Slashdot Mirror


A Critical Look At Walter "Scorpion" O'Brien

1729 (581437) writes Back in August, there was speculation that the "real life" Walter O'Brien (alleged inspiration for CBS's new drama Scorpion) might be a fraud. Mike Masnick from Techdirt follows up on the story: "The more you dig, the more of the same you find. Former co-workers of O'Brien's have shown up in comments or reached out to me and others directly — and they all say the same thing. Walter is a nice enough guy, works hard, does a decent job (though it didn't stop him from getting laid off from The Capital Group), but has a penchant for telling absolutely unbelievable stories about his life. It appears that in just repeating those stories enough, some gullible Hollywood folks took him at his word (and the press did too), and now there's a mediocre TV show about those made up stories." Masnick's article is a fascinating look at a man who appears to have conned both TV executives and journalists into believing his far-fetched Walter Mitty fantasies.

193 comments

  1. Suspension of Disbelief by mythosaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm happy to suspend disbelief for a good show. Scorpion is not a good show. It's impossible to suspend that much disbelief for the junk they threw at us.

    1. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Totally true. They confabulate genius with autistic savant, they misrepresent what genius (or autistic savants) can do, and generally have no idea how "normal" people react.

      The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    2. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Reason58 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.

      Most of the viewers are not smart, let alone geniuses either.

    3. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Same problem as 'Big Bang Theory'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Reason58 · · Score: 1

      And it is one of the most watched shows on TV.

    5. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      And it is one of the most watched shows on TV.

      I believe that proves the point. ;-)

      People watch American Idol as well ... that doesn't make it any good.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Suspension of Disbelief: Spiderman exists and has super powers and is the only one capable of stopping The Lizard.

      Terrible Writing: Some guy in New York totally knows all the crane operators in New York, knows the location of Spiderman as well as his destination, and at a moments notice is able get all his crane operator buddies to line up a dozen or more cranes on building tops along a single street and extend them so that Spiderman may web sling from them.

      Hollywood: The cops hate Spiderman and want to capture him, but after seeing The Lizard they have a change of heart and love Spiderman. To show their newfound love for their new favorite superhero, a police helicopter hovering just above the roof Spiderman is on shines its spotlight onto the cranes that were lined up for him. Showing Spiderman the way to swing, swing, swing, swing, swing toward the Lizard Man is a nice gesture, but it would have been faster, easier, less dangerous, and a hell of a lot more practical to just give him a ride in the fucking helicopter.

    7. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's impossible to suspend that much disbelief for the junk they threw at us.

      Painfully true. I saw the pilot. I won't be watching any more episodes. The show didn't have to be that lame. In Tokyo Airport, a Japanese drama, a similar problem occurs. The controllers get out hand-held radios and their final backup, a big hand-held spotlight with red and green lenses.

      It's a painful demonstration of the fact that Hollywood has an idea shortage. Almost everything is either a sequel, or awful, or by Joss Whedon. The most successful trend in Hollywood now is mining old Marvel comic books for second and third tier characters who haven't had a movie yet. The second most successful trend is recycling novels from the Teen Paranormal Romance section.

      Then there's CBS, the Police Procedural Network.

    8. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comment box isn't long enough to list all of the logical fallacies you committed.
      Let's start with the difference between A implies B and B implies A.

    9. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      Somehow I happened to see a commercial for it. I say somehow because I no longer have a cable connection so wouldn't normally see commercials.

      Anyway, I watched the commercial for this new show and instantly recognized it was a complete and utter disaster, on multiple levels.

      Just the preview alone showed the execs were trying much too hard to make a show with suspense and/or cuteness. It's one thing to have someone be able to fool people. It's quite another for someone to deduce which hard drive to pull from a bank of hundreds to stop the explosion/traffic jam/whatever from occurring.

      However, one small bit I did like was as the lead character and someone else are racing through the streets, she, the driver, makes some comment about not using seat belts because the car has air bags. Scorpion replied to the effect, the air bags would make things worse at their speed. Therefore, drive faster.

      Aside from that, suspension of belief was impossible for anything the commercial showed.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    10. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      I suspect those viewers are watching Ghost Hunters and happy with it. This is a show whose niche market is mostly disgusted with it.

    11. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Holy hell is this post ever going to come off as smug and condescending, but I have a point I want to make, and I can't express it less awfully.

      Entertainment and intelligence are basically oil and water, most of the time. You can take brilliant writers who are very smart people, and they don't write "intelligent" stuff for mass market entertainment. They just focus their intelligence into making good writing that is evocative to everyone. I wouldn't expect a brilliant screenplay to expect everyone in the audience to make the kind of deductions I know some people are capable of, to tie everything together super subtly as some kinda cleverness test(though the occasional piece like that is nice).

      In the same way, writers of all stripes(though mostly bad ones) write "smart" characters by filling their lines up with appropriate jargon. In some cases most familiar to slashdotters that means technobabble, but in others legalbabble, moneybabble, or psychobabble. They do this because actually coming up with intelligent things to say is hard and requires a lot of in depth knowledge of an appropriate field(there's an anecdote out there about the director of "A beautiful mind" expecting their math consultant to fill a chalkboard with genuinely intelligent math equations in an hour, as if that were no problem). And in the end that hard work doesn't come off to most people as nearly as intelligent as a bunch of nonsensical jargon.

      That brings me to my thesis: real genuine genius is only interesting to people equipped to break it down and understand how it's novel. And that has a lot more to do with field-specific domain knowledge than intelligence. For example, anyone versed in math can tell you that the triumph for a brilliant idea comes when you have an new notion of where to start deducing things, not when you write the final calculation down. And the formulation of a clever computer program comes way back in the architecture phase, not a few lines of coded jotted out at the last moment.

      You don't want it in most entertainment. It's nowhere near as satisfying as coming up with the right thing at the right moment to solve the problem facing you. It doesn't fit with the narrative format.

    12. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Funny
      Damn...wish I could have thought of doing this and made some serious $$$ selling my story to the network.

      I've just been wasting my tall tales for free in the bars when getting hammered.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      Idiots like the show does imply the show was written by and for idiots.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    14. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      And it is one of the most watched shows on TV.

      I believe that proves the point. ;-)

      People watch American Idol as well ... that doesn't make it any good.

      Yes! Ding, ding ding: popular does not (necessarily) equal good
      (Review our current/historical crop of elected officials, fast-food chains, etc... for examples.)

      If this guy can keep this up, he has a big future as a TV "News" pundit (somewhere...)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    15. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by onkelonkel · · Score: 2

      Just like the Big Mac is the most eaten burger.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    16. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by plopez · · Score: 1

      Or people posting on /. for that matter ;)

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    17. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that it's specifically an intelligence problem. It's going to be essentially impossible to write a convincing 'genius' or distinguish him from a 'savant' unless both the writer and the audience have at least an approximate idea of how the difficulty level in their discipline is distributed.

      Computers are a horrific subject for that. People don't know what's easy, what's hard, what's suspected to be impossible but so far not proven to be, what would leave a *nix-using CS expert puzzled but be solved in moments by a geek squad kid who has fixed exactly the same broken update 30 times this week, and so on.

    18. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow I happened to see a commercial for it. I say somehow because I no longer have a cable connection so wouldn't normally see commercials.

      Broadcast (cable-less) television, like the network this show is on, typically has commercials.

    19. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So it's not possible for a non-idiot to be smart enough to intentionally write something that an idiot would like?

      Do you have any actual evidence for that remarkable claim?

    20. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by laie_techie · · Score: 1

      Totally true. They confabulate genius with autistic savant, they misrepresent what genius (or autistic savants) can do, and generally have no idea how "normal" people react.

      The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.

      I say the same thing about The Big Bang Theory. Not everyone with a high IQ is socially awkward or OCD. For better or worse, the show is written to appeal to its intended audience. Hackers, The Matrix, and Jurassic Park took liberties to try and show "normals" how the world appears to hackers.

    21. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by msmonroe · · Score: 1

      I hate that show. It makes absolutely no sense to me; I swear I thought it was a show about some mentally handicapped people trying to live on their own. I had to have a friend explain to me the premise of the show.

    22. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is something I've never understood about hollywood. A genius normally knows how to communicate effectively. A genius can be smoother than George Clooney, yet in Hollywood, the genius is always some low EQ autistic freak.

    23. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by CaptainJeff · · Score: 2

      One can be "on" - or thinking critically and deeply - only so often. There is valid and merit in entertainment that causes one to not think/ponder/actively-consider for a period of time. Just because something does not require you to think about it and is incredibly stupid does not mean there isn't value in it, even if it does cause you to have to stop thinking things through logically for a period of time. Genius TV sticks with you. You *need* to think about it. You need to figure things out. Your brain can only do so much of this. If you're spending those cycles doing this, you are not using them for more noble purposes, such as thinking about things that actually matter. And that's a poor tradeoff.

