It's part of my series of pages in the Star Wars vs. Star Trek technology discussions, but I figured I'd share it since I've seen the idea all over the net.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
And, uh, seems good, though I would not touch that SW/ST thing with a hundred foot pole attached to a remote control device.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Suggestion: Tone down the Warsie antagonism. Like your last link shows, it's not necessary to PROVE that they are an inferior lifeform.
Idle musing: Perhaps the nature of holodeck safeties could be further examined. Apparently, a good many holoprograms involve KE and edged weapons, and it seems those can be played on a safe mode. How is this accomplished without sacrificing realism?
We know of the three types of holodeck objects: the pseudo-physical and nonpermanent (hologangsters), the physical and permanent (Moriarty's paper) and the aphysical (immune-to-fists EMH). Let's call them "holomatter", "matter" and "opticals" for brevity.
We don't know what the default setting for things on the 'deck is. Safest would be if everything was optical illusions unless otherwise required. Then a swordfight would involve matter or holomatter grips for the swords, but the blades would be mere opticals - unless they touched the user's body, in which case they would become a combination of opticals and holomatter that only looks hard and sharp but creates an impact more fitting of a soft and dull object. The same would apply to holobullets.
In this case, the command "safeties off" would have to mean a deliberate "please hurt me". Turning the safeties "off" would actually involve MORE work for the computer and its replicators, not less: opticals can't hurt, so the computer would have to use the more demanding holomatter or matter.
But what if the default setting is matter? A replicated sword would create the clang, the sparks and the rusty smell more easily than a holo-faked one. On the other hand, the computer would have to actively dematerialize the sword if it was about to hit the user, which would be hard work. "Safeties off" could reduce this workload and thus enhance other aspects of the simulation. It wouldn't need to be a deliberate "please hurt me" in this case. And the tommy-gun in "FC" could have been real and kinetically lethal.
OTOH, the heroes always speak of "holo-this" and "holo-that", possibly suggesting that holomatter is the norm. This would represent the middle ground in the safety issue, too: flipping the swords or bullets between safe and unsafe modes would not involve extra work, but maintaining them in either mode would still be more laborious than using mere opticals or matter.
One could also look further into this "safety" concept. Clearly, the holodeck doesn't provide "active safety", because people often injure themselves in crazy stunts without ANY mention of the safeties being off. Does this mean you could take a real knife to the holodeck and murder somebody with it, with the safeties on? Well, just watch "A Man Alone". (Of course, those were Ferengi safeties...) And failing that, you could always strangle your victim with bare hands. The computer could dematerialize your knife, but not your hands, not in the safe mode!
So you don't need the "safeties off" command for a "please hurt me" mode. You can play SM games or deadly sports in there just fine with the safeties on. Which sort of supports the idea that the 'deck produces inherently unsafe objects, for reasons of economy, and the safeties exist merely to compensate for that, not to provide actual "positive safety".
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Comment: Comprehensive, Categorical, Cool.
Thanks!
quote: Suggestion: Tone down the Warsie antagonism. Like your last link shows, it's not necessary to PROVE that they are an inferior lifeform.
Actually, any antagonism I show is several billion levels of tame compared to what I usually encounter in debates. As one of the few vocal pro-Trek debaters, and pretty much the only one a few places, I am their favorite whipping boy. However, in the midst of all the shenanigans, one of them will occasionally say something useful, showing where I need to modify or idiot-proof my argument.
I was almost to the point, not too long ago, where I was going to remove terms like "Warsie" and "Rabid Warsie" from my site. Then, I saw this, and just couldn't bear to be so nice:
quote:We know of the three types of holodeck objects: the pseudo-physical and nonpermanent (hologangsters), the physical and permanent (Moriarty's paper) and the aphysical (immune-to-fists EMH). Let's call them "holomatter", "matter" and "opticals" for brevity.
Assuming the holo-gangsters are equal to the not-immune-to-fists EMH, then "holo-matter" is simply opticals with a force-field backing it up. This would suggest an active safety protocol watching the participants, and preventing (at least) deadly behaviors, if not some of the more injuring ones.
Also, while holo-matter is, from what I understand, a concept in the Encyclopedia, I've ended up making my site canon-only for both universes, since (for example) Lucas says the SW books and such occur outside his universe, and the StarTrek.Com website suggests a canon policy that leaves the Tech Manuals and Encyclopedia on vague, ill-defined footing. For more information:
i.e. the drones in question may have reacted to the initial impression that it was a "real" gun and adapted incorrectly. By the time they figured out the problem they were toast. The next drones would have been ready. You'll notice that Picard didn't just hang out there waiting for them.
Borg are relentless but they aren't "smart" or clever really. They stand by this whole power in numbers thing. Good website however.
-------------------- Twee bieren tevreden, zullen mijn vriend betalen.
Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Like G2000 said, the two Borg had already poked a holo-character with their laser pointers, and found him less than human. So they *could* have guessed the gun was holographic in nature, too.
