The only conclusion found from that book is that obsessive schizophrenics tend to need a captive audience for their "genius" - and if it is not present they will invent one.
Pirsig was a schizophrenic who ended up being treated with ECT and later had to stop giving interviews after hearing his own voice coming from a TV he was passing by. It was showing one of his earlier interviews but he was so freaked out by "hearing voices" again, he was afraid he was loosing touch with reality, again.
The entire book is a collection of didactic "I am so smart and wise and others are not" lectures by a Mary Sue going around and reminiscing of all the times when he was wiser than everyone else. All the while providing an adoring and captive audience for his bullshit by inventing characters solely to listen to him in awe and adoration. At the same time he's having flashbacks of himself before ECT, when he was younger and more obsessive (to the point of having a nervous breakdown), treating that person as some dark figure that's haunting him. As he is also gnawed by the fear that his son, who is accompanying him on that ride, may have inherited his mental issues.
Aaaaand that's it. There's no actual conclusion to be gleaned from his philosophy by the end of the book. But he does inform the reader of his past and present mental issues. While his tales of wisdom are really sophomoric.
"I made a shim for my friend's bike, out of a beer can, for I am both skillful and wise. But at learning that the tiny metal thing was made out of a common beer can, my friend got offended and chose to drive a bike with broken handlebars rather than have it touched by metal of such a low prominence. For he was neither skillful nor wise."
That kinda shit.
There is maybe some useful info to be gleaned from reading it while knowing that the guy is full of himself and that he has mental issues. If you're into stories by unreliable narrators or a fan of irony.
I'd add that D: Fishing in the middle of Sahara is almost as hard as building sand castles on the North Pole... regardless of the society one may be coming from.
What? First, it's only some scenes. Second, even if it was all the scenes, it still wouldn't double the cost.
Only all the scenes of people talking. And all the cover scenes. And all the scenes to recut the movie so it makes sense to non-Indians.
If no one wants to watch it, you wouldn't bother. And you don't have to pay Americans. You just need English speakers. In fact, it would be weirder if you used Americans.
That's a catch-22. If you want to show it, just to see if anyone wants to watch it - you must already have filmed it.
Also... Indians speak English. With an accent. You're not dubbing it so lazy Americans don't have to read. You're dubbing it cause it sounds weird and confusing for those Americans. It's like American... but it's like how Mexicans talk. Only not exactly. More like how Apu talks. Only that's funny and this isn't.
And dubbing it in non-American you're just asking for trouble. There's a reason British actors are THE go-to for villains, with their weird, non-American, "English".
People watch a lot of weird shit full of cheap melodrama here.
Not like this.
India only got electrified last year. For certain values of "electrified". Needless to say... their movies are made for a different kind of an audience. And... Indian stories are... different. So are their family comedies. Can you even tell the genre of this one?
All three movies are recent commercial and critical successes. All ranging around $3-4.5 million to make, and raking in around $15-30 million. Just releasing them in US theaters would cost more. Cause they would be competing for theater screens with Hollywood movies. While their entire take is less than a budget of a black and white indie. As in independent.
Best they could hope for would be some kind of a digital Netflix-like distribution, hoping for their audience to stumble onto them or be pushed by algorithms. But that would have happened already, had there been a market for those movies. Maybe if more Indians migrate to US and they grow to be 1 or 2 percent of the population?
The fanbase thought the TLJ was so bad that they let Solo burn.
Let Solo burn? I think you overestimate the fanbase! And its tolerance. That movie was bad. And stupid. And they knew it.
Original directors were filming a COMEDY. Does that movie look like a comedy to you? Not many jokes for a comedy, right? What is a comedy without jokes? Think about it. A movie made to make you laugh - but there are no jokes. Cause they got cut out and replaced with new scenes. STUPID! And bad! And worst of all... BORING.
Disney fired the original directors SIX MONTHS INTO THE SHOOT, reshooting a bunch of it with a new director, who had about two months to finish it all and do the reshoots. And Ron Howard knows how to do that. He went to The Corman Film School. He knows how to pack six months of filming into two months of reshoots. But then you get a Roger Corman movie! Only it has a bigger budget. Thus, along the way, they sunk nearly 300 million into production of it. Practically guaranteeing that it will be a flop, cause with marketing etc. it would need to make twice as much just to break even.
Oh... and then there's the issue of the "lead characters" having nearly zero chemistry. Lead boy+girl couple that is. Ehrenreich had great chemistry with Suotamo (Chewy) and pretty good chemistry with Harrelson as well. But we are supposed to believe he did it all for a girl... while there's no room for their romance in the movie at all. We don't get to feel the chemistry. Which is supposed to be the main character's motivation for the entire story.
Instead we're thrown three or four mini-motivations. Gotta get outta here... Gotta get outta here, again... Gotta get the paper... Gotta get the paper, again... Gotta get the ship... Gotta get the ship, again... and then the movie ends. Can you tell they made the movie TWICE?
The movie was messed up in production, it went over budget - and it sucked. Which is a shame, Ehrenreich is a very charmin fella. But there was no boycott by the fans. It was simply a bad and boring movie. And even Star Wars fans have their limits.
And yet, clearly, you are getting all upset, stressed and emotional about mere words, about words, which are about people having to examine reported cases of suspected child abuse on a web site - i.e. a medium where said abuse is found primarily in the form of text an images.
So... At least 5 degrees of separation and abstraction away... And there you are shouting, all boldface and exclamation points, that certain text is far worse than other text... because text can't be in the same category as text.
Hmm... Something tells me that you should not apply for that moderator position at Cognizant. Regardless of the ease of access to weed and the lactation room, when needed.
As cheap as most of those movies seem to be to make, they ought to be able to shoot the dialogue scenes twice
Even at the cost of a Bollywood movie it still costs AT LEAST TWICE AS MUCH to film the same movie twice.
and then overdub them... the point being to get the lip motions right, not to do anything with the practical audio. Their pronunciation can be poor.
Dubbing costs money too. Bollywood "blockbusters" have budgets comparable to episodes of TV shows in US. And if you're dubbing INTO English - now you're paying American actors American salaries to dub something that no one wants to watch. Not because of dubbing but because of cultural differences. Hell, Americans remake British shows and redub British cartoons with voices done by stars whose names and voices Americans recognize.
