My people.
The PCP is absolutely nowhere _near_ the graphical wizardry of the state of this app, and the overlay of executing code atop a given directory structure is quite beautiful (practicality be damned), but I can see the inspiration.
I do wonder if, on a modern Linux system with SELinix, this model (code accessing a directory) is actually closer to viable? SELinux's contexts/labels for subjects overlaying with the same for objects can, I imagine, be visualized. The normal access patterns would be way too overwhelming, I think - but exceptions/policy violations? :ponder:
(I think the movie is wildly overrated just as a piece of storytelling; the hacker fan-service in it is just fine, they clearly got some tfile kids to consult with the script.)
Not familiar with that term, and my googling has failed. What does it refer to?
people familiar with the culture
I let go of fanboying on what Hollywood "did to" the story and instead just decided to be thankful something I love was given a new medium / audience / interpretation... and voila! now I have two things to love.
It's still fun to point out where things could've been done differently, but instead of actually disliking the film(s) because of those things, it's just another mechanism that lets me talk to my friends about something. Much more fun than riding home in silence in any case. ;)
Unpopular opinion amongst those who grew up on the anime, but I was late to the anime so my childhood-integrity isn't dependent upon requiring a faithful one to one retelling (or whatever would satisfy those folks - possibly nothing).
I enjoyed the "Hollywood" Ghost in the Shell as a stand-alone 'thing', unrelated to the manga / anime. The ending is quite on the nose; ultra-formulaic where formulaic has no place.
I never managed to reach your third time. Once was enough for me, at the time, to decide it was an awful movie which didn't have anything to do with hackers or computers and which was terribly overacted, and that was that. Filed under yet another "Hollywood just doesn't get it", subsection "so bad it's embarrassing".
Much later I realized I had missed a cult classic. Oh well. I still think it's a bad movie, but I'm ok with other people loving it... maybe that's my growth moment.
If you can unlock that teenage feeling of wonder at the potential size and scope of the world and, at the right age at the right time, feeling like that world is your oyster, that's the feeling in which to watch this movie.
I refuse, however, to get into that feeling-zone for other 'high school' movies; they're stupid...
The best music, in my opinion, in the movie is not on the soundtrack and it is:
Guy Pratt - Combination
A trifle offtopic, but.....
In the 1990's and for us Gen-X'ers, the worst thing you could do was to sell out; to take the mans money instead of keeping your integrity. Calling people and bands 'sell outs' (sometimes without justification!) was to insult them.
With the rise of 'influencers' the opposite appears to be the case; people go out of their way to sell out and are praised for doing so. This is a massive change in the cultural landscape which perhaps many born in the 2000's aren't aware of. (Being aware of this helps give some perspective to Gen-X media and films like hackers).
Content creators on YouTube, for example, get criticized when they literally sell their brand to a larger conglomerate. It seems people do not complain if they do sponsorizations tho.
I'd argue the very words creating "content" implies something commercial is already in mind and is a driver, rather than just doing your own thing online and not caring (such showing a video of your band/hobby on YouTube in case anybody is interested).
To a Gen-X'er, the former sounds like they are already a sell out :-)
I certainly agree with you that perceptions have shifted.
"Content creator"... what happened to artist, playwright, painter, hobbyist, etc? It makes it seem as if they were making stuff for a corporation to sell.
Note it's not even relevant whether something is commercial. Art can be commercial and not be just "content". A musician is not a "content creator" which happens to create content in the shape of music. "Content" implies it doesn't really matters, what matters is engagement and the platform (and advertisers, etc). It's not healthy to think of hobbies, art, and entertainment as exclusively about this. Imagine if Oscar Wilde, Herman Melville, Alan Moore, etc had been thought of merely as "content creators".
This is not a new idea. Stallman was already pushing back against this "content" term decades ago.
Society sold out.
Can recommend such a mix, too. Gather select works of The Chemical Brothers, The Dust Brothers, Bassbin Twins, Crystal Method, DJ Krush, Dub Pistols, Lunatic Calm, Meat Katie... and you're Somewhen Else during it. Works for commutes/trips, too.
I had a couple of Dust Brothers (a) cassettes before they changed their name after getting a call from the other Dust Brothers (b).
Still can't believe they knowingly copied another band's name "because it sounded cool". Isn't coming up with a shit name half the fun? "I need a handle man".
https://www.discogs.com/release/1423591-Various-Hackers%C2%B...
https://www.discogs.com/release/131024-Various-Hackers%C2%B3
https://www.discogs.com/release/29127-Various-Hackers-Origin...
It's frustrating that often tracks from soundtracks like this aren't available on Spotify, such as Phoebus Apollo.