Not that the Borg would have been any more familiar with a real submachine gun. It's not as if they had assimilated anybody with firsthand knowledge of such ancient and outdated things as tommy-guns and Dixon Hill stories. Oh, wait...
Anyhow, I doubt the nature of the weapon matters much. The Borg ALWAYS succumb to the first shots, even if the weapon used is a thoroughly familiar hand phaser. (Except when the drone is not expendable - Seven of Nine was immune to phasers from the very first shot!) Killing two drones is not a heroic feat or anything. Picard could probably have ordered a Klingon simulation, confiscated a disruptor, and killed the drones with that. Any weapon would do, as long as it was different from what the Borg were expecting.
posted
Except you can't replicate discruptors or phasers. You'd have to charge them. Usually. Most of the time.
Anyway, good analysis, but I always thought what Timo had thought, mainly because it seems simpler. The Borg obviously don't maintain an active adaption to every weapon they've encountered, for whatever reason. So drones get sent over, a couple die, and then the 7 billion behind them adapt. No big loss, really.
If more Borg had turned up, I think they would have adpated somehow. If you want to add in anything extra, you could assume that the Borg realised they were on a holodeck, and were expecting some form of holographic attack, rather than real bullets. But the Borg don't do that. They don't think ahead. Otherwise they'd think "Hmm, I'm beaming over to a Starfleet ship. I'd better activate my anti-phaser forcefield". They die, and the ones behind them get better.
Regarding Worf's knife attack, again, I tend to think that resistence to physical attacks would be an "adaption" of sorts. Normally, they aren't expecting it, so they are vunerable (although as you pointed out, they put up a fair showing in "BoBW", if Riker can be counted as a decent threat). If you started to chop them up, then they'd activate some sort of anti-getting chopped up subroutine, and start moving like Jackie Chan. Possibly. It would be interesting to see.
That poll was amusing, BTW. But then I've seen Transformers fan argue long into the night that the Decepticons weren't evil either, so it's to be expected.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Crouching Borg, hidden Assimilator?
There's cross-over material.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: If you started to chop them up, then they'd activate some sort of anti-getting chopped up subroutine, and start moving like Jackie Chan. Possibly. It would be interesting to see.
Well that drone in "Unimatrix Zero" was no Jackie Chan but he took down that Klingon armed with the batleth in one move. Of course this was after his Borg buddies got diced.
Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
Remember "A fistful of Datas"? When Gunslinger Data fired at Worf, who managed to improvise a personal shield with his combadge, didn't we clearly see bullets glancing off that shield? Can't we assume from that episode, that with a holodeck's safeties off, bullets become replicated, rather than smoke and mirror?
*gets shot with a hologram gun*
Absolutely love the site though, Guardian. It's about time someone came up with an answer to Stardestroyer.net.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Like G2000 said, the two Borg had already poked a holo-character with their laser pointers, and found him less than human. So they *could* have guessed the gun was holographic in nature, too.
Actually Timo I need to beg to differ... They may have assumed that the gun was a holographic projection and adapted but then they were wrong because it was replicated and thus a Real Weapon. But they could have assumed that it was a real gun and adapted but then they were wrong because it was holographic and with the safeties off the computer would have created a "force field" [read a small shield] shaped like a built it when it came in contact with real matter. If the borg did not adapt to the weapon with a full envelope personal shield [in short their shield didn't cover their back side, it covers the front side only] then the holo-emitters would have been able to create the bullet shape shield on the other side of the borg's shield [because it would not have activated until something hit it, and because the "holo-bullet" was not real it did not activate the borg's shield]. Thus two dead drones.
Having said all that I'd like to add that if phasers can be replicated [I don't know if they can or not, it sounds to me that they can't because those phaser crystals are grown] then a using a phaser from a holodeck will have the same exact effects that using the tommy gun did. Two dead drones.
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
posted
Just some points about the comparison page: "The Federation seems to have no tanks or armored personnel carriers."
Combat hoppers were mentioned in DS9. Used as troop carriers, they were apparently armored to a certain extent, judging by what that Starfleet NCO-lookalike said to Jake. There's no reason why they can't be armed to serve in a more direct combat role.
"Other special advantages"
Ecological weapons: The technology to destroy all life on a M-class planet by blazing away the atmosphere comes to mind. The Klingons did it in "The Chase" without batting an eye. Saves one from having to build an entire Death Star, blow up a planet, and litter a solar system.
Interphasic techology: Is there anything it can't do?
Artificial intellegence: AI seems to be more advanced in Star Trek. You have sentient androids and holograms, versus your idiotic basically-just-slaves droids.
Terraforming: As far as I know, SW never demonstrated, canonically, the ability to terraform planet, and certainly not on the scale of Genesis.
Advanced genetic engineering: Our dear Dr. Bashir and his book club friends, Mr. Barkley's mutagenic virus, DNA alternations, to name a few.