    24. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Most of the viewers are not smart, let alone geniuses either.

      The show isn't trying to portray smart people, it's trying to portray dumb people's idea of what smart people are probably like..

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    25. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to me that if I write a show that idiots like, I'd be rich. I'd rather be a rich idiot than a broke and jealous.

    26. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      But in all fairness, both Mythbusters and Penn & Teller's Bullshit also portray dumb people's idea of smart people.

      So don't get smug over there. Yeah, I'm talking to you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    27. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! Ding, ding ding: popular does not (necessarily) equal good

      Can you actually justify why you think your preferences are superior to the general population's? Standing around in a circle of your peers tut-tutting the mob for being ignorant isn't actually an argument. Do you have anything that doesn't distill down to "X is stupid because they like Y, and Y is inferior because it is liked by X"

      Popularity in and of itself is a very strong measure. You need very solid evidence to overcome it. Tell us why (using hard, objective metrics) we should discount it.

    28. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      They want their viewers to feel good about themselves. They figure their viewers are working class dopes.

      Also, they know there is a fascination with people who have high IQs, but are deficient in other ways.

    29. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on now, you made up that story.

    30. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Downloaded TV does not. Who still puts up an antenna?

    31. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by nine-times · · Score: 1

      That brings me to my thesis: real genuine genius is only interesting to people equipped to break it down and understand how it's novel. And that has a lot more to do with field-specific domain knowledge than intelligence.

      I think that's only really true when you're talking about writing a character who is supposed to be a field-specific genius, regarding whether that character is saying actual genius things.

      So for example, if you want to have a character that's a medical genius (e.g. Dr. House), then it might be hard to come up with medical deductions that are actually genius, and it's probably not worthwhile because almost none of your audience will know the difference. In cases like that, I don't mind writers coming up with some medical technobabble. The most I'd hope for is that it's somewhat plausible and doesn't sound stupid to a layman.

      However, I don't think that this means you have to be a genius to appreciate smart writing. You can appreciate an extremely well written character without being able to write good characters yourself. It's possible you could even write a very good character without understanding why it's such good writing. And even relatively stupid people can appreciate a comedic genius pulling together a brilliant joke.

      So I think that was part of what was behind the statement, "I'm happy to suspend disbelief for a good show." I'll accept some silly technobabble in a good show. I enjoyed House, and I don't care one bit if some of the medical jargon is wrong. But if it's a stupid show and the technobabble is noticeably stupid even to a layman, that's when there's a problem.

    32. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I enjoy BBT.

      While the idiosyncrasies of the characters are grossly exaggerated, and while Sheldon's character is rife with contradictions, I still find the show enjoyable for exactly what it is -- simple comedy. 22 minutes a week, most weeks, where I get to have a laugh with some familiar faces who stumble through the same sort of tried-and-true TV comedy tropes of shows past -- except this time it happens in places and settings and over topics I'm intimately familiar with. I've sat in a game store and had conversations about girlfriends over comic books. I've seen friends that needed rescued from 96 straight hours of WoW. Putting your basic "Cheers" comedy in this setting makes it something I can relate to.

      I can put aside Sheldon's conveniently-ignored-when-inconvenient logic as part of my suspension of disbelief.

      The show used to be about the "triangle" between Sheldon and Leonard and Penny. The show has evolved to a compare-and-contrast of the relationships of Shedon/Amy, Leonard/Penny and Howard/Bernadette. Even now we explore the relationships of Raj and his new girlfriend, and minor character Stewart and Howard's mom. I've grown up in the nerd world. I'm watching my younger friends get married now. I see the same compare and contrast.

      ...and non geeks can relate to this. They can relate to normal human interaction told in a funny way but in a slightly nerdier setting that most of them come from. People could laugh at Wings, even though they'd never worked in a regional airport...taking a plane flight or two probably helped though. You didn't have to be an alcoholic to like Cheers, you didn't have to serve in Korea to like MASH, and you didn't have to share an apartment in Manhattan to like Friends. You can hate all of those shows, of course, but it's possible to enjoy these shows from the outside looking in too.

      It's not perfect, but it's an enjoyable 22 minutes.

      Aside: If you enjoy Chuck Lorre's comedies AT ALL, I suggest tuning into "Mom." It's surprisingly dark with a wonderful cast who deal with real problems -- teen sex and pregnancy, alcohol and drug dependency, infidelity, money....real problems. It's not intended to be literal-serious, of course, but it's a wonderfully refreshing twist on what Chuck gives us.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

    33. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      ...[I]t would have been faster, easier, less dangerous, and a hell of a lot more practical to just give him a ride in the fucking helicopter.

      In before "Why didn't the eagles fly the One Ring to Mount Doom" and/or "Why didn't the eagles fly the company of Dwarves to the Lonely Mountain."

    34. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      I'm happy to suspend disbelief for a good show. Scorpion is not a good show. It's impossible to suspend that much disbelief for the junk they threw at us.

      The first episode was AWFUL. I think it has gotten better since then, though. It is absolutely not "great", but is a somewhat enjoyable "dumb action show".. I think "Person of Interest" is a better show, but both are completely ridiculous technologically, but they're both enjoyable "dumb action shows".

    35. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Yeah but they do not watch 'Big Bang Theory' for the abilities of the characters, they watch for the quirks and laughable moments.

      In fact, quite a few plot lines on other sitcom shows evolve or devolve around out of place people with idiosyncrasies. It's sort of a go to for Hollywood and it's ilk.

    36. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      I agree 100% with what OP said. However, to be brief, he basically said, that for entertainment to be interesting you have to have no understanding of the field at all. Those of us who aren't oil rig techs, miners or rocket scientists can love Armageddon. However, those who are those will generally hate it because it talks about stuff thats impossible. Tyson hated Gravity because he knew how wrong the physics of it was. Me, I though wow! thats amazing. I didn't know that could be possible. Our entertainment is never supposed to teach. Its suppose to amuse, delight, inspire, titillate, evoke (fear and awe) or bore.
      I Personally love Scorpion. I don't care if its real. Its real enough for me. No I don't expect that a person with no medical degree can solve a custom virus problem or save a file off of a internet router during a terrorist attack or download a file while moving at 200mph.
      However, I am not remotely interested in O'brien's life, it would be very dull. Nor do I find Big Bang Theory funny. Remember writing have to make you feel for it to be good. Boring isn't good.

    37. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Most of the viewers are not smart, let alone geniuses either.

      The show isn't trying to portray smart people, it's trying to portray dumb people's idea of what smart people are probably like..

      Same could be said for Big Bang Theory. Look at how popular that is.

    38. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Ok are you suggesting a comedy that revolves around a genius savant isn't comparable to a drama involving a team of said people. Honestly, the only different in Jim Parson's character and Ari Stidham's character is career choice and human body mass. They way Parson's plays Sheldon is actually inferior to Stidham because all he has to do is be funny. Lets see him play Sheldon as straight,serious in a cross over episode. It won't happen. So A equals B because A and B are roughly the same thing. The fact you can't see that, implies you are refusing to pay attention or unwilling to.

    39. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Its hollywood's superiority complex. Those people want to feel like they are superior to everyone. If you watch (or your teen watches) Red band society, Hollywood is Kara and we are that Nurse that has to monitor her. For those of you who don't. Hollywood believes its the in crowd and the popular cliche. Thats why they never protray anyone accurately. Its hard to when the only thing you see in the inside of your own ass.

    40. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Suspension of Disbelief: Spiderman exists and has super powers and is the only one capable of stopping The Lizard.

      Terrible Writing: Some guy in New York totally knows all the crane operators in New York, knows the location of Spiderman as well as his destination, and at a moments notice is able get all his crane operator buddies to line up a dozen or more cranes on building tops along a single street and extend them so that Spiderman may web sling from them.

      Hollywood: The cops hate Spiderman and want to capture him, but after seeing The Lizard they have a change of heart and love Spiderman. To show their newfound love for their new favorite superhero, a police helicopter hovering just above the roof Spiderman is on shines its spotlight onto the cranes that were lined up for him. Showing Spiderman the way to swing, swing, swing, swing, swing toward the Lizard Man is a nice gesture, but it would have been faster, easier, less dangerous, and a hell of a lot more practical to just give him a ride in the fucking helicopter.

      Reality: Spiderman gets bit and dies a horrible death, The lizard is captured by several bullets to the chest and heat and is disected by some doc in washington and we never notice anything.

    41. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      ...[I]t would have been faster, easier, less dangerous, and a hell of a lot more practical to just give him a ride in the fucking helicopter.

      In before "Why didn't the eagles fly the One Ring to Mount Doom" and/or "Why didn't the eagles fly the company of Dwarves to the Lonely Mountain."

