As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Star Trek] Keep On Trekkin' (Lower Decks stuff in SPOILERS)

1313234363760

Posts

  • MegaMan001MegaMan001 CRNA Rochester, MNRegistered User regular
    edited May 7
    Well, I now know where this image comes from. That was a delightful reveal.

    bmrc83trabkh.jpg


    EDIT:. WOOOO TOTP!

    MegaMan001 on
    I am in the business of saving lives.
    RMS OceanicBloodySlothCambiataMatevShadowenStrikorshrykeCroakerBCDonnicton
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    The crazy thing about the Archer cloning Trip thing is the clone would normally have a life of only a few weeks, so then the ethical question is whether it's acceptable to bring life into the world only to harvest it. And to be fair, the show itself acknowledges this, and Archer explains that yes, it's skeevy, but in the mission they're on (the Xindi), he needs his chief engineer, so gotta do it. Okay, cool, a tough but rational decision.

    But then

    Doctor Phlox announces "oh hey with some genetic tinkering I've been experimenting with I could get this clone to have a normal lifespan", abruptly changing the nature of the dilemma.

    And I'm like "you knew the reasom behind this clone, you suggested it after all, why would you then turn the solution into killing one human to save another like that?"

    And then I remember Dear Doctor. Oh yeah.

    HevachCommander ZoomCambiataRichyShadowenStrikorCasual
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    So Archer would kill Tuvix, but Phlox would rush in at the last minute and say, "Good news," and stick some weird alien bug to him. "I've figured out how to make Tuvix suffer horribly for a thousand lifetimes first."

    "Why would you DO that?"
    "Well I wasn't going to just let Porthos keep eating them."

    RMS OceanicBloodySlothCambiataMatevShadowenQuantum Tigerautono-wally, erotibot300StrikorDonnictonhlprmnkyGiantGeek2020
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    "Just a few simple tweaks and this cloned engineer will be able to suffer for a lifetime. Perhaps, a few centuries from now, we'll be able to extend that to several lifetimes, but let's not get ahead of ourselves."

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    CambiataShadowenRMS Oceanicautono-wally, erotibot300DonnictonGiantGeek2020
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Bizazedo wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Is it? The Tuvix situation is exactly like this. The transporter accident tied Tuvok and Neelix to the track. It's Janeway's choice to either let them stay dead or to throw the switch, kill someone else, and save them from that death.

    And again, this is not weird. A big part of the trolley problem has always been the question of whether there is even culpability for the setup of the entire thing that you, the person who has to make the choice, took no part in. That no one on Voyager created the original problem on purpose is literally part of trolley problem setups from the start. Like, from wikipedia because it's actually useful in this case:
    Again, the problem is that you are basically arguing like inaction cannot be a moral wrong and there's a lot of people that would disagree with that. Which is part of what this kind of thought exercise is designed to highlight.

    The sci-fi element kind of messes it up, though, because it's saying "Yes, they're dead, but not really." It also skews it a bit because there's way more involvement from Janeway in the situation than in the classic Trolley problem. Lining it up with the classic trolley question essentially relies on you ignoring the fact that Tuvok and Neelix are already gone.

    Change the sci fi premise from a transporter accident to a time machine.

    You have a time machine. Tuvok and Neelix are hit by a space trolley. Is it okay to use a time machine and go back, put Tuvix in the path of the space trolley, and save Tuvok and Neelix?

    Even though it's a meme image....
    ds4xm3p4fym7.jpg

    The sci-fi element doesn't really change the basic idea much. Not any more then the tons of variations of the problems that there are out there. And yeah, I don't see how the time-machine situation is any different either. Can you push the button and save 2 people at the cost of 1? Still basically just the trolley problem. This kind of question has always involved the question of inaction vs action and of what responsibility one has to do something about a situation you had no part in creating but you can fix.

    Richy
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I also think it's was an interesting choice they made to frame the solution here as not being based on a purely utilitarian or whatever moral system. Via Kes they pretty explicitly frame a lot of this as "They like Tuvok and Neelix more then Tuvix".

    Honestly the episode could have used another whole section on what happens afterwards and how everyone, including Tuvok and Neelix, react to the situation.

    BizazedoCroakerBC
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Honestly, I think Janeway made the right choice just because Tuvix always skeeved me the heck out. Not sure why, still does to this day. :)

    Hardtarget
  • see317see317 Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    I also think it's was an interesting choice they made to frame the solution here as not being based on a purely utilitarian or whatever moral system. Via Kes they pretty explicitly frame a lot of this as "They like Tuvok and Neelix more then Tuvix".

    Honestly the episode could have used another whole section on what happens afterwards and how everyone, including Tuvok and Neelix, react to the situation.

    "We like Tuvok more than Tuvix, and Neelix just kind of gets bundled in when we get Tuvok back...:"

    I'm wondering, when we're talking about the other captains, are we assuming Tuvok and Neelix, or do we swap that around for their crew members?
    Like, is Kirk dealing with Tuvix, or is he working with McCoy/Spock splitting his duty hours?
    Does Picard's view shift if he's dealing with Tuvix as opposed to Worf/Riker?

    Ringo wrote: »
    Well except what see317 said. That guy's always wrong.
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Well then obviously not for Kirk because the hybrid name of McCock would... not go well on TV.

    shrykeCambiataBizazedoShadowenBloodySlothStrikorhlprmnky
  • BizazedoBizazedo Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    The sci-fi element doesn't really change the basic idea much. Not any more then the tons of variations of the problems that there are out there. And yeah, I don't see how the time-machine situation is any different either. Can you push the button and save 2 people at the cost of 1? Still basically just the trolley problem. This kind of question has always involved the question of inaction vs action and of what responsibility one has to do something about a situation you had no part in creating but you can fix.
    The only thing I'd say (and I only respond so much because Tuvix and the surrounding arguments amuse me greatly and I love the memes) is the variation does change the basic idea because it introduces the idea of accepting death.

    In the original trolley issue, the deaths haven't occurred. You're choosing (or not acting, and thus letting) death.

    Due to the sci fi premises, it adds on to it the idea of accepting death.

    Tuvok and Neelix are dead. Do you accept that, or harm an innocent life to reverse it?

    XBL: Bizazedo
    PSN: Bizazedo
    CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited May 7
    Bizazedo wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    The sci-fi element doesn't really change the basic idea much. Not any more then the tons of variations of the problems that there are out there. And yeah, I don't see how the time-machine situation is any different either. Can you push the button and save 2 people at the cost of 1? Still basically just the trolley problem. This kind of question has always involved the question of inaction vs action and of what responsibility one has to do something about a situation you had no part in creating but you can fix.
    The only thing I'd say (and I only respond so much because Tuvix and the surrounding arguments amuse me greatly and I love the memes) is the variation does change the basic idea because it introduces the idea of accepting death.

    In the original trolley issue, the deaths haven't occurred. You're choosing (or not acting, and thus letting) death.

    Due to the sci fi premises, it adds on to it the idea of accepting death.

    Tuvok and Neelix are dead. Do you accept that, or harm an innocent life to reverse it?

    Why is that even relevant? That is itself something one person might bring to the question that others would think is irrelevant.

    eg- You don't have to accept shit. There's an anti-death button. Tuvok and Neelix are only as dead as you choose to let them be.

    shryke on
    CambiataLanlaorn
  • SneaksSneaks Registered User regular
    edited May 7
    shryke wrote: »
    There’s an anti-death button. Tuvok and Neelix are only as dead as you choose to let them be.
    Really wish I hadn’t been bottom paged. But let’s talk about an anti-death button that works on trillions of people at a time: Annorax’s time ship.
    Sneaks wrote: »
    So let’s talk about Year of Hell for a second.

    In that episode, Chakotay is driven to find a way to save everyone (or at least every civilization within the Krenim sphere of influence) by way of eliminating non-sentient life forms from history (as opposed to Kurtwood Smith, who’s happy to eliminate whomever to get his wife back). In the end, Chakotay and Paris conclude that continuing to tamper with these forces simply isn’t worth it, and that Kurtwood Smith must be stopped. The big flying time gun (BFTG) must be destroyed.

