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)

1568101159

Posts

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    If my brother had simply stated the gun safety rule I probably wouldn't remember it to this day, because I was also raised to understand that rule. No, he was specifically mad that Vash chose to never kill anyone.

    Well, when your only tool is a hammer, all your problems start looking like nails. Soldiers are trained indoctrinated to shoot to kill even if there is a solution that doesn't involve shooting.

    steam_sig.png
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    rRwz9.gif
    Kana
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    JacobkoshMatev
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    There's a fairly notable Superman story that attempts to as well. I found it a pretty naive take though, and time has done it no favors.

  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    There's a fairly notable Superman story that attempts to as well. I found it a pretty naive take though, and time has done it no favors.

    Curious, do you find it naive because superman can only hold his view because he is "superman"? Otherwise, i find the sentiment of people with power should choose to pursue a higher level of morality a worthy goal, even if reality does not mirror that.

  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    Pailryder wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    There's a fairly notable Superman story that attempts to as well. I found it a pretty naive take though, and time has done it no favors.

    Curious, do you find it naive because superman can only hold his view because he is "superman"? Otherwise, i find the sentiment of people with power should choose to pursue a higher level of morality a worthy goal, even if reality does not mirror that.

    No, it's very on brand for Superman. The issue I have with it is that it's basically going "Sure, people SAY they want people with power to brutally kick the crap out of the people they don't like, but if they actually saw it, they would be horrified and realize that violence is never the answer. People HATE violent spectacle." A rosy theory about society, but it pretends like feeding people to the lions was not a thing, and every new video of police violence that gets cheered, not repulsed, by 35-40% of the country is another strike against it.

  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited March 10
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    CroakerBC wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Point of order. The Federation is a socialist society, not a communist one. The workers of The Federation do not directly control and benefit from the means of production. The state owns the means of production and distributes resources equally to the workers.

    Based on what?
    Surely if a citizen has a replicator in their home, they do control the means of production.

    Replicators are not all the same (see the continually referenced "industrial replicator") and still require power anyway.

    Exactly. I'm talking about energy production. The Federation controls the means of energy production which in turn controls the means of producing goods via replicator.

    I don't think they ever show that Star Fleet controlling resources like that. The only time they talk about power generators was in DS9 during the terrorist attack on earth, and those were controlled by Earth's government.

    All resources seem to be from member worlds, either donated or given in trade and distributed to improve quality of life for Federation members or general "good neighbor" policies for non members.

    But Earth's government IS the Federation. I'm not talking about StarFleet. We see plenty of examples of communist societies outside of The Federation. I'll also admit the line gets pretty blurry when anyone can take a 10TW power generator that will run for 1000 years to a planet and setup their own society structured however the hell they want. However, inside of it's borders, The Federation controls the production of energy, the distribution of replicators and securing scarce resources, And that's not a bad thing. They make a policy of giving everyone whatever they want so the only limiting factor is your own personal skill and achievements.

    It's kind of freaky, The Federation's fanatical devotion to biological and genetic purity. Getting augmented in any way is seen as a bad thing and any divergence from "the path to ascension" will, at best make you a paria and ultimately lead to your own downfall most of the time. There is this unnerving theme of evolution being this linier path that ultimately unlocks godhood in a way not entirely dissimilar to a certain monotheistic religion we have now. Only, instead of righteousness being the path to eternal life in heaven, biological purity becomes the path. I kind of understand that becoming the dominant philosophy after contact with Q and The Traveler but it still just weird to me.

    It absolutely is not, Earth government is a member of the Federation, a big member that's very important, but it like any other member maintains autonomy, that's why the Federation has to get permission to do anything on Earth. Other members have even more autonomy, keeping their own fleets and warships rather than sitting back and letting the Federation do everything for them.

    It's also how so many Earth citizens are able to just go off and make an autonomous colony... until a space monster shows up at which point they run crying back to the Federation.

    I mean it’s a federation.


    It’s kind of like if you argued “My government is the state of South Carolina, not the United States!”

    There’s a full on governmental body that is electorally accountable to the populace of the Federation, so it’s more than an interplanetary alliance.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    That_Guy
  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    There's a fairly notable Superman story that attempts to as well. I found it a pretty naive take though, and time has done it no favors.

    Curious, do you find it naive because superman can only hold his view because he is "superman"? Otherwise, i find the sentiment of people with power should choose to pursue a higher level of morality a worthy goal, even if reality does not mirror that.

    No, it's very on brand for Superman. The issue I have with it is that it's basically going "Sure, people SAY they want people with power to brutally kick the crap out of the people they don't like, but if they actually saw it, they would be horrified and realize that violence is never the answer. People HATE violent spectacle." A rosy theory about society, but it pretends like feeding people to the lions was not a thing, and every new video of police violence that gets cheered, not repulsed, by 35-40% of the country is another strike against it.

    interesting, thanks! I have fuzzy memories of it but i thought that the comic/movie reflected that pretty well, people were cheering the Elite for their actions until Superman showed them how extreme it could get. It's great when the guys you hate get punished in a horrific fashion but oh no, the people we like had it happen, that's wrong! Seems pretty real world applicable and now i'm wondering (bringing it back to the thread) if there's a good star trek analogue.

  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    Pailryder wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Jacobkosh wrote: »
    You see this sometimes with a couple people (not very many, thankfully) in superhero threads here.

    "Why doesn't Superman just melt that guy's face off?"

    I don't know how to explain to somebody that it's because that's really fucked up!

    The Boys actually covers this. It's kinda terrifying.

    There's a fairly notable Superman story that attempts to as well. I found it a pretty naive take though, and time has done it no favors.

    Curious, do you find it naive because superman can only hold his view because he is "superman"? Otherwise, i find the sentiment of people with power should choose to pursue a higher level of morality a worthy goal, even if reality does not mirror that.

    No, it's very on brand for Superman. The issue I have with it is that it's basically going "Sure, people SAY they want people with power to brutally kick the crap out of the people they don't like, but if they actually saw it, they would be horrified and realize that violence is never the answer. People HATE violent spectacle." A rosy theory about society, but it pretends like feeding people to the lions was not a thing, and every new video of police violence that gets cheered, not repulsed, by 35-40% of the country is another strike against it.

    interesting, thanks! I have fuzzy memories of it but i thought that the comic/movie reflected that pretty well, people were cheering the Elite for their actions until Superman showed them how extreme it could get. It's great when the guys you hate get punished in a horrific fashion but oh no, the people we like had it happen, that's wrong! Seems pretty real world applicable and now i'm wondering (bringing it back to the thread) if there's a good star trek analogue.

    I was thinking in regards to this about the Voyager episode with the Rock, but that's more of a "Hey, we can all enjoy some boxing and violence. Nothing wrong with that. Oh wait, they're slaves battling each other to the death. Well, uh, that's wrong then?"

    Pailryder
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Y'know, thinking about the whole "People in the Federation must have some sort of money because only so many people can live in Manhattan or the South of France and there are only so many seats at Sisko's"... I don't think I agree. It seems superficially true, but I think it only seems that way when viewed through the lens of modern life.

    Take the food at Sisko's as a simple example. Most people, for the past year, haven't gone out to eat. Home cooking (to whatever extent they are capable) and delivery/take-out have sufficed. Sure, people who like going out to eat still want to go out to eat, as much for the "being somewhere different and seeing other humans" aspect as the actual food, but think about the Sisko's situation. If you could get any food you want, at a quality commensurate with being prepared by an expert chef, immediately, without any concerns about delivery times or price of the meal, is having that meal prepared by human hands going to be that important to that many people? It's not like the chef is using higher quality ingredients - he's probably mostly preparing replicated raw foods because I guarantee you the Federation doesn't have shrimp farms. And if everybody's got a holodeck in their house, they can even have their replicated gourmet meal in whatever environment they like.

    I suspect Sisko's clientele would mostly just be regulars who show up specifically because of the other people at the restaurant, mixed with the occasional rando coming in for the novelty factor. I really doubt it would be so packed, so regularly that people are bartering for a spot in the queue.

