The Trek BBS

The Trek BBS (http://www.trekbbs.com/index.php)
-   The Next Generation (http://www.trekbbs.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question (http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=215458)

JoeZhang June 2 2013 04:22 PM

Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
You are a Starfleet Captain... a captain with needs... you create a program on the holodeck where Worf is tea-bagging commander Riker - moral or not?

If nobody else sees it - what's the problem? How is it really different from simply thinking about the same activities?

T'Girl June 2 2013 07:06 PM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Quote:

JoeZhang wrote: (Post 8191066)
what's the problem?

Just keep repeating that over and over again, as Worf drags you towards the air lock.

:)

R. Star June 2 2013 08:26 PM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Guess that's not much different that Barclay's Goddess of Empathy program... that also character assassinates Riker.

Still, I'm not sure I'd call it "moral" but at the same time... hey, whatever floats your boat. It's your holodeck time. But yeah, T'Girl's right... if Worf sees it you're screwed. However you want to take that. ;)

JirinPanthosa June 2 2013 08:39 PM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
A person's fantasies are their own business.

Dream June 2 2013 11:38 PM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Quote:

R. Star wrote: (Post 8191987)
Guess that's not much different that Barclay's Goddess of Empathy program... that also character assassinates Riker.

Still, I'm not sure I'd call it "moral" but at the same time... hey, whatever floats your boat. It's your holodeck time. But yeah, T'Girl's right... if Worf sees it you're screwed. However you want to take that. ;)

Yeah, Barclay just has to be prepared for Riker and Wolf to make his life a living hell the moment they find out.:lol:

George Steinbrenner June 3 2013 03:52 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
People should have the right to know if somebody else is simulating them in a holodeck. The computer should let the holodeck program proceed, but still notify the person being simulated.

Everyone reading this, admit it: You would want to know if somebody's doing something unspeakable to you, even if it's only a holoprogram. Don't even try to deny it. Hologram or not, it's still you. Whoever's running the program, whatever they're doing - the fact that they're simulating you, proves that they want to do that thing to YOU. (If not, they wouldn't be simulating you in the first place.) Wouldn't you want to know what that thing is?

JirinPanthosa June 3 2013 04:24 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Of course I'd want to know but it wouldn't be my right to know, not unless they had any intent to do me harm in real life.

Every time you imagine having sex with a woman, do you call her up and tell her about it? The holodeck is like your imagination, only with sensory feedback.

I like Dax's response to Bashir's Dax in If Wishes Were Horses. "If anything I should apologize to you for intruding on your private fantasies".

Third Nacelle June 3 2013 04:33 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Imagining having sex with someone is one thing, but I think running a simulation of someone like that infringes on a person's right to privacy.

How would you feel is someone had a RealDoll made that looked just like you?

R. Star June 3 2013 04:34 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Quote:

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: (Post 8194168)
People should have the right to know if somebody else is simulating them in a holodeck. The computer should let the holodeck program proceed, but still notify the person being simulated.

Everyone reading this, admit it: You would want to know if somebody's doing something unspeakable to you, even if it's only a holoprogram. Don't even try to deny it. Hologram or not, it's still you. Whoever's running the program, whatever they're doing - the fact that they're simulating you, proves that they want to do that thing to YOU. (If not, they wouldn't be simulating you in the first place.) Wouldn't you want to know what that thing is?

Nah, the holodeck is basically a tool that can be an extension of a person's fantasy life. As human nature as it is to be curious about other people's fantasies, especially if they may regard you, a person's fantasy life is their own business. Notifications about "personal violations" in the holodeck is pretty much akin to playing thought police.

George Steinbrenner June 3 2013 05:47 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
^ But fantasies can affect a person's real life, I would imagine. You spend enough time fantasising about somebody, it's going to affect how you feel about that person IRL.

And I did say that the computer should let the holodeck program run, but still notify anybody being simulated in it. If somebody simulates me on a holodeck, that's much more than thoughts. It's actions. I have the right to know, if they do that. Holosimulation of somebody without their consent is an invasion of that person's privacy.