    The trolley problem—by design—frames inaction as morally equivalent to action. If this is the case—as Shryke insists—does destroying the BFTG (or doing anything that isn’t “continuing to use it”) make Chakotay, Paris, and of course Janeway, culpable for the trillions of deaths that the machine could have undone? Isn’t spending however many years or decades or lifetimes it takes to maximize and optimize the number of people saved versus the number wiped out the morally utilitarian thing to do? If inaction is morally equivalent to action, don’t our heroes have that obligation?

    Kurtwood Smith’s character would say so. I don’t think he’d be right. The problem with utilitarianism is that the “acceptable” amount of evil grows in proportion to the “achievable” amount of good. Ultimately, it can be used to justify any number of bad actions.

    Sneaks on
  • Smaug6Smaug6 Registered User regular
    edited May 7
    shryke wrote: »
    Bizazedo wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    But again, both these things are core components of the trolley problem. The balance of "more lives saved vs less lives saved" against "action vs inaction". There's always been a ton of discussion when it comes to the trolley problem over whether you are morally culpable for your inaction.

    This is exactly like Tuvok and Neelix on one track and Tuvik on the other, with the train heading for Tuvok and Neelix. Do you push the button and actively save 2 people by letting 1 die? Or do you do nothing, let 2 people die rather then only 1 and feel not morally culpable for those deaths because you didn't act to make their deaths happened, you just let their deaths occur via inaction?

    I think more then anything the episode exposes the number of people who really want to believe there's only 1 right answer to the trolley problem.
    I don't think it does except when one is reductionist to the extreme. It also doesn't indicate that people believe there's only one right answer to the trolley problem because, in Tuvix, people are already dead.

    Again, you reference the trolley, but the person didn't tie them to the tracks. They came after the fact and were left to the decision on whether to redirect the trolley to save two or not. With the trolley, redirecting or doing nothing results in death, but is still the result of a choice by the person....but they presumably didn't create the original problem.

    In Tuvix, the deaths have already happened, completely separate from Janeway, and Janeway is unrelated to Tuvok and Neelix going poof. Janeway comes in after the fact, backs the trolley up, figuratively then ties Tuvix to the train track, and kills in the hopes it brings two people back to life.

    In the trolley scenario, the person (presumably hah) didn't tie any of the people to the track. They came upon a bad situation and they're left with a choice. In the Tuvix scenario, it's a bit more....malicious.

    Is it? The Tuvix situation is exactly like this. The transporter accident tied Tuvok and Neelix to the track. It's Janeway's choice to either let them stay dead or to throw the switch, kill someone else, and save them from that death.

    And again, this is not weird. A big part of the trolley problem has always been the question of whether there is even culpability for the setup of the entire thing that you, the person who has to make the choice, took no part in. That no one on Voyager created the original problem on purpose is literally part of trolley problem setups from the start. Like, from wikipedia because it's actually useful in this case:
    A utilitarian view asserts that it is obligatory to steer to the track with one man on it. According to classical utilitarianism, such a decision would be not only permissible, but, morally speaking, the better option (the other option being no action at all). An alternate viewpoint is that since moral wrongs are already in place in the situation, moving to another track constitutes a participation in the moral wrong, making one partially responsible for the death when otherwise no one would be responsible. An opponent of action may also point to the incommensurability of human lives. Under some interpretations of moral obligation, simply being present in this situation and being able to influence its outcome constitutes an obligation to participate. If this is the case, then deciding to do nothing would be considered an immoral act if one values five lives more than one.

    Again, the problem is that you are basically arguing like inaction cannot be a moral wrong and there's a lot of people that would disagree with that. Which is part of what this kind of thought exercise is designed to highlight.

    Classic Utilitarian theory states you don't flip the switch. You only actively participate in something if it makes things better and does not hurt anyone. Else you do not act. With understanding of how the world works, thats why no one uses it anymore as its a perfect if impossible philosophy.

    Edit: Also, if makes anyone feel better for advocating the murder of Tuvix, he is probably the first example of a loot piñata. Whack him to death to get two characters back for the price of one death!

    Smaug6 on
    steam_sig.png
  • BizazedoBizazedo Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »

    Why is that even relevant? That is itself something one person might bring to the question that others would think is irrelevant.

    eg- You don't have to accept shit. There's an anti-death button. Tuvok and Neelix are only as dead as you choose to let them be.

    It's relevant because in the original trolley problem, you're saving either one or two people. You didn't put them into that situation, you stumbled across it.

    In the Voyager scenario, you're killing a person to try (It's been too long, I can't remember if the process was guaranteed, but knowing their shit writing I assume it was guaranteed) to resurrect people. As you mentioned, Kes wanted Neelix. We all know Tuvok was Janeway's BFF. They missed them.

    They didn't accept the deaths, nor the new life that was created, and killed to get it back.

    That's also why I mentioned the time machine, because that's the actual effect of it. They didn't want to accept the accident had occurred.




    XBL: Bizazedo
    PSN: Bizazedo
    CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited May 7
    Sneaks wrote: »
    Bizazedo wrote: »
    The sci-fi element kind of messes it up, though, because it's saying "Yes, they're dead, but not really." It also skews it a bit because there's way more involvement from Janeway in the situation than in the classic Trolley problem. Lining it up with the classic trolley question essentially relies on you ignoring the fact that Tuvok and Neelix are already gone.

    Change the sci fi premise from a transporter accident to a time machine.

    You have a time machine. Tuvok and Neelix are hit by a space trolley. Is it okay to use a time machine and go back, put Tuvix in the path of the space trolley, and save Tuvok and Neelix?

    I’m glad you brought up how the analogy only works if the trolley is also a time machine.

    So let’s talk about Year of Hell for a second.

    In that episode, Chakotay is driven to find a way to save everyone (or at least every civilization within the Krenim sphere of influence) by way of eliminating non-sentient life forms from history (as opposed to Kurtwood Smith, who’s happy to eliminate whomever to get his wife back). In the end, Chakotay and Paris conclude that continuing to tamper with these forces simply isn’t worth it, and that Kurtwood Smith must be stopped. The big flying time gun (BFTG) must be destroyed.

    The trolley problem—by design—frames inaction as morally equivalent to action. If this is the case—as Shryke insists—does destroying the BFTG make Chakotay, Paris, and of course Janeway, culpable for the trillions of deaths that the machine could have undone? Isn’t spending however many years or decades or lifetimes it takes to maximize and optimize the number of people saved versus the number wiped out the morally utilitarian thing to do? If inaction is morally equivalent to action, don’t our heroes have that obligation?

    Kurtwood Smith’s character would say so. I don’t think he’d be right. The problem with utilitarianism is that the “acceptable” amount of evil grows in proportion to the “achievable” amount of good. Ultimately, it can be used to justify any number of bad actions.

    I had to rewatch the highlight reel for the episode, and I think the whole point Chakotay found was that Annorax's weapon was trying to do brain surgery with a shotgun. Every time they used it, even on a tiny asteroid floating loose in interstellar space, its results wete profound, far reaching, uncontrollable, and unpredictable. All the trillions you could save would come at the costs of quadrillions more. And we can't forget that the weapon ultimately only destroys. You can manipulate the ripple effects all you want, but can never undo firing the weapon at something, that thing is gone forever. Chakotay destroyed an asteroid, and with it the seeds of life for several species. Those species are now gone, irretrievable, until the weapon was turned on itself, and now all those things were never lost to begin with.

    Hevach on
    RichyCambiatashryke
  • SneaksSneaks Registered User regular
    edited May 7
    Hevach wrote: »
    Every time they used it, even on a tiny asteroid floating loose in interstellar space, its results were profound, far reaching, uncontrollable, and unpredictable. All the trillions you could save would come at the costs of quadrillions more.
    Unpredictability cuts both ways. Early in the episode Annorax’s crew achieves their greatest success, restoring a lot of people that were dead (from Annorax’s perspective) before the weapon was ever built. “Saving” lives, in effect. But because Annorax’s wife wasn’t among them, he kept rolling the dice.

    And why wouldn’t he? If you have unlimited tries and a success literally undoes all prior failures? It’s another so-called “anti-death” button. It just takes longer to use.
    Hevach wrote: »
    You can manipulate the ripple effects all you want, but can never undo firing the weapon at something, that thing is gone forever.
    So is Tuvix.

    Both scenarios revolve around the idea that there is such a thing as acceptable losses. But in one of them, the crew concludes that—as Chakotay puts it, “a single life is significant.” In the other, Janeway murders a man with a transporter.

    Sneaks on
  • BloodySlothBloodySloth Registered User regular
    I think the sci-fi nature of the Tuvix thing adds another element to it, which is that we've seen transporters fuck up a human and produce a different thing in a trillion and one different ways at this point, and it's just hard for me to buy the idea that they couldn't prism the individual out into Tuvok, Neelix, and Tuvix. It couldn't really be that much more difficult than the solution they end up with. Getting Tuvok and Neelix back should be the hard part.

    It also sucks because it's a missed opportunity for really interesting character and relationship growth with Tuvok and Neelix, but lolvoyager

    Caedwyr
  • CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Incidentally they forgot to parse out the flower that caused the original accident. Do they one or both of them still have a little flower DNA in there? Who knows!

    While it doesn't seem that any rich were eaten. It definitely feels like a soup course with broth made from rich stock - bouillonaire if you will - was had.

    My Dragon Age Origins Let's Play

    autono-wally, erotibot300Commander ZoomBloodySlothshryke
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Did Neelix/Tuvok remember their merged time? Did we see their stance post separation? It would have been a great twist if they did and were haunted by being a merged being that wanted to stay merged.

  • BloodySlothBloodySloth Registered User regular
    I just want to commend the glory of this page's top post that I'm blessed with seeing every time I check this thread.

    StrikorRichyCroakerBCCambiataMegaMan001
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited May 8
    Bizazedo wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »

    Why is that even relevant? That is itself something one person might bring to the question that others would think is irrelevant.

    eg- You don't have to accept shit. There's an anti-death button. Tuvok and Neelix are only as dead as you choose to let them be.

    It's relevant because in the original trolley problem, you're saving either one or two people. You didn't put them into that situation, you stumbled across it.

    In the Voyager scenario, you're killing a person to try (It's been too long, I can't remember if the process was guaranteed, but knowing their shit writing I assume it was guaranteed) to resurrect people. As you mentioned, Kes wanted Neelix. We all know Tuvok was Janeway's BFF. They missed them.

    They didn't accept the deaths, nor the new life that was created, and killed to get it back.

    That's also why I mentioned the time machine, because that's the actual effect of it. They didn't want to accept the accident had occurred.

    In the Tuvik Trolley Problem you are either killing 2 people or 1 person. You just stumbled upon this transporter accident. You can press the button to reverse it. Not pushing the button kills 2 people, pushing it kills 1. The fact that the button is hooked up to a "reverse the accident" button really doesn't matter much at all under a lot of approaches to the problem.

    To put it another way, imagine the trolley problem but the train has already come through and run over 2 people. And you can go back in time and get a chance to flip the switch so it only rolls over 1 person instead. It's still just the trolley problem.

    shryke on
    HevachRichyCambiataLanlaornCasual
  • HerrCronHerrCron It that wickedly supports taxation Registered User regular
    I'm half tempted to show Fraucron what her quick capsule review of Tuvix has wrought.
    But I'm worried she'd go mad with power.

    sig.gif
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited May 8
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    Did Neelix/Tuvok remember their merged time? Did we see their stance post separation? It would have been a great twist if they did and were haunted by being a merged being that wanted to stay merged.

    They did remember it, IIRC they described it similarly to the way Tuvix described both their memories - they were there in his mind but he didn't feel like either one was entirely his.

    We never get their statements on it but at the end of the episode Neelix is giddy like a puppy and Tuvok is stoic and unmoved. Which is basically 90% of their range as characters so pfffft.

    Hevach on
    Sneaksshryke
  • WinkyWinky rRegistered User regular
    Just watched "Weekend at Quarks"

    What an ignominious end for that Vorta character

    shrykeHevachStrikorCambiataShadowenRMS OceanicDonnicton
  • WinkyWinky rRegistered User regular
    Also Iggy fucking Pop!

    CambiataMsAnthropyAbsoluteZeroShadowenRMS OceanicDonnictondanx
  • BloodySlothBloodySloth Registered User regular
    Iggy Pop shows up in the weirdest shit and he's always a treasure.

    Dark_SideCambiataAbsoluteZeroShadowenJacobkoshautono-wally, erotibot300DonnictonshrykeCasual
  • StrikorStrikor Calibrations? Calibrations! Registered User regular
    Such a crime that Badgey isn't a combat pet in STO.

    I was killing Thresher Maws on foot before I knew it was a Krogan rite of passage.
    CambiataSnicketysnickAeolusdallas
  • evilmrhenryevilmrhenry Registered User regular
    On the plus side, I think I have a greater understanding of my response to the trolley problem. I flip the switch to kill one person, because I do not see this as action vs inaction. I am just deciding which way the switch is pointed when the trolley comes through, and I set it to minimize death. The current position of the switch is irrelevant.

    Richy
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited May 8
    Strikor wrote: »
    Such a crime that Badgey isn't a combat pet in STO.

    I'd settle for a duty officer with a zany ability like the other Lower Decks characters get (I especially like Rutherford's, which is called "Probably Get Me Fired" and turns exocomps into suicide bombs).

    Edit: Though with the combat pet change a few patches back made my away team absolutely ridiculous, since pets live longer than their cooldowns now and effectively count as additional party members instead of DPS cooldowns. I wouldn't mind adding a cell shaded murder badge on top of the tripod walker, assorted drones, horta, laser targ, cyberdinosaur, and miniature runabout.

    Hevach on
    Commander ZoomSnicketysnickAeolusdallas
  • MegaMan001MegaMan001 CRNA Rochester, MNRegistered User regular
    There's an insane two part DS9 time travel episode where Sisko and Bashir end up in a period of time that's going to lead to massive social improvements in the USA because of a riot that kills a few hundred people.

    Of course they end up fucking up that riot and have to make it happen again.

    First, the idea that a few hundred dead rioters would lead to any massive change in US social policy is quaint.

    Second, Bashir walking around just slamming how shitty the US is at this time is pretty funny.

    I am in the business of saving lives.
    CambiataevilmrhenryHydropoloautono-wally, erotibot300painfulPleasance
  • SnicketysnickSnicketysnick The Greatest Hype Man in WesterosRegistered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    Strikor wrote: »
    Such a crime that Badgey isn't a combat pet in STO.

    I'd settle for a duty officer with a zany ability like the other Lower Decks characters get (I especially like Rutherford's, which is called "Probably Get Me Fired" and turns exocomps into suicide bombs).

    Edit: Though with the combat pet change a few patches back made my away team absolutely ridiculous, since pets live longer than their cooldowns now and effectively count as additional party members instead of DPS cooldowns. I wouldn't mind adding a cell shaded murder badge on top of the tripod walker, assorted drones, horta, laser targ, cyberdinosaur, and miniature runabout.

    I want the crew from the holodeck episode as klingon doffs, it's an easy win that has been somehow overlooked.

    7qmGNt5.png
    D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
    HevachStrikor
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    There's an insane two part DS9 time travel episode where Sisko and Bashir end up in a period of time that's going to lead to massive social improvements in the USA because of a riot that kills a few hundred people.

    Of course they end up fucking up that riot and have to make it happen again.

    First, the idea that a few hundred dead rioters would lead to any massive change in US social policy is quaint.

    Second, Bashir walking around just slamming how shitty the US is at this time is pretty funny.

    It's scarily prescient in terms of some of the things that are going on. The real interesting question is "did Sisko and Bashir fuck up the Bell Riots, or would they have not happened in the first place without them?" We don't get a pre-change photo of Bell, and if I remember right (but it's been some time), they recognize bell by his ID, not by his face.

    Cambiatahlprmnkyshryke
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    There's an insane two part DS9 time travel episode where Sisko and Bashir end up in a period of time that's going to lead to massive social improvements in the USA because of a riot that kills a few hundred people.

    Of course they end up fucking up that riot and have to make it happen again.

