A witty, exhilarating and mind-expanding exploration of the word of our times - data - with mathematician Dr Hannah Fry. Following in the footsteps of BBC Four's previous gleefully nerdy, award-winning maths films The Joy of Stats, Tails you Win - The Science of Chance and The Joy of Logic, this new high-tech romp reveals exactly what data is and how it is captured, stored, shared and made sense of. Fry also tells the story of the engineers of the data age, people most of us have never heard of despite the fact they brought about a technological and philosophical revolution.
For Hannah Fry, the joy of data is all about spotting patterns. She's Lecturer in the Mathematics of Cities at UCL as well as being the presenter of the BBC series Trainspotting Live and City in the Sky, and she sees data as the essential bridge between two universes - the tangible, noisy, messy world that we see and experience, and the clean, ordered, elegant world of maths, where everything can be captured beautifully with equations.
Along the way the film reveals the connection between Scrabble scores and online movie streaming, explains why a herd of Wiltshire dairy cows are wearing pedometers, and uncovers the remarkable network map of Wikipedia. What's the mystery link between 'marmalade' and 'One Direction'?
The Joy of Data also hails the giant contribution of Claude Shannon, the American mathematician and electrical engineer who, in an attempt to solve the problem of noisy telephone lines, devised a way to digitise all information. It was Shannon, father of the 'bit', who singlehandedly launched the 'information age'. Meanwhile, the green lawns of Britain's National Physical Laboratory host a race between its young apprentices in order to demonstrate how and why data moves quickly and successfully around modern data networks. It's all thanks to the brilliant technique first invented there in the 1960s by Welshman Donald Davies - packet switching - without which there would be no internet as we know it.
But what of the future, big data and artificial intelligence? Should we be worried by the pace of change, and what our own data could and should be used for? Ultimately, Fry concludes, data has empowered all of us. We must have machines at our side if we're to find patterns in the modern-day data deluge. But, Fry believes, regardless of AI and machine learning, it will always take us to find the meaning in them.
杰克·吉伦哈尔没法想象得难看成什么样
2.5 某种程度上，也算是有点牛逼的了，一本正经的把坊间流行的一些瞎扯编撰成故事，一本正经的基于一些一看就不太可能的设定和理论来编故事，某种程度上也算是一种基于类型片视角的反类型片了。“反”在哪里？“反”在一切内容都不合情合理，“反”在整个故事本身的走向真的是莫名其妙……大场面还可以，故事本身属于典型的缝合怪，这里来一点那里来一点。其实这样拍下去罗兰·艾默里奇也不用拍了，确实有点晚节不保的样子。
开始以为是月球异形，原来是月球马蜂窝，最扯的是硬塞进去的AI桥段，比硬塞于文文还让人尴尬。最让人无语的是宁可保住自己老婆，也不惜毁掉整个地球，宗教信仰的力量令人毛骨悚然。剩下的看点除了特效只有特效。4
罗兰灾难大片的质感还是有的，节奏也够紧凑，但是bug过多，感情戏也敷衍，特效游戏CG感较强，有人物的特效抠图感严重，沦落到和国产一样的水平……
在东方神秘力量的加持下，艾莫里奇的灾难电影只剩下了灾难。。
Literally a disaster 当然是指电影本身。Jesus，RE导演是怎么把灾难电影拍成真灾难的啊？！（damn尤其考虑到他以前的classic灾难片，就…..无语了），不过想了想，毕竟是独立日2的导演，不奇怪，晚节不保了，早点收手吧，真的。考虑到钱和时间，别看，当然了，要是说“我不带脑子，就想去看看特效大制作balhblah，而且我还比较失眠”，那当然推荐了
迈克尔贝指定有点啥毛病，镜头稀碎，晃来晃去，真的快晃出脑震荡了！
3-
科学技术问题上错漏百出的灾难片，真的不是好科幻片。
肯定是冲着吉伦希尔来的。这种警匪片拍到现在，要是还能真正突破实在是难。只能扯了。
一般般……如果没有Jake 那就不堪设想了~
我以为是灾难片 看着看着发现是科幻片 最后发现其实是玄幻片……
是灾难片的老前辈马失前蹄？小人物拯救地球的套路满满，科幻片的基础还是科幻，不然就是玄幻了，格局看似很大，但是展开讲讲，又没讲到什么。如果想看特效，这方面还是在线的，但是你要说剧情方面，其实就有点乏善可陈了。还算及格，真想回到看《后天》时，收到的那种震撼。
科幻切玄幻，地球又完蛋。剧本太缝合怪了难怪扑街。我觉得艾默里奇适合拍“三体”，反正这个IP迟早要毁，还不如毁得惊天动地一点！
爆炸贝一贯的影像风格，只是过于炫技，镜头摇晃的有些不适。
离最大的谱，扯最大的蛋òᆺó好在特效还算好看……看完后忍不住吐槽，米国人的格局属实是太小了，拯救地球这么重要的事怎么能在个别人手上下赌注呢，得依靠全球命运共同体呀！
地震把一屋子领导砸死了，谁看了不说一声干得好。灾难就灾难，别给我扯什么母星外星人星际大战。肥宅只配去死呗，他还是我最喜欢的角色。加一星是有些特效场景还挺漂亮的
人工智能有了自我意识进而反抗人类，老套。月球是个巨型结构，这个设定有点儿意思。
片子本身比片中的月球还烂，除了特别炫的粒子特效之外几乎一无是处。。。ps:万万没想到小胖最终成了嫦娥。。。
为什么评分这么低啊，虽然有很多逻辑硬伤，但看电影又不是做逻辑分析题，好看不就行了吗？良心特效，脑洞大开，虽然剧情是美国大片标准模式，但是还是有很多亮眼的地方，一眼万年的地球变迁就很美。很多场景像梦中会出现的画面。配乐没什么亮点，胖子有点聒噪，不喜欢。其他都不错，值回票价
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
