It also happened quite famously to Google. The divisions of the company did not realize they were working on Android and Chrome OS at the same time, and have even come out to say as such publicly later.

You miss the entire point. You insist there are real life consequences, as if by watching this movie, it advances Card's anti-gay agenda. The reality is that the movie is far likely to do the opposite given that the story itself advocates tolerance. You continue to insist on something that makes no sense logically, and historically has proven false repeatedly.

If there was a clear correlation, such as all proceeds of the movie going directly to Card (who was likely already paid his set amount), and in turn those proceeds going directly to fund discrimination, then perhaps you'd have a point. Card already has wealth, and that wealth has not caused direct harm to the LGBT community, even though Card has certainly written ignorant essays calling for the criminalization of homosexuality. And despite those essays, homosexuality has not been criminalized. In fact, Utah is rumored to be on the precipice of overturning their gay marriage ban (despite Card's comments, and despite it being a strongly Mormon state).

The decision to attend the movie or not doesn't advance any political cause. Speaking to your elected officials, voting, volunteering, donating money, etc. These things advance political causes.

I'd dare say your false pretense of political activism is what is wrong with the country. You think you're making a difference by skipping a movie, and in doing so clearing yourself of obligation for actual action.

My original statement is that it is ironic that Card is a homophobe despite writing this fantastic story of tolerance, to which you foolishly tried to counter that his story doesn't promote tolerance. However, it does. It influenced me in a very positive way in promoting tolerance as a youth, because I experienced the story without the context of his personal political views. I'd wager most movie-goers will do the same.

For every single Hollywood movie you can see this summer, I'm sure you can find at least one person attached to the movie who has done or said something abhorrent. And unless you are consistent in your pointless boycott, then yes, you are fully a hypocrite.

Except that is what I said. Backwards compatibility is done with emulation, but the OS itself was written as something completely new, not something that had to be built around old apps.

Because key Windows apps will move forward and have new versions that support the new OS.

If you're running an old app that won't be updated for the new kernel, then it can't take advantage of new Windows features either way, and is already a second-class citizen. For example, Windows 7 added support for Jump Lists on the task bar. Vendors have to put out new versions of their app to support this feature.

When Apple made the leap to OS X, Adobe rewrote their app to work on OS X. When Apple switched to X86 processors, Adobe rewrote their app to work on OS X.

Being obsessed with backwards compatibility, you give no incentive to developers to write better apps.

Whatever you do, don't read Jack London or H. P. Lovecraft, who both wrote racist, propoganda books that fed the fear of "Yellow Peril". Supporting these racist authors will have real world implications.

Watching Lethal Weapon advances antisemitism.

Driving a Volkswagen on the autobahn is a clear indication you support Nazi ideals.

And watching a movie whose whole message is one of tolerance clearly will support the exact opposite ideal.

The problem with your comment is that it is entirely incorrect.

Orson Scott Card initially had a short story, but it really took life when he came up with the concept for the sequel. An editor suggested taking that concept for Speaker of the Dead and inserting Ender, a character from an unrelated short story at that point.

The novel of Ender's Game was written literally as a means to lead into Speaker for the Dead, a story he had already decided he wanted to tell. The books were actually bundled together and distributed as Ender's War.

Even more, the "hand-waving" you want to invent is actually something present in the first book. Go re-read the last chapter of Ender's Game in which Ender takes possession of the Hive Queen and vows to right his wrong. From the very beginning, the story was about tolerance, not advocating genocide and war.

I perceive it a bit different in that they became influential bloggers.

Mike and Jerry made dicks jokes on Penny Arcade, and in turn made Time's Most 100 Influential people list and now run the Penny Arcade empire with a gaming expo more relevant than E3.

And Peter Wiggin didn't become a world leader by receiving Reddit upvotes as it were. He had puppet writers creating propaganda and support for his real persona. He was brother to the most famous man in the world, who was now removed from the equation. Celebrity can be parlayed into political power.

The point of Locke and Demontheses was two-fold:

1. The Human/Bugger war stemmed from our innate desire for conflict and war. The moment the threat was removed, we looked for new enemies (human again)
2. Public support for these conflicts could be generated by fear mongering and propaganda.

This joke is entirely apt and inaccurate at the same time.

Microsoft keeps losing market share in every key market and their rate of growth keeps slowing.

But yet they are growing still none the less with record profits.

There are some who feel Balmer needs to go to save Microsoft, yet how do you kick out a CEO delivering record profits?

I think moving in almost the opposite direction is the way to go.

Clinging to all the backwards compatibility holds them back. Apple made huge leaps forward when they made a new OS with almost no regard for backwards compatibility, thinking only of how to move forward with the best possible OS.

Legacy apps can be run through some sort of emulation or virtualization system included in the OS.

I once noted at an Exchange demonstration (put on by a professional Microsoft Evangelist) that not all of the new features in Exchange were supported in the new version of Outlook, which seemed odd. He confessed that the two teams are not allowed to talk to each other during initial development because of NDAs. The two divisions of the company are kept in the dark from each other, even though the two products are designed to work together.

I think many large companies suffer from their size.

Ender is the protagonist of the series. So he is the one that needs to demonstrate tolerance. It isn't about the world tolerating him.

But for what it is worth, people initially see him as a hero for saving the Earth. Then after he writes a book on tolerance (The Hive Queen), society rails against his actions as a Xenocide, but loves the author of the book on tolerance. They also worship him for writing Speaker of the Dead, not realizing that he is the same person.

Again, there is a lesson on tolerance and acceptance there.

Locke and Demontheses are shock jocks in a sense. Kids create these puppets and have them say outrageous things to stir up populist movements and gain political power. Orson Scott Card basically predicted the internet, blogs and our current media.

As a kid, Ender's older brother is a bully and loves torturing animals just because, which is why the military program rejects him. Great leaders aren't sadists. They need empathy so their troops will want to support them.

In the Fantasy Game, Ender keeps dying to the Giant in his version of the Kobyashu Maru, and eventually kills the Giant by thinking outside the box. In a video game, he doesn't mind killing because it isn't real, and it sure beats dying.

Ender is tricking into killing an alien species because he thinks he is playing a game BUT the most important part is the end (and the entire rest of the series) in which Ender discovers the truth. He also discovers there is one alien left alive, who doesn't hate him. And Ender vows to find a safe planet for the last Hive Queen to right his wrong. The Buggers are perceived to be evil and abhorrent, when in reality they aren't if you get to know them. Ender writes a book called The Hive Queen in defense of his former enemy.

Jane, the first AI in the universe comes out to Ender because she knows he is tolerant and will accept her.

He also writes a book called Speaker of the Dead in which he says we must speak truthfully in all things about a life to really know someone.

When Humans then encounter their next alien species, Ender works to prevent another Xenocide and preaches tolerance.

The book doesn't advocate genocide/xenocide. It isn't about training kids to that end. It is a cautionary tale of how prejudice can lead to horrible mistakes, about empathy and tolerance. You either never read the book, or you have terrible reading comprehension.

I wouldn't boycott the movie because I disagree with the artist's personal views, or I'd have to boycott a lot of art.

I'd boycott the movie because I love the book, and the movie will likely piss me off. Spoilers below:

The movie apparently doesn't have Ender killing Bonzo because they didn't want to show youth violence or bullying. There is no fantasy game. The "kids" are much older and practically adults. Locke and Demontheses are completely cut out of the story.

The odd thing is that the point of Ender's Game is tolerance. The same man who wrote in essays that homosexuality itself should be criminalized and gays thrown in jail wrote this fantastic book that teaches tolerance.