    Sorta similarly with the "Only so many people can live in Manhattan" thing.... Manhattan is special in part because the population distribution of Earth means there are only so many places with that many different people contributing to local culture and in part because the density of wealth and wealthy individuals makes it one of only a few places on Earth that can support something like the row of theaters on Broadway. On top of that, of the relatively few places on Earth that are like Manhattan, most people can only practically hope to live in one or a small handful. Language barriers, the difficulty of immigration processes, and the simple logistical challenges of trying to move your life from small-town Kentucky to, say, Berlin, make Manhattan (or one of the other iconic cities of the US) basically your only choice.

    If anyone could pick up and move anywhere on any of hundreds of planets with no worries about logistics, language, or cost, and if anyone could feasibly plop down a Gershwin's Theater equivalent in any open plot of land, knowing that people who want to see the shows there can do so with relative ease from anywhere on that or any nearby planet, I'm not sure places like Manhattan would even still exist. People might still want to live somewhere scenic like the South of France, but for how many is it being specifically the South of the France going to be more important than the vistas (which are likely available on tens or hundreds of worlds), the food and wine (which are available to anyone, anywhere, instantly), and the culture (which is likely going to be far more homogenous in a society where anyone can move anywhere at any time)?

    I feel like, realistically, in a post-scarcity society like that of Trek, a desire for hand-crafted items is probably going to far more often be like the one person in-thread's relative's cat pictures than the novelty of having something fashioned by a human. And the desire to live in a specific locale is likely going to be far more dilute than is the case in our current world. Picard wants to live in the South of France probably more because it's his ancestral home than because of how special France itself is. His vineyard is a very large-scale version of amateur kitten art.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
    Jacobkosh
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Where I want to live on a planet where transporters are a think is also kind of a non-starter. I'd be a LOT more inclined to live in the middle of no where if things like replicators, transporters, and easy small vessel (shuttles/etc) travel is a thing.

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    Where I want to live on a planet where transporters are a think is also kind of a non-starter. I'd be a LOT more inclined to live in the middle of no where if things like replicators, transporters, and easy small vessel (shuttles/etc) travel is a thing.

    Well, if access to other places are the only constraint in picking a place to live, then sure.

    But there are other factors people can use to decide where to live.

    What if I want an oceanfront beachside property? Not live in the middle of the Sahara and take a transporter or shuttle to the beach, I want a house that overlooks the ocean and to open my door and be on a beach. What if I want to become a winemaker, and live and work on a French countryside château that I didn't inherit from my British ancestry? What if I visited historic Québec Old Town and fell in love with it and decided I want to live there?

    There are just so many of those to go around. Scarcity is still a thing in a post-scarcity society.

    sig.gif
    exis
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited March 10
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    steam_sig.png
    hlprmnkyshrykeRichyrahkeesh2000autono-wally, erotibot300ShadowenDoodmannoverride367DonnictonSeal
  • exisexis Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    This is what the Eugenics Wars were actually about.

    CptHamiltonRichyrahkeesh2000Shadowenoverride367Donnicton
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited March 11
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    Ironically I think a cow being smart enough to be capable of expressing it's desire to be eaten is what would actually make it morally questionable to eat it.

    shryke on
    Commander ZoomShadowenDoodmann
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    I'd expect the vast majority of restaurants (which there are probably still quite a lot of... running a restaurant is almost never a means to great wealth bu
    t people keep on fuckin' doin' it because so many people enjoy making food at scale for some reason) to have a replicator in the back producing whatever ingredients are needed as-needed. I think you'd have to go pretty far down to "I want real food!" rabbit hole to convince yourself you'd rather have a piece of meat or a pile of vegetables of variable quality grown somewhere, on some planet, then frozen or put into stasis or whatever and shipped, stored, and finally prepared for you to eat instead of the chef taking an atomically-identical-to-freshly-butchered cut or a just-picked-off-the-vine Romulan Notomato or whatever out of the replicator.

    I do wonder, though, whether anyone objects to eating meat on ethical grounds a couple of centuries after the last mass-farmed animal was butchered and fed into a replicator's in-hole. Unless replicator technology showed up sufficiently far after vat-grown meats that nobody was farming whole cows by that point anyway. Didn't TOS Enterprise have, like, a hold full of live turkeys or something?