      Because the eagles would have been corrupted (the one ring corrupted everything, thats why it was sought by Sauron. Its evil. As for the dwarves, because walking to Lonely mountain creates character and creates a second useless movie for Hollywood to shove at us.

    42. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Hey CBS still has Survivor and the Amazing Race. And what is wrong with Joss Whedon?

    43. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      True, but Big Bang does a great job of getting it with nerd culture although perhaps in a self deprecating way. Where Scropion just blows it with idiots trying to pretend to be smart. It is the classic problem of the person with an IQ of 135 thinking they are the smartest person in the room, where the person with an IQ of 155 often thinks they are not. The difference being they tend to be in different rooms and different social crowds. It really all comes down to one problem smart people can recognize other smart people, or people that are smarter than themselves, stupid people can only do the second part.

    44. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      Antenna's are great for breaking news, particularly when it is breaking world news happening in your back yard. My personal example is when a space shuttle happens to break up above where you live and is raining down around you.

    45. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      On network TV? No, not for decades. There's 'Benny Hill'. Maybe 'PeeWee's Playhouse'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    46. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by LessThanObvious · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can only say to him. Well done - Sir. Hollywood could use a taste of that after the hacker themed swill we've seen like "Swordfish" and "The Net". Fun stories perhaps, but written by people with zero subject matter comprehension.

    47. Re: Suspension of Disbelief by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      I can think of TWO good reasons to watch Swordfish..

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    48. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Eristone · · Score: 2

      There's a simple answer to this one from Oglaf:

      http://oglaf.com/ornithology/

      (note - while this particular entry is safe enough, in general this comic is *highly* NSFW - and may flag depending on which blockers your employers use)

    49. Re: Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't mind the 200 mph transfer that was cool if plane where a single system and there was 50 feet of 10 baseT and some airplay could not land with out talking to the tower.
      Or analog phones still worked.
      And all smart people where some kind of autistic.

    50. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Comic book universe. That's why Spiderman could never take a ride in a helicopter.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    51. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't know good entertainment if Shakespeare himself walked up to you and slapped you silly with his collected works.

    52. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by retchdog · · Score: 1

      and to think that once upon a time we had the naive belief that the arts themselves could spark and inspire thought about these noble purposes, so that your dichotomy would not apply.

      fortunately we've gotten over that silly notion; now, get back to your drudge work and be happy to enjoy your optimized video experience.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    53. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Which says nothing about the claim. Well actually I guess is disproves it via counter example if you now saying those are two examples of what you claimed was impossible?

    54. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Entertainment and intelligence are basically oil and water

      Only if you equate entertainment with some popular TV shows.

      It's like writing off cinema as an art form because Transformers 2 was popular.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    55. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Popularity in and of itself is a very strong measure

      It's a very strong measure of popularity.

      Popularity and quality are orthogonal. Measuring one tells you nothing about the other.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    56. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Antenna's are great for breaking news, particularly when it is breaking world news happening in your back yard. My personal example is when a space shuttle happens to break up above where you live and is raining down around you.

      If I was being bombarded with burning chunks of metal raining from the sky, I don't think my first reaction would be "ooh, better turn on the TV to see what's happening".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    57. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Viewers of TV shows in general, or this one in particular?

      If the latter I sure as hell agree with you.

    58. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      1) Compare to the Big Bang TV show. The show itself is not to my liking, but they at least write intelligent people as intelligent. Entertainment and intelligence are NOT basically oil and water - unless you have stupid people trying to write intelligent people.

      2) I was not complaining about the lines in scorpion. No, that was actually reasonably done. I am instead talking about the ACTIONS. No smart person in their right mind would ever try to connect a physical hard line from a moving airplane to a car. They would find a way to boost the reception allowing the car to receive the broadcast information.

      3) Real genius is interesting to EVERYONE. It's not about the coding, it's about the actions taken. Smart people are NOT 'just smart about one thing', they are smart about a lot of things. If you are only smart about one thing, you generally are an autistic savant. You want a great example of a smart person written as smart? Watch the Raccoon in the Guardians of the Galaxy. He doesn't talk one wit about what he is doing, but just watching him play practical jokes makes you understand how smart he is - in addition to him constructing machines on the fly.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    59. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by OklahomaRed · · Score: 1

      Its very interesting fiction. I have worked with a couple of folks with IQ's that were off the chart that worked outside the box and delivered wonderfully elegant solutions. They can't deliver them on cue or deliver every time. One took two years to write 20 lines of code.

      Only idiot savants deliver on cue and they do it every time. I knew one rather well with an IQ in the 60's he followed simple instructions very well. He could keep track of the location, moment, ownership and place in the ginning rotation of at least 2,000 cotton trailers, all in his head. I don't think he could read or write. He was one of the cotton gins greatest human asserts.

      Red

    60. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Most of the viewers are not smart, let alone geniuses either.

      The show isn't trying to portray smart people, it's trying to portray dumb people's idea of what smart people are probably like..

      Don't be an elitist ! Many of the people out there are smarter than you are, even if you are very smart.

      That's not to say you are wrong. That's Hollywood's problem, they don't realise that the audiance is smarter than they are...
      Just because we will watch entertaining drivil, doesn't mean we would not appreciate something better.
      But it has to actually be better, not just bigger words.

    61. Re: Suspension of Disbelief by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      is it breasts?

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    62. Re:Suspension of Disbelief by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      It is an action version of the BBT.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. Then, he's the writer of the series? by BringsApples · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why it'd matter. Just look at him as the writer of the series.

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    1. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by 1729 · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why it'd matter. Just look at him as the writer of the series.

      He's been all over the media promoting his super-genius consulting company, and CBS has been running news stories proclaiming his "achievements":

      http://losangeles.cbslocal.com...
      http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/...
      http://boston.cbslocal.com/201...

    2. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't understand why it'd matter

      From the sounds of it ... he's making some pretty deluded statements about his life, passing them off as if they're true, and then selling it to people who are making it into TV which says 'based on a true story'. In many places, that's called fraud when you financially gain from it.

      Why, when I first carved the internet out of an old bar of soap, I took the left over soap scraps and molded them into the prototype of the first iPod, but Steve Jobs and I got drunk and I forgot all about it until years later. I told Al Gore he could keep the whole internet thing as long as we made sure to put plenty of porn in it.

      And then my wife, Morgan Fairchild (who I've slept with) and I decided to go on an around the world cruise in our giant yacht, and by the time I was done rescuing all the baby seals, Apple was already marketing it. I swear, between the sea-sickness and the size of my giant penis, poor Morgan could barely walk for weeks.

      Why only the other week, Warren Buffet was calling me to ask why I never filed a patent, and BTW, what do I think of HP splitting into two companies. I told him I don't have a lot of time to explain market fundamentals to him, and suggested he reads Investing for Dummies" first. And, besides, I'm still on retainer with HP as their shadow CEO, so it would be unethical.

      I'd tell you why Kim Jong Il has been out of the public eye for a while, but I'm sworn to secrecy for the next twenty years. Fortunately, me am Obama were chilling over steaks the other night, and he had a good laugh about it. At least I can talk to someone about this. The Secret Service guys are really cool, and sometimes let me shoot the guns, and the airforce pilots let me show them how to do a hammerhead in airforce one. Good times. You wouldn't believe what they've got in the secret fortress under Camp David, though. All I can say is Area 51 isn't where the really cool stuff is.

      Basically, it boils down to credibility. Sure, have all the fiction you want. But if you are passing it off as fact, and someone is failing to check if any of it's true, and then subsequently pass it off as fact ... they're morons.

      It sounds like this guy has been going around making extraordinary claims, and nobody has had the slightest inclination to challenge him on it.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Soch · · Score: 2

      Yeah. And. So. What?

      He can tell whatever stories he wants to in order to promote himself or his business. Lies in those situations are to be expected.
      CBS is the group responsible, in this case, for determining how much is verifiable. If you're surprised that the news isn't fact checking well, then you've not been watching the news for the past decade or so.

      --
      Everything and everyone is an aspect of Gd. So remember to show proper respect!
    4. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I call it 'Dan Browning.'

    5. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      You should call up CBS with your life story. I'd watch that show.

    6. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should call up CBS with your life story. I'd watch that show.

      No thanks. I stopped reading at the point when a bar of soap and Steve Jobs were introduced. Sounds like a bit of fiction the boys over at AppleInsider would appreciate...

    7. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by taustin · · Score: 1

      From the sounds of it ... he's making some pretty deluded statements about his life, passing them off as if they're true, and then selling it to people who are making it into TV which says 'based on a true story'. In many places, that's called fraud when you financially gain from it.

      In Hollywood, however, it's called "a day that ends in 'y'."

