RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,584
Posts: 5,515,266
Members: 25,156
Currently online: 423
Newest member: jerrlaro

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > The Next Generation

The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 1 2014, 05:31 PM   #16
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Reality of Data

HIjol wrote: View Post
...and would you be willing to go further and say that guys, also, could get attached to their "cold bedfemmes/fellows"????...sort of like an artificial "Mudd's Women/Men"???...
Androids with female features are just high-tech, expensive blow-up dolls. And although some wouldn't mind, a Man still has his pride to think of ...

And what greater reason is there to boast, than in claiming the woman who nobody could get with? Holding her close, in victory. Showing her off, at all the right places. Taking her to all of the right parties. And just 'taking' her, of course.

That ... that's what it's all about! And where's the passion with a robot? No ... there's just no substitute for an attractive, real-life, flesh-and-blood woman. And that's the way we like it, really, am I right, fellas? Or Am I RIGHT?!!
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 2 2014, 02:15 AM   #17
Makarov
Captain
 
Re: Reality of Data

No need for android sex toys when you have the holodeck. Just don't forget to leave the safety protocols on if you know what I mean.

It doesn't come across in the show but I think an android's face would look a bit off which might give off slightly creepy vibes. To the point where it would be as non-mainstream as "real dolls" are today. Not to mention, I get the feeling in the Star Trek world people can find out what you're spending your credits on.

I love Data's response to getting dumped in that one episode, "I will delete the appropriate program"
Makarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 2 2014, 02:58 AM   #18
Kevman7987
Captain
 
Kevman7987's Avatar
 
Location: Erie, PA, USA
View Kevman7987's Twitter Profile
Re: Reality of Data

If there were Data-like positronic androids, I do admit I'd probably purchase an attractive "female" model. It would be mostly in a care-giving role due to my health issues though. However, I would make sure that "she" is fully-functional in various other capacities as well, like housekeeping for example. We'd be best friends too. "She'll" give me high-fives every time I crack a one-liner.
__________________
"Don't do it, Meat!"
"Don't do it, Cheese!"
Kevman7987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 2 2014, 06:13 AM   #19
Sleigh Ride
Commodore
 
Sleigh Ride's Avatar
 
Location: A Circle Has No End; HIjol
Re: Reality of Data

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
HIjol wrote: View Post
...and would you be willing to go further and say that guys, also, could get attached to their "cold bedfemmes/fellows"????...sort of like an artificial "Mudd's Women/Men"???...
Androids with female features are just high-tech, expensive blow-up dolls. And although some wouldn't mind, a Man still has his pride to think of ...

And what greater reason is there to boast, than in claiming the woman who nobody could get with? Holding her close, in victory. Showing her off, at all the right places. Taking her to all of the right parties. And just 'taking' her, of course.

That ... that's what it's all about! And where's the passion with a robot? No ... there's just no substitute for an attractive, real-life, flesh-and-blood woman. And that's the way we like it, really, am I right, fellas? Or Am I RIGHT?!!
I feel your resolve, Two-Takes, and yield to your rebuttal!

Kevman7987 wrote: View Post
If there were Data-like positronic androids, I do admit I'd probably purchase an attractive "female" model. It would be mostly in a care-giving role due to my health issues though. However, I would make sure that "she" is fully-functional in various other capacities as well, like housekeeping for example. We'd be best friends too. "She'll" give me high-fives every time I crack a one-liner.
LOVE your style, Kevman, and the high-fives you would certainly get!!!!
__________________
"If man is to survive, he will delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear" Gene Roddenberry
Sleigh Ride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2014, 03:13 AM   #20
JirinPanthosa
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Reality of Data

Here's the catch-22 of the 'Female android companion' though. There are three options.

1. The android is very realistic but not sentient. In which case it's just expensive masturbation.
2. The android is sentient, and you force it to be your companion or even program it with the desire to. This is slavery.
3. The android is sentient, and you do not force it at all to be your companion. Then the android can leave you just like a biological woman can.

#2 is morally repugnant, and #1 is not morally repugnant but can not be a true marriage because she does not return the affection. #3 is no different than real marriage and thus would not have any hedonistic advantages over it.

#1 is probably a generation away.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2014, 04:12 AM   #21
DecktheThralls
Rear Admiral
 
DecktheThralls's Avatar
 
Location: Triskelion
Re: Reality of Data

Robots are already taking our jobs. Jus' sayin'.

In the near future, hardware & software will replace a good many low~medium skill jobs. Like what Wordpress & Wix have done to web design, or automatic cashiers have done at retail stores.

In our reality, there would be a branding component to a high tech android, which might put people off worse than the malware issues. Like when a commercial tries to appropriate slang ~ its very commercialization makes its coolness expire. Interpersonally, accepting an android as a peer, this will factor.

Add to this future 3D printing/replication of cheap household goods, and I truly wonder what it will do to the earning potentials of the poor. Particularly in countries with one trick pony economies (oil, widget mass production, etc).

