posted
I was only kidding! Although his beinf involved at all id a bit unsetteling....
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Oh, was Moore involved in Voyager?
His resume basically goes like this: He started out on TNG around season 3, stayed with it through Generations, and then switched to DS9 until the end of its run. He says DS9 was the best of the Trek series, largely because Rick Berman was focussed on Voyager and stayed out of their hair. After DS9 they offered him a spot on Voyager, but he says they were hostile to his ideas for fixing it, so he didn't stay long.
posted
No, but back to the Network thing. I just can't imagine a vehicle as technically advanced as Galactica is being so backwards. I know that the Space Shuttle's computers are networked. I don't know enough about the Apollo capsule, to know whether it had multiple computers or whatever, but so my point is that being in space is inherently a more complicated place to be than, say, water. The WWII battleships may not have had Networked computers, but you weren't asking a WWII battleships to do the sorts of things a Battlestar would be required to.
Have you any idea how complicated prioritizing, ranging and firing their guns at thousands of targets swarming all around them at what must certainly be thousands of kilometers per centon would be? How could they possibly compete with the presumably massively networked Cylon counterparts? There's no way to do that effectively no matter how many people you've got reading off digits from octagonal sheets of paper. What about human error? With the amount of redundant data entry that would have to be happening, I would think that might constitute a threat to rival the Cylons. How could their CIC even work without at least some networked systems? How could Tigh see how much bullets [sic] they had in their magazines? Would someone go look at the gage, come back, ring up someone upstairs, then that person types that number into the Magazine X computer (since each Magazine would need one, right?) when Tigh isn't using it? That doesn't fly for me.
I'm sorry I'm having so much difficulty with this, and I realize I'm belaboring the point. There is such a thing as dramatic license and all. I just think maybe for the sake of simplifying things they've sacrificed credulity to make this one point overly simple. So much of the rest of the show I'm willing to swallow, but this one sticks. Are the producers trying to make the point that computers talking to one another is a bad thing? No wonder the internet buzz was so negative. They could've just said that the only networks on Galactica are old and hard-wired and are using some really byzantine (but effective) encryption.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Mabye the "Networking" Adama refers to allows for such good ideas as computer override of Vipers and other shuttlecraft, remote directional control of misssiles and remote computer taps into planetary defense systems and the other ships in the fleet. That kind of remote "network" would be (and was!) hugely comprimised by Cylon technology.
The real question is, if that's what Adama ws referring to, why didint the fleet learn this lesson: if the (obsolete) Galactica was built to avoid that kind of remote computer violations?
Silly writers.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Charles Capps
We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.
Member # 9
posted
Perhaps networking refers to connecting multiple unrelated systems together? Thus an attack on, say, the targeting computers won't impact anything else. There are very few things that humans can't do that computers can, though we're always slower.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It's probably the difference between LANs and WANs. Even today, LANs are becoming so commonplace we hardly think about them any more. But WANs require a bit more protocol and setup and maintanance, and all that.
It's likely the bridge computers are all hooked up through a LAN that isn't connected to the rest of the ship, or anything outside. And so on.
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The more important line, is that Apollo couldn't use the automatic landing system, because there isn't one. By choice. The Cylons didn't use any new weapons or tactics, they just used a computer virus. The Galactica had the virus, but it hadn't infected anything that mattered.
-------------------- joH'a' 'oH wIj DevwI' jIH DIchDaq Hutlh pagh (some days it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps in the morning) The Woozle!
Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
In general, objections the plausibity of Galactica's lack of networking seem to be based on two assumptions: it needs networking because it's a spaceship, or because it's a warship.
quote:Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane: ...so my point is that being in space is inherently a more complicated place to be than, say, water.
Hey, it's not like it's rocket science or anything. Oh, wait... =)
But seriously, maneuvering in three dimensions isn't that much more complicated than maneuvering in two. Nothing Sir Isaac Newton couldn't handle. Orbital mechanics are a little trickier at first, because they aren't intuitive--you basically accelerate to slow down and brake to speed up--but once you get a handle on it it's not that hard. I can do it on paper without any computer, networked or otherwise. Remember, Apollo 13 was able to make burns with her guidance 'puter down.
In short, a spaceship doesn't need networked computers just because it's a spaceship.
quote: The WWII battleships may not have had Networked computers, but you weren't asking a WWII battleships to do the sorts of things a Battlestar would be required to. [SNIP]
Aren't we? I don't know how complicated "prioritizing, ranging and firing their guns at thousands of targets swarming all around them" would be, but I'll bet AA gun crews on WWII warships did. After all, Galactica wasn't trying to hit each Cylon with a single shell so much as throw up a wall of metal.