      "Based on a true story" means "based on the title of a book that you might recognize." If you don't know that, you should be kept in a home for the mentally insufficient, for your own safety.

      It sounds like this guy has been going around making extraordinary claims, and nobody has had the slightest inclination to challenge him on it.

      Why would they? It doesn't make any difference whatsoever if the producers (or network) believe him in any way. It doesn't matter how credible he is.. All that matters is if they think they can sell more advertising during the show than they think they could during a different show. They thought they could.

      I expect they're wrong on that, But that's hardly unusual, either.

    8. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      Although Dan Brown's books do require extreme suspension of disbelief, I've never heard any claims that the author actually experienced any of the same kind of events in his life, which is what people are having a problem with in this case.

    9. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      "Based on a True Story" leads us to "Inspired by Actual Events" which is synonymous with "I made this crap up."

    10. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should call up CBS with your life story. I'd watch that show.

      No thanks. I stopped reading at the point when a bar of soap and Steve Jobs were introduced. Sounds like a bit of fiction the boys over at AppleInsider would appreciate...

      Dude, MacGyver could make the internet out of a bar of SOAP and a shoelace if he needed to.

    11. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      From the sounds of it ... he's making some pretty deluded statements about his life, passing them off as if they're true, and then selling it to people who are making it into TV which says 'based on a true story'.

      Perfect answer. I didn't know that the show was 'based on a true story', but then again, I don't watch tv at all.

      Interestingly enough, yesterday I was lost in YouTube and ended up looking at some clips that had to do with folks going around telling others that they were Navy SEALs, and how some real Navy SEALs would give them hella shit about it. I wonder if any of this guy's BS had gained the attention of anyone that could debunk it. I guess not.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    12. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by 1729 · · Score: 1

      If you're surprised that the news isn't fact checking well, then you've not been watching the news for the past decade or so.

      I'm not surprised, but does that mean we should just be complacent? News should be based on verifiable facts. When it's not, we -- the viewers -- should call them out on it.

    13. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Jstlook · · Score: 1

      I'm more inclined to believe that hollywood was just figuring that the TV show would be more believeable / watchable if they had a "based on a true story" element to it, and rewrote his backstory to fall in line with the show.

      --
      ---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
    14. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why, when I first carved the internet out of an old bar of soap, I took the left over soap scraps and molded them into the prototype of the first iPod, but Steve Jobs and I got drunk and I forgot all about it until years later. I told Al Gore he could keep the whole internet thing as long as we made sure to put plenty of porn in it.

      And then my wife, Morgan Fairchild (who I've slept with) and I decided to go on an around the world cruise in our giant yacht, and by the time I was done rescuing all the baby seals, Apple was already marketing it. I swear, between the sea-sickness and the size of my giant penis, poor Morgan could barely walk for weeks.

      Why only the other week, Warren Buffet was calling me to ask why I never filed a patent, and BTW, what do I think of HP splitting into two companies. I told him I don't have a lot of time to explain market fundamentals to him, and suggested he reads Investing for Dummies" first. And, besides, I'm still on retainer with HP as their shadow CEO, so it would be unethical.

      I'd tell you why Kim Jong Il has been out of the public eye for a while, but I'm sworn to secrecy for the next twenty years. Fortunately, me am Obama were chilling over steaks the other night, and he had a good laugh about it. At least I can talk to someone about this. The Secret Service guys are really cool, and sometimes let me shoot the guns, and the airforce pilots let me show them how to do a hammerhead in airforce one. Good times. You wouldn't believe what they've got in the secret fortress under Camp David, though. All I can say is Area 51 isn't where the really cool stuff is."

            Actually, that's pretty hilarious. You're good, keep it up. Not as funny as "The Ronny and Nancy Show" but getting there.

    15. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      "Based on a true story" means "based on the title of a book that you might recognize." If you don't know that, you should be kept in a home for the mentally insufficient, for your own safety.

      'Based on' should be on Wikipedia's list of weasel words. True story:

      A guy was bitten by a spider.

      Based on this true story:

      A guy was bitten by a spider and turned into spiderman!

      You can recognise the true story from the film, but that's not why you watch the film...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:Then, he's the writer of the series? by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      The Da Vinci code famously includes the line:

      FACT:... All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.

      They were not accurate.

      I think the difference is, I get the impression that this Scorpion guy believes his own bullshit to a degree.

  3. What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you noticed that almost every show on CBS prime time glorifies the police state?

    1. Re:What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..........even Survivor, Amazing Race and Thursday Night Football?

    2. Re:What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      almost: very nearly but not exactly or entirely

      And yes, Thursday Night Football does glorify the police state.

    3. Re:What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Modern day gladiators. I.e. the "circuses."

    4. Re:What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by Thud457 · · Score: 1
      too easy:
      • Survivor - starving people struggle to survive while uncaring overseers with video cameras heartlessly record their plight
      • Amazing Race - people, probably ones who escaped from the island in Survivor, flee pursuit while overseers with cameras record their crimes against the state
      • Thursday Night Football - FFA - Future Felons of America
      • CSI / Miami / New York - DNA always tells the truth
      • Bluebloods - The elite Chief of Police presides over a nepotistic dynasty, as is right.
      • Person of Interest - hackers can't escape from the loving all-seeing AI
      • NCIS / Los Angeles / New Orleans / JAG - we'll get you if you fuck with the Navy.
      • Two Broke Girls - occupy Brooklyn
      • Two and a Half Men - perennial loser's son is one of the disappeared. Stay in line, don't let this happen to you.
      • Hawaii Five O - again, don't fuck with the Navy.
      • The Mentalist - we can read your mind, resistance if futile. And the police will lie and trick you.
      • Mike an Molly - police officers are likable normal joes, not crazed thugs with pepperspray and tazers.
      • The Good Wife - a party apparatchik leverages her political connections to get ahead.
      • Madam Secretary - hey look, we're really good guys, we don't really want to bomb you. but you need bombing.
      • Big Bang Theory - ok, I have to use my lifeline on this one...
      • Scorpion - hackers can be good, too. They work for the State.
      • Elementary - Winston Smith solves crimes for the police.
      • Criminal Minds - that's you. There's no escape.
      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    5. Re:What? A CBS show is a fraud? No way! by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      too easy:

      • Survivor - starving people struggle to survive while uncaring overseers with video cameras heartlessly record their plight
      • Amazing Race - people, probably ones who escaped from the island in Survivor, flee pursuit while overseers with cameras record their crimes against the state
      • Thursday Night Football - FFA - Future Felons of America
      • CSI / Miami / New York - DNA always tells the truth
      • Bluebloods - The elite Chief of Police presides over a nepotistic dynasty, as is right.
      • Person of Interest - hackers can't escape from the loving all-seeing AI
      • NCIS / Los Angeles / New Orleans / JAG - we'll get you if you fuck with the Navy.
      • Two Broke Girls - occupy Brooklyn
      • Two and a Half Men - perennial loser's son is one of the disappeared. Stay in line, don't let this happen to you.
      • Hawaii Five O - again, don't fuck with the Navy.
      • The Mentalist - we can read your mind, resistance if futile. And the police will lie and trick you.
      • Mike an Molly - police officers are likable normal joes, not crazed thugs with pepperspray and tazers.
      • The Good Wife - a party apparatchik leverages her political connections to get ahead.
      • Madam Secretary - hey look, we're really good guys, we don't really want to bomb you. but you need bombing.
      • Big Bang Theory - annoying geniuses who make the bmbs for those who need bombing like ISIS
      • Scorpion - hackers can be good, too. They work for the State.
      • Elementary - Winston Smith solves crimes for the police.
      • Criminal Minds - that's you. There's no escape.

      Fixed that for you. However, some do need bombing. Really.

  4. I watched half an episode by tekrat · · Score: 2

    And decided it wasn't worth my time. It's not just a crap show, it's a fake crap show and there's no way it's based on anybody's life, any more than that Lazzarr guy worked on an Alien Spacecraft at Area 51. If you believe any of that crap, I've got a nice bridge to sell you.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:I watched half an episode by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      You'd probably be more successful if you offered to coat the bridge in tin-foil free of charge.

    2. Re:I watched half an episode by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      If you believe any of that crap, I've got a nice bridge to sell you.

      Where is it located and how much are you asking for it?

    3. Re:I watched half an episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which bridge?

    4. Re:I watched half an episode by knarfling · · Score: 1

      If you believe any of that crap, I've got a nice bridge to sell you.

      Where is it located and how much are you asking for it?

      We can discuss where it is later. The bridge is only $1,000 US dollars, but I do require shipping and handling in advance. (FedEx Rates, of course.)