    First, the idea that a few hundred dead rioters would lead to any massive change in US social policy is quaint.

    Second, Bashir walking around just slamming how shitty the US is at this time is pretty funny.

    idk, the military killing hundreds of civilians (when was the last time this happened), which led to riots all over the country might have an effect

  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    The crazy thing about the Archer cloning Trip thing is the clone would normally have a life of only a few weeks, so then the ethical question is whether it's acceptable to bring life into the world only to harvest it. And to be fair, the show itself acknowledges this, and Archer explains that yes, it's skeevy, but in the mission they're on (the Xindi), he needs his chief engineer, so gotta do it. Okay, cool, a tough but rational decision.

    But then

    Doctor Phlox announces "oh hey with some genetic tinkering I've been experimenting with I could get this clone to have a normal lifespan", abruptly changing the nature of the dilemma.

    And I'm like "you knew the reasom behind this clone, you suggested it after all, why would you then turn the solution into killing one human to save another like that?"

    And then I remember Dear Doctor. Oh yeah.

    Well, it wouldn't be the first time a character in Star Trek is replaced by themselves. In fact it'd be like... the third, fourth time? At least.

    Commander Zoom
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    There's an insane two part DS9 time travel episode where Sisko and Bashir end up in a period of time that's going to lead to massive social improvements in the USA because of a riot that kills a few hundred people.

    Of course they end up fucking up that riot and have to make it happen again.

    First, the idea that a few hundred dead rioters would lead to any massive change in US social policy is quaint.

    Second, Bashir walking around just slamming how shitty the US is at this time is pretty funny.

    I don't know man, BLM riots haven't killed anybody and they the impetus for huge social movements.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    I do remember one interview with Alexander Siddig, where he talks about the scenes in questions and he pointed out that every Sisko and Bashir one on one interaction was unique in that neither of them where portraying either a criminal or a terrorist.

    You would be hard pressed to find such racial pairing even today. Last I can remember is Burnham in S3x01, where she meets the federation liason played by Adil Hussain, a Muslim of Indian descent.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
    MegaMan001
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited May 8
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    There's an insane two part DS9 time travel episode where Sisko and Bashir end up in a period of time that's going to lead to massive social improvements in the USA because of a riot that kills a few hundred people.

    Of course they end up fucking up that riot and have to make it happen again.

    First, the idea that a few hundred dead rioters would lead to any massive change in US social policy is quaint.

    Second, Bashir walking around just slamming how shitty the US is at this time is pretty funny.

    It's not just the massacre at the end, the riots and killing started in the 90's, and continued for almost 30 years with an ever growing portion of the US population in Arkham City style open air prisons, TOS also mentions the unrest between the Eugenics Wars and WWIII involving a series of terrorist attacks culminating with one that killed 20 million people. The Bell Riots are the Boston Tea Party of the era, an easy to spin scenario that encapsulated a clear cut point of conflict and is a lot cleaner to point to than all the rest, but which was really a minor part of history.

    The 21st Century goes completely off the rails in the Star Trek universe.

    Hevach on
    Cambiata
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    Strikor wrote: »
    Such a crime that Badgey isn't a combat pet in STO.

    I'd settle for a duty officer with a zany ability like the other Lower Decks characters get (I especially like Rutherford's, which is called "Probably Get Me Fired" and turns exocomps into suicide bombs).

    Edit: Though with the combat pet change a few patches back made my away team absolutely ridiculous, since pets live longer than their cooldowns now and effectively count as additional party members instead of DPS cooldowns. I wouldn't mind adding a cell shaded murder badge on top of the tripod walker, assorted drones, horta, laser targ, cyberdinosaur, and miniature runabout.

    I want the crew from the holodeck episode as klingon doffs, it's an easy win that has been somehow overlooked.

    I would love for evil Tendi's to be one that takes the piracy ability off the Orion raiders and gives them a hull heal or something.

    Snicketysnick
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    The 21st Century goes completely off the rails in the Star Trek universe.

    Yeah, not like what's really happened at all. :eek:

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    BloodySlothRichyHahnsoo1MsAnthropyJacobkosh
Sign In or Register to comment.