Also... Most of the stuff that works great in India would only register as weird or as cheap melodrama in the USA. Or most anywhere. Tropes are different. Cultural references are different. Language of the cinema is different. Think bright colors and all that singing and dancing. At best, Indian movies come off as over-the-top tearjerkers - at worst a movie comes off as comical when it should be a moving melodrama. Plus, it's perfectly normal for an Indian movie to be 3-4 hours long.
There's simply no market for those movies outside of their culture. Unless you're selling them to a very niche market of Indophiles or people who've migrated from India elsewhere. And that market may be a tricky thing to determine - with India being a country with 30-120 "major" and over 1500 "minor" languages, spread across some 2000 ethnic groups. It might end up like trying to market a Hungarian movie to Germans - "Cause that's what you Europans watch, right?"
Re "- with actual number of crimes on the increase city-wide." That would be detected and added in.
No, it wouldn't.
Read the bit about people not reporting the dealer next door for the fear of reprisals.
Low crime, nice parts of a city would not suddenly become filled with crime.
Cause the "nice" people there wouldn't go to parts of the city where there are drug dealers but no cops, to buy drugs and take them home? Or pay a dealer to do that and bring them drugs to their home? Or cause they would report themselves for doing that? Possession of drugs IS a crime.
Crime stays in parts of a city filled with criminals. Thats why the ability to track time works so well.
No. And I'm not sure which sentence makes less sense. The one which implies that criminals are paraplegics encased in concrete or the one which implies that we measure time with concrete-encased paraplegic criminals - instead of with clocks and calendars.
Spoken like a man who never had problems affording or purchasing a good pair of boots. If you can't grasp a metaphor, maybe an anecdote (or two) will help?
I'm a kinda guy who destroys footwear. High instep plus an old ankle injury... I have a funny step. I've worn out three pairs of army boots during less than a year of service - and I was in personnel. And you can bet your ass I was maintaining those boots, being a lowly conscript surrounded by officers and NCOs all day.
Important caveat - I'm a Bosnian. But rules of the market still apply. Anyway... for years I would buy a pair of boots around November... wear them until the spring... then start wearing them in September-October while looking for a new pair. Tried out civilian versions of army boots (no worse or better than the actual thing issued to recruits), various hiking shoes/boots, supposedly fancier (2-3 times the price of the army kind) boots... all the same crap. One pair of hiking shoes literally fell apart as I was cleaning them for the next season - soles fell off.
Granted... none of those boots were ever more than maybe $75 (the fancy kind). But they were all crap, regardless of price. Now... I could maybe shell out much more than that for a fancy pair of hiking boots... those look robust... But who's to say those won't fall apart in a year? They are sold in the same boutique.
Then... I discovered work boots. Not "work boots" sold at boutiques - the real deal. Steel toecaps, heavy, hard and ugly. And actually cheaper than most boots cause they tend to be "ugly" and a single boot will weigh as much as a pair of fancy boots. A decent pair would be $20-30. Then I found the REALLY good ones. Italian manufacturer, high shaft, laces and zippers, all the regular trimmings, ten-year warranty... Sure... at around $60 a bit pricier, for that kind of footwear, but still cheaper than what I used to pay shopping for "civilian" boots. And I even got to test that warranty - cause thanks to my "magic feet" the leather started tearing. Yes, you can technically use that quick-access zipper to put them on quickly... but that may not be such a great idea. But hey... they were under warranty, so I replaced them, wore those for 3 seasons... and as they were starting to show quite a bit of wear and tear (still not leaking though) - I went to the same shop to buy another pair. They are no more.
Thing is, those were some REALLY good boots. So good in fact that the manufacturer stopped making them. Thought of ordering some directly from the manufacturer - they don't make them anymore. You want all those features (it's the quick-release zipper) on a pair of work boots? Competition sells that for twice as much and in a wider color range. Clearly, not because it costs twice as much to make them or cause the manufacturer would be losing money. It's cause that's what "the market will bear" and the manufacturer would be losing "potential earnings". And to add insult to injury, I'm clearly so far out of "the market" that even should those other boots (with the same features) be worth the price, I'd have to take a 5-hour ride just to try them on. Ended up buying a pair of "similar but clearly not the same quality" Romanian-made boots for around $50.
Similarly... We went shopping for a freezer a few months back. After digging around online, driving around local malls and shops, checking and comparing features, sizes, quality, price... Turns out you can either buy cheap crap, cheap crap that is too big, cheap crap which spends twice as much electricity as it should in that price-feature range - or you can buy large freezer-fridge combos, which are more expensive and for which we don't have room. And they might be crap too... didn't check. Buuuuut... if I check the manufacturer's website - they DO produce and sell better freezers. More isolation, use less electricity... They just don't sell them here. Cause they sell for about $60 more. Market won't bear such a high
Except the ISSUE IS NOT REPORTING or "noticing crimes" - IT'S PREDICTING CRIMES that's the issue.
Algorithm doesn't notice nor report crimes. It predicts where to send the police. Resulting in a "garbage in = garbage out" predictive result based on reinforcement of outdated data.
E.g. If there was an arrest of a guy selling pot in front of a local Starbucks last month, and another guy arrested selling meth in a parking lot of a mall - algorithm now dictates through "near-repeat victimization" that both the Starbucks and the mall AND EVERYTHING AROUND THEM are likely locations of future crimes. And should cops actually notice something in that area aroooouuund the location of a previous crime while being under pressure to fulfill their monthly quotas - it is seen as a validation of the predictive powers of the magical AI. Rinse and repeat.
It's "Round up the usual suspects!" - only with locations and "supported" by math.
Pretty soon you have cops policing parking lots for broken tail lights and ID-checking everyone around a Starbucks, falling number of arrests for preventable crimes (such as selling drugs or opportunistic crimes) - with actual number of crimes on the increase city-wide. Cause everyone is listening to the magical algorithm, designed to predict earthquake aftershocks. Instead of having police patrolling even there where no crimes are being reported - e.g. cause the locals don't trust the police or are afraid of reprisals from the drug dealer next door.
Frankly, I'm more comfortable with his flavor of mental issues and moral flaws than with those of James Woods and Adam Baldwin. Never really was much of a Firefly fan, but I'm sure gonna miss all those charming assholes Woods managed to ruin retroactively.
Watching Cruise I at least don't feel like I'm being shoved someone's toxic worldview down my throat... Well... apart from that whole "everything revolves around ME-ME-ME" thing.
