Author Topic: Real code vs. Code in the movies (Read 23,685 times)

zridling · « **on:** December 07, 2006, 09:38 PM »

Matthew Inman has it right, and his explanation of each is hilarious:

1. Code does not move

2. Code is not green text on a black background

3. Code has structure

4. Code is not three dimensional

5. Code does not make blip noises as it appears on the screen

6. Code cannot be cracked by an 8-year-old kid in a matter of seconds

7. Not all code is meant to be cracked

8. Code isn't just 0100110 010101 10100 011

9. People who write code use mice

10. Most code is not inherently cross platform

Gothi[c] · « **Reply #1 on:** December 07, 2006, 10:15 PM »

1) it does when i scroll down in it :)
2) mine is sometimes :) depending on what I'm using.
3) You'd hope,- if not it's time to fire someone
4) Unless you're using >4 dimensional arrays. ;)
8) Well, eventually that's what it compiles to.
9) I rarely use a mouse when coding, but that's just me.
10) No, to write cross platform you actually have to fork out the effort to use cross platform libraries instead of sticking to what 'everyone else' does.

f0dder · « **Reply #2 on:** December 07, 2006, 11:16 PM »

Code can indeed be green - especially comments ^_^

And I certainly don't use a mouse while coding.

mouser · « **Reply #3 on:** December 07, 2006, 11:23 PM »

the real difference is that in the movies the coders are rarely cursing out the computer in fits of pure rage.

thefritz_j · « **Reply #4 on:** December 07, 2006, 11:49 PM »

I love how on CSI (I know there's lots of stuff to rant about on this show) every single database on whole entire the planet is connected into one easly queried app! Forget HIPAA, privacy, data-sharing legislation and who knows what other legal and technological roadblocks exist!

I love to see a few episodes that say "sorry boss, we don't have access to that database", or "okay boss I should be able get clearance for that data in 3 months"

Not to mention all of their hugeo flat panel screens are constantly graphing and charing 3d images and spyrographic animations! obviously they parallel processing fingerprints or something, which of course is graphically intensive!

There's my rant

app103 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 08, 2006, 12:24 AM »

Quote from: mouser on December 07, 2006, 11:23 PM

the real difference is that in the movies the coders are rarely cursing out the computer in fits of pure rage.

or crying from frustration.

jgpaiva · « **Reply #6 on:** December 08, 2006, 12:49 AM »

1. Code does not move <- but it'd be cool if it danced with me when i got it right

2. Code is not green text on a black background <- green? BAH! i hate green

3. Code has structure <- hum... you should see some of my friends' code

4. Code is not three dimensional <- it might be easier to handle if it was visual, though

9. People who write code use mice <- i do use the mouse, but only when i'm not coding

10. Most code is not inherently cross platform <- unfortunatelly

mwb1100 · « **Reply #7 on:** December 08, 2006, 05:54 AM »

Quote from: thefritz_j on December 07, 2006, 11:49 PM

I love how on CSI (I know there's lots of stuff to rant about on this show) every single database on whole entire the planet is connected into one easly queried app!

My favorite fictional computer power is the ability they have in movies & TV to take the fuzziest, ultra telephoto image that looks like a blob and have the computer transform the image into something clear as day. Usually just by uttering the word 'enhance'.

mouser · « **Reply #8 on:** December 08, 2006, 05:55 AM »

Quote

My favorite fictional computer power is the ability they have in movies & TV to take the fuzziest, ultra telephoto image that looks like a blob and have the computer transform the image into something clear as day. Usually just by uttering the word 'enhance'.

hahahaha, so true.

nudone · « **Reply #9 on:** December 08, 2006, 08:41 AM »

sorry, i don't know about code things but i did start to watch CSI: Miami for the first time in my life about 3 days ago. got to the 5th episode and just ejected the dvd out of the player.

i don't quite see what all the fuss is about with this show. their ridiculous use of imaginary technology was definitely something that put me off. from all the hype i was expecting to see a show that remained realistic but it's beyond fantasy.

anyway, if you're talking about fictional computer power in the movies - don't forget 'lawnmower man'. it must rate as the top most ludicrous representation of what computers do. i felt embarrassed to see all that virtual world crap - but then it does still look better than 'second life'.

app103 · « **Reply #10 on:** December 08, 2006, 09:10 AM »

Those movie 'hackers' are amazing...I can remember watching one movie (can't remember name of it now) where the software they were using to save and/or ruin the world was.....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Outlook?

mwb1100 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:04 PM »

Quote from: app103 on December 08, 2006, 09:10 AM

I can remember watching one movie (can't remember name of it now)...

Really? You must try to recall the name of that movie for us.

Oh, and don't forget that the Terminator was apparently powered by a 6502 (the CPU that was in the Apple ][). With Dual core Pentium 4 class CPUs around now, I'm wondering where our robot servants are?

f0dder · « **Reply #12 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:05 PM »

Quote from: mwb1100 on December 08, 2006, 04:04 PM

Oh, and don't forget that the Terminator was apparently powered by a 6502 (the CPU that was in the Apple ][). With Dual core Pentium 4 class CPUs around now, I'm wondering where our robot servants are?

