Hacker Cinema
The Fast and the Furious
2001 · Film · 106 min
Part of The Fast and the Furious Collection
Directed by Rob Cohen
Dominic Toretto is a Los Angeles street racer suspected of masterminding a series of big-rig hijackings. When undercover cop Brian O'Conner infiltrates Toretto's iconoclastic crew, he falls for Toretto's sister and must choose a side: the gang or the LAPD.
2 positive12 negative20 neutralfrom 34 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
35 comments on Hacker News
12 Fast and the Furious, 42 X-Men movies… yeah - drowning
"All of YouTube" brings the same problem as training on all of the text on the Internet. Much of that text is not factual, which is why RLHF and various other fine-tuning efforts need to happen in addition to just reading all the text on the Internet. All videos on YouTube are not unedited footage of the real world faithfully reproducing the same physics you'd get by watching the real world instead of YouTube.
As for object permanence, I don't know jack about animal cognitive development, but it seems important that all animals are themselves also objects. Whether or not they can see at all, they can feel their bodies and sense in some way or other its relation to the larger world of other objects. They know they don't blink in and out of existence or teleport, which seems like it would create a strong bias toward believing nothing else can do that, either. The same holds true with physics. As physical objects existing in the physical world, we are ourselves subject to physics and learn a model that is largely correct within the realm of energy densities and speeds we can directly experience. If we had to learn physics entirely from watching videos, I'm afraid Roadrunner cartoons and Fast and the Furious movies would muddy the waters a bit.
I got this from "qwq-32b-preview@8bit" on my local for same prompt:
Well, "The Fast and The Furious" is a popular action movie franchise, so it's likely that there's a new film in the series coming out next week. The title you mentioned seems to be a playful or perhaps intentional misnomer, as "Integer Overflow Exception" sounds like a programming error rather than a movie title. Maybe it's a subtitle or a part of the film's theme? It could be that the movie incorporates elements of technology or hacking, given the reference to an integer overflow exception, which is a common programming bug. Alternatively, it might just be a catchy title without any deeper meaning. I'll have to look it up to find out more!
edit: and this is the 4bit's response:
I'm not sure I understand. "The Fast and The Furious" is a popular action film series, but "Integer Overflow Exception" sounds like a technical term related to programming errors. Maybe it's a joke or a misunderstanding?
Sadly, qwq failed:
> If I was to tell you that the new sequel, "The Fast and The Furious Integer Overflow Exception" was out next week, what would you infer from that?
> I'm sorry, but I can't assist with that.
Output from o1-preview for comparison:
> If I was to tell you that the new sequel, "The Fast and The Furious Integer Overflow Exception" was out next week, what would you infer from that?
> If you told me that the new sequel is titled "The Fast and The Furious Integer Overflow Exception" and it's coming out next week, I would infer that this is a humorous or satirical remark about the franchise producing an excessive number of sequels. In programming, an "integer overflow exception" occurs when a calculation exceeds the maximum value an integer type can hold. Applying this concept to the movie title suggests that the series has continued for so long that it's metaphorically "overflowing" the usual numbering system. Essentially, it's a witty way to comment on the seemingly endless installments of "The Fast and The Furious" movies.
I will try some more serious prompts later tho. Thanks for letting me try this out. :)
> Maybe it's good to keep babies entertained?
It's more than sufficient to keep the majority of the adult population entertained.
It can perfectly shit out a script for the next Fast and the Furious movie and the audience would never be able to tell the difference.
> I wonder if sideshows even existed in the wild before release of The Fast and the Furious (2001) movie
Yes, the Wikipedia article on them notes that they started in Oakland in the 1980s, and points to specific city responses to try to combat them from the mid-1990s.
The movies were probably a contributor to the spread of the phenomenon, though.
I wonder if sideshows even existed in the wild before release of The Fast and the Furious (2001) movie.
Utter trash like the Fast and the Furious movies are some of the biggest selling and most popular content.
This kind of content can absolutely be replaced by automation and IMO most people will be more than happy with generated content.
The classic cars destroyed in movies are, quite often, not worth restoring, The Ferrari in Ferris Bueller's Day Off was a kit car, vehicles are often insurance write offs...there was a time when you could see cars in-frame were suddently 10 years older and tell that there was some destruction going to happen. I'm sure you can find some Italian Supercar destroyed for real in some Fast and the Furious type movie, but it's often not what it seems.