CIC doesn't need to know the exact number of bullets each turret has; a good officer would know roughly how long the magazines will last, and if a gun is about to fall silent, it's crew tells DCC (or whatever the equivalent), and the skipper gets an update from the DCO.
Generally speaking, two crewmen and a telephone can handle any specific piece of networking necessary, just as they have done on real warships until very recently. It takes a lot of warm bodies to manage the dataflow for a carrier, but it can be done. It has been done, successfully, under combat conditions.
In short, a warship doesn't need networked computers just because it's a warship.
I also don't agree that the creeping return of computer networking in the fleet constitutes "silly writing," either. The show addressed that, in a number of scenes. It's been 40 years. People are complacent. They've forgotten the danger and see only the convenience. People who still worry about it are old fogeys that no-one takes seriously, like those people in the 1980s who were so concerned about the Japanese "buying up everything." It's very human.
In researching for the script Moore spend an extended tour aboard the USS Constellation, and it shows. He's said in interviews that he wanted to make the Galactica as much as possible like an aircraft carrier from the 1950s or 60s, and I think he's succeeded. I've never seen any scifi TV show come close to this level of verisimilitude in depicting life aboard a warship. Even in good SF TV like Babylon 5 there are many moments that make me wince.
On the other hand, I didn't watch B5 because I wanted to see a realistic depiction of life aboard an O'Niell cylinder. =) While the characters also feel "real" as military people, I don't like them very much. That, and the unnecessary and juvenile sexuality, are my biggest disappointments about the show. If a series does follow, that's what they need to work on--making us care about the people and what happens to them.
posted
I would just like to state briefly that Marian is the first "newbie" I've taken a liking to right off the bat since probably Captain Mike. Hope you stick around, Marian!
quote:Originally posted by MarianLH: But seriously, maneuvering in three dimensions isn't that much more complicated than maneuvering in two. In short, a spaceship doesn't need networked computers just because it's a spaceship.
I also don't agree that the creeping return of computer networking in the fleet constitutes "silly writing," either. The show addressed that, in a number of scenes. It's been 40 years. People are complacent. They've forgotten the danger and see only the convenience..
In researching for the script Moore spend an extended tour aboard the USS Constellation, and it shows. Marian
Actually, The galactica would need everything not only networked, but also all of it's mass accounted for and all it's systems working in perfect synnchronicity because, it goes FTL. I shudder to think of all the things that would have to be interconnected for an FTL jump or heck, even retracting the landing bays before making the jump. I said the writing was "silly" simply because it's an EXACT copy (down to protocall and terminologies!) of a US aircraft carrier in space and not something that humans far in advance of ourselves, with hundreds of years experience in space and zero connection to present day earth would have made. It's one thing to take inspiration from real life military sources and another to completely copy them and call it something "colonial". Even if the 12 colonies had originated from Earth of today (with all the military ideas and jargon in place) in hundreds of years, none of that would remain.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I shudder to think of all the things that would have to be interconnected for an FTL jump or heck, even retracting the landing bays before making the jump.
Why? I mean, we don't know anything about the requirements for an FTL jump except that the hanger deck probably needs to be secure, do we? And even if there are various things that need to be done, they can all just run to a big board of green lights on the bridge. If it's done, the green light comes on. If all lights are on, you can jump.
I said the writing was "silly" simply because it's an EXACT copy (down to protocall and terminologies!) of a US aircraft carrier in space and not something that humans far in advance of ourselves, with hundreds of years experience in space and zero connection to present day earth would have made.
The protocol and terminologies could have been translated for our benefit, like the names and language, to be something we could easily understand. As for what we might build centuries from now... well, why not? Can you point to something on Galactica that could be done better in some objective sense, without requiring networked computers?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
We know that FTL jumps apparently require some calculations. Tigh and Gaeta, I believe, did the required calculations for the jump to the Ragnor munitions stations. Gaeta was tasked with calculating the jump from Ragnor to just beyond the red-line. We also know that there are FTL engines that need to spin up in preparation for the jump. Depending on how the jump engines operate, the process could be as simple as programming the engine controller to run the engine for the set amount of time to travel the distance they wish to traverse. I do doubt, however, that the process is that simple.
As for the networks, I think I like Peregrinus's analogy of LANs and WANs. Obviously there are networks on the Galactica. There's a network of sensors that connected to the damage control panel on the command center that Tyrol, Tigh, and someone else were pondering. There's a network of communications devices that allow the phone and intercom systems to work. And, to echo Charles, the virus was in the communication system of the Galactica, but it was prevented from spreading to the power system because the two were not networked together.
Looking at it like this kind of reminds of the DS9 episode where Eddington sabotaged the computer system of the Defiant. The systems basically worked, but there was a lot of verbal communications going on to get the ship to function properly.
And, while I like that explanation, it doesn't explain why Adama was so damned adamant about not having freakin' maps networked together on the Galactica. I guess all we can say at this point is that Moore was very much less-than-clear on this issue, and that the series would explain the issue more (should there be one).
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
On a side note, there's a virtual tour of the command information center now online at SciFi's Battlestar Galactica site. I have to say that that is a pretty impressive set; I don't think I ever got a real sense of the details and dimensions of the room from the miniseries.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I know, I know. "Let it go bX." I can tell you're all silently wishing I would (while simultaneously feeling a little sorry for me). Know that this isn't some blatant attack and a reason to hate the show. This is not a "no-networks-therefore-show-is-crap" argument. Rest assured I am making this stand for the benefit of the writers of a potential future on-going series, who have been known from time to time trawl the boards (especially those renowned for exceptional techno dorkdom) looking to get feedback about how to do things. I'm just saying that while the idea of not having any networks is very interesting, if they are going for believability, then a more moderate WAN, limited wired-LAN, encrypted traffic approach is the better way to go. Saying "No Networks" is going to get them into big-hairy fan-boy trouble. I actually do quite like the series, this is my primary bone of technical contention. I also have solutions for their dramatic issues, but I suspect tha the series creators are A) not the least bit interested in what I have to say B) certainly aren't looking for that here C) already quite aware of the problem and working on a solution. D) intimidated by Edward James Olmos's star power and the machinations of the studio system pinching every penny such that the very marrow of their bones quivers for even a dollop of artistic freedom. With that in mind...
quote:Originally posted by MarianLH: But seriously, maneuvering in three dimensions isn't that much more complicated than maneuvering in two. Nothing Sir Isaac Newton couldn't handle. Orbital mechanics are a little trickier at first, because they aren't intuitive--you basically accelerate to slow down and brake to speed up--but once you get a handle on it it's not that hard. I can do it on paper without any computer, networked or otherwise. Remember, Apollo 13 was able to make burns with her guidance 'puter down.
Ok, I might even be able to do that given a semi-nice calculator and some graph paper. But, let's say you're flying Galactica. You're maneuvering out of a gas-giant (or gas-coud or whatever Ragnor was supposed to be.) with some shearing force coming from atmospheric and magnetic impulses (we'll make it simple and sum those forces with a net vector S). Ok, now you have X number of fighters accelerating out of your port tubes which are canted at angle V from the center of gravity (which will, of course, be shifting from time to time from these exits and entries), and Y number from the starboard tubes canted at an angle W. Some of these fighters are Mk IIs and some are Mk VIIs which each exert different thrust. Now you have T number landing in the port and U in the starboard. Ok, now one of the civie ships is coming up a little fast. Speed up. And another one is along side. Steer to port. Got that? How you doin? Keepin' up? Ok, and now there are seventeen nuclear warheads bearing down on your position, please try to avoid getting hit without exposing the civilian ships. Ok, and so now you have A-N turrets exerting P torque along Q axes, which variables will likely be changing nearly constantly. How's it coming. All of this assuming that the maneuvering system is functioning properly and that there is no damage or malfunctions from, say, said inbound nuclear warheads for example. Just to keep things interesting please bear in mind that in a few minutes we're going to make an FTL jump which requires minutely accurate positioning and so therefore you must constantly know our precise location and orientation. Also we'd better minimize our profile, escape the gravity well, and btw, your entire extended family has been reduced to irradiated dust along with everyone and everything you ever loved on the crumbling cinder that was your homeplanet about ten hours ago.
I'm saying it's a daunting task, and there's a lot to try to keep track of, and if it's changing as fast as the scenario above, even with a REALLY nice well structured program, you are going to have to be entering an awful lot of data REALLY fast in order to make it work.
Also I like Marian. But then I liked kmart and look where that got me.
Also, yes, I do realize that it's, like, 8:30 on a Friday night and that my entry above only serves to further the theory that therefore I have no life.
-------------------- "Nah. The 9th chevron is for changing the ringtone from "grindy-grindy chonk-chonk" to the theme tune to dallas." -Reverend42
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: I would just like to state briefly that Marian is the first "newbie" I've taken a liking to right off the bat since probably Captain Mike. Hope you stick around, Marian!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