Y Maze Spontaneous Alternation is a behavioral test for measuring the willingness of rodents to explore new environments. Rodents typically prefer to investigate a new arm of the maze rather than returning to one that was previously visited. Many parts of the brain--including the hippocampus, septum, basal forebrain, and prefrontal cortex--are involved in this task.
Testing occurs in a Y-shaped maze with three white, opaque plastic arms at a 120Â angle from each other. After introduction to the center of the maze, the animal is allowed to freely explore the three arms. Over the course of multiple arm entries, the subject should show a tendency to enter a less recently visited arm. The number of arm entries and the number of triads are recorded in order to calculate the percentage of alternation. An entry occurs when all four limbs are within the arm. This test is used to quantify cognitive deficits in transgenic strains of mice and evaluate novel chemical entities for their effects on cognition.
Apophenia is the tendency to mistakenly perceive connections and meaning between unrelated things.[1]
Originally, character's name was Gally. Name was changed during translation in order "to appeal to more than just the hard-core manga and anime crowd".
Actually, the discrepancy between the names Gally and Alita comes courtesy not of AD Vision, but from Viz. In the October 1993 issue of Animerica, Fred Burke, co-translator for the Viz Comics Battle Angel Alita manga explains that, "For a Viz Comic to work, it's got to appeal to more than just the hard-core manga and anime crowd;" therefore there were several alterations made in the translation of the manga. Yukito Kishiro's title Gunnm, a compound of Gun Dream, was re-named Battle Angel Alita. Gally, the protagonist, had her name changed to Alita, a name, Burke explains, means "noble": a name that he discovered while searching through a book of baby names. Burke also explains that, for no reason given, the floating city Zalem was re-named Tiphares: a name meaning "beauty", taken from the Qabalah and the mystical Tree of Life. Furthermore, Yugo's name was given a cosmetic change to Hugo for American readers.
Sorry... Edge of Tomorrow was actually good. In fact, it was better written than the original book or manga... which have issues with finding an ending and some of its fan service.
It also managed to create a coherent story while not having to spell it out for the audience. The time travel, the technology, why is it all happening... while leaving all the elements in there, for audience to piece it together. Like the whole Alpha-Omega thing in the end which doesn't have to be explained with technobabble for the audience to get it - unlike all that crap with servers and antennae and author's ideas how wi-fi works, in the manga/book.
The movie is so good, one can forget for a while what a piece of narcissist crap Tom Cruise is in real life. Though, he is a good actor. But he doesn't really succeed in coming off as an empathic human being in every movie.
I'm a huge fan of the manga... Waited for the movie since it was announced that Cameron bought the movie rights, as it was known already that he is a fan... And I can't get myself to watch it.
Basically, when Cameron passed the project on to Rodriguez it was obvious this will not be anything like the story in the manga. It may LOOK like it... here and there... But Rodriguez is neither a fan who'd keep it all kinda there by simply sticking to a 1:1 adaptation - nor is he intellectual enough to read, understand and adapt the subtleties of the story.
As for motorball... In the manga it is all about self-discovery and self-actualization by reaching one's ultimate potential in a battle with the Universe which dictates that you can't win, break even or get out of the game. And liberating oneself by reaching for and achieving the "freedom to".
To see anything like it in a movie, I'd advise going to the source - 1975 Rollerball. There it is more about individualism as a solution... but it is just a metaphor for that same self-actualizing battle with the world.
Unless you're talking about the "scientists" who've breezed through all those years of school and training without ever picking up on the basics of statistics and probability. On account of just repeating the correct answers they memorized earlier.
Although, to be fair, they did fuck up on the Pavlovian conditioning as well. In half of the experiments, "correct answer" was always going straight from the point of entry, not changing the direction. To make sure bees actually "made choices" - both addition and subtraction were tested for. Addition choices were blue, while subtraction choices were yellow.
"Amazingly", bees were not only "getting it right" more often if the answer is just "fly straight ahead". When subtracting, they were "getting it right" more often when the answer demanded flying away from the wrong answer. Clearly, bees are doing math, right?
Except, experimenters rigged the game. For addition, "correct answers could be 2, 3, and 5 and the incorrect answers could be 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5". While for subtraction, "correct answers could be 1, 3, and 4 and the incorrect answers could be 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5".
I.e. When "adding" bees were trained to just go straight if the color is blue, and for 2 out of 5 "answers" that would be the correct answer. When "subtracting", flying AWAY from the presented option would be the correct answer in 2 out 5 "answers".
Leaving 3 "answers" where the bee would have a 50:50 chance of getting it right. I.e. 2 answers the bees were conditioned for + 1.5 answers where they'd get it right 50% of the time = getting 3.5 out of 5 answers correctly, or 70%.
I.e. By color conditioning and random choice alone, bees should be getting it correctly more often than most of their measurements show. Though right smack in the middle of their error bars when accounted for the color conditioning training. 72.1 +/- 3.20% for addition and 67.9 +/- 3.66% for subtraction.
In each of the four tests, the bees performed at a level that was significantly different from chance. In the addition (same direction) test, the bees chose the correct option of 4 in 72.1 +/- 3.20% (mean +/- SEM) of choices (z = 5.05, P < 0.001; Fig. 2B). In the other addition (opposite direction) test, the bees chose the correct option of 4 in 66.4 +/- 2.69% of choices (z = 3.81, P < 0.001; Fig. 2B). In the subtraction (same direction) test, the bees chose the correct option of 2 in 63.6 +/- 2.89% of choices (z = 3.17, P = 0.002; Fig. 2B). In the other subtraction (opposite direction) test, the bees chose the correct option of 2 in 67.9 +/- 3.66% of choices (z = 4.13, P < 0.001; Fig. 2B). There was no significant difference between the performance of the bees in any of the four tests (z = -0.887, P = 0.375), demonstrating that the bees performed equally well on all tests.
They've "discovered" that bees can tell colors and tastes.
Naah... Scots have the stupid common law system as well. Along with the belief that some people are simply better, being born with a title which makes the natural rulers of common peasants.
Also, comparing Louisiana "civil law" system to a civil law one is a false equivalence.
They do what they want cause their product is free... You are their product! Yarr har fiddle dee dee Being a product is alright to be They do what they want cause their product is free... You are their product!
