2 ms·
I guess I was able to give foundation a pass on that simply because of the fact that there is by definition no way to express an unknown branch of mathematics.
by monocasa 5y ago
I guess I was able to give foundation a pass on that simply because of the fact that there is by definition no way to express an unknown branch of mathematics. The sin of hackers was that we knew at the time what mid 90s hacking offense looked like. We don't know what a new branch of math in the year 10,000 dependent on many branches ofath also unknown to us in the year 2020 looks like or what tools and processes mathematicians would use to help them manage that complexity. At that point is sort of give the writers/vfx carte blanche to make it at least look really sweet since accuracy is off the table anyway.
- pas 5y agoFoundation's problem is not with "math visuals", but that it's amazingly bad. Cliffhangers so dumb that made me vow never to pay for that show. Plotlines so weak I was wishing they'd just show more of the bland visuals in quiet. Pacing so fucked Asimov is going to rise up and bitchslap them. (Of course in the books there is some mention of how the math looked. Just a fuckton of equations on a wall :D)