And let's face it, if you are operating a holodeck program and you actually let people in who are being simulated in that program, you deserve any nasty remarks they give you in return. :p

R. Star June 3 2013 07:09 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Sure, fantasy can become unhealthy when taken to excess. So can just about anything. However just because something can or may happen, doesn't justify an invasion of privacy. Anything that happens on a holodeck when it's being used recreationally is just a private extension of a fantasy life. It'd be like writing a fan fiction about a real person and keeping it to yourself for your own enjoyment. I'd agree publishing such a fiction would be questionable at best, but if it stays with the author as a device for their own personal entertainment, what's the harm? The same with a holodeck program, the only difference is technology having advanced.

As for letting people in the holodeck? Well sometimes you just can't help it if that jerk of a first officer overrides the lock and barges in on you. ;)

Third Nacelle June 3 2013 07:19 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
The invasion of privacy comes in when you create an exact replica of someone. As detailed as Barclay's holodeck simulations of Troi were, he must have been using some kind of holoimage of her, not just his imagination.

Dream June 3 2013 08:54 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Quote:

Third Nacelle wrote: (Post 8194840)
The invasion of privacy comes in when you create an exact replica of someone. As detailed as Barclay's holodeck simulations of Troi were, he must have been using some kind of holoimage of her, not just his imagination.

Normal people get angry at things like this.

Reminds me of when Quark tried to take a holoimage of Kira to make a sex hologram for one of his costumers in ""Meridian". She was rightfully pissed. Also Odo offered to arrest Quark for his actions.

Timo June 3 2013 11:34 AM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Then again, Odo threatening to arrest Quark is like Germany invading France: it's the thing to do in case of X, for all values of X. Doesn't mean Quark did anything illegal.

Today, it's very difficult to sue anybody over making an image or other copy of yourself. Even photographing without permission only becomes a crime in extremely specific circumstances. If somebody did make a statue of you, and didn't put it on public display, you'd be laughed out of court if you called for reparations or destruction of the statue or whatever. Even if said statue had anatomically correct holes...

But what's moral today doesn't tell much about what's moral in the TNG era. We know that our heroes object to holo-copies of themselves in all cases: Leah Brahms, Troi/Riker/LaForge, Kira all voice their objections. But we have no idea whether anybody would have objected to the scene where Barclay spoke to "bridge officers" at the end of "Hollow Pursuits".

Timo Saloniemi

JarodRussell June 3 2013 03:59 PM

Re: Morality and the Holodeck - slightly different question
 
Quote:

Third Nacelle wrote: (Post 8194840)
The invasion of privacy comes in when you create an exact replica of someone. As detailed as Barclay's holodeck simulations of Troi were, he must have been using some kind of holoimage of her, not just his imagination.

If it was forbidden in the Trekverse, Geordi would not have been able to create Leah Brahms (including her psychological profile!), because the computer would simply not let him do it (privacy settings in the Starfleet database and all that).

The invasion of privacy in Barclay's case would ONLY be the taking of the pictures without consent, not the digital recreation for personal use. But then again, that's what paparazzi do in the real world and it's widely accepted.

Quote:

Third Nacelle wrote: (Post 8194300)
Imagining having sex with someone is one thing, but I think running a simulation of someone like that infringes on a person's right to privacy.

How would you feel is someone had a RealDoll made that looked just like you?

Depending on who uses it, I'd ask: "Why just the doll?" ;)

And if you masturbate to photographs of your crush on Facebook, it's actually YOUR private right to do so.

Quote:

JirinPanthosa wrote: (Post 8194270)
I like Dax's response to Bashir's Dax in If Wishes Were Horses. "If anything I should apologize to you for intruding on your private fantasies".

That is indeed a good point about it.


People act like it's a horrible invasion of their privacy if someone, only for himself, imagines stuff with them. But the bigger invasion of privacy is how they find out about that after all. People should be able to do whatever the hell they want. And if it's just for personal use, it doesn't hurt ANYONE. And if you find out about it, then you gotta ask yourself first how you found out about it (probably by invading the privacy of someone else).


It's like checking emails of your partner if you suspect (s)he's cheating on you. That doesn't make it right.


Just imagine a world where every Hollywood celebrity could sue anyone who jerked off to footage of them. They SHOULD be able to stop paparazzi taking pictures of them everywhere, though, because that is the actual invasion of privacy.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.