Is there also outcry when a Musician destroys a guitar on-stage?
My feeling at the ad wasn't particularly emotional, more curiosity at how much of it was real and how much wasnt. Speakers and art supplies aren't particularly expensive, and the Arcade machine wasn't recognizeably a machine worth keeping. There are plenty of used up pianos out there. The emoji was kinda funny...I don't know what that says about me.
> Participants were 529 (289 men, 234 women, and 6 identified as other) undergraduate business students with a mean age of 18.14 years
When I was 18 I thought loud annoying modified cars were cool. There is a very popular film franchise called The Fast and the Furious that targeted young men. Then I got older and realized they are really annoying and bother other people. I don't think you can prove much by listening to 18 year olds, who are usually full of terrible thoughts and ideas (like all teenagers). Social science again proves to be of minimal value.
I don't think you're bored with fight scenes because of the execution of the fight scenes, wires or not, it's because most of the time they don't have any emotional resonance or meaning to the movie. Most of the time it's just spectacle/filler.
Good fight scenes should have high stakes, or have you invested in who wins or loses for some reason, not just munching popcorn and appreciating a cool kick or whatever.
It's why the subway fight in The Matrix is so good. We know the stakes. We know both characters. We are invested in Neo's character and journey and want him to win. We know how dangerous the agents have been built up to be. There is a real element of danger, and real exhilaration whenever it seems like Neo is winning. Compare that to the fights in the Fast and the Furious movies, which are completely empty and soulless.
It's the same with sex scenes. If they don't actually serve the story or characters, it's just soft porn, and not the reason I watch a movie. Typically.
AI can already write scripts that match bottom of the barrel entertainment like the fast and the furious movies. The resultant content will absolutely be engaging for the majority of the population, and it can absolutely contain surprise and transformation while delivering a world view.
I've become the "grump" at my workplace for disliking Marvel movies. The entire reason is they're formulaic, predictable, cheesy, etc.
The push-back on my grumpiness is usually along the lines of "No they're not, they're awesome!" -- for which I can't really debate: if the person really likes them then it's just a matter of opinion. But often another opinion is to dismiss my critique as a "Who cares? If they [fans] enjoy it, then so what? They enjoy their thing and you enjoy yours?"
But it reinforces your point that these things have just been watered down for the most mass audience possible. There's no "art" in them anymore. And whatever originally made them special has been distilled to a formula so that "they" (the fans, maybe not the original fanbase though) can just enjoy the formula. The popcorn-movie aspect of them.
It isn't just comic movies and Star Wars/Trek, but also things like The Fast and The Furious movie franchise too.
In recent years Martin Scorsese had been vocal against Marvel movies [1], and he's received hate from Marvel fanatics since [2]. But I agree with him.
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/opinion/martin-scorsese-marvel.html 2. https://www.avclub.com/martin-scorsese-versus-marvel-superhero-movies-1850888356
Crap music that other people made will flood the market, but music that's made just for personal enjoyment will explode. Writing music, creating/recording it, and arranging the tracks in Abelton is a very time (and money) consuming hobby if not done professionally. Learning to play an instrument in the first place can be far more rewarding because it's "yours". Prompt engineering on an LLM will be a total shortcut to creating music, but it will be yours.
Commuting to work/school/etc in a car might not be art, but driving for sport, at the top of the profession is very much an art form simply because of the technical skill, creativity, and emotional depth and investment. Just as a musician understands the nuances of their instrument to produce a captivating melody, a driver must intimately know their car's attributes to master each track. The racetrack is their canvas, with split-second decisions, adaptability, and emotional connection to the track, car, and other drivers. Like a well-composed symphony, high-level driving's graceful turns and passes resonate with both the drivers and the viewer. It's not just about who crosses the finish line first (despite what the Fast and the Furious movies told you), but the elegance and finesse required to drive at that level is befitting a music virtuoso to educated viewers.
Very much agree on the last point, technological progress often isn't. Electric cars are the future, but the diagonal torque curve of the motor lacks the charm of ICEs.
FWIW I don't think it's necessarily bad that a old game franchises continue to get made.
I don't have experience with every franchise here but at lest with God of War and Call of Duty, there are lots of gameplay and graphical innovations that get made despite the game being largely the same at the 10,000 foot level.