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    Where I want to live on a planet where transporters are a think is also kind of a non-starter. I'd be a LOT more inclined to live in the middle of no where if things like replicators, transporters, and easy small vessel (shuttles/etc) travel is a thing.

    Well, if access to other places are the only constraint in picking a place to live, then sure.

    But there are other factors people can use to decide where to live.

    What if I want an oceanfront beachside property? Not live in the middle of the Sahara and take a transporter or shuttle to the beach, I want a house that overlooks the ocean and to open my door and be on a beach. What if I want to become a winemaker, and live and work on a French countryside château that I didn't inherit from my British ancestry? What if I visited historic Québec Old Town and fell in love with it and decided I want to live there?

    There are just so many of those to go around. Scarcity is still a thing in a post-scarcity society.

    Sure, but again, I'm not convinced that with virtually instant access to those places, and/or holodecks, that that many people would care, especially if also moving to offworld colonies for a lot of the more nature based things are... well.. a thing. But again, this is STILL the wrong arguement. You are arguing that things will still have value, which we've said MAAAANY times would still be a thing, and people could work out a system of exchange. What is not needed is the need to work for a living when all your basic needs/comforts are met. The end of pure capitalism also removes the need to be constantly expanding (and again, with the ability to move off-world) it would start removing a lot of population pressures.

  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    I'd expect the vast majority of restaurants (which there are probably still quite a lot of... running a restaurant is almost never a means to great wealth bu
    t people keep on fuckin' doin' it because so many people enjoy making food at scale for some reason) to have a replicator in the back producing whatever ingredients are needed as-needed. I think you'd have to go pretty far down to "I want real food!" rabbit hole to convince yourself you'd rather have a piece of meat or a pile of vegetables of variable quality grown somewhere, on some planet, then frozen or put into stasis or whatever and shipped, stored, and finally prepared for you to eat instead of the chef taking an atomically-identical-to-freshly-butchered cut or a just-picked-off-the-vine Romulan Notomato or whatever out of the replicator.

    I do wonder, though, whether anyone objects to eating meat on ethical grounds a couple of centuries after the last mass-farmed animal was butchered and fed into a replicator's in-hole. Unless replicator technology showed up sufficiently far after vat-grown meats that nobody was farming whole cows by that point anyway. Didn't TOS Enterprise have, like, a hold full of live turkeys or something?

    I can see two kinds of justifications to wanting "real food". One is Eddington's hipper-than-thou diatribe against replicated food where his whole gripe is just that it's replicated; Sisko, the son of an actual chef and a chef himself, seems to think replicated food is just as good as the "real" thing when it comes to flavor, feel, etc. This sounds like a pure snobbery situation, where somebody can't tell the difference between replicated and "real" food in a blind taste test but will devoutly insist a meal tastes better if you say it's "real".

    But the other is, to me, a pretty justified view: there is a different experience to going somewhere to have food prepared for you versus just replicating it. Humans are social critters and food is one of the biggest sharing points of society; going to Grandpa Sisko's restaurant to socialize and eat is a vastly different experience than pulling it out of a magic hole in the wall. You sit, you talk, you order, and the food that comes out is going to be unique each time, even if you only order the same thing every time. On top of that, making food can definitely be fun and entertaining unto itself, plus the added bonus of getting to see somebody enjoy what you've prepared. So when Sisko is cooking up a storm at home, it's not because he dislikes replicated food, but because it's an expression of both what he likes to do and that he cares for the people he cooks for.

    Ethically, Federation types don't see to have much of an issue with horking down live gackt. I think many of them would not have a problem with eating meat from a dead animal, but I also think they appreciate not having to kill stuff to eat meat and also that they would inherently think about the cost of eating that "real" meat. But they aren't so stuck up that they'll refuse to eat meat out camping or in a survival situation or something.

    Commander Zoom
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    Ironically I think a cow being smart enough to be capable of expressing it's desire to be eaten is what would actually make it morally questionable to eat it.

    Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,

    steam_sig.png
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    Ironically I think a cow being smart enough to be capable of expressing it's desire to be eaten is what would actually make it morally questionable to eat it.

    Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,

    Are you really, really sure?

  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    everyone would want to live in carmel if no one else lived in carmel, but the thing about the technology in trek is that you could live in teh desert and have it seem like it is carmel. the picard show maybe took that a step back from what TNG was like but certainly with holovideo windows, or holodecks or whatnot, you'd never miss "scenery".

  • LanlaornLanlaorn Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    Ironically I think a cow being smart enough to be capable of expressing it's desire to be eaten is what would actually make it morally questionable to eat it.

    Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,

    Jesus Christ, absolutely not. If you somehow Brave New World programmed a class of people happy to be butchered for the meat industry I'd consider you a monster, not suddenly decide human cattle and cannibalism is OK.

    I don't care about animals dying because they're not people, making them into brainwashed people would a) give their lives value and b) make me want to fight to free them from you.

    DoodmannCambiataHappy Little Machine
  • hlprmnkyhlprmnky Registered User regular
    The thing about scarcity of locality is that it is entirely about the resource constraints of movement between places. Even limiting the discussion to Earth, we are functionally never going to “run out” of places to live, so the question becomes how hard is it to get where you want to be from where you live, and the answer is apparently “Hey Siri, please materialize me at that other place” and then later “Hey Siri, please materialize me at home.”
    Some people are going to absolutely insist upon a beachfront house or to live within walking distance of the Louvre or whatever thing, all the time, for their entire lifetime, but how many, really? Enough that there’s too little Louvre to go around? I am skeptical. And let’s say you tire of the ocean view and want to go live on Risa for a few years, or join your college buddies on a walkabout to Vulcan, Tellar, and Andoria to celebrate your fiftieth birthday or whatever - the day you leave, someone else can build exactly the housing they want on that plot of land, and use it, and when you come back you can find a vacant plot of beach and build exactly the house you left if you like. You might even be able to get the very same location back if nobody else is using it then!
    And if you don’t have this quixotic fascination with waking up in the same place every day? You can still go to any beach, and the Louvre, and Manhattan, and back to a house that’s big enough for all your needs, hobbies, entertaining guests, etc. - it would be a busy, tiring day, but you could do all that in a day if you wanted.
    Thinking about scarcity of locality as if you had to, I don’t know, move your body and possessions everywhere in subsonic vehicles - what’s that about?

    _
    iOS: hlprmnky | PSN: hlprmnky_2 | SC2: Callow.126
    CptHamilton
  • CaedwyrCaedwyr Registered User regular
    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Here’s post scarcity Trek question for you: what’s the scene like for restaurants regarding meat?

    Obviously you’re going to a restaurant for someone’s own cooking rather than the programmed iterations in replicator libraries, but freed from the need to farm animals for meat thanks to replicators, or other methods of growing just the edible tissues minus the whole “part that makes it a thinking, feeling creature” thing, are restaurants supplying their kitchens via industrial replicators of various samples of meat from around the world across the decades, getting stocked via basically lab meat? Or is there still, arguably barbaric, a practice to farm animals just to kill and eat them?


    [I think Riker and company eat a wild game space rabbit in Picard, so I guess there’s still hunting]

    Through hundreds of years of selective breeding, The Federation has created a cow that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly.

    Ironically I think a cow being smart enough to be capable of expressing it's desire to be eaten is what would actually make it morally questionable to eat it.

    Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,

    Jesus Christ, absolutely not. If you somehow Brave New World programmed a class of people happy to be butchered for the meat industry I'd consider you a monster, not suddenly decide human cattle and cannibalism is OK.

    I don't care about animals dying because they're not people, making them into brainwashed people would a) give their lives value and b) make me want to fight to free them from you.

    It's a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy reference.

    autono-wally, erotibot300That_Guy
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    All this talk about restaurants made me think of a part I really liked from "Use of Weapons"
    Later, he had wandered off. The huge ship was an enchanted ocean in which you could never drown, and he threw himself into it to try to understand if not it, then the people who had built it.

