PIC: The End is the Beginning.

[Link8909]

The Federation overacting on a moral principal? How shocking!

Indeed, Star Trek being about the human condition and showing our fallibilities and how we should strive to be better? harumph to the the nth degree I say!

But seriously, Star Trek has always shown that both the government and even the heroes are fallible, and make decisions that are morally wrong but are done for a number of reasons, whether it's a high ranking officer like Admirals Pressman, Kennelly, or Leyton that went against Starfleet principles for what they felt was a greater good, or decisions that the Federation endorsed like abandoning Federation colonists in the Demilitarized Zone because of an unfair treaty with the Cardassians to maintain peace in the short term, or when they conspired with the Klingons to continue the conflict with each other rather than accepted peace in The Undiscovered Country, or our heroes like when Captain Sisko poisoned a planet to force Eddington to give himself in, or when he tricked the Romulans into joining the Dominion War that involved a number of crimes, and even just regular people like Lieutenant Commander Ben Finney who framed Captain Kirk for his apparent murder because of his long seeded grudge that slowly drove him mad, or Eddington who abandoned Starfleet because of that unfair treaty with the Cardassians, and these are just some of the examples I can think off the top of my head.

I personally feel Star Trek Picard showing government and human fallibility in its dividedness in whether to help the Romulans is good for the franchise, not only does it shows the complexity of politics and that it's not about people being good or evil, just that everyone has their own views and opinions, but like with all the examples I'm mentioned, it shows that the Federation and our heroes aren't perfect, not ever decision is always the right one.

I'd like to see a franchise that shows are own fallibilities and call them out, either by have characters like Picard who are paragons of Starfleet ideals and never waver from them no matter what, or like Captain Sisko who does sacrifice his moral principles for a greater good and admits he has to live with that gilt, rather than one that says that they are always right no matter what, that everything is perfect and fine, and it all just works.

And this doesn't even dismiss the good that the Star Trek future shows us either, as I said, Picard and many people in Star Trek Picard and Star Trek overall still hold to those moral principles, rather than saying that we are going to just evolve into the perfect human and there's no sense in trying to be better now, it's saying that humans in the future are just as fallible now, but we are already capable of the kindness, love, compassion, empathy, and open-mindedness of the people of the future that Star Trek has and is always showing us, and we should always try live up to.

[Link8909]

What did Mass Effect steal from Trek? Might be the odd detail reminiscent of Trek (hard to do any of that sort of sci-fi without there being something that might remind you of it), but I can't recall anything particularly standing out.

https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/com ... influence/

Personally I only saw these similarities when someone else had pointed them out, and even then I wasn't bothered by this as Star Trek Picard handles the idea of cybernetic Lovecraft aliens from across the galaxy differently than Mass Effect, and even then as I said this feels more like both were inspired by Lovecraft's work, and it's not like Mass Effect has the monopoly on this idea either, a lot of media is based of some other work, intentionally or otherwise, and one can enjoy both regardless.

By the logic of people arguing that a work is just a rip off, Star Trek Deep Space Nine must be bad because it's just a rip off of Babylon 5, Alien much be bad because it's just a rip off of It: The Terror From Beyond Space, or Star Trek and Star Wars are bad because they are just a rip off of Forbidden Planet and Flash Gordon respectively, and even then, when an argument stars and end with "it's just a rip off," what does this add to a discussion?

In Chuck's review of It: The Terror From Beyond Space, he had a great piece on comparing and contrasting both It and Aliens, Steve Shives has a great video that talks about both Deep Space Nine and Babylon 5, and I've recently found a great Star Trek channel by the name of Rowan J Coleman that has another great video about people calling things rip offs, I'll put those videos here if anyone want to watch them.