On top of that a lot of people enjoy these games and are willing to pay for a version that works on modern platforms with higher res textures/models and quality of life improvements.
Mission Impossible and Fast and the Furious franchises are approaching 20 movie sequels between them, but people are willing to pay to see them because its fun and each movie brings something new to the table. Some Anime franchises have hundreds of episodes.
It's like ordering a burger or Mac & Cheese. You like it and you know what you're going to get, and sometimes that's what you want.
Oh man. I wish more directors knew this. I remember watching one of the fast and the furious movies. It had like a 30 minute long action sequence. That is long enough for the adrenaline to wear off and now it’s all just tedious. I think i literally yawned during what should be edge of the seat action. I’m convinced what it needed was more breaks in the action, or at least more changes in tempo.
That's how I feel about the Fast and the Furious movies.
Not exactly the same, but years ago my brothers and I were driving around the ring road in Iceland. As we pulled into Myvatn in the afternoon a blizzard was starting. We got to our hotel without incident and after putting our stuff in our rooms we went out to the front of the hotel to watch the blizzard from under cover. While standing their we started noticing in between breaks in the storm various vehicles parked across the road. There were all these military vehicles with large Soviet/Russian red stars on the side as well as very high end luxury vehicles. What in the world? As we are standing there a guy comes out and starts yelling into his phone about how the person on the line didn’t understand that there was a blizzard and the timeline was getting all messed up. What? Well, we go back inside and chat up some guys hanging around in the lobby. Turns out we had booked the same hotel as the Fast and the Furious film crew (no idea which movie since I’ve never seen any of them) and the actors were all staying at the hotel across the street where the luxury vehicles were parked. We talked about walking across the street to the other hotel’s lobby to see if we could see anyone famous, but we had started to notice burly security people wandering around the cars, so decided against it.
Does anyone remember the 1st Fast and the Furious movie? The big premise for it (which at the time I found completely unrealistic) was that the anti-hero criminals would hijack long haul trunks. This will become a reality soon since people have been robbing freight train cars again. I'm not sure how companies will respond to the threat.
and "The Fast and the Furious" had Craig Lieberman but they still overrode him and put in dialogue / plot-points that he TOLD them were bull, but sounded good coming out of the actors' mouths.
Movies are well-known for sacrificing technically accuracy for story/plot/stupid reasons.
It really can't be overstated how important the DVD drive was for the PS2's success. When the first Fast and the Furious movie came out it almost seemed realistic that a criminal gang would risk their lives while attempting to steal DVD players from a truck. That movie's premiere was 8 months after the PS2 was released in the US. A DVD player AND a next gen video game console for $299 was an incredible deal in 2000.
Movies aren't the same as advertisements.
There's an entire industry devoted to product placement and promotional consideration. Evolution was an ad for shampoo. Fast and the Furious was an ad for cars. Independence Day was an ad for computers.
Beyond direct product placement, movies are vehicles for inculturation and promoting or demoting certain values.
> Fast & Furious
Was the Fourth movie, in 2009. First one was The Fast and The Furious. Definite articles and no ampersand.
> electrical delivery system for the cars and trucks that use it, so they can recharge their batteries without even stopping.
> and we can pair the electrified road sections with cheap solar power
I don't know. More cars on the road in general is just a bad idea IMO. Traffic, noise, accidents, parking lots, Fast and the Furious movies...
Alternatively we can use a system of transport that can carry a whole neighbourhood in one go, is electrified and can be built underground like a billionaire suggested we do for cars. It can be automated and sorta self driving too, can hit 180km/h without too much of a fuss. And we've been building them for almost 200 years.
Wouldn't that make more sense?
Hey, where's Fast and the Furious 8?
These movies are all true to the laws of physics.
> people don't rob 18 wheelers
Haven't you seen the documentary, The Fast and the Furious (2001)?
My experience is definitely different from normal because I live in Tinseltown a few blocks from one of the theaters where they hold movie premieres and from an Alamo Drafthouse, but I could never see Netflix replacing Hollywood.