      --
      Great civilizations have lived and died on false theories. Don't mess up mine with a few facts.
    5. Re:I watched half an episode by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Everybody knows it was Brent Spiner who worked on the Alien spacecraft at Area 51!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    6. Re:I watched half an episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one for sale.

    7. Re:I watched half an episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the same guy both do alien autopsies, and try to reverse engineer alien spacecraft? Unless the aliens are cybernetic, or the spacecraft organic, those seem like they would be very different fields.

    8. Re:I watched half an episode by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      I don't like receiving my packages unbroken, could we use UPS instead?

    9. Re:I watched half an episode by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      It seemed easy to make that conclusion from the advertisements.

    10. Re:I watched half an episode by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      You have to keep a tight circle of trust. Can't let too many people in.

    11. Re:I watched half an episode by knarfling · · Score: 1

      I don't like receiving my packages unbroken, could we use UPS instead?

      ummm.... perhaps I should clarify. While charging "shipping and handling" implies that something will be shipped, I did not actually say that the bridge would be shipped. Only that you would be charged shipping and handling fees at FedEx rates.

      --
      Great civilizations have lived and died on false theories. Don't mess up mine with a few facts.
    12. Re:I watched half an episode by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Because he's a scientist and if Hollywood has taught me anything it's that, once you get to a certain level of proficiency as a scientist, you can instantly turn your mind to anything and understand it.

      Actually, most physicists I've met seem to believe this too...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  5. Confused about summary by ralphsiegler · · Score: 2

    So a person's story used to make a fictional drama for entertainment purposes on TV turns out to be fictional drama made for entertainment?

    1. Re:Confused about summary by 1729 · · Score: 1

      The linked article should clarify a bit: O'Brien is using the news stories about his "genius" to promote his consulting business.

  6. Good for him! by briancox2 · · Score: 1

    So let's suppose he's a "fake". He would therefor be guilty of turning a lie into a profitable entertainment venture.

    Isn't that exactly how every author, producer and actor makes their living?

    --
    We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
    1. Re:Good for him! by briancox2 · · Score: 1

      No.

      You believe Henry Cavill has super powers?

      --
      We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
    2. Re:Good for him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know who that is.

      You should learn what "every" means. Or kill yourself. Either way.

  7. Fraud? by Soch · · Score: 1

    The guy told exaggerated or made up stories about himself. People who are TV writers made a TV show out of them. None of that is fraud.

    Even if the writers believed him - and I think that's doubtful - he's still just telling tall-tales to writers who then write about them.

    The writers are crappy writers anyway. Let them write crap.

    --
    Everything and everyone is an aspect of Gd. So remember to show proper respect!
    1. Re:Fraud? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      He owns a consulting business, and he's using these bullshit stories (and the show) to promote it.

  8. Confused about summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Basically the story is he is getting screwed on a writing credit.

  9. Same old, same old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you're saying he's like everyone else in Hollyweird?? Oh, how surprising...

  10. Good for him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

  11. O'Brien's fascination with 2600 by tekrat · · Score: 2

    He has claimed that his misused image recognition software caused 2600 casualties in the Iraq war, and also later claims that Scorpion has 2600 employees across the globe...

    What's his fascination with this number? I think Emmanuel Goldstein (Eric Corely), publisher of 2600 Magazine, has grounds to sue. And so does Captain Crunch (John Draper).

    I'm willing to bet this guy couldn't program his way out a paper bag, and I've known and befriended hackers who were many times smarter than this fraud.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:O'Brien's fascination with 2600 by sexconker · · Score: 2

      I've known and befriended hackers who were many times smarter than this fraud.

      I've known and befriended quackers who were many times smarter than this fraud. Actual ducks.

    2. Re:O'Brien's fascination with 2600 by dysmal · · Score: 1

      Maybe he just misses his Atari 2600 after seeing the butchered plot behind Destiny and everyone is missing the real message.

  12. Frank Dux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reminds me of when word got out that Frank Dux was a complete and total scam... You might remember a movie about him from the 80s called bloodsport that apparently no one from Hollywood even tempted to fact check.

    1. Re:Frank Dux by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      LA Times article on Dux.

      http://articles.latimes.com/19...

  13. How is this news for geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is news for people who watch TV.

  14. mediocre eh? That's not even coming close to it. by BenLutgens · · Score: 1

    It's bloody horrible. It's so loaded with fake, unbelievable nonsense it's not even watchable. In episode one, they were racing a ferrari or a lambo or something underneath a jumbo jet, so that they jumbo jet could drop an ethernet cable down to a waiting hot chick who inserted it into a laptop. 2 seconds later they had magically retrieve a backup of the communication software for the fucking air traffic control towers. Which they then uploaded to every air traffic control tower in the country so they can FINALLY land all those planes.

    Aside from ogling catherine mcphee or whatever her name is, there was NOTHING watchable about this epicly bad pile of rancid monkey shit.

    --
    "If you love someone, set them free. If they come home, set them on fire." - George Carlin
  15. Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by enjar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I watched the first episode but only made it to the part where the stereotypical Asian woman was telling the stereotypical black government agent to not shoot the Radio Shack quality keypad at the "data center" that was obviously a self-storage vault, after the rest of the contrived story line (yes, of course, the aviation industry has no backup plans for backup plans if a tower goes dark and EVERYONE WILL DIE ; emergency vehicles in LA are only allowed to use the freeway and cannot bypass traffic ; you have to drive to a data center to get a hard drive ; software at an air traffic control sysem is only backed up 12 hours, every five minutes), collection of stereotypes (the Smart Ethnic People, The Guy in the Bowler Hat, The Unknown Genius Kid and The Misunderstood Autistic Guy. Not to mention The Eye Candy Waitress Who Isn't Just Eye Candy And Tells You About It) and over-used hacking tropes (I just hacked your video camera system from a diner in three seconds).

    I turned the TV off and read a book about a English policeman who is also a wizard, which was far more believable that the utter crap which Scorpion was. I read a lot of science fiction and fantasy, so I'm not opposed to the fantastic and/or the outlandish -- but Scorpion just pulled the same old tired crap out of the file, changed the names, crapped out a script, spent a pile of money and called it done. There are other shows on television with fantastic or scifi elements that are entertaining and fun to watch -- Doctor Who and Sleepy Hollow to name two current series, and there have been plenty in the past which have done a credible job -- The X-Files, Fringe, Alias, LOST, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, 24 to name a few. Some varied from "light mind candy" (e.g. Alias showed off Jennifer Garner's abs at 30 minutes in every time) to serious business (LOST, BSG), but Scorpion just missed on everything -- plot, story, characters, originality. It's just terrible to watch.

    1. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by taustin · · Score: 1

      Dude, you missed the best part, at the end, when they're driving a Ferrari under the jet liner that's flying eight feet off the runway, with the copilot sitting on the lowered landing gear dangling an Ethernet cable down to the car so they could grab a copy of the magic software off the plane's flight systems.

      It was so ridiculous, I kept looking for Bruce Campbell with a chainsaw for a hand. What made it funny was how earnest they were about it all. How anyone could keep a straight face long enough to finish a single scene, I don't know. Funniest new show of the season. Far funnier than any of the comedies, like Two and a Half Years Past When It Should Have Been Canceled And The Entire Cast Put in a Home. Or Mysteries of Laura, which is based on the premise that using police powers to blackmail your children (who had been kicked out of preschool for peeing on each other) in to a new preschool, then drugging the children to keep them quiet while interviewing with the headmistress, well, that's the funniest shit on television.

    2. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I turned the TV off and read a book about a English policeman who is also a wizard, which was far more believable that the utter crap which Scorpion was

      Rivers of London series, by any chance?

    3. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by enjar · · Score: 1

      Yes, indeed. I'm reading the fourth book (Broken Homes) now and I'm really enjoying his writing style, the setting, the characters -- pretty much the whole package.

    4. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by enjar · · Score: 1

      I kept looking for Bruce Campbell with a chainsaw for a hand.

      I'd take Bruce Campbell with a boomstick. Or heck, even Bruce Campbell as Sam Axe. Or Bruce Campbell as Elvis Presley.

      At least when Bruce is on the screen you know it's not all that serious. As an aside, if you ever get the opportunity to see "Evil Dead Live", I highly recommend the show.

    5. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I finished that one just a few weeks ago. Thankfully the next one is due out in a month or so. :)

      Hopefully there's not too much of a lag for the audiobook - they make the 4 hour drive to Dr. Girlfriend's place up north much more bearable, and Kobna Holbrook-Smith definitely does the writing justice.

      Yes, indeed. I'm reading the fourth book (Broken Homes) now and I'm really enjoying his writing style, the setting, the characters -- pretty much the whole package.

      And they're just fun to read. :) That's frequently missing these days, with all the crapsack countries and grimdark being all the rage.