    He walked for days, stopping at bars and restaurants whenever he felt thirsty, hungry or tired; mostly they were automatic and he was served by little floating trays, though a few were staffed by real people. They seemed less like servants and more like customers who'd taken a notion to help out for a while.

    'Of course I don't have to do this,' one middle-aged man said, carefully cleaning the table with a damp cloth. He put the cloth in a little pouch, sat down beside him. 'But look; this table's clean.'

    He agreed that the table was clean.

    'Usually,' the man said, 'I work on alien—no offence—alien religions; Directional Emphasis in Religious Observance; that's my speciality... like when temples or graves or prayers always have to face in a certain direction; that sort of thing? Well, I catalogue, evaluate, compare; I come up with theories and argue with colleagues, here and elsewhere. But... the job's never finished; always new examples, and even the old ones get re-evaluated, and new people come along with new ideas about what you thought was settled... but,' he slapped the table, 'when you clean a table you clean a table. You feel you've done something. It's an achievement.'

    'But in the end, it's still just cleaning a table.'

    'And therefore does not really signify on the cosmic scale of events?' the man suggested.

    He smiled in response to the man's grin, 'Well, yes.'

    'But then, what does signify? My other work? Is that really important, either? I could try composing wonderful musical works, or day-long entertainment epics, but what would that do? Give people pleasure? My wiping this table gives me pleasure. And people come to a clean table, which gives them pleasure. And anyway,' the man laughed, 'people die; stars die; universes die. What is any achievement, however great it was, once time itself is dead? Of course, if all I did was wipe tables, then of course it would seem a mean and despicable wast of my huge intellectual potential. But because I choose to do it, it gives me pleasure. And,' the man said with a smile, 'it's a good way of meeting people. So; where are you from, anyway?'

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    JacobkoshHydropoloCommander ZoomSnicketysnickDiarmuidCaedwyrhlprmnkyNightslyrCambiataCptHamiltonElbasunuWinkyoverride367Happy Little Machine
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    Yeah, one of the things that's great in the Culture series is that people are involved in the shit they like but that stuff will all get done with or without them. Practically any ship large enough to build other ships seems to have some portion of "crew" dedicated to helping build ships even though the Mind onboard doesn't need them at all, but the Minds like having humans around and the humans like making stuff.

    It's the flipside of cosmic nihilism wherein instead of getting lost in how meaningless any act of any person may be, any person gets to appreciate what any act means to themselves.

    autono-wally, erotibot300CaedwyrShadowenCroakerBCNightslyrCambiataWinkyoverride367Happy Little Machine
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Yeah, one of the things that's great in the Culture series is that people are involved in the shit they like but that stuff will all get done with or without them. Practically any ship large enough to build other ships seems to have some portion of "crew" dedicated to helping build ships even though the Mind onboard doesn't need them at all, but the Minds like having humans around and the humans like making stuff.

    It's the flipside of cosmic nihilism wherein instead of getting lost in how meaningless any act of any person may be, any person gets to appreciate what any act means to themselves.

    Yeah, this excerp really describes the philosophy behind the culture pretty well. No one is taking scores, and if they try to, these scores are just as ephemeral as the rest of everything. So, ultimately, the one you need to be content with is yourself. That kinda drives the whole society, and even the conflicts they get in. From various angles! Are they honest? Are they right? Does it matter? Should they stop if it doesn't?

    Man I really like these books, if you couldn't tell..

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    CaedwyrCroakerBCCambiataHappy Little Machine
  • SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    edited March 14
    SO I watched Star Trek Generations last night.

    I have seen it before but I was much younger. Seeing it again, it's pretty fun! The first half is better I think. Data's emotion chip stuff is unsettling but amusing (Oh, shit!), Malcom McDowell is a lot of fun talking about the fires of time, and Riker saying "Fire" was pretty damn cool. The end bits with Kirk and Picard were sort of weird and they never really explained why there's an energy heaven flying around but oh well!

    Also Cameron from ferris beuller is a starfleet captain? Weird!

    I have also been watching more TNG. Got to the "There are four lights" episodes and quite enjoyed them, but especially enjoyed A Fistful of Datas. Worf in a cowboy hat is very good. And then, Moriarty episode! Always fun.