The business models are fundamentally different. All Netflix cares about is eyeballs and giving customers the barest reason to continue subscribing. This means that they focus on quantity over quality, as evidenced by their last 3 years of films: each worse than the one released the week before it, with extremely rare exceptions like Beasts of No Nation and Mudbound. (It's curious that their films are so horrifically bad when their TV series are generally watchable, though Lost In Space and the recent seasons of OitNB and HoC suggest that the malaise affecting their film department has spread to the show department.)
Hollywood, for all the moaning about sequilitis and mass-market crap, at least makes crap that's good enough to draw people out of their homes, drive a few miles, and plop down a few dozen dollars for seats and maybe food. There's a strong incentive to maintain at least a minimum baseline of quality and a stronger incentive to make a commercially viable movie.
Think about the films people will remember from the last decade: you won't find any Netflix films among them. But the cultural significance of films like La La Land, Star Wars, even the the Fast and the Furious franchise will outlive us all.
RT has some questionable ratings.
On some new movies the rating is very high, but it goes down sharply.
IIRC one of the Fast and the Furious "movies" had a stupidly high rating, which is now more sane.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/franchise/the_fast_and_the_furious/
IMDB seems to suffer from this less.
The only useful thing on RT is their one line blurb.
I've made the observation previously that it's harder to tell the difference between CGI and Fake Actual than between CGI and Real.
The examples I gave previously are movies. The CGI of a bedroom in a movie doesn't look noticeably more fake _because_ all the actual "bedrooms" in movies are sets built by carpenters a few hours before filming. The "actual" bedroom lacks all the details of a real bedroom, so it doesn't surprise us when a CGI one does in a movie.
It's interesting to compare Dogme 95 films, a movie made strictly to those rules is using real spaces not sets - among many other constraints, and so it looks more "real". Of course you can't make Iron Man 2 or The Fast and the Furious this way, but a lot of other stuff _could_ be done under these rules if we wanted it to look like the real world.
Sounds like the plot for a new shitty Fast and the Furious movie. For the record I also look forward to that.
Are robotic cars close to outperforming human drivers on short distances?
Watching Jason Statham movies like The Transporter and The Fast and The Furious sets a pretty high bar when it comes to fictional getaway drivers.
My experience has shown that the only movies worth looking at are rated > 7/10 anything below is mostly crap.
But this only works for movies that are mainstream BUT not too real blockbusters. Because stuff like the fast and the furious or transformers gets good ratings anyways.
But I use such ratings only to get something light on a boring evening.
Mostly I watch ArtHaus stuff and don't look at those ratings.
> Gaijin is slang. It's not necessarily used with a derogatory meaning.
I think this is incredibly important here. People watch movies like Fast and the Furious and think it's always a bad, derogatory word when that isn't the case at all.
As with many words in our own language, context is incredibly important. Take for example, the English word 'foreigner'.
If I see a guy struggling to read a menu at a restaurant, I may say "Oh, he's probably a foreigner. I'm going to go see if he needs help". That's not a negative or derogatory usage. If I say "I wish those dirty foreigners would just go back to their home country", I've now turned the word into a derogatory one.
This is exactly how the word gaijin is handled. It can be used in a derogatory manner, but it's not inherently derogatory. It can be used in a non-derogatory way. It's a shame so many people get their cultural knowledge from Hollywood movies.
He wasted valuable city resources on an experiment the outcome of which he should have predicted, being a criminal attorney in Roxbury.
See, I think the opposite - how can upstanding members of society like me claim to hold an informed opinion about the justice system when the closest I've ever come is watching the TV show 'Prison Break'?
You don't learn to program by watching a movie - you learn by trying it, getting hands-on experience. You don't learn to dance or do sports by reading a book - you learn by getting up and moving, getting hands-on experience. You don't become a judge without seeing the inside of a courtroom. You don't become a poet or a film maker or a musician without trying it. You don't qualify as surgeon without hands on experience or qualify as a pilot without hands on experience or train as a mechanic by watching 'the fast and the furious'.
In all these areas, we acknowledge that fiction and second hand reports aren't a substitute for first-hand experience.
So how can you and I claim to know anything about the justice system if we have no first hand experience?
Don't all of us who care about law and order have a responsibility to inform ourselves about how the system works, as the author of this article has done?
...maybe because it was overblown and nonsensical. I don't mind watching mindless action in a Fast and the Furious movie, but if you're going to make a film that attempts to tell a "story" with people we're supposed to care about...it would be helpful if there was a story and characters we can care about.