    6. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by enjar · · Score: 1

      I agree. I read a lot of Golden Age scifi when I was growing up, and there was a lot of unbridled optimism out there. Humanity was going to expand to the stars, and it was going to be (mostly) wonderful. Nowadays, it's really hard to find that. I read a pile of Discworld books, which were fun for a while, but they became very formulaic. Great light reading, though. I also picked up The Expanse, which was grittier, but was still fun reading that kept me going.

      My "ultimate dark" book is Cormac Mc Carthy's "The Road". I read it exactly once. It was very well written but I won't read it again.

    7. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I especially like the fact that they, and this is what they actually said, claimed the *speed differential* was too great for the wifi to work.

      Because we all know that radio signals stop working at 200 mph speed differentials. (Ignore the fact they were talking to someone over a cell phone, please. Or that we normally communicate with airplanes via radio.)

      Ironically, I thought this one of the few things they actually got right the first time, because I missed that line of dialog, and assumed the problem that the damn wifi didn't work was, duh, the place was moving too fast, and trying to get a signal through both the airplane skin and the tower. (I could have told them that was a stupid plan.)

      For all the marbles, here's the plot-hole question: Even with all their nonsense, why didn't they find someone with a smart phone, have them turn it on, and, hey, the plane has wifi, and the smart phone has a data connection? (BTW...that was a dumb phone, not a fricking analog phone. Analog phones haven't worked in almost a decade, idiots.) Because we're forced to assume that's what *actually* happened at the end, that the guy's laptop had a cellular modem, or we're forced to assume that somehow the wifi on a plane dangling from an airplane worked.

      Incredibly, mind-blowingly, stupid writing.

      Seriously, I was actually tempted to write a scene-by-scene 'This thing is stupid, this thing is stupid, this thing is stupid...' rebuttal to it.

      Of course, it started with a *closing* html tag, so that wasn't a very good sign.

    8. Re:Mediocre? How about godawful? Terrible? by david.given · · Score: 1

      For me it was Nicholas Montserrat's The Cruel Sea. A brilliant, brilliant book, but it was clearly written as therapy after a hellish time on the WW2 North Sea convoys, and by god it shows.

      Peter Grant books: awesome, waiting for Foxglove Summer to show up. The Expanse: pretty awesome, although the authors have definitely been reading their Neal Asher; who these days pretty much defines the cheerful big-things-exploding-in-space genre.

      Never heard of Scorpion. Never heard of the guy in the article. Sounds like I haven't missed much. And if you'll excuse me, I need to get on with Ancillary Sword...

  16. Pilot episode was unwatchable by BLToday · · Score: 1

    Pilot episode was unwatchable. Characters were annoying caricature of "nerds". I wanted to punch people at CBS after about 15 minutes.

  17. Based on true story by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 1

    "Based on true story" can mean only one fact is in the whole story, it's Hollywood. Relax people! It's entertainment , either watch it or don't, hate it or love it or anywhere in between.

  18. Try Person Of Interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not perfect, but it still manages to do ok with the topic of AI.

  19. Re:You mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The Democrats in general.

    Step 1. Repeat something enough.

    Step 2. Get media to report it over and over again.

    Step 3. Point at steps 1 and 2 as examples of why it's true.

  20. You mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No like Baron von Munchhausen you insufferable twit.

  21. Re:You mean by msmonroe · · Score: 0

    Oddly Obama rhymes with you're momma. What's with that?

  22. Stay in perspectve... by NReitzel · · Score: 1

    Yeah, the show is mediocre, but it starts off with an end tag so what do you expect. I saw the end of the show first and wound back to see if they had started with a matching open tag, but no. Nobody there has a clue what they are, just "web stuff."

    Look, compared to network tv shows, it's in the top third. Would you rather have another reality show about an ugly woman and her abusive husband who both have an IQ of 98?

    See if you can maintain a perspective on all this.

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

    1. Re:Stay in perspectve... by enjar · · Score: 1

      Look, compared to network tv shows, it's in the top third. Would you rather have another reality show about an ugly woman and her abusive husband who both have an IQ of 98?

      I've started grouping any recreational activity like television, music, movies, reading, video games, web surfing as "entertainment". So any arbitrary television show might have to compete against a decent novel I've wanted to read, a new album from a band I like, a video game I'm working through, watching a movie I've heard about and checking my Facebook feed. In all those cases, there are good examples of better entertainment available to me that are better than Scorpion. I've only got so much time before I shuffle off this mortal coil, and I already know I likely won't have time for all of it. Why waste time on sub-par entertainment when there are so many great examples out there to choose from and a limited amount of time in which to enjoy them?

    2. Re:Stay in perspectve... by taustin · · Score: 1

      Would you rather have another reality show about an ugly woman and her abusive husband who both have an IQ of 98?

      Or Sex Box. Because "Naked Dating" was such a smash hit.

    3. Re:Stay in perspectve... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the show is mediocre, but it starts off with an end tag so what do you expect. I saw the end of the show first and wound back to see if they had started with a matching open tag, but no. Nobody there has a clue what they are, just "web stuff."

      Look, compared to network tv shows, it's in the top third.

      Would you rather have another reality show about an ugly woman and her abusive husband who both have an IQ of 98?

      Alright already, stop teasing, on what station and time can I find it?

  23. This show made my brain sad by uvsc_wolverine · · Score: 5, Informative

    I watched 10 minutes of it the other night (on accident I swear!) and had to spend another 10 minutes explaining to my wife why I was laughing so hard. They were tracking down some cyber-bad guy (ugh) through the internet and one of the characters stopped working to do the obligatory "I'm going to explain how the internet works to the seasoned tech-illiterate detective who fears technology" part of the episode. He then proceeded to explain how data flows through many points on the internet to get where it needs to go (okay so far). He told the cop that these points are called (I am NOT kidding) "Router-hubs". These router-hubs each keep a "shadow copy" of every document (shut up shut up SHUT UP!) that flows through them for months (what the hell?) and that they could find the document they needed by going to some random data center with one of these router-hubs (it hurts to type that) and getting the shadow copy.

    Then they went to some random building start doing things on a computer next to a long row of what appeared to be rack-mounted LED lights. Oh, and there was a smokey haze in the DC for some reason. Probably some atmospheric bullcrap. Anyway this show does have entertainment value, but only if you look at it as a parody.

    --
    This space for rent...
    1. Re:This show made my brain sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These router-hubs each keep a "shadow copy" of every document (shut up shut up SHUT UP!) that flows through them for months (what the hell?) and that they could find the document they needed by going to some random data center with one of these router-hubs (it hurts to type that) and getting the shadow copy.

      That sentence made my eyes burn uncontrollably and brought a nearby puppy to tears. So, so glad that I stopped watching after fast-forwarding through the first episode.

    2. Re:This show made my brain sad by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      After seeing the exact same scene, I turned to my wife and said thats nice and all if the internet actually worked that way

    3. Re:This show made my brain sad by garutnivore · · Score: 1

      Yep, I saw that very scene because my wife watches it and I happened to be around, and I also had to explain to my wife why I was laughing derisively.

      I'm sure some hack can spin our common laughter into a story about how watching Scorpion is a communal experience for people in tech fields.

    4. Re:This show made my brain sad by Trogre · · Score: 1

      These router-hubs each keep a "shadow copy" of every document (shut up shut up SHUT UP!) that flows through them for months (what the hell?) and that they could find the document they needed by going to some random data center with one of these router-hubs (it hurts to type that) and getting the shadow copy.

      They're probably not far from the truth there but more by accident than anything else. The "router-hubs" are just installed and maintained by the NSA.

      Lol "rack-mounted LED lights".

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    5. Re:This show made my brain sad by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Probably some atmospheric bullcrap.

      Awesome phrase.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:This show made my brain sad by lippydude · · Score: 1

      @uvsc_wolverine: "I watched 10 minutes of it the other night (on accident I swear!) and had to spend another 10 minutes explaining to my wife why I was laughing so hard"

      It's worse than I would have thought possible, see links to screenshots from episode one .. btw, can a magnet erase a harddrive enclosed in a hot-swappable caddy? .. ref ref

    7. Re:This show made my brain sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Third in a row with the "my wife watches it" excuse!

    8. Re:This show made my brain sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't see this show - but every time I laugh at techno-crap-babble in any program, my wife says I'm negative and ruining it (Person of Interest comes to mind). Sorry hon, the writers ruined it, I'm just amused. -T

    9. Re:This show made my brain sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw this episode and just chuckled a little bit.. it actually turned me off from the show all together. WTF is a router hub and when did they start keeping shadow copies of the millions of copies of packets this mysterious device would transmit in an hour (much less a day).