Like a real life violation of the prime directive: medieval mindset + modern technology = boom.
DecktheThralls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2014, 04:32 AM   #22
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Reality of Data

Most of the female TREK fans - of whom I am aware - who would love to marry Data, or an android exactly like him in appearance, mannerisms and temprement, have explained that real life men can do them harm. They can be emotionally and physically abusive, unlike an android, which is usually their stance.

And yet, I've seen it happen with my friends and it's been done to me, where a woman will torture you to see how far she can push you. It's excites them, knowing that their man, who's got these big, powerful hands that could crush them like a bear's paws would, can have his buttons pushed to the nth degree, and yet still control himself for reasons of "love" or some such.

I don't know what's all behind it, it occupies them or ... something. But with an android, whose great strength, once aroused, could crush bone, even, they can try to annoy and irritate him, endlessly knowing full well his "safety" switch is permanently "On." He won't strike them. He won't revenge on them. He won't do anything at all, ever, towards them, that isn't a part of his programming.

Whereas one of the joys of real life women for men is their unpredictability. Something a subroutine or mathematical equation just can't simulate and sure as hell can't match. So, it's interesting, really, how the sexes can be such Polar Opposites. On such extreme ends of the scale. And besides, realistic looking robots, like what some AI Labs have already come out with are very creepy! Come on ...
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2014, 02:46 AM   #23
JirinPanthosa
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Reality of Data

We're speaking hypothetically if the android had really achieved sentience though. If it were truly capable of generating it's own thoughts, whose electric circuitry is every bit as complicated and malleable as our neural circuitry. Then it would be capable of being 'Unpredictable'. Our own unpredictability is due to the complexity of our neural circuitry, why wouldn't an equally complex android produce the same?

I'm sure there are many women who fit your description but honestly that sounds more like a male fantasy than an honest description of women's motives. Except, I think you're right that women who've been abused might see Data as the ultimate 'safe' companion.

Personally I prefer smart, strong women who push me to do things I wouldn't do otherwise.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2014, 01:41 PM   #24
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Reality of Data

How can someone lust after a machine, though? A robot? A toaster? I believe the term for that form of psychological impedimentia is "pygmalionism." It's not good. Not healthy. Not ... not a part of the Human Condition, if you take my meaning.
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2014, 02:38 PM   #25
DecktheThralls
Rear Admiral
 
DecktheThralls's Avatar
 
Location: Triskelion
Re: Reality of Data

Perhaps not, but if you could devise a sufficiently complex machine - with sentience, aesthetically pleasing, and individual - how would that be different than what a human being actually is? There may not be procreation, but that is fine with some. At that point, you ask - what is it to be human? Can it be replicated artificially?

If all we have to go on vis-a-vis a "soul" is ancient metaphors - then who is to say a sentient individual does not have one? How can anyone lay boundaries around something there is no scientific definition for?

You can't - at best, it'd be a bluff. A human conceit.

Here's a funny question - what if all life on Earth is the product of artificial intelligent robots that evolved and seeded the galaxy with biological analogues of their "immortal" intelligence? What would humans be then?
DecktheThralls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6 2014, 05:10 AM   #26
SoM
Commander
 
SoM's Avatar
 
Re: Reality of Data

JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
Here's the catch-22 of the 'Female android companion' though. There are three options.

1. The android is very realistic but not sentient. In which case it's just expensive masturbation.
2. The android is sentient, and you force it to be your companion or even program it with the desire to. This is slavery.
3. The android is sentient, and you do not force it at all to be your companion. Then the android can leave you just like a biological woman can.

#2 is morally repugnant, and #1 is not morally repugnant but can not be a true marriage because she does not return the affection. #3 is no different than real marriage and thus would not have any hedonistic advantages over it.

#1 is probably a generation away.
I think #2 is really two separate bits
2a) The android is sentient, does not want to be your companion, and you force it to be with physical force, the threat of termination, the threat of damage to things it cares about, etc.
2b) The android is sentient, and you have programmed it with the desire to be your companion.

#2a is no different to a real-life forced marriage morally
#2b is a more... interesting case for one reason - is it really possible without tipping over into #1?
SoM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6 2014, 05:21 AM   #27
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Reality of Data

SoM wrote: View Post
JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
Here's the catch-22 of the 'Female android companion' though. There are three options.

1. The android is very realistic but not sentient. In which case it's just expensive masturbation.
2. The android is sentient, and you force it to be your companion or even program it with the desire to. This is slavery.
3. The android is sentient, and you do not force it at all to be your companion. Then the android can leave you just like a biological woman can.

#2 is morally repugnant, and #1 is not morally repugnant but can not be a true marriage because she does not return the affection. #3 is no different than real marriage and thus would not have any hedonistic advantages over it.

#1 is probably a generation away.
I think #2 is really two separate bits
2a) The android is sentient, does not want to be your companion, and you force it to be with physical force, the threat of termination, the threat of damage to things it cares about, etc.
2b) The android is sentient, and you have programmed it with the desire to be your companion.

#2a is no different to a real-life forced marriage morally
#2b is a more... interesting case for one reason - is it really possible without tipping over into #1?


if you can program something to that extent that you can exactly control its behaviors and desires then by definition it CAN'T be an autonomous and self-aware being.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6 2014, 07:10 AM   #28
Mama Claus
Captain
 
Mama Claus