Nanotechnology: A bloody cadet (even though it's Wesley) could engineer a nanobot capable of nearly crippling a ship.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by David Templar: Just some points about the comparison page: "The Federation seems to have no tanks or armored personnel carriers."
Combat hoppers were mentioned in DS9.
Bah, dammit. One problem I have is that later-DS9 and Voyager were not shown in my area, so I'm left with whatever I can download and see for myself, or cull from reliable sources. (For instance, that whole bit on the TR-116 is from online sources . . . never saw the ep.)
quote:Used as troop carriers, they were apparently armored to a certain extent, judging by what that Starfleet NCO-lookalike said to Jake. There's no reason why they can't be armed to serve in a more direct combat role.
Yeah, I'm looking online now . . . hoppers were used to deploy ground troops. Are they like fat shuttlecraft, or dedicated land/atmospheric, or do we know?
quote:"Other special advantages"
Ecological weapons: The technology to destroy all life on a M-class planet by blazing away the atmosphere comes to mind. The Klingons did it in "The Chase" without batting an eye. Saves one from having to build an entire Death Star, blow up a planet, and litter a solar system.
Very true, but I wouldn't imagine that Starfleet would employ that technology, or at least not against a populated world. It might make for an effective way to prevent a power from establishing a beachhead on some uncolonized Class-M world, though.
For wiping out a civilization, Starfleet already has General Order 24, as threatened by Kirk in "A Taste of Armageddon"[TOS]. For better or worse, I doubt we'll ever see that actually employed.
quote:Interphasic techology: Is there anything it can't do?
Quite true, but the tactical applications we've seen are somewhat limited. There's the phase cloak, and perhaps transphasic torpedoes, but I'm trying to stay pretty strict insofar as giving Starfleet only that technology which it is seen to employ fairly commonly. Since phase-cloaks weren't used during the Dominion War, and since evidently Starfleet will employ some sort of Temporal Prime Directive in reference to transphasic torpedoes and the Batmobile armor from "Endgame" (I assume as much, since the E-E won't have the armor in Nemesis), I'm leaving it out.
quote:Artificial intellegence: AI seems to be more advanced in Star Trek. You have sentient androids and holograms, versus your idiotic basically-just-slaves droids.
R2-D2 and C-3PO are the exceptions that prove the rule. They are presented as quite sentient, and R2 has excellent data storage (the plans for a 100+ kilometer starship cannot be small). Their main problems are limited normal mobility, and the fact that no "Measure of a Man"-type judgement about their sentience ever occurred. Of course, this is the same universe where cloned humanoids are genetically-altered to be servile, and are slaves designed to fight and die on alien worlds, even before the rise of the even-more-evil evil Empire.
*
On the matter of terraforming and nanotechnology, I'd say you're right . . . but I have chosen to make some allowances, and not attack too much based on little things that we don't get to see, but can reasonably assume to be there. For example, 20th Century Earth has made very nice headway into the nanotech front . . . I must assume that a culture which has been in space for a thousand years (if even going very slowly) and which has a million systems probably has the resources to have at least dabbled in nanotech as much as we have. As for terraforming, it is possible that they lack it entirely, depending on how readily-available Class-M worlds are . . . necessity being the mother of invention and all that.
And that does lead me to wonder just what the Class-M planet population density is in the Federation. As of TOS, Kirk reported that they were on a thousand planets and spreading out, and Picard reports 150 member worlds spread across an 8,000 light-year Federation in First Contact. There should be about 200,000,000 stars within a 4,000 light-year radius of Earth. One would think that unless Class-M planets are damn rare, there would be so many available that multi-decade terraforming (as seen in "Home Soil"[TNG]), geo-terraforming starships (as mentioned on a computer screen in "Field of Fire"[DS9]), and Genesis Device attempts would be unnecessary, and therefore somewhat unlikely.
At any rate, there are something like 500 hours of canon Trek, and by the time Lucas gets done, there will still be only about 12 or 13 hours of canon Wars. I figure giving them the benefit of the doubt on some things is only fair.
Thanks!
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
M-class planet density depends on the number of main sequence stars in the same spectral class as our Sun. Earth-like worlds can only exist (as far as we know) around stars that exhibit a very narrow band of characteristics - ruling out all types except F8, G0 through G10, and K1. Together, these account for approximately 0.05% of the total galactic composition, so decade-spanning terraforming projects would likely remain a necessity... most stars don't even have any orbiting companions.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
On another note.....assuming one can compare the relative merits of ST and SW by pitting ships and characters from each fictional universe against each other in some form of mortal combat.
A thought occurs: Why hasn't anyone attempted to compare Shakespeare and Dickens by dropping Romeo and Oliver Twist into "Mortal Kombat"? Or for that matter, by having Sherlock Holmes and Miss Marple duke it out for the title of "Bad Motherfucker"?
I for one would find that much more entertaining than the normal fare in your average high school English class. Your mileage may vary.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
