshe does have a nice butt. She(the butt) was also great in Civil War as well.
>>198562969>they used a quantum computer which by-defintion relies upon the many worlds theory to try to prove that many worlds isnt correctWhat??Quantum computers in general don't require MW. In Devs, it's certainly possible that the computer could still work even if the underlying assumptions of their working QM theories were flawed.The capacity to simulate the past and future is largely independent of the QM theory. One could presumably also be a simulated person inside of a simulation under multiple flavors of QM. In a MW simulation, the past/present/future is one deterministic series but the simulation is no more accurate than the best approximation of the actual time series. So the past/future can be noisy.In Bohm/pilot wave, there is only one entirely deterministic series. So if you knew all events (way more than yottabytes of data) at a time, you could perfectly simulate with no noise. But any known issues in the dataset introduces noise into the simulation. In indeterministic Orthodox QM, there is inherent noise in the simulation as even if the collapse of the wave function fixes the past, whatever is physically simulating the past, is introducing uncertainties into the simulation itself. The simulations would somehow need to be designed to be definitive tests of each QM theory, and I don't think Devs goes that deep. It's not metaphysically easy to tell which theory might be right. Note that if a deterministic chaotic algorithm creates a sequence of numbers and a truly random algorithm creates a sequence of numbers the following holds: for any two relatively large finite string of numbers, the two strings will look statistically indistinguishable. Meaning you can't tell if a given finite string is random or not.The more obvious problem is that the amount of computation to simulate a simple activity like a marble run might require more computation than is physically possible for the mass in our galaxy to produce( even in a quantum computer).
>>198561786had potential but needed more cailee
>>198562097Her ass is too fat
>>198565631Cailee should have been the lead. Sonoyo could have played a little Asian boy just as easily. Also bring it down to a feature length film and cut all the spy filler.
>the baby genius literally gets tricked into jumping off a bridge
>>198565687The logic was sound. Fuck Allison pill.
>>198565570>Meaning you can't tell if a given finite string is random or not.*Is the product of a truly random process. It's at least possible that at the most fundamental levels physics suffers from a "metaphysical underdetermination" problem. If there is no alternative to these two options:-D: The universe is microphysically deterministic and chaotic according to a parsimonious theory. -I: The universe is microphysically indeterministic according to a parsimonious theory.Underdetermination occurs if the evidence for the two theories supports both theories equally but entail mutually exclusive microphysics.In one version, nothing is really random. In the other version, randomness is a deep facet of the universe. But both situations look identical to the ideal observer.
It was crypto christ kino. I liked it
>>198565805>>198565687>by the way, Lyndon is in your car>oh, is that today?Perfectly executed plot related quip-less humor.
>>198561786its garbage for midwits
alex garland is so obviously buck brokenturned himself into an absolute hack
>>198565805she knew she'd stand there until lyndon fell. thus, lyndon's logic was flawed.
>>198566727why do you keep repeating some gay nigger's gay fantasies?
>>198567011>why are you calling a guy acting like a gay nigger a gay nigger?stfu gay nigger
>>198566634>hi, Mr. Garland? Yes this is Hulu, we’ve decided to greenlight that miniseries you wrote specifically for rocket surgeonsIdiot.
>>198567783>uhhh no actually its was supposed to be gargabe for midwits from the startthat doesn't make it any better
>>198568396It was supposed to be interesting and entertaining, not a fucking TED talk.
>>198568763and it was neither
Strange Idea for a poster
>>198568878not that strange desu because its in the show
>>198569006Weird idea for a shot
>>198569006Cute giant feet, is there a 4k version of the show?
>>198568876You are entitled to your opinion. Maybe in a different timeline you don’t suck on your dads dick on a daily basis.
>>198568876For you
>>198569137>>198569155watch more shows/moviesyour taste is terrible
>>198569183Idk bro, after foundation and 3 body problem, this just looks like a masterpiece in comparison, even as flawed as it is
imagine liking this cucky ZOG propaganda garbagekys nonwhites
>>198569392Bad bot
i mean the show was fine but predicting the future is obviously impossible>take ball into room>predict where ball will be in 1 minute>computer says a corner>put it in another cornerthe computer isn't mindgaming you or can effect the outside world, it's just predicting something and you're specifically going against its predictions
>>198569488kill yourself subhuman kike
>>198569598pretty much, yeah. predestination makes sense backwards ("if you see all the variables, of course X was inevitable") but not forwards
>>198569388Exactly. Devs is extremely flawed but at least there’s some glimpses of the kind of hard sci-fi that really grabs your imagination. Nobody besides garland is even trying anymore besides penis Villanueva and the Nolan brothers.
Explain, without sounding weird, why there's a giant statue of a little girl with bare feet and plump lips
>>198569388I don't know how you can shit on 3 body problem (which is terrible and i dropped it on ep3) but in the same breath praise Devs.Both of these shows suffer from similar problems.>complete lack of understanding of the subject mattercheckI don't expect phd level explanations but it would be nice if they at least tried. Devs is hilariously bad at this. I still cringe at that scene from episode 1 where the show tries to present Lily as some superhackerman just because she can name the most numbers in the fibonacci sequence. This isn't even the only instance of this type of thing happening but it is probably the most egregious one. It feels like Garland found some basic coding tutorial online, saw that one of the exercises mentioned the fibonacci sequence and went "Huh guess thats what programmers do".>characters are not smart, you are just told they are smartcheckI don't remember Lily ever doing anything substantial. Does she use her superhackerman talent and knowledge to aid her in any way?>people not acting like real peopleI feel like I don't even need to list any examples because almost the entierty of Devs suffers from this.But the overall most offensive thing about the show is how self-masturbatory it is. These semi-long sequences at the start of every episode that don't actually show you anything interesting, the way people talk and what they talk about, the borderline religious music. All of it is deeply offensive to me because underneath it all there is nothing there. Devs is the definiton of "style over substance".The only nice part of Devs was Kenton
>>198570260>Ron Swansons daughter dies in a car accident>he feels sad>he makes a tech company and names it after her>also puts a giant statue of her in the middle of his tech company>no one in the show questions it in any way
>>198571013People just congregate around her feet like it's normalInteresting
>>198564676Both of these things can be entertainingly shitty in their own way.There's just more capeshit than shows like Devs or say Maniac which is very similar to Devs (even has the same asian chick in it) and just as un-talked about even to mock. Devs at least hit on an idea interesting enough for certain nerdy viewers to become extremely frustrated and shit-posty about how poorly it was explored.Most people can't even remember what Maniac was about, if they even remember it at all.
>>198569598It probably has a Two Week "solidification" window of upstream events. Until then nothing is registered as having 100% happened.Diffusion (Fuzziness as QM calls it iinm) has a forward half-life.If you did the "moving the ball" experiment it would likely show extra heavy diffusion in the areas of greatest ball-placement potentiality. This is why the multiversal signal comes in clearer, because the observer is not present there to change events on the fly.
>>198571103Upskirt fans, should have been more Asians
>>198569006I have not noted that before, but the shadows are wrong also it looks like they used a wrong ISO level and the picture has very poor contrast. Is Garland a hack?
>>198573149>bad shadows and poor contrastIts just typical modern cinematography
>>198563430>>198563457>>198563912what type of mental illness is required to give a single shit about what literal whos say?