  24. Praise indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To original Poster:
    I think you made a typo in the heading paragraph.... right where you said "a mediocre TV show", I'm sure you just hit the wrong keys a few times. What you clearly meant was "abysmal TV show"

    Mediocre is way to much praise for what is a truly awful awful show.

    1. Re:Praise indeed! by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      Hey, but at least the second episode was better than the first, at this rate after another 98 episodes or so it may reach mediocre

    2. Re:Praise indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I liked the part where email was traced back to a packet loop on the internet, so you couldn't tell where it came from (never mind packet TTLs). They just happened to know the dude that had used that kind of trick before and have to go bust him. All to save some girl with a custom tuned virus that was going to kill her in 24 hours - but you know the CDC would engineer a cure in a just 45 minutes once they could get the code from the bad guys computer.
      How they manage to get across LA and find parking right at the mall doors in just seconds is beyond me though. Totally unbelievable.

    3. Re:Praise indeed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the second episode was only 'better' than the first because none of us know anything about bioengineering or infectious diseases, so don't see the stupid.

  25. 'Based on a true story' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The terms 'based on a true story' can be as vague as 'His name was correct' all the way up to 'They got it right, all the way down to his shoe lace color'. The whole purpose behind being able to say 'based on a true story' is that something about the story is true and they (the writers, directors, etc) took 'artistic license' with the actual facts.

  26. This is news? by wcrowe · · Score: 1

    The way I see it, the only possible problem is that the network claims that the show is based on real life. Otherwise, pretty much everything on TV is a made up story, including everything on "reality" shows, some of the stuff on the news, and perhaps even the occasional sporting event.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
  27. It's not about the show! by 1729 · · Score: 3

    For everyone saying "it's just a show": that's not the problem. Walter O'Brien is using his credibility from his show to promote himself as a real super-genius consultant. He has news programs touting him as the person who solved the Boston marathon bombings. He spent two hours on the radio last night promoting his "concierge" service. It's not just a bad TV show; the guy is perpetrating a real-life fraud.

    1. Re:It's not about the show! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you I SO AGREE WITH YOU! If that would just be show whatever but he is committing a fraud b/c he that's NOT base on "his true story" ...that's just not right to gain a financial reward for a lie it would be different when that would be true....

  28. Michael Synergy by Trixter · · Score: 1

    There will always be people willing to capitalize on the ignorance of others. O'Brien may be laughable, but he wasn't the first, nor was Michael Synergy, nor will either of them be the last.

  29. Who cares if he lied? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People don't usually watch TV dramas expecting them to be based on reality. So who cares if he lied about "what really happened"? People just want to be entertained. If his dreamed up fantasy life does the trick, then yay for him, and yay for people who've found entertainment.

    If the show sucks, I doubt anyone's going to cite the fact that none of the storylines were based on truth. They're going to say that the storyline wasn't exciting enough, interesting enough, or scintillating enough. Well, guess what? Real life rarely is. So he should just lie better to get good ratings. That's what entertainment is about.

    1. Re:Who cares if he lied? by databeast · · Score: 1

      Because CBS keeps pushing news articles that present Walter as a respected expert in the infosec industry. None of us had heard of him before the show. He does not speak for us.

    2. Re:Who cares if he lied? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least he doesn't have a baby bump........

      Haven't seen anything about him personally. Even some trumped up news stories about this fake would be better than some of my news feeds.

  30. Thank you! It's about Walter IRL by databeast · · Score: 3

    thank you.. This is the problem, this assclown is representing his delusions as state of the art in the Infosec world. None of us in that community had heard of this dude before.

    We have enough problems with the world at large assuming that everything we do is magic. Walter's bullshit is actively damaging to our field.

  31. Quite honestly I find by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The comments about this article about the guys website MUCH more impressive than the website. You are all a bunch of nerds, and that makes me happy.

  32. Isn't everybody on TV a genius? by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Funny

    On TV, an IQ as low Albert Einstein's (165?) is a joke.

    Big Bang Theory, Fringe, Criminal Minds, etc; I think everybody has an IQ of 190, or better.

    Furthermore, I would think that everybody on slashdot would know that computer security is all about high speed car chases and gun fights. It's not as if computer security people just sit around in front of computers all day.

  33. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if he has hand spears?

  34. Recycling of old brands by steveha · · Score: 1

    Hollywood has an idea shortage.

    True, but there is another point you might want to consider: media fragmentation.

    It used to be that there were only three TV networks, and most people could only see a movie by going to the theatre (which didn't have 12 different screens in those days either). For music, there were a limited number of radio stations.

    Now, there are many different cable channels, plus YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, Spotify, Rhapsody, and DVD rentals or purchases. For consumers this is great, because you can watch what you like, when you like it.

    But Hollywood is unhappy because it's much harder now to build a new franchise. As a result, Hollywood is recycling old franchises, even if the end product has very little to do with the original.

    For a bonus, many people who have purchasing power now have fond memories of things they watched as kids.

    Thus, you have crazy stuff like the Battleship movie; I'm pretty sure they literally started with the brand name, and ginned up a movie project to put on it. I submit to you that Battleship isn't an example of scraping the barrel for ideas, but rather an example of jump-starting the marketing for a movie by building off a well-known pre-existing brand. It's gotta be the same thing with Tetris: we have this brand, how can we leverage it to sell movies?

    Many of the reboots and sequels have little to do with the original source material; and I think in many cases Hollywood just took some script and said "we can shoehorn this into a pre-existing franchise" and did it.

    Also, in my opinion the reason Guardians of the Galaxy was so successful was that it was made with love, and well-made at that; the third-tier Marvel characters are so obscure that they didn't really bring much to the marketing. I, for one, saw it because the previews made it look fun and because I read some really favorable reviews.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:Recycling of old brands by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Thus, you have crazy stuff like the Battleship movie; I'm pretty sure they literally started with the brand name, and ginned up a movie project to put on it. I submit to you that Battleship isn't an example of scraping the barrel for ideas, but rather an example of jump-starting the marketing for a movie by building off a well-known pre-existing brand.

      I always assumed that someone realised Rihanna would look good running around in uniform and firing a machine gun, and fit the movie round that.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  35. entertainment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's entertainment. I don't really care if it's true or not! You idiots probably believe all "based on a true story" means every milli second of a show has to be true. Why are you so worried about what dumb people will think? Don't you have better things to do?

  36. The Real Story by koan · · Score: 1

    Isn't this person, it's how useless news media is and how little fact checking goes on.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  37. Re:mediocre eh? That's not even coming close to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did the same thing just yesterday /junior network engineer

  38. Cap'n crunch by operagost · · Score: 2

    The number "2600" appears a lot in his stories. Phreaker wannabe?

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  39. actually, I find MXC entertaining... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    I really don't understand why "OW MY BALLS!" isn't a real show on Spike. Or SyFy.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:actually, I find MXC entertaining... by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      give it time.

      Cowell just hasn't seen the pilot yet.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  40. Re:You mean by sumdumass · · Score: 1

    More like Chuck Barris and his confessions of a dangerous mind.

  41. What....!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An ineffectual irish programmer talking gobshite and Americans believed him. No American will ever believe you.

  42. Re:mediocre eh? That's not even coming close to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's bloody horrible. It's so loaded with fake, unbelievable nonsense it's not even watchable. In episode one, they were racing a ferrari or a lambo or something underneath a jumbo jet, so that they jumbo jet could drop an ethernet cable down to a waiting hot chick who inserted it into a laptop. 2 seconds later they had magically retrieve a backup of the communication software for the fucking air traffic control towers. Which they then uploaded to every air traffic control tower in the country so they can FINALLY land all those planes.

    Aside from ogling catherine mcphee or whatever her name is, there was NOTHING watchable about this epicly bad pile of rancid monkey shit.

    Nevermind that if the plane could get that close to the runway in the first place then there was no reason why it couldn't, you know, just LAND.

  43. Ah, there's your problem... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.

    ...right there.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  44. So the shows are actually based on his stories? by bad_fx · · Score: 1

    Because if so then I sort of admire the guy, because that is some EPIC level trolling he's managed to pull off:

    I've only seen one clip of the show, but I kid you not it was some of the dumbest "hollywood take on tech" shit I have ever seen. Something to do with having to download some software from the onboard computer of a commercial airplane and the best way to do it was... DANGLE a goddamn ethernet cable down from the airplane mid-flight to the protagonists in their fast car so they can plug it into their laptop and download the required software.

  45. re by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL, I spent the rest of the time wondering why you would want a huge ethernet cable coiled up under the floor of an airplane. I don't even remember why he couldn't just land. Agreed the whole thing was bit too much. Out of fuel? I am landing if you are ready or not! No, wait, I'll fly around in circles til I crash that will end much better. They were talking to the planes obviously, so I don't even get the whole premise of the magic software anyway.

