Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Hodgepodge posted:

voyager at least tried to be interesting, and sometimes succeeded. i've also ran into at least one fan opinion (janeway being a psychopath) which isn't entirely without truth but is mostly just misogyny

after that there's nothing. there are no star treks after that.

I thought Janeway was one of the most interesting captains. Yea, there were problems with the writing of her because sometimes she'd go hard on some regulation, but often she very frequently compromised.

All of the rest of them, except Archer, all had this huge institution to draw on. The Federation. Almost everyone they spoke to knew the Federation and had dealings with them. They were never more than a week or two away from resupply and assistance, and even then rarely.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:


What this misses is that, because of how the transporter kills and clones its users, there is no singular Janeway either. We have a collective of Janeways-clones, successively scanned, deleted, and reprinted by the transporter-replicator machine. Who knows how many there have been.

That's not how the transporter works tho.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004



No it isn't.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


It's important to note that even Barkley, who's a hypochondriac especially when it comes to transporter stuff, is never once concerned that he is dying and being reborn.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


FunkyAl posted:

Disco bones is, however

No, Bones didn't think it would work correctly. He was afraid his molecules would get scrambled, because the transporter would fail while he was getting transported.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

If a transporter merely pushes material from one place to another, there should be no need to disintegrate it first. Why bother with the extreme cost of disassembling and reassembling the object every time?

But although all transportees are definitely dead, it’s not a super-interesting topic. It comes down to a boring argument over whether there’s a literally-existing afterlife: the transporter doesn’t kill you if there’s a God who simply lets you survive the complete obliteration. (Of course, by this logic, you can argue that nothing ever kills anyone & there’s consequently no such thing as murder.)

What’s actually interesting is, again, in the economics of all this. For every ‘energization’ of a transportee, it takes vastly more power to put one back together again. Imagine the amount of energy needed to reassemble 2 billion tons of TNT, atom by atom, after it’s exploded. You’re reversing entropy. Plus, consider the energy need to run the scanner, for the computer to interpret the assloads of information, to absorb/contain the massive explosion, to project this stuff through space, etc.

And, y’know, people don’t just spontaneously turn into energy. It takes roughly 1.5 gigatons of energy just to vapourize a person. Energization goes way beyond that.

How is this better than using a shuttle, which is basically just a stupid helicopter?

Ultimately, it’s conspicuous consumption. Transporting yourself is a power-display, like regularly smashing a priceless teacup in front of your subordinates. Only backwards plebs prefer the shuttle.

The fact that you think this is how transporters work does not support your idea that it kills you (it totally doesn't)

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Welp looks like you get turned into energy.

Yes, but it uses that energy to make you later. It's not like they're recreating your body using a different energy source and just dispersing the energy that was harvested from the conversion of your body.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


hakimashou posted:

It cannot make more land on earth, which is why the human military and political elite is dominated by earth landowning families.

Like, one captain has a vineyard.

Drawin an awful lot from one dude.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


hakimashou posted:

Read the thread op!

lol

"Someone in Janeway's family past owned land at some point" does not support these theories as much as you might think it does.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


She lived near her grandpa's farm. This, a landed elite does not create.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Wow, at first I was like "This person can't be as bad as Squizzle suggested" but i've just seen "This thing that I heard about that didn't make it in the show is cannon" so welp.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Atrocious Joe posted:

of course an inner doesn't realize just having land makes you an elite

Other people owning land does not mean you own land.

How is this hard?

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

There's no real indication that Jake is exaggerating

The indicator that he's exaggerating is that he's a teenager whining about chores.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Troi refuses to ride a holo-replicated horse because she would be overwhelmed by its thoughts, emotions, and ‘passions’.

This is false.

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

It’s something that you can infer even without the explicit confirmation, because Troi can barely function without her empathic powers. People appear as “blank”, and it’s really distressing.

Also false.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

The episodes are Pen Pals and The Loss, so you can check it out!!!

I did. That's how I know you are lying.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


And your little editing cuts out the part where they were just discussing a real life animal.

Almost like it's on purpose. :thunk:

Troi doesn't know how to ride a horse because of the empathy. It's not about that specific holo horse. She doesn't have the skill, interest, or inclination to do horsey things.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Just trimming out the part about a live animal again, but this time in the other side

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


No.

Troi just never learned how to ride a horse because she doesn't do animal training because of the emotions involved.

So either:

A) She has to ride a horse in manual control, using skills she never learned in a sphere of activity that holds no interest for her

or

2) She has to ride a horse that is controlled by the computer, which is not a method of transportation she prefers.

Either way, the holodeck entities are not fully realized AI with thoughts and emotions.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Finger Prince posted:

Seems people are getting hung up on the semantics of "a mind if it's own". One side takes that to mean a literally self aware and independently thinking entity, the other side takes it as a turn of phrase.
You could contemporarily state that you don't want a Tesla with Autopilot because you prefer a mode of transportation without a mind of its own.
The mind of its own in the case of the horse is the starship computer, which is some level of near-AI. The horse doesn't actually have a mind, it just has a subroutine of the holodeck program. But there's nothing wrong with describing that as "a mind of its own", unless you want to argue semantics.

