Re: DIS - Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:35 pm
Could someone explain to me the Elon Musk comment?
An opinionated discussion of all things SFDebris
https://sfdebris.net/forum/
I liked Saru... for those two or three episodes when the theory about him was that he was from a herd species. That is fascinating to me and I cannot think of it done elsewhere. A prey species surviving long enough to reach the level of its planet's apex (because remember, up until now only warp capable species were allowed to know the Federation exists) is a chance for some really unique stories. And then we learn that he is part of just another plaything species and any interest I had dried up.CrypticMirror wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 7:24 pmThe shields were down when the same thing happened on DS9. That is what distracted me from the scene, the fact that I'd already seen that scene done before in Deep Space Nine, where Quark and a guest star had to disarm a torpedo lodged in the hull of the Ben Sisko's MfPH. Deep Space Nine did it better. You should never have your show remind the audience of the same thing that was done in a better show.cloudkitt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 5:23 pm I didn't notice the window on the blast door, which is indeed stupid, because I couldn't get past both the manual override being on only one side of the door, AND that they couldn't just freaking beam her out after she shut it. ...
(And I'm not sure the shields are even up anyway if that that torpedo can get lodged in the hull.) I can't stand such stilted, manufactured "tragedy."
--
I have no problem with Starfleet taking the Armin Tamzarian option with regard to Discovery's antics across the first two seasons. If I was them, I wouldn't want to admit those idiots existed either. They make the Lower Decks crew seem intelligent by comparison. The problem I have is that CBS won't take the same approach.
Tilly I found just grated on me, like she had all of Season one DS9's Rom and Bashir's irritating quirks combined with Neelix's desperate need for validation. She fulfils one purpose in the show, to me anyway, and that is to make me go "maybe we should check in on Michael again" just to get away from her. I want the character to grow the fuck up, and quiet the fuck down.
Saru, I just found his character so stupid because of S1 that nothing can save him except a noble self sacrifice on the other side of an airlock, one that sticks.
Michael, well, thanks to her Travis on Enterprise is no longer the most boring black character in Star Trek.
And the other drones... are there, I guess. That is the problem with the show, the only series regulars characters' names which I can recall are memorable only because of how irritating they are. That is not a good thing.
Pike was interesting, so was Lorca though, and even Evil Georgiou had something going on. I had zero interest in watching the third season even before they announced they were going to be using it as a reboot of Andromeda. I wasn't that riveted by Andromeda the first time around, so it has no residue of nostalgic goodwill to draw upon to bring me back to see how this bunch of assholes handle it. Not only am I not interested in their hapless blundering around the galaxy, but the very premise of finding a Fallen Federation repulses me so that even if it was Picard, Sisko, Garak, Nemoy-Spock, and Tom Paris doing that show, I still would not want to watch it; so why do they think that seeing this shambles doing so will make it palatable.
It is not hard to put together a watchable show, set it in the Picard timeframe, keep it upbeat and adventurous, ditch the pizza cutter ship design, reduce Michael et al's role [in fact, just bring them back for the season opener to pass the torch], and bring in a new and more interesting as well as functional crew, have them go out and explore somewhere new every week. There, that is a Star Trek show I'd watch.
Going on that both Discovery and Picard deal with Artificial Intelligence (and like I said, I feel that Star Trek Picard handles the topic of A.I. far better and was more interesting than in Star Trek Discovery) I Googled elon musk fear of ai and got this:
Google wrote:Elon Musk fearing AI is like Bill Gates fearing a pandemic. They both profit greatly from pandemics that slow their competition and bring the singularity a step closer. One one hand Elon Musk tells us to fear AI supremacy, and on the other he offers us the red pill of a chip that can cure autism , schizophrenia and anything else undesirable.
Elon Musk has been very vocal about his fear that AI will end up destroying humanity. Which imo is a bit rich coming from a guy who owns a company at the forefront of cutting edge technology, but his opinions are actually very similar to what Stephen Hawking thought about AI: when the day comes that machines are can both think for themselves and have access to their own replication, they will not need us any more. That doesn't automatically mean they will wipe us out obviously, but I think you can agree that something that is smarter than us, doesn't need to eat, drink, sleep, breathe, take 9 months to reproduce and a further 18 years to be useful, is an enemy that we probably cannot defeat outside of a Hollywood film.
I personally don't mind the USS Discovery design overall, it's not the worst design I've seen [glares at Yeager-Class] but it's not the best either, personally out of all the resent ships we've gotten, I love the USS Cerritos, that ship feels like a character in it's own right.clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:49 pm The Discovery looks like something from Deviantart. People defend it by pointing out indignantly that ''its a design from the failed Star Trek Planet of the Titans that Gene Roddenberry tried to make before TMP'' and therefore its ''a great homage.''
...
So let me get this straight: the defence for the 1701 redesign is that special effects have moved on from the 1960s. And simultaneously, your defence for the design of the Discovery is that its a rejected design from the 1970s. Uh-huh. Someone doth protests too much methinks.
Star Trek Picard is more about the cycle of fear, artificial lifeforms are treated as monsters by the actual villains, the Zhat Vash, and the series depicts them as being just as alive and sentient as any other form of life, and Soji only going the wipe out organic life route because with either being hunted down by the Zhat Vash, or oppressed by Federation laws like genetically engineered people, and only knowing mistrust thanks to Narek, felt she had no choice, and the artificial lifeforms that she was going to summon (who are just as sentient as any other lifeforms) have the same mistrusted of organic life, thus in the end it was about breaking that cycle and not fulfilling the Zhat Vashs prophecy, to be better and show that artificial lifeforms are not just monsters.clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:58 pmElon Musk has been very vocal about his fear that AI will end up destroying humanity. Which imo is a bit rich coming from a guy who owns a company at the forefront of cutting edge technology, but his opinions are actually very similar to what Stephen Hawking thought about AI: when the day comes that machines are can both think for themselves and have access to their own replication, they will not need us any more. That doesn't automatically mean they will wipe us out obviously, but I think you can agree that something that is smarter than us, doesn't need to eat, drink, sleep, breathe, take 9 months to reproduce and a further 18 years to be useful, is an enemy that we probably cannot defeat outside of a Hollywood film.
TL;DR, PIC is a series about a cycle of androids trying to wipe out humanity and STD isn't favourable to AI either.
You know with the existence of the Red Angel suit and Mama Burnham messing around with time one can pretty much confirm that it is a different timeline.Enterprising wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2020 10:02 pmIt's almost like this is a completely different timeline to actual Star Trek canon...