    Gonna watch First Contact tonight which I don't think I've ever seen. Would watch all of TNG first but the movies are kind of refreshing with their budget/action to mix it up a little here and there.

    Oh, and having watched all of Lower Decks before I watched this season, I saw the stuff with the
    Exobots coming. DAMN YOU PEANUT HAMPER

    SniperGuy on
    Twitch Streaming basically all week
    SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
    JacobkoshhlprmnkyCambiataPailryderAbsoluteZeroautono-wally, erotibot300SnicketysnickWinkychrono_travelleroverride367
  • HardtargetHardtarget There Are Four Lights VancouverRegistered User regular
    I feel like I've said this hundreds of times in these threads but Generations is incredibly underrated

    steam_sig.png
    kHDRsTc.png
    AbsoluteZeroMonwynNaphtali
  • BlarghyBlarghy Registered User regular
    Hardtarget wrote: »
    I feel like I've said this hundreds of times in these threads but Generations is incredibly underrated

    Generations was ok. It suffered for coming after All Good Things. I remember seeing it in theaters and thinking it felt more like a two-part tv episode than a movie. Perfectly serviceable, but suffered because they needed to force certain things into it that either contradicted the series (Data's emotion chip suddenly working after being fried in the series) or because they had to hit certain plot points whether the story really needed them to or not (Kirk, the destruction of Enterprise-D).

    NightslyrCommander ZoomCaedwyr
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    In which two old hack frauds ramble for 80 minutes about season 1

    DanHibikiAbsoluteZero
  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited March 15
    Blarghy wrote: »
    Hardtarget wrote: »
    I feel like I've said this hundreds of times in these threads but Generations is incredibly underrated

    Generations was ok. It suffered for coming after All Good Things. I remember seeing it in theaters and thinking it felt more like a two-part tv episode than a movie. Perfectly serviceable, but suffered because they needed to force certain things into it that either contradicted the series (Data's emotion chip suddenly working after being fried in the series) or because they had to hit certain plot points whether the story really needed them to or not (Kirk, the destruction of Enterprise-D).

    Brent Spiner going full Daffy Duck with the emotion chip was really annoying in those movies.

    Also I love that All Good Things Data is living his life as a Sherlock Holmes cosplay, it's the sort of thing I'd expect from an Android nerd.

    DanHibiki on
    NightslyrMsAnthropy
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular

  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    they're wearing the purple TAS uniforms omg

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    override367MatevAbsoluteZero
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited March 15
    hlprmnky wrote: »
    The thing about scarcity of locality is that it is entirely about the resource constraints of movement between places. Even limiting the discussion to Earth, we are functionally never going to “run out” of places to live, so the question becomes how hard is it to get where you want to be from where you live, and the answer is apparently “Hey Siri, please materialize me at that other place” and then later “Hey Siri, please materialize me at home.”
    Some people are going to absolutely insist upon a beachfront house or to live within walking distance of the Louvre or whatever thing, all the time, for their entire lifetime, but how many, really? Enough that there’s too little Louvre to go around? I am skeptical. And let’s say you tire of the ocean view and want to go live on Risa for a few years, or join your college buddies on a walkabout to Vulcan, Tellar, and Andoria to celebrate your fiftieth birthday or whatever - the day you leave, someone else can build exactly the housing they want on that plot of land, and use it, and when you come back you can find a vacant plot of beach and build exactly the house you left if you like. You might even be able to get the very same location back if nobody else is using it then!
    And if you don’t have this quixotic fascination with waking up in the same place every day? You can still go to any beach, and the Louvre, and Manhattan, and back to a house that’s big enough for all your needs, hobbies, entertaining guests, etc. - it would be a busy, tiring day, but you could do all that in a day if you wanted.
    Thinking about scarcity of locality as if you had to, I don’t know, move your body and possessions everywhere in subsonic vehicles - what’s that about?