Some people are trying to state that the holodeck computer creates an AI for everything and somehow transmits their feelings and thoughts to telepaths and empaths.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Picard simply asks for a horse, and the computer automatically creates a horse with overwhelming amounts of thought and emotion. Same thing with Moriarty. It’s the default.

Do you have any other evidence of this, or are you relying entirely on mis-representing dialog?

I mean, she's standing right there and not holding her head and making the face she makes every other time she gets overwhelmed by emotions.

But this time for some reason she's just standing there.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

You’re having some troubles.


nah. I'm just not trying to describe the federation as some kind of dystopian hell hole so I don't need to read stuff into the scene that doesn't exist.

She never says, or hints, that riding a holo-horse will overwhelm her. At all.

Edit: You can tell she doesn't get overwhelmed by holo-things because she goes to the holodeck too in other episodes and is fine.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


reignofevil posted:

why Troi wouldn't ride a holo-horse

She has no interest in horses. Not every woman does ya know.

Also, can anyone find any instances where Troi specifically says she senses a holo-deck creation's emotions? Because I can't think of one.

Also, i'm doing my rewatch of all star trek in chronological order, and I just got to Code of Honor and while I was typing this, Tasha Yar summons an aikido combatant in the holodeck and the person she's showing it off to goes "You can create people without a soul?"

her response is "It's not a real person, Lutan. It has no life"

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


hakimashou posted:

The transporter creates people without a soul every day

That's fine, souls don't exist.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


It's interesting that in none of those responses does anyone point out a single time Troi says "I am sensing this emotion from this holo-person".

Which is a thing she says in like, a third of her lines because it's her thing.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


So it seems that the only time Troi sensed something from a holodeck creation, was when it created Moriarty. You know, that very special rare event and not the normal holodeck operation.

And even then, she doesn't sense any emotions. She sense "order".

So no, holo-creatures aren't feeling.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


galagazombie posted:

There really is no single answer.

There may not be any single answer, but we know that "genocide excuse" isn't one of them.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


You know, if there was no prime directive SMG would be on and on about imperialism instead.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Takes some serious gymnastics to complain about how starfleet's non-interference is also imperialism.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


ruddiger posted:

Why do you think it’s not?

If you can explain to me how any group can start taking over planets while simultaneously not doing that, i'm all ears.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


ruddiger posted:

Through ideology and claiming the star systems the planets reside in as part of Federation space? It’s not like imperialism hasn’t worked through proxies and propaganda throughout all of human history.

Well, beaming down and saying "you're all in the federation now" would be interference. So that wouldn't be it.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

the violence faced by ‘prewarp’ noncitizens in the Federation is not unique.

There are no prewarp noncitizens in the federation. So there's that. There are also zero pre-warp planets annexed by the federation. Actually i'm pretty sure there are no planets annexed by the federation.

And the augments aren't discriminated against, they're disallowed because they always kill a bunch of people and try to take over.

ruddiger posted:

I guess that explains the blind spots if you think that’s the only way imperialist expansion works.

No, you just haven't explained how someone can interfere while also not interfering at the same time.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


I don't think any of you knows what annexation means.

Also no, that isn't what happened with Bajor either.

Does anyone in this thread actually watch Star Trek?

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


How exactly does the federation break the prime directive in their support of Bajor?

I don't think it's reasonable to call them "Pre-warp" anymore since they were under cardassian rule for 40 years.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


I get the feeling that for some folks, if the federation knows you exist you've been annexed.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


The prime directive doesn't mean "ignore all aliens".

It means don't get involved in their internal politics and culture.

For a pre-warp society, that means everyone because everyone is internal. The Bajorans are def not pre-warp by that metric after 40 years of cardassian annexation.

Edit: To be more precise it's about not swaggering in with higher technology and interfering with other people's internal poo poo. Which is why loving with people who are more technological advanced is okay.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Kesper North posted:

do you deny that the federation is annexing the spatial volume around our hypothethical primitive species' world so as to deny the rights to exploit those resources (and interfere with the native population) to the klingons and romulans, in the strict legal sense?

because yes that kind of his how annexation works and how the federation practices it. it's not just "the federation knows you exist", it's "the federation has to serve notice to everyone it has diplomatic dealings with that you are Under Starfleet Protection" (as with the kelpians). the ferengi get mad about it because they aren't allowed to pursue those markets, et cetera.

it's politics and diplomacy the same as anywhere else, Trek uses diplomatic and Cold War metaphors all the time

Nah, that's not annexation. Because once those pre-warp societies achieve warp technology they get to do whatever. Join the federation, don't join it. Up to them.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Goonswarm is a WH40k gimmick, not a star trek gimmick. That's the dental thing.

Any way none of that happens tho.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

That’s not really a trap, because it’s a distinct issue: why is the Federation so expansionist?

They aren't. Mystery solved.

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Then how did they end up with all those ‘pre-warp’ planets in their territory?

Being in a territory is not the same as being annexed.

Also, being "so expansionist" claims that they're growing quickly. Which isn't true either.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

CainFortea
Oct 15, 2004


Kesper North posted:

if a sovereign state rolls up and says "this territory is now part of the united federation of planets", that is annexation

Please let me know what episode it is where someone from the federation claims the planet that someone else was living on.

I'll wait.

Also:

Kesper North posted:

fishing rights

:ironicat:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply