Could the Borg adapt to a disintegration field? Would an energy ball penetrate their shields? If the answer is yes to either of those, the Combine might be screwed. If the Borg ever got their hands on Xen portal technology, gg.
when For All Mankind hits the 2020s in Season 6, we’ll get the Bell Riots and the start of World War III
this would be nice but it would be complicated due to the fact that (RDM says) https://lemmy.ml/post/10457222 in the For All Mankind universe. maybe he’ll at least fill in some details from Phase II though :)
Star Trek is one of the things I still hang onto as optimistic about the future. We can make a better world for everyone and overcome racism, capitalism, transphobia, etc. We can build something better and reach for the stars. And that’s always been the message. The characters have advanced technology like ships and teleporters, but what’s really advanced is how they are as people. They’re curious, educated, accepting people who want to explore the universe for the sake of it.
I also hang onto the X-Men. That was also important to me growing up, seeing how the characters could come together to defend themselves against hatred. I grew up in a really conservative area so I’m always gonna be grateful to Star Trek and X-Men (and later all sorts of books) for keeping me sane as a kid
Star Trek and X-Men were a huge part of my childhood and teen years as well, so I 100% get where you’re coming from.
Only tangentially related, I really do wish Marvel would take a back to basics approach with the X-Men so I could get into them again. I know a lot of people love the Krokoa era, and I’m happy they have it, but for me it is too dense and too far removed from what I grew up with for me to be able to penetrate. I know they’ve got an upcoming sea change happening, so maybe then.
In my opinion STD is just badly written with the focus on timeline breaking technology and a Mary Sue.
There is nothing wrong with LGBT characters if they fit to the story (not just people with the superpower of being gay).
I read the Mary Sue link you provided but I can’t figure out what character you’re suggesting is “portrayed as inexplicably competent across all domains, unrealistically free of weaknesses, extremely attractive, innately virtuous, and generally lacking meaningful character flaws.” (from your link).
I agree about the timeline stuff and also that the LGBT representation was excellently done and not any character’s “superpower” or anything.
(Also the official initialism for Disco is “DSC” (or “DIS” on Memory Alpha) but never “STD”)
I’ve only just started discovery, and knowing how ST almost always has bad first seasons I’m giving it some slack. I’m not a big fan of the Klingon redesign but my main dislike is the less episodic nature of the show. That was my issue with the last seasons of ENT as well. I’ll keep watching it but I do really prefer the more episodic nature with occasional multiparters.
I meant especially Michael Burnhams abilities as a human. Her short and unbelievable backstory on vulcan, her super vulcan logic where she outsmarts experts in their fields, her exceptionally fighting skills and so on.
Maybe not all checkpoints could be marked here, but I think she was written in the wrong genre.
Maybe a superhero movie (with a better backstory) would be more appropriate.
Why even have gay humans? I thought the sexy point of sexy star trek sex was interspecies sex? Remember when Trip got pregnant? Riker boned the 3 fingered mitten hand doctor after he was captured? Troy and Crusher both got mind raped! Even data has sex! See, no need for this silly human on human stuff.
NBI for stating that you achieved the scoring conditions necessary for victory within the sporting match. EIH overall. Spending potentially productive time during an active war on frivolous sporting matches is illogical. The human “Ben” and non-Vulcans for overly celebrating a meager score is illogical. YABI for not accepting the tenets of IDIC, not attempting to absorb the POV of other species, and basing multiple papers on one anecdote instead of collecting more evidence or focusing on other behaviors. Despite the frivolous match, the logical thing would have been to encourage morale by congratulating them on their exerted effort, as this would reflect a reward for similar exerted efforts during an interstellar conflict that you mentioned.
NBI. A captain of mine once said that it is possible to commit no mistakes and yet still lose. Perhaps your opponent was celebrating having made no mistakes?
Assuming an alternative goal is indeed the logical response here. It is plausible that the opposing team recognised that they could not triumph against a Vulcan team and set themselves a more achievable goal, for example scoring within 80%.