    Personally, stealling the airport firetruck to do that scene would have been cooler. Those things are awesome when you floor it!

    hurfy
    says i am logged in and i have mod points and the buttons to select em. yet comments only AC wtf

  46. Re:You mean by msmonroe · · Score: 1

    really only a zero?

  47. That's a lot of foil... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Are you perchance "weird" al-vin-rod?
    Cause a suggestion such as that reminds me of only person that would keep that much tin-foil handy.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  48. Re: You mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No like curve ball the guy who told your man Bush about the WMDs

    bTW yahoo news is that way.

  49. The Secret Life Of Walter O’Brien by lippydude · · Score: 1

    "All of the lazy copy and paste repurposed articles written about O’Brien after he helped sell a TV show are based on one initial article in The Irish Times." ref

  50. far fetched by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    ...like passing a cat5 cable down a wheel well of an airliner and into the waiting hand of someone in another vehicle (without scraping engine nacelles on the runway - yeah, those wheels were NOT down and locked) while travelling over 200mph and waiting around long enough to download some firmware that for some reason couldn't be done entirely from the aircraft (what, nobody on board had a fucking ipad??) then bringing a Ferrari to a stop before it pancaked into a steel barrier, from 200+ to 0 in less than fifty feet - sideways, without flipping? All in the space of SEVEN SECONDS??

    Not far fetched at all.

    By the way: SPOILER ALERT.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  51. Now I understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the writers of the show wrote O'Brien as a borderline imbecile with some odd form of technical jargon spouting Tourettes Syndrome, it was not because they, themselves are idiots. They were actually going for accuracy.

  52. Re:mediocre eh? That's not even coming close to it by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    It's so loaded with fake, unbelievable nonsense it's not even watchable. In episode one, they were racing a ferrari or a lambo or something underneath a jumbo jet, so that they jumbo jet could drop an ethernet cable down to a waiting hot chick who inserted it into a laptop. 2 seconds later they had magically retrieve a backup of the communication software for the fucking air traffic control towers. Which they then uploaded to every air traffic control tower in the country so they can FINALLY land all those planes.

    I bet you loved McGyver...

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  53. Missing Opening Tag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know about the rest of you, but when I see an ad for </SCORPION>, I keep looking for the opening tag.

  54. I believe it by whitroth · · Score: 1

    A techie mailing list I'm on has multiple people ranting about the absolutely bs that happens - not the way aircraft comm works, not the way this, that and the other work, and the plot...um, what plot?

                    mark

  55. So he exists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was almost certain this Walter O'Brien figure is a promo creation, because what he claims to have done is just too absurd. I guess the cognitive and fact-checking skills of TV execs cannot be underestimated.

  56. The real Scorpion :) by lippydude · · Score: 1
  57. This show made my brain sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you had seen the pilot, your brain may have melted.

    Spoilers ahead!

    Hacker Dude is a Super Genius with a troubled past. As a child, he hacked into NASA to get Space Shuttle blueprints to use as wall posters. This results in black helicopters and Secret Agents raiding his childhood home. Secret Agent Man recognizes Hacker Dude's brilliance, and asks him to Do Some Stuff.

    Fast forward many years, and Hacker Dude is making ends meet by fixing the WiFi of a local diner where Single Mom works as a waitress. Her Young Boy likes to rearrange condiments. Hacker Dude sees that the Young Boy is actually a Super Genius playing chess with condiments. Nobody else realizes this, because Super Genius kids act all autistic and stuff.

    Hacker Dude is an asshole and can't go three sentences without telling everyone what a Super Genius he is. He wants to do Super Genius Stuff, so he's put together a Super Genius Team. There's the neckbeard who's the Math Whiz, a tough and spunky Asian woman who's The Mechanic, and a fedora wearing rogue who's The Mentalist. They have an average IQ of nearly 200, but can't remember to pay the electric bill, and haven't figured out what to do with themselves yet.

    Secret Agent Man shows up at their hideout and needs their help. You see, a software update has broken the communications system for air traffic control at LAX. As a result, they can't communicate with the planes circling overhead. In a few hours, planes will start to run out of fuel, and they will have no choice but to scramble fighter jets and shoot them down, because shooting down passenger planes that are out of fuel is the correct solution.

    Hacker Dude doesn't really want to help because the last time he helped Secret Agent Man, something bad happened. But Secret Agent Man convinces him to help, so Super Genius Team springs into action. First, they need an "unbreakable" WiFi hotspot, so they go to the diner where Single Mom works. In seconds, Hacker Dude has hacked into air traffic control, and he uses their security cameras to point at the computer screens there so he can see what he's doing. Or to see who he's talking to, maybe. He's going to revert the software update by restoring from backup! But for reasons, the only backup is at an offsite datacenter that isn't answering their calls, and according to the backup schedule, it will soon be overwritten! So he sends Mechanic Girl and The Mentalist to the datacenter to retrieve the backup, because hacking into air traffic control is trivial, but hacking into a datacenter is not.

    Mechanic Girl and The Mentalist arrive at the datacenter, but the door is locked, and nobody's home! Hacker Dude decides that causing a power outage with a power surge will open the door. Math Whiz scribbles on a board for two seconds to figure out the exact amount of power needed to overload the grid. Mechanic Girl then dumps this exact amount of power by flipping all the switches at the nearest power junction box. As expected, the worst security system ever designed opens. With seconds to go, The Mentalist is able to derive the location of the backup drive from a group photo of the IT staff, and rips the drive out of the rack just before the backup would be overwritten.

    The drive is returned to the diner where Hacker Dude intends to send the software to air traffic control via email attachment. But the backup drive is corrupted! Maybe because it was violently yanked from the server rack, but it's explained that The Mentalist put the drive in the door pocket of the car on the way back, and the magnet from the car speaker messed it up. All hope is lost, and Hacker Dude is very upset over his failure to save the day.

    Hacker Dude reveals to Single Mom that when he was young, Secret Agent Man had him design a guidance system for delivering aid packages. I'm not sure why aid packages need guidance systems, and apparently the military didn't either, because they used it for bombs instead. Unfortunately, Hacker Dude designed the system for "speed, not accuracy" and on

  58. swear at the TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haven't sworn so much at my TV ever. Worst technobabble ever. Swordfish at least had Holly.

    Let me fix primer for them.

    Ali: Bob, there is a bug in the code you just released to LAX.
    Bob: Oops should I fix it quick or should we just pull previous version from source control?
    Ali: Just fix it, they well use the backup system for now.
    Bob: K. What are you doing for lunch?

  59. http://www.selimoglunakliyat.com/ by ayhanaylioglu · · Score: 1
    --
    selmmjhdsuru
  60. Score Pi On Cuckooland Building Blocks in the NW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Walter is an actor playing a part in explaining why the Higgs Boson is also known as the God Particle. P is the 16th English letter, Pi is the 16th Greek letter. If you look close at the letters of Pi they are representative to the binary human reproductive organs. P being the male phallus while the i is cleverly the female genitalia. The action and fantasy are added to the show to generate mainstream viewers then the conspiracy behind Walter not being who he says he is will open this debate when the real scorpion team announce who the real man with 197 IQ is. Viewer are subliminally being implanted with a true story mixed with fantasy so that when team scorpion is given the green light by the justice league the real creator of team scorpion's magic will emerge into the spotlight like Simba singing "Everybody look left!... Everybody look right! Everywhere you look I'm standing spot light". SUB-A-TO-MIC-KEY MOUSE in the study of P-Article Physics. Score Pi On
    Scorpions brain decoded Pi to find this information as well as ZION written in a Poly-Alphabetic/Numeric ciphering technique he created.
    Z=26,i=9,O=15,N=14 which makes pi 3.14-15-9-26 spell ZION in English letters yet coded in the direction you'd read He-Brew since Zion protects his chosen people.
    Look even loser at the letter i and see that it's a point and a one which leads you to see spelling PiE and flip it upside-down and reverse it becomes 3!d which the letter d is the 4th letter making 3!d cleverly code 3.14 hidden as 3!4.
    Also look at Starmus' logo on their webpage and see that their logo has a letter V above the letter A in STARMUS. Av in hebrew means father. Starmus is encrypting the isolation of the father who'll explain what the God Particle is. Little hint for you all... It's has to do with why Guy Fawkes masks are WARN-R-BROs on the 5th of November each year in peaceful protest of corruption. And re-member that in ancient He-Brew they wouldn't mention Alpha's name or the letter A. So if Av means father in HE-BREW and the Jewish anciently don't mention Alpha then there would be no letter A in Av so that must mean that guy named V in V for Vendetta is actually a super clever subliminally ciphered message meaning father. Hidden in plain site so subtly that none other than the father himself could point out who patented mind control in a previous life and wrote the idea behind SaleMKultRa and programmed his kingdom for his return.