If you can answer us where the skilled programmers are, perhaps you have the answer for your own question

Eóin · « **Reply #13 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:12 PM »

I remember a scene in a film, I'm convinced it was Chain of Command where a fancy UI used on one of the computers in the film was clearly just a word processor document with some large coloured text and the hero interacted with it by pressing 'page down' to move on to the next screen mock-up.

mitzevo · « **Reply #14 on:** December 08, 2006, 04:20 PM »

Hey.. every one.. they are movies.. c'mon. what do you expect? reality? hahaha

app103 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 08, 2006, 05:30 PM »

Quote from: mitzevo on December 08, 2006, 04:20 PM

Hey.. every one.. they are movies.. c'mon. what do you expect? reality? hahaha

It's a hobby of mine to point out the absurdities while watching movies...makes it more fun. Watching a movie in my house is like being a part of MST3000.

Ruffnekk · « **Reply #16 on:** December 08, 2006, 06:26 PM »

Me too app. My wife hates it when I start criticizing everything in a movie, especially one about computers or hackers

Like hacking is all about taking a couple of wild guesses on a huge 36 point font, multi-coloured, 3D animated login prompt and getting it right in every movie $:-\$ Same thing with lock-picking.. don’t get me started *G*

Edvard · « **Reply #17 on:** December 08, 2006, 07:11 PM »

yeah, remember WarGames? We could add another rule...

11. NORAD ICBM launch sequences don't talk
(and BTW, NORAD is completely electronically disconnected from the outside world. You cannot pick the lock if there is no door)

Quote

Like hacking is all about taking a couple of wild guesses on a huge 36 point font, multi-coloured, 3D animated login prompt and getting it right in every movie

Right. However, hacking IS popping in a diskette of Nmap 2.54BETA25 and scanning for a vulnerable SSH Server and exploiting it with the SSH1 CRC32 exploit from 2001.

What movie did that?

Take a wild guess first

and go to the next to last item here -> http://insecure.org

Oops, they violated rule 2...

Actually when I'm in terminal mode on my Linux box at home, I have Bash configured for green on black. It takes me back to 1985 and a classroom full of Apple IIe's... :sigh:

f0dder · « **Reply #18 on:** December 08, 2006, 09:14 PM »

Quote

(and BTW, NORAD is completely electronically disconnected from the outside world. You cannot pick the lock if there is no door)

Yeah? That's what YOU think!

Code

Using username "falken".
Authenticating with public key "rsa-key-1983" from agent
Passphrase for key "rsa-key-1983": joshua
Last login: Thu Dec  7 04:29:55 2006 from 0x1337c0de.adsl.cybercity.dk
Linux 2.4.30.
falken@norad-42:~$ su
Password:
root@norad-2:/home/falken# icbm-launch "Redmond, WA 98052"

Edvard · « **Reply #19 on:** December 08, 2006, 09:48 PM »

and using Linux kernel 2.4.30 to do it too!

although I could not find "icbm-launch" on SourceForge

P.S. Nuking all of Redmond as opposed to passing GPS coords for the MS campus only would perhaps be a little overkill, but I used to live there and the streets through town are pretty much a drive-thru shopping mall, so no great loss...

f0dder · « **Reply #20 on:** December 08, 2006, 09:52 PM »

Edvard, duh - something as important as that is of course closed-source..

And well, if you drop a nuke, you're going to mess up most of redmond anyway, so might as well do the job proper

Deozaan · « **Reply #21 on:** December 10, 2006, 02:22 AM »

Quote from: Edvard on December 08, 2006, 09:48 PM

and using Linux kernel 2.4.30 to do it too!

although I could not find "icbm-launch" on SourceForge

P.S. Nuking all of Redmond as opposed to passing GPS coords for the MS campus only would perhaps be a little overkill, but I used to live there and the streets through town are pretty much a drive-thru shopping mall, so no great loss...

I'm not well informed on the destructive power of intercontinental ballistic missiles, but I think an ICBM would destroy more than Redmond if one was detonated there.

zridling · « **Reply #22 on:** December 17, 2006, 10:59 PM »

There have been some terrible, terrible tech movies. Remember Sandra Bullock in "The Net" running around on the beach all Baywatch-style with her laptop? Real, as in nonfictional, science and movies rarely mix. "Swordfish" was a decent movie, but if I could do that with a computer, I wouldn't need John Travolta ordering Halle Berry to seduce me! (I'd just steal the money and be gone.)

GideonTech has a list of the Top 10 Worst Portrayals of Technology in Film. I couldn't finish the first hour of the winner, which wasn't even on my radar.

Josh · « **Reply #23 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:24 PM »

A supercomputer from the 1980's CANNOT out-perform a supercomputer from the current era. This was demonstrated in War Games - The Dead Code where Joshua (AKA, The WOPR) out-processes Ripley, a modern "supercomputer" which has the power to immediately begin processing right where it left off despite losing all power and not being a redundant power system.

40hz · « **Reply #24 on:** September 27, 2009, 06:11 AM »

Quote from: zridling on December 17, 2006, 10:59 PM

There have been some terrible, terrible tech movies. Remember Sandra Bullock in "The Net" running around on the beach all Baywatch-style with her laptop?

Well...maybe it's just "a guy thing," but I'd rather look at Sandra Bullock than Kevin Mitnick - and technical accuracy be damned.

Sandy or Kev? You be the judge:

[attach]