While I'm not familiar with Mass Effect beyond Chuck's reviews, Linkara's Streams, and cultural osmosis, I can already see the biggest difference in how Star Trek Picard uses the Alliance of synthetic life in it's overall theme of showing "fear being an incompetent teacher" as Picard said, and how fear can lead to a never ending cycle of destruction, and how this cycle can be broken by not giving into that fear, what I love about the ending of season one is that the day was saved not with a flashy space battle, or a technobabble solution, or sacrificing principles, but simply with Picard showing Soji that there were people that will defend their right to exist, appealing to (for lack of a better term) humanity, and showing her she was not the monster that the Zhat Vash made her and the androids out to be and treating her like a living being, for me personally this ending was the most Star Trek thing to resolving a conflict.

Plus I like the potential connection to the Alliance of synthetic life and the living machines that found the Voyager 6 probe and made it into V'ger, and the only thing I wish was that when the portal opened it was another V'ger, or V'ger like probe,


youtu.be/dNXdonu8u-A

youtu.be/8BkfFdl60vA

[hammerofglass]

So synthetic life forms are banned and there is no effect on the economy of the Federation? Were synthetics only being used to construct the relief convoy of ships?

I suppose the more PC term "synthetic" refers to human-like AI+robotic body, so maybe industrial robots are excluded. Though if that's the case, what happened to the exocomps.

We're told in a later episode that it basically means anything using "positronic matrix" technology, including medical treatments that don't even involve AI. This explicitly extends to letting children die of easily treatable diseases.

The Federation overacting on a moral principal? How shocking!

Overacting on a weird nitpicky moral principal that doesn't even make sense if you think about it in a way that completely tramples what in the real world are the actual moral principles of the humanist philosophy Star Trek purports to preach.

Actually yeah, that basically is The Federation's MO isn't it? Why are we supposed to be rooting for them?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Because it's a show about exploration and progress.

[Robovski]

Because it's a show about exploration and progress.

Is that something that happens in Picard? I was not given that impression from the trailer material but I have not watched the show.

[CrypticMirror]

Because it's a show about exploration and progress.

Is that something that happens in Picard? I was not given that impression from the trailer material but I have not watched the show.

Uh... sorta?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Because it's a show about exploration and progress.

Is that something that happens in Picard? I was not given that impression from the trailer material but I have not watched the show.

I guess it's kind of like DS9 where it's more about national or state matters. Picard being more on the former and DS9 more on the latter.

[CharlesPhipps]

Picard finds a new planet with a new species made on it and makes peace with them.

Pretty basic Trek.

[Hero_Of_Shadows]

I have to disagree with Chuck about Picard's use of a resignation to force the Admiralty into throwing resources into the rescue armada 2.0.

While I agree with Chuck that Picard's name should have a whole lot of weight I think Picard overestimated it and tried to push for too much.

Picard's plan was, and please correct me if I'm wrong since it's been a while since I saw the show, double down on the robots build even more robots to make sure that the fleet gets built in time.

Did Picard know why the robots rebelled on Mars ? No.

Does he have a technical solution except the exact same robots ? No.

Can he guarantee it won't happen again ? No.

Does he have a way to heal the wounds of those who have lost loved ones and make the usage of robots palatable to the general public ? No.

Even with Picard's influence the "let's try again lol" plan was a bridge too far.

I understand the themes the showrunners were going for but in-universe it just paints Picard who has always been an excellent diplomat (thus by necessity a good politician) as an out of touch old man who believes everyone shares his values and opinions.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I have to disagree with Chuck about Picard's use of a resignation to force the Admiralty into throwing resources into the rescue armada 2.0.

I understand the themes the showrunners were going for but in-universe it just paints Picard who has always been an excellent diplomat (thus by necessity a good politician) as an out of touch old man who believes everyone shares his values and opinions.

I don't think Chuck glorified the faceoff much. He just made light of Picard thinking that the institution would make a personal decision over a bureaucratic one, to obvious peril.

Picard's really good at throwing the sail to the wind but is ultimately rebelliously secular and defiant towards institution.