    I think this is why the DMZ colonies insisting on a war be fought for them is nonsensical to me, and why I really liked Sisko cutting through the bullshit with Eddington, the only reason these people suffer and die is because idiots like him that want to be characters from some novel hes read, "heroic freedom fighters", when he should be telling them to leave, and that the Federation will do whatever it can to make them whole

    (I didn't see Eddington grabbing a phaser and heading to Bajor to be a resistance fighter ten years earlier, if that's what he cared about)

    They could live the simple farmer's life on earth, nobody is going to force them to eat replicator grown food, and there are enough of them that they could absolutely get a whole gob of farmland and go play harvest moon in the 24th century

    override367 on
    JacobkoshCommander Zoom
  • LanlaornLanlaorn Registered User regular
    That argument is pretty silly, "Look if the Germans invade Poland and France just move to Britain, I didn't see you grabbing a rifle when the they seized Czechoslovakian territory a year earlier"

    For whatever reason these people preferred to make their homes on these colony worlds and it's outrageous to blame them for either forming a resistance group or being upset when the Federation decides it's not worth a fight to defend them from the expansionist empire next door.

    The Federation politics involved were pretty clumsy and the entire plot feels goofy given the much more significant Dominion War playing out simultaneously, but honestly, especially when dealing with Eddington I couldn't believe the shit Sisko did. I don't understand the people who rush to defend him when he decides to just adopt the terrorist's tactics and start using biological WMDs on entire planets. That was supposed to be a dark turn, like "Computer, delete log entry" after the Romulan assassination. These are things that are wrong, and a Federation officer should not be doing, but it's easy to be a saint in paradise and out here on the frontier in a hard spot Sisko compromises his principles.

    Richy
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I mean, afaik the Maquis were invented for Voyager (who hilariously never used them) and were basically thrust upon TNG and DS9. Who then had to wrap the whole thing up in the middle of the story they actually wanted to tell.

    Basically, Voyager left a flaming bag of poop on DS9's doorstep and they had to do their best to put it out without ruining their shoes.

    Commander Zoomoverride367JacobkoshJandaru
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    The "brave pioneer on the (final) frontier" is literally the cherished myth of the colonizer, though it tends to be more palatable when there actually aren't any natives to be erased (figuratively and/or literally).

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    JacobkoshHappy Little MachineNightslyr
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited March 15
    It's more like a group of American fundamentalists moving to a global hotspot and demanding the American military pursue a war that will kill millions to protect them.

    what happened was unfortunate, could have done better, etc - but Eddington and those that demanded they fight back are 100% the reason they all died.

    I'm struggling to understand your analogy though: the colonies amount to basically a handful of towns in real life terms, not entire nations. Towns who ended up on the wrong side of the border after a peace treaty was signed. It sucks! It really sucks for those people! You know what sucks more? Them condemning their children to death because they don't want to start over with new farms (that other people would gladly build for them), a literal recreational activity bundled with a rose colored outlook on a period of colonialism in earth's history, a love of the idea of "the frontier" that most of the time on Earth resulted in lots of death, suffering, and misery


    The bottom line is that their way of life is essentially a recreational activity, they want to play farmer while having modern medicine, tools, etc, and it HAS to be on the frontier - if there was a single other settlement on the planet it wouldn't be satisfying enough. This is fine, they live in a utopian society - but then they want to put their preferential lifestyle ahead of the lives of literally millions of people


    Based on what we're told, from the Cardassian point of view, imagine how distressing those human colonies would be: Humans, whos homeworld is an incredible distance away, are building colonies within rapid striking distance of the Cardassian homeworld. Sure, the Federation isn't an expansionist empire, but the Cardassians are, and they are much weaker than Starfleet militarily (see the Defiant episode where one Starfleet vessel cuts a path of death through Cardassian space by itself, or the same with the TNG episode with Obrien's old captain). There's no way the Cardassians don't see those colonies as a threat. Starfleet has kind of an obligation to cede a bit to the Cardassians, as uncivilized as they are by comparison, because to do otherwise comes off ... well a bit colonialist to be honest.

    In universe there is absolutely no way that warnings weren't handed out when these colonies were formed, and if there weren't well, then Eddington might have a point

    override367 on
    Commander ZoomJacobkoshNightslyrMatev
Sign In or Register to comment.