Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 388 posts

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#371

Post by StillBored »

the_af wrote: post #319
StillBored wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a case of "your holding it wrong". These movies (blade runner/etc) should come with screen calibrations to assure that people don't have the brightness on their TV's turned up too high. A problem that is far to prevalent, along with having the contrast set at cartoon levels to make them pop. These old movies were _DARK_. For long stretches you could barely see anything much less all the details of the ships. I re…

Agreed in general but do note the dropship scene is not particularly dark. The dropship is going through the clouds and the "superimposed" image is pretty bad. I'm pretty sure Cameron cringes nowadays when he looks at it. Do note most of the other Aliens SFX stood the test of time very well, and of course, it's a Well made movie with awesome pacing, making it easy to forgive those few effects that aren't very good.

Yah I re-watched it after posting that comment, and I think i conflated it with the landing in the original.

But even so, with the brightness on my 10" tablet turned down most of the way it didn't look too bad, some of the dialog though.. guess i've outgrown that kind of stuff.. lol.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#372

Post by AussieWog93 »

midoridensha wrote: post #367
AussieWog93 wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had the whole passport system with "valids" and "invalids", and Vincent eventually achieved his goal. I don't think what your saying was the main point of the show.

No, I'm just presenting an alternate point of view, that of the people in the movie who supported the system in place. However, one objective fault I see in the movie (from what I remember, it's been many years) is that their "valids/invalids" system assumes that non-GE people are automatically inferior, which may not be the case (and also depends on the task/role). Even today, some people obviously won the "genetic…

No, you're right. Dumb old me was looking for an argument when you were trying to simply share your perspective.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#373

Post by midoridensha »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #372
midoridensha wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm just presenting an alternate point of view, that of the people in the movie who supported the system in place. However, one objective fault I see in the movie (from what I remember, it's been many years) is that their "valids/invalids" system assumes that non-GE people are automatically inferior, which may not be the case (and also depends on the task/role). Even today, some people obviously won the "genetic…

No, you're right. Dumb old me was looking for an argument when you were trying to simply share your perspective.

Honestly, I was trying to play devil's advocate in a way. In that reality, most of society had decided that getting their kids genetically engineered (GE) was the correct choice: we have the technology, so why not use it? I see it as somewhat similar to medical technologies we have today, like vaccinations, with a small number of people refusing them because "they're not natural" or whatever. Most people prefer to have a society where polio and smallpox are eradicated instead of normally-occurring, so vaccinations are generally required in most places. So in the future, would having your kids GE'ed be seen the same way? For low-hanging fruit, what if your kid has sickle-cell anemia or MS or some other obvious genetic defect, and a simple tweak can fix this and keep them from being condemned to a lifetime of health problems and an early death? Why wouldn't we avail ourselves of this, and what parent would want their kid to suffer with these things? But with GE technology, obviously we can go much farther than just fixing a few transcription errors that have devastating consequences, so where does that lead us as a society? I do find this question really fascinating.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#374

Post by midoridensha »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #372
midoridensha wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm just presenting an alternate point of view, that of the people in the movie who supported the system in place. However, one objective fault I see in the movie (from what I remember, it's been many years) is that their "valids/invalids" system assumes that non-GE people are automatically inferior, which may not be the case (and also depends on the task/role). Even today, some people obviously won the "genetic…

No, you're right. Dumb old me was looking for an argument when you were trying to simply share your perspective.

Another thing I just thought of with my Michael Phelps example: genetically engineering people isn't necessarily going to make them superpeople, so I wonder how this will be handled. Phelps is really good at swimming with his body type, but that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling. Different body types are better optimized for different activities. Currently, people just get lucky usually, born with physical attributes that make them good at those tasks. So you don't see any pro cyclists that look like the "The Mountain" guy from Game of Thrones, for instance (whereas that guy is really good at weightlifting).

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#375

Post by AussieWog93 »

midoridensha wrote: post #374
AussieWog93 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're right. Dumb old me was looking for an argument when you were trying to simply share your perspective.

Another thing I just thought of with my Michael Phelps example: genetically engineering people isn't necessarily going to make them superpeople, so I wonder how this will be handled. Phelps is really good at swimming with his body type, but that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling. Different body types are better optimized for different activities. Curr…

>that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling

I wouldn't be so sure of that. I'm sure Phelps could lift more and cycle faster/further than most people on earth.

If anything, the fact he's good at swimming means it's likely that he's also really good at other sports - just like someone good at one sort of cognitive task is probably good at most.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#376

Post by AussieWog93 »

midoridensha wrote: post #373
AussieWog93 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're right. Dumb old me was looking for an argument when you were trying to simply share your perspective.

Honestly, I was trying to play devil's advocate in a way. In that reality, most of society had decided that getting their kids genetically engineered (GE) was the correct choice: we have the technology, so why not use it? I see it as somewhat similar to medical technologies we have today, like vaccinations, with a small number of people refusing them because "they're not natural" or whatever. Most people prefer to ha…

Oh, of course. If it were possible to actually do it, then it wouldn't ever be possible to contain. Either a small selection of elites get access to the tech and use it to dominate all of society, or we all have it. I don't think you could put the genie back in the bottle once it's possible to make your children smarter, stronger and more successful.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#377

Post by midoridensha »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #375
midoridensha wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing I just thought of with my Michael Phelps example: genetically engineering people isn't necessarily going to make them superpeople, so I wonder how this will be handled. Phelps is really good at swimming with his body type, but that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling. Different body types are better optimized for different activities. Curr…

>that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling I wouldn't be so sure of that. I'm sure Phelps could lift more and cycle faster/further than most people on earth. If anything, the fact he's good at swimming means it's likely that he's also really good at other sports - just like someone good at one sort of cognitive task is probably good at most.

I disagree. Sure, he's probably better at those sports than "most people", but that's not important, it's whether he can compete at an Olympic level in those sports. I'm sure he can't. He's optimized for world-class performance in just one sport, but not likely to be able to excel (at that level) in many others, no matter how much he trains.

I can cycle faster and farther than most people on Earth too. That doesn't mean I can compete at a pro level, or worse an Olympic level. I'm nowhere near that level of performance; the bar for "most people on Earth" just isn't very high for most sports, in fact it's pathetically low. Most people are laughably bad at any sport.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#379

Post by caycep »

anonporridge wrote: post #8

The great thing about Gattaca is that the cinematography ages incredibly well on top of the amazing plot. A lot of great sci-fi is marred by cheap effects that look incredibly dated only a decade later. Gattaca chose to focus on the story and create a minimalist future environment that still looks beautiful 25 years later.

with the Marin County Convention Center to boot!

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#380

Post by majani »

Tv9m wrote: post #307
giberson wrote: post #218

I though about this movie a lot going through IVF with my wife. Particularly when selecting the embryo to implant. For those that don’t know: With IVF, the doctor harvests as many eggs from the woman as possible. Then after taking the make sample and cleaning, selecting the semen with best modality , fertilize each embryo. Then let the embryo grow for a couple of days then freeze the embryo until it’s ready to be imp…

> And then the slippery slope, “we can also improve the odds of higher intellect, being taller , thinner, etc”. I would love to have been born in a world that had slid to the bottom of that particular slope.

Many species have already slid to the bottom of that slope. The phenomenon is called Fisherian Runaway, and it's not pretty.
Post reply on HN