Ah well... I still got plenty of copy/paste left from the last time that happened. Cause it's infinite. Unlike mod points. Anyway...
This "bring down thousands of pages" line is a shot at bullshiting ignorant Americans (and maybe Brits too) - cause Netherlands is a civil law country.
As such, one ruling of a court is nothing but one ruling by that court. It changes no laws, nor does it affect other cases anywhere in the land. Or the world. A precedent will get you no more than a cup of coffee. Provided you have the money to pay for it.
See... Most of the world DOES NOT use a legal system created for illiterate lords who've inherited their lands from their illiterate dead parents, along with the job to dispense justice to local peasants. Nor the legal system which came out of that one, only now judges were illiterate local strongmen with guns, somewhere out on the "frontier". A system where a "hanging judge" makes the law, the rest of the state be damned. Most of the world thinks that's kinda stupid.
Although common-law systems make extensive use of statutes, judicial cases are regarded as the most important source of law, which gives judges an active role in developing rules. For example, the elements needed to prove the crime of murder are contained in case law rather than defined by statute. To ensure consistency, courts abide by precedents set by higher courts examining the same issue.
In civil-law systems, by contrast, codes and statutes are designed to cover all eventualities and judges have a more limited role of applying the law to the case in hand. Past judgments are no more than loose guides. When it comes to court cases, judges in civil-law systems tend towards being investigators, while their peers in common-law systems act as arbiters between parties that present their arguments.
Oh an BTW... If the "law firm" is called MediaMaze and if it specializes in "Online reputation management", "Online PR" and "right to be forgotten"... It's a PR firm. And they are selling their spiel, hoping that either someone at Google will fall for it - or for free publicity for themselves, and possibly some illiterate potential clients from the US and UK.
If you'd read the link you provided you'd notice that the Louisiana "civil law" is akin to fruit juice with "at least 5% real fruit".
The starting paragraph would have done the trick.
Louisiana's criminal law largely rests on American common law. Louisiana's administrative law is generally similar to the administrative law of the U.S. federal government and other U.S. states. Louisiana's procedural law is generally in line with that of other U.S. states, which in turn is generally based on the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Also, this:
One often-cited distinction is that while common law courts are bound by stare decisis and tend to rule based on precedents, judges in Louisiana rule based on their own interpretation of the law.[22] This distinction is not absolute, though. Civil law has its own respect for established precedent, the doctrine of jurisprudence constante. But the Louisiana Supreme Court notes the principal difference between the two legal doctrines: a single court decision can provide sufficient foundation for stare decisis, however, "a series of adjudicated cases, all in accord, form the basis for jurisprudence constante."[23] Moreover, Louisiana Courts of Appeals have explicitly noted that jurisprudence constante is merely a secondary source of law, which cannot be authoritative and does not rise to the level of stare decisis.[24]
I.e. In Louisiana they use of SOME aspects of civil law - but in a court which finds and treats common law as superior. Basically, worst parts of both systems.
This "bring down thousands of pages" line is a shot at bullshiting ignorant Americans (and maybe Brits too) - cause Netherlands is a civil law country.
As such, one ruling of a court is nothing but one ruling by that court. It changes no laws, nor does it affect other cases anywhere in the land. Or the world. A precedent will get you no more than a cup of coffee. Provided you have the money to pay for it.
See... Most of the world DOES NOT use a legal system created for illiterate lords who've inherited their lands from their illiterate dead parents, along with the job to dispense justice to local peasants. Nor the legal system which came out of that one, only now judges were illiterate local strongmen with guns, somewhere out on the "frontier". A system where a "hanging judge" makes the law, the rest of the state be damned. Most of the world thinks that's kinda stupid.
Although common-law systems make extensive use of statutes, judicial cases are regarded as the most important source of law, which gives judges an active role in developing rules. For example, the elements needed to prove the crime of murder are contained in case law rather than defined by statute. To ensure consistency, courts abide by precedents set by higher courts examining the same issue.
In civil-law systems, by contrast, codes and statutes are designed to cover all eventualities and judges have a more limited role of applying the law to the case in hand. Past judgments are no more than loose guides. When it comes to court cases, judges in civil-law systems tend towards being investigators, while their peers in common-law systems act as arbiters between parties that present their arguments.
Oh an BTW... If the "law firm" is called MediaMaze and if it specializes in "Online reputation management", "Online PR" and "right to be forgotten"... It's a PR firm. And they are selling their spiel, hoping that either someone at Google will fall for it - or for free publicity for themselves, and possibly some illiterate potential clients from the US and UK.
"FamilySearch is a genealogy organization operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also known as the LDS Church).... The resource is maintained to support the process of obtaining names and other genealogical information so that Latter-day Saints can perform temple ordinances for their kindred dead.[3]... In February 2014, FamilySearch announced partnerships with Ancestry.com, findmypast and MyHeritage, which includes sharing massive amounts of their databases with those companies. They also have a standing relationship with BillionGraves, in which the photographed and indexed images of graves are both searchable on FamilySearch and are linked to individuals in the family tree.[6]"
"The LDS Church teaches that deceased persons who have not accepted, or had the opportunity to accept, the gospel of Christ in this life will have such opportunity in the afterlife. The belief is that as all must follow Jesus Christ, they must also receive all the ordinances that a living person is expected to receive, including baptism. For this reason, members of the LDS Church are encouraged to research their genealogy. This research is then used as the basis for church performing temple ordinances for as many deceased persons as possible. As a part of these efforts, Mormons have performed temple ordinances on behalf of a number of high-profile people, including the Founding Fathers of the United States,[47][48][49] U.S. Presidents,[47] Pope John Paul II,[50] John Wesley,[47] Christopher Columbus,[47] Adolf Hitler,[51] Joan of Arc,[51] Genghis Khan,[51] Joseph Stalin,[51] and Gautama Buddha.[51]... In February 2012, the issue re-emerged after it was found that the parents of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal were added to the genealogical database.[74] Shortly afterward, news stories announced that Anne Frank had been baptized by proxy for the ninth time, at the Santo Domingo Dominican Republic Temple.[75]"
Mormons are playing the long game of baptizing everyone ever straight into their "free planets for everygod" heaven. If that means buying up banks of genetic data one by one... so be it.
Slashdot Mirror
The only conclusion found from that book is that obsessive schizophrenics tend to need a captive audience for their "genius" - and if it is not present they will invent one.