If Kurtzman did anything with it, that trek is likely garbage and ignorable. If someone else wrote and directed without Kurtzman sticking his mystery box horseshit in it, I’ll give it a shot. Lower decks is great. Strange new worlds is sometimes fantastic, and sometimes very fucking stupid, which brings it in line with trek in general, so I like it.
You are being illogical. It is well known that the Federation as a whole, and humans specifically, practice a belief in equality, where they do not believe in inherent superiority, and it is illogical to try and force them to believe otherwise. It is a very… emotional reaction to try and prove them wrong, when it does not affect you in any way.
It would be far more logical to get along with them, rather than rest on the belief of Vulcan superiority, and also participate in merry-making. It is not illogical to celebrate a friendly game, irrespective of whether one has won or lost.
These memes are spoofing Reddit’s “Am I The Asshole”? subreddit. The original posts are usually personal anecdotes about someone having to cancel plans at the last minute or stealing a coworker’s lunch. They’ve been replaced here with first person perspectives from various Vulcan episodes, with Illogical being swapped in for Asshole. The acronyms everyone’s using are letter swapped versions of popular responses on that Reddit. (NTA, cars break down. YTA, don’t steal your coworker’s lunch. Etc.)
While the human's behavior following the loss of the game is illogical, as humans are want to do, your dismissal of their responses to your clarifying statement regarding their loss as 'petty' is inherently illogical as well. Doing so instead of, as logic would dictate, rigorously testing their response for potential validity, if only in a human context, has resulted in your hypothesis being unanswerable with available information. Please keep in mind that while the actions of humans often appear illogical, this commonly is due to a lack of context surrounding those actions or understanding that, being highly emotive beings, the logic of their actions may be derived from a not immediately accessible source given a Vulcan perspective in observing the events. Further inquiry in this matter is generally welcomed by persons engaging in apparently illogical behavior, and your failing to clarify these conditions at the time of the event necessitated the query passing to this board, which could have been a post in /c/humansubspacemicroblog providing insight into this phenomenon instead of us attempting to ascertain fact with incomplete data.
YABI. Why even ask for the second match? Was your initial study incomplete, or, perhaps, flawed? If so, why did you not include that detail in this post? If not, your rendezvous with this old classmate seems like nothing more than an exercise in redundancy at best. I posit that you have fallen victim to the emotion humans refer to as pride. One of their most basic negative emotions, if I correctly recall my ancient human history course.
It is my recommendation that you take a leave of absence from Starfleet. You have clearly spent too much time among humans. A decade or so of meditation in a monastery should help you to reclaim your logic.
While replication of research is important, one must be sure to use a diverse selection of subjects to compensate for any discrepancies caused by subject idiosyncrasies.
One may argue that a follow-up study may be warranted for any specific individual subject, yet without that additional, supplementary testing on diverse subjects, the follow-up study might present the appearance of some sort of emotional attachment.
NBI. Cultural exchange is not only one of the fundamental principles upon which the United Federation of Planets was built, but also among the purest expressions of IDIC.
If said cultural exchange were to reveal the innate superiority of the Vulcan species, one could hardly be held responsible.
Indeed, it would be an invaluable contribution to existing bodies of evidence demonstrating just that.
The thing I love about this, the thing I always find funny whenever this comes up, is that these midwits are just too dumb to make the obvious argument. The argument that is “in their face” and “being shoved down their throats.”
There is a rational, coherent argument to make their point. It’s one I disagree with. It’s one that, in my opinion, can only be made in bad faith with no purpose other than to be a concern troll, but it’s there.
They always bring up Adira, Gray, Jett, Stamets, Culber, and anything else that’s gone up their ass but never any of the actual social commentary because they’re so thick it went over their heads and they didn’t even notice it. You can see it in this thread. They mention the characters and people respond with “but they’re just existing, how does that bother you?” They just bring up the characters again to a response of “yeah, we heard you the first time, what are they doing that bothers you other than existing?” And it just goes in a circle.
There was never an episode of ToS where Uhura talked about how hard it was to be a black woman as a bridge officer, because it wasn’t. That’s the whole point. In the future Star Trek wants us to imagine, a black female officer is completely unremarkable. Whenever they wanted to engage in social commentary about race relations in the 60s they had to invent an allegorical race, time travel, or use some other device to make their point.
The same thing is happening in the newer series. All those characters are just existing. Their sexuality and gender identity is completely unremarkable in the future Star Trek shows us. If those dipshits had two brain cells to rub together they would see the new series are full of allegories about not just tolerance, or even acceptance, but appreciation for beings with non-conforming expressions of self. If any of that did manage to trickle through their thick skulls they probably just twisted it into “yeah, people shouldn’t make fun of me for having a relationship with a waifu pillow.”
If they weren’t so stupid they could easily give a half dozen examples and say “it’s too much,” “I got it the first time,” “focus on something else for a change,” or whatever other bullshit justification they came up with to oppose these themes. It would be a bad faith argument that I would disagree with but at least they could pretend they’re not bigots, instead of their current position which seems to be “I’ve got no problem with these people, I just don’t want to see them.”
And, on the flip side, there’s also their total blindness to many examples of old Trek being decidedly unsubtle. They just will not address those, because to do so would completely undermine their point—and they’re not interested in the truth, really. They just want their anger.
I don’t know how someone can be a Star Trek fan and not get it. It’s an attitude diametrically opposed to the core spirit of the franchise. How do these people enjoy a show about exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and new civilizations, but they can’t stand the presence of different humans?
TBH, I initially had a strange reaction to Discovery. It seemed to me like it was virtue-signalling and pandering to an audience to increase viewership or profit. Similar to how you sometimes see fake stock-photos of a business where they contains exactly one person from every ethnicity. I think the word I’m thinking of is “tokenism.” I still watched it for a couple seasons, and it was decent. I didn’t really realize at the time how prevalent and dangerous bigotry still was in the U.S… Now I think it’s probably good some shows and movies over-represent minorities.
It seemed to me like it was virtue-signalling and pandering to an audience to increase viewership or profit.
Until people stop seeing minorities as different, then these kind of labels are going to get applied just because they exist. If a cast of non-minorities doesn’t raise an eyebrow, then a cast of minorities shouldn’t either. Base such labels on the way the characters are written, not because they exist. Stopping bigotry requires not caring about sex, gender, or sexual orientation.
I didn’t really realize at the time how prevalent and dangerous bigotry still was in the U.S
Bigotry is a worldwide issue, not just in the US. The problem is often implicit discrimination, where someone is subconsciously influenced by bigotry and isn’t aware they’re doing it. It never gets resolved because people get defensive when it’s pointed out to them. Stopping it requires prioritizing doing the right thing over being right.
In the future Star Trek wants us to imagine a black female officer is completely unremarkable.
Interestingly, in the unaired TOS pilot Pike did in fact remark on a female officer (albeit Una rather than Uhura), saying he “can’t get used to having a woman on the bridge”.
Of course, being unaired, the episode’s canonicity was pretty questionable. Until SNW used the exact clip of him saying that as archive footage.
(n.b. None of this is intended to negate the point you’re making. It’s just a strange little thing that could have been brushed aside as an artifact of the show not quite having figured out what it was yet, had not modern Trek gone and affirmed it.)
Until SNW used the exact clip of him saying that as archive footage.
That never happened. Discovery was the only show that used a scene from The Cage but it wasn’t that clip. If Memory Serves did a “last time on Star Trek Discovery” segment that used clips from that episode. It gave backstory on Talos and Pike’s relationship with Vina. The clip of Pike making a sexist comment was not used, and has never been used in any other show to date.
The one argument that Star Trek has gone woke I agree with is that the characters are all tripping over themselves to make make Tilly captain despite her obvious incompetence for that position. Contrast that with Barkley who everyone recognized needed self improvement to progress.
Otherwise I totally agree. Star Trek has always been progressive when it comes to race, religion, etc.
I remember seeing people complaining about “woke adaptation” with The Sandman, and Neil Gaiman always reply on Twitter he was ok with that, is like people can’t believe there is authors or works who is being left-right stories, people acted like he was controlled, mind-washing or something.
The Sandman is such a hilarious example of something to get upset about being too woke, too. “This adaptation of a comic written that featured gender fluid characters in 1989 has been corrupted by the woke mob!”
risa
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.