Pirsig was a schizophrenic who ended up being treated with ECT and later had to stop giving interviews after hearing his own voice coming from a TV he was passing by.
It was showing one of his earlier interviews but he was so freaked out by "hearing voices" again, he was afraid he was loosing touch with reality, again.
The entire book is a collection of didactic "I am so smart and wise and others are not" lectures by a Mary Sue going around and reminiscing of all the times when he was wiser than everyone else.
All the while providing an adoring and captive audience for his bullshit by inventing characters solely to listen to him in awe and adoration.
At the same time he's having flashbacks of himself before ECT, when he was younger and more obsessive (to the point of having a nervous breakdown), treating that person as some dark figure that's haunting him.
As he is also gnawed by the fear that his son, who is accompanying him on that ride, may have inherited his mental issues.
Aaaaand that's it.
There's no actual conclusion to be gleaned from his philosophy by the end of the book. But he does inform the reader of his past and present mental issues.
While his tales of wisdom are really sophomoric.
"I made a shim for my friend's bike, out of a beer can, for I am both skillful and wise. But at learning that the tiny metal thing was made out of a common beer can, my friend got offended and chose to drive a bike with broken handlebars rather than have it touched by metal of such a low prominence.
For he was neither skillful nor wise."
That kinda shit.
There is maybe some useful info to be gleaned from reading it while knowing that the guy is full of himself and that he has mental issues.
If you're into stories by unreliable narrators or a fan of irony.
I'd add that D: Fishing in the middle of Sahara is almost as hard as building sand castles on the North Pole... regardless of the society one may be coming from.
Also, E: Time has to be right.
What? First, it's only some scenes. Second, even if it was all the scenes, it still wouldn't double the cost.
Only all the scenes of people talking. And all the cover scenes. And all the scenes to recut the movie so it makes sense to non-Indians.
If no one wants to watch it, you wouldn't bother. And you don't have to pay Americans. You just need English speakers. In fact, it would be weirder if you used Americans.
That's a catch-22.
If you want to show it, just to see if anyone wants to watch it - you must already have filmed it.
Also... Indians speak English. With an accent.
You're not dubbing it so lazy Americans don't have to read. You're dubbing it cause it sounds weird and confusing for those Americans.
It's like American... but it's like how Mexicans talk. Only not exactly. More like how Apu talks. Only that's funny and this isn't.
And dubbing it in non-American you're just asking for trouble.
There's a reason British actors are THE go-to for villains, with their weird, non-American, "English".
People watch a lot of weird shit full of cheap melodrama here.
Not like this.
India only got electrified last year. For certain values of "electrified".
Needless to say... their movies are made for a different kind of an audience.
And... Indian stories are... different.
So are their family comedies.
Can you even tell the genre of this one?
All three movies are recent commercial and critical successes. All ranging around $3-4.5 million to make, and raking in around $15-30 million.
Just releasing them in US theaters would cost more. Cause they would be competing for theater screens with Hollywood movies.
While their entire take is less than a budget of a black and white indie. As in independent.
Best they could hope for would be some kind of a digital Netflix-like distribution, hoping for their audience to stumble onto them or be pushed by algorithms.
But that would have happened already, had there been a market for those movies.
Maybe if more Indians migrate to US and they grow to be 1 or 2 percent of the population?
The fanbase thought the TLJ was so bad that they let Solo burn.
Let Solo burn? I think you overestimate the fanbase! And its tolerance.
That movie was bad. And stupid. And they knew it.
Original directors were filming a COMEDY. Does that movie look like a comedy to you? Not many jokes for a comedy, right?
What is a comedy without jokes?
Think about it. A movie made to make you laugh - but there are no jokes.
Cause they got cut out and replaced with new scenes.
STUPID!
And bad!
And worst of all... BORING.
Disney fired the original directors SIX MONTHS INTO THE SHOOT, reshooting a bunch of it with a new director, who had about two months to finish it all and do the reshoots.
And Ron Howard knows how to do that. He went to The Corman Film School. He knows how to pack six months of filming into two months of reshoots.
But then you get a Roger Corman movie!
Only it has a bigger budget.
Thus, along the way, they sunk nearly 300 million into production of it.
Practically guaranteeing that it will be a flop, cause with marketing etc. it would need to make twice as much just to break even.
Oh... and then there's the issue of the "lead characters" having nearly zero chemistry.
Lead boy+girl couple that is. Ehrenreich had great chemistry with Suotamo (Chewy) and pretty good chemistry with Harrelson as well.
But we are supposed to believe he did it all for a girl... while there's no room for their romance in the movie at all.
We don't get to feel the chemistry. Which is supposed to be the main character's motivation for the entire story.
Instead we're thrown three or four mini-motivations.
Gotta get outta here... Gotta get outta here, again... Gotta get the paper... Gotta get the paper, again... Gotta get the ship... Gotta get the ship, again... and then the movie ends.
Can you tell they made the movie TWICE?
The movie was messed up in production, it went over budget - and it sucked. Which is a shame, Ehrenreich is a very charmin fella.
But there was no boycott by the fans. It was simply a bad and boring movie. And even Star Wars fans have their limits.
And yet, clearly, you are getting all upset, stressed and emotional about mere words, about words, which are about people having to examine reported cases of suspected child abuse on a web site - i.e. a medium where said abuse is found primarily in the form of text an images.
So... At least 5 degrees of separation and abstraction away...
And there you are shouting, all boldface and exclamation points, that certain text is far worse than other text... because text can't be in the same category as text.
Hmm...
Something tells me that you should not apply for that moderator position at Cognizant.
Regardless of the ease of access to weed and the lactation room, when needed.
As cheap as most of those movies seem to be to make, they ought to be able to shoot the dialogue scenes twice
Even at the cost of a Bollywood movie it still costs AT LEAST TWICE AS MUCH to film the same movie twice.
and then overdub them... the point being to get the lip motions right, not to do anything with the practical audio. Their pronunciation can be poor.
Dubbing costs money too. Bollywood "blockbusters" have budgets comparable to episodes of TV shows in US.
And if you're dubbing INTO English - now you're paying American actors American salaries to dub something that no one wants to watch.
Not because of dubbing but because of cultural differences.
Hell, Americans remake British shows and redub British cartoons with voices done by stars whose names and voices Americans recognize.
Also... Most of the stuff that works great in India would only register as weird or as cheap melodrama in the USA. Or most anywhere.
Tropes are different. Cultural references are different. Language of the cinema is different. Think bright colors and all that singing and dancing.
At best, Indian movies come off as over-the-top tearjerkers - at worst a movie comes off as comical when it should be a moving melodrama.
Plus, it's perfectly normal for an Indian movie to be 3-4 hours long.
There's simply no market for those movies outside of their culture.
Unless you're selling them to a very niche market of Indophiles or people who've migrated from India elsewhere.
And that market may be a tricky thing to determine - with India being a country with 30-120 "major" and over 1500 "minor" languages, spread across some 2000 ethnic groups.
It might end up like trying to market a Hungarian movie to Germans - "Cause that's what you Europans watch, right?"
Card. Leave. By door. Out.
Betsy "Let's arm teachers to protect schools from grizzly bears" DeVos also coughed up $100 mill for Balto to poop on.
It's the black turtleneck.
Steve Jobs discovered that people with more money than sense get easily hypnotized by black turtlenecks.
Well... it's three roads for Rodent Frost.
Mice get dropped onto the "crossroads" between three paths, not two.
Re "- with actual number of crimes on the increase city-wide."
That would be detected and added in.
No, it wouldn't.
Read the bit about people not reporting the dealer next door for the fear of reprisals.
Low crime, nice parts of a city would not suddenly become filled with crime.
Cause the "nice" people there wouldn't go to parts of the city where there are drug dealers but no cops, to buy drugs and take them home?
Or pay a dealer to do that and bring them drugs to their home?
Or cause they would report themselves for doing that?
Possession of drugs IS a crime.
Crime stays in parts of a city filled with criminals. Thats why the ability to track time works so well.
No.
And I'm not sure which sentence makes less sense.
The one which implies that criminals are paraplegics encased in concrete or the one which implies that we measure time with concrete-encased paraplegic criminals - instead of with clocks and calendars.
Spoken like a man who never had problems affording or purchasing a good pair of boots.
If you can't grasp a metaphor, maybe an anecdote (or two) will help?
I'm a kinda guy who destroys footwear. High instep plus an old ankle injury... I have a funny step.
I've worn out three pairs of army boots during less than a year of service - and I was in personnel.
And you can bet your ass I was maintaining those boots, being a lowly conscript surrounded by officers and NCOs all day.
Important caveat - I'm a Bosnian. But rules of the market still apply.
Anyway... for years I would buy a pair of boots around November... wear them until the spring... then start wearing them in September-October while looking for a new pair.
Tried out civilian versions of army boots (no worse or better than the actual thing issued to recruits), various hiking shoes/boots, supposedly fancier (2-3 times the price of the army kind) boots... all the same crap.
One pair of hiking shoes literally fell apart as I was cleaning them for the next season - soles fell off.
Granted... none of those boots were ever more than maybe $75 (the fancy kind). But they were all crap, regardless of price.
Now... I could maybe shell out much more than that for a fancy pair of hiking boots... those look robust...
But who's to say those won't fall apart in a year? They are sold in the same boutique.
Then... I discovered work boots. Not "work boots" sold at boutiques - the real deal. Steel toecaps, heavy, hard and ugly.
And actually cheaper than most boots cause they tend to be "ugly" and a single boot will weigh as much as a pair of fancy boots. A decent pair would be $20-30.
Then I found the REALLY good ones.
Italian manufacturer, high shaft, laces and zippers, all the regular trimmings, ten-year warranty...
Sure... at around $60 a bit pricier, for that kind of footwear, but still cheaper than what I used to pay shopping for "civilian" boots.
And I even got to test that warranty - cause thanks to my "magic feet" the leather started tearing.
Yes, you can technically use that quick-access zipper to put them on quickly... but that may not be such a great idea.
But hey... they were under warranty, so I replaced them, wore those for 3 seasons... and as they were starting to show quite a bit of wear and tear (still not leaking though) - I went to the same shop to buy another pair.
They are no more.
Thing is, those were some REALLY good boots.
So good in fact that the manufacturer stopped making them. Thought of ordering some directly from the manufacturer - they don't make them anymore.
You want all those features (it's the quick-release zipper) on a pair of work boots? Competition sells that for twice as much and in a wider color range.
Clearly, not because it costs twice as much to make them or cause the manufacturer would be losing money.
It's cause that's what "the market will bear" and the manufacturer would be losing "potential earnings".
And to add insult to injury, I'm clearly so far out of "the market" that even should those other boots (with the same features) be worth the price, I'd have to take a 5-hour ride just to try them on.
Ended up buying a pair of "similar but clearly not the same quality" Romanian-made boots for around $50.
Similarly... We went shopping for a freezer a few months back.
After digging around online, driving around local malls and shops, checking and comparing features, sizes, quality, price...
Turns out you can either buy cheap crap, cheap crap that is too big, cheap crap which spends twice as much electricity as it should in that price-feature range - or you can buy large freezer-fridge combos, which are more expensive and for which we don't have room. And they might be crap too... didn't check.
Buuuuut... if I check the manufacturer's website - they DO produce and sell better freezers.
More isolation, use less electricity...
They just don't sell them here.
Cause they sell for about $60 more.
Market won't bear such a high
Except the ISSUE IS NOT REPORTING or "noticing crimes" - IT'S PREDICTING CRIMES that's the issue.
Algorithm doesn't notice nor report crimes. It predicts where to send the police.
Resulting in a "garbage in = garbage out" predictive result based on reinforcement of outdated data.
E.g. If there was an arrest of a guy selling pot in front of a local Starbucks last month, and another guy arrested selling meth in a parking lot of a mall - algorithm now dictates through "near-repeat victimization" that both the Starbucks and the mall AND EVERYTHING AROUND THEM are likely locations of future crimes.
And should cops actually notice something in that area aroooouuund the location of a previous crime while being under pressure to fulfill their monthly quotas - it is seen as a validation of the predictive powers of the magical AI.
Rinse and repeat.
It's "Round up the usual suspects!" - only with locations and "supported" by math.
Pretty soon you have cops policing parking lots for broken tail lights and ID-checking everyone around a Starbucks, falling number of arrests for preventable crimes (such as selling drugs or opportunistic crimes) - with actual number of crimes on the increase city-wide.
Cause everyone is listening to the magical algorithm, designed to predict earthquake aftershocks.
Instead of having police patrolling even there where no crimes are being reported - e.g. cause the locals don't trust the police or are afraid of reprisals from the drug dealer next door.
Frankly, I'm more comfortable with his flavor of mental issues and moral flaws than with those of James Woods and Adam Baldwin.
Never really was much of a Firefly fan, but I'm sure gonna miss all those charming assholes Woods managed to ruin retroactively.
Watching Cruise I at least don't feel like I'm being shoved someone's toxic worldview down my throat...
Well... apart from that whole "everything revolves around ME-ME-ME" thing.
https://med.stanford.edu/sbfnl...
Y Maze Spontaneous Alternation Test
Y Maze Spontaneous Alternation is a behavioral test for measuring the willingness of rodents to explore new environments. Rodents typically prefer to investigate a new arm of the maze rather than returning to one that was previously visited. Many parts of the brain--including the hippocampus, septum, basal forebrain, and prefrontal cortex--are involved in this task.
Testing occurs in a Y-shaped maze with three white, opaque plastic arms at a 120Â angle from each other. After introduction to the center of the maze, the animal is allowed to freely explore the three arms. Over the course of multiple arm entries, the subject should show a tendency to enter a less recently visited arm. The number of arm entries and the number of triads are recorded in order to calculate the percentage of alternation. An entry occurs when all four limbs are within the arm. This test is used to quantify cognitive deficits in transgenic strains of mice and evaluate novel chemical entities for their effects on cognition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Apophenia is the tendency to mistakenly perceive connections and meaning between unrelated things.[1]
Originally, character's name was Gally.
Name was changed during translation in order "to appeal to more than just the hard-core manga and anime crowd".
https://www.animenation.net/bl...
Actually, the discrepancy between the names Gally and Alita comes courtesy not of AD Vision, but from Viz.
In the October 1993 issue of Animerica, Fred Burke, co-translator for the Viz Comics Battle Angel Alita manga explains that, "For a Viz Comic to work, it's got to appeal to more than just the hard-core manga and anime crowd;" therefore there were several alterations made in the translation of the manga.
Yukito Kishiro's title Gunnm, a compound of Gun Dream, was re-named Battle Angel Alita.
Gally, the protagonist, had her name changed to Alita, a name, Burke explains, means "noble": a name that he discovered while searching through a book of baby names.
Burke also explains that, for no reason given, the floating city Zalem was re-named Tiphares: a name meaning "beauty", taken from the Qabalah and the mystical Tree of Life.
Furthermore, Yugo's name was given a cosmetic change to Hugo for American readers.
Also...
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
Sorry... Edge of Tomorrow was actually good.
In fact, it was better written than the original book or manga... which have issues with finding an ending and some of its fan service.
It also managed to create a coherent story while not having to spell it out for the audience.
The time travel, the technology, why is it all happening... while leaving all the elements in there, for audience to piece it together.
Like the whole Alpha-Omega thing in the end which doesn't have to be explained with technobabble for the audience to get it - unlike all that crap with servers and antennae and author's ideas how wi-fi works, in the manga/book.
The movie is so good, one can forget for a while what a piece of narcissist crap Tom Cruise is in real life.
Though, he is a good actor. But he doesn't really succeed in coming off as an empathic human being in every movie.
I'm a huge fan of the manga... Waited for the movie since it was announced that Cameron bought the movie rights, as it was known already that he is a fan...
And I can't get myself to watch it.
Basically, when Cameron passed the project on to Rodriguez it was obvious this will not be anything like the story in the manga.
It may LOOK like it... here and there...
But Rodriguez is neither a fan who'd keep it all kinda there by simply sticking to a 1:1 adaptation - nor is he intellectual enough to read, understand and adapt the subtleties of the story.
As for motorball...
In the manga it is all about self-discovery and self-actualization by reaching one's ultimate potential in a battle with the Universe which dictates that you can't win, break even or get out of the game.
And liberating oneself by reaching for and achieving the "freedom to".
To see anything like it in a movie, I'd advise going to the source - 1975 Rollerball.
There it is more about individualism as a solution... but it is just a metaphor for that same self-actualizing battle with the world.
To be fair "New "Metallic Ass" Is As Strong As Titanium But Much Lighter" simply doesn't have quite the same sound to it.
Unless you're talking about the "scientists" who've breezed through all those years of school and training without ever picking up on the basics of statistics and probability.
On account of just repeating the correct answers they memorized earlier.
Basically, you could "train" a group of 14 coins to do the same task.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Although, to be fair, they did fuck up on the Pavlovian conditioning as well.
In half of the experiments, "correct answer" was always going straight from the point of entry, not changing the direction.
To make sure bees actually "made choices" - both addition and subtraction were tested for.
Addition choices were blue, while subtraction choices were yellow.
"Amazingly", bees were not only "getting it right" more often if the answer is just "fly straight ahead".
When subtracting, they were "getting it right" more often when the answer demanded flying away from the wrong answer.
Clearly, bees are doing math, right?
Except, experimenters rigged the game.
For addition, "correct answers could be 2, 3, and 5 and the incorrect answers could be 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5".
While for subtraction, "correct answers could be 1, 3, and 4 and the incorrect answers could be 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5".
I.e. When "adding" bees were trained to just go straight if the color is blue, and for 2 out of 5 "answers" that would be the correct answer.
When "subtracting", flying AWAY from the presented option would be the correct answer in 2 out 5 "answers".
Leaving 3 "answers" where the bee would have a 50:50 chance of getting it right.
I.e. 2 answers the bees were conditioned for + 1.5 answers where they'd get it right 50% of the time = getting 3.5 out of 5 answers correctly, or 70%.
I.e. By color conditioning and random choice alone, bees should be getting it correctly more often than most of their measurements show.
Though right smack in the middle of their error bars when accounted for the color conditioning training.
72.1 +/- 3.20% for addition and 67.9 +/- 3.66% for subtraction.
They've "discovered" that bees can tell colors and tastes.
Naah... Scots have the stupid common law system as well.
Along with the belief that some people are simply better, being born with a title which makes the natural rulers of common peasants.
Also, comparing Louisiana "civil law" system to a civil law one is a false equivalence.
They do what they want cause their product is free... You are their product!
Yarr har fiddle dee dee
Being a product is alright to be
They do what they want cause their product is free...
You are their product!
Ah well... I still got plenty of copy/paste left from the last time that happened. Cause it's infinite.
Unlike mod points.
Anyway...
This "bring down thousands of pages" line is a shot at bullshiting ignorant Americans (and maybe Brits too) - cause Netherlands is a civil law country.
As such, one ruling of a court is nothing but one ruling by that court.
It changes no laws, nor does it affect other cases anywhere in the land. Or the world.
A precedent will get you no more than a cup of coffee. Provided you have the money to pay for it.
See... Most of the world DOES NOT use a legal system created for illiterate lords who've inherited their lands from their illiterate dead parents, along with the job to dispense justice to local peasants.
Nor the legal system which came out of that one, only now judges were illiterate local strongmen with guns, somewhere out on the "frontier".
A system where a "hanging judge" makes the law, the rest of the state be damned.
Most of the world thinks that's kinda stupid.
https://www.economist.com/the-...
Although common-law systems make extensive use of statutes, judicial cases are regarded as the most important source of law, which gives judges an active role in developing rules.
For example, the elements needed to prove the crime of murder are contained in case law rather than defined by statute.
To ensure consistency, courts abide by precedents set by higher courts examining the same issue.
In civil-law systems, by contrast, codes and statutes are designed to cover all eventualities and judges have a more limited role of applying the law to the case in hand.
Past judgments are no more than loose guides.
When it comes to court cases, judges in civil-law systems tend towards being investigators, while their peers in common-law systems act as arbiters between parties that present their arguments.
Oh an BTW...
If the "law firm" is called MediaMaze and if it specializes in "Online reputation management", "Online PR" and "right to be forgotten"...
It's a PR firm.
And they are selling their spiel, hoping that either someone at Google will fall for it - or for free publicity for themselves, and possibly some illiterate potential clients from the US and UK.
If you'd read the link you provided you'd notice that the Louisiana "civil law" is akin to fruit juice with "at least 5% real fruit".
The starting paragraph would have done the trick.
Louisiana's criminal law largely rests on American common law.
Louisiana's administrative law is generally similar to the administrative law of the U.S. federal government and other U.S. states.
Louisiana's procedural law is generally in line with that of other U.S. states, which in turn is generally based on the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Also, this:
One often-cited distinction is that while common law courts are bound by stare decisis and tend to rule based on precedents, judges in Louisiana rule based on their own interpretation of the law.[22] This distinction is not absolute, though. Civil law has its own respect for established precedent, the doctrine of jurisprudence constante. But the Louisiana Supreme Court notes the principal difference between the two legal doctrines: a single court decision can provide sufficient foundation for stare decisis, however, "a series of adjudicated cases, all in accord, form the basis for jurisprudence constante."[23] Moreover, Louisiana Courts of Appeals have explicitly noted that jurisprudence constante is merely a secondary source of law, which cannot be authoritative and does not rise to the level of stare decisis.[24]
I.e. In Louisiana they use of SOME aspects of civil law - but in a court which finds and treats common law as superior.
Basically, worst parts of both systems.
This "bring down thousands of pages" line is a shot at bullshiting ignorant Americans (and maybe Brits too) - cause Netherlands is a civil law country.
As such, one ruling of a court is nothing but one ruling by that court.
It changes no laws, nor does it affect other cases anywhere in the land. Or the world.
A precedent will get you no more than a cup of coffee. Provided you have the money to pay for it.
See... Most of the world DOES NOT use a legal system created for illiterate lords who've inherited their lands from their illiterate dead parents, along with the job to dispense justice to local peasants.
Nor the legal system which came out of that one, only now judges were illiterate local strongmen with guns, somewhere out on the "frontier".
A system where a "hanging judge" makes the law, the rest of the state be damned.
Most of the world thinks that's kinda stupid.
https://www.economist.com/the-...
Although common-law systems make extensive use of statutes, judicial cases are regarded as the most important source of law, which gives judges an active role in developing rules.
For example, the elements needed to prove the crime of murder are contained in case law rather than defined by statute.
To ensure consistency, courts abide by precedents set by higher courts examining the same issue.
In civil-law systems, by contrast, codes and statutes are designed to cover all eventualities and judges have a more limited role of applying the law to the case in hand.
Past judgments are no more than loose guides.
When it comes to court cases, judges in civil-law systems tend towards being investigators, while their peers in common-law systems act as arbiters between parties that present their arguments.
Oh an BTW...
If the "law firm" is called MediaMaze and if it specializes in "Online reputation management", "Online PR" and "right to be forgotten"...
It's a PR firm.
And they are selling their spiel, hoping that either someone at Google will fall for it - or for free publicity for themselves, and possibly some illiterate potential clients from the US and UK.
After she dies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"FamilySearch is a genealogy organization operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also known as the LDS Church). ... ...
The resource is maintained to support the process of obtaining names and other genealogical information so that Latter-day Saints can perform temple ordinances for their kindred dead.[3]
In February 2014, FamilySearch announced partnerships with Ancestry.com, findmypast and MyHeritage, which includes sharing massive amounts of their databases with those companies. They also have a standing relationship with BillionGraves, in which the photographed and indexed images of graves are both searchable on FamilySearch and are linked to individuals in the family tree.[6]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/......
"The LDS Church teaches that deceased persons who have not accepted, or had the opportunity to accept, the gospel of Christ in this life will have such opportunity in the afterlife. The belief is that as all must follow Jesus Christ, they must also receive all the ordinances that a living person is expected to receive, including baptism. For this reason, members of the LDS Church are encouraged to research their genealogy. This research is then used as the basis for church performing temple ordinances for as many deceased persons as possible. As a part of these efforts, Mormons have performed temple ordinances on behalf of a number of high-profile people, including the Founding Fathers of the United States,[47][48][49] U.S. Presidents,[47] Pope John Paul II,[50] John Wesley,[47] Christopher Columbus,[47] Adolf Hitler,[51] Joan of Arc,[51] Genghis Khan,[51] Joseph Stalin,[51] and Gautama Buddha.[51] ...
In February 2012, the issue re-emerged after it was found that the parents of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal were added to the genealogical database.[74] Shortly afterward, news stories announced that Anne Frank had been baptized by proxy for the ninth time, at the Santo Domingo Dominican Republic Temple.[75]"
Mormons are playing the long game of baptizing everyone ever straight into their "free planets for everygod" heaven.
If that means buying up banks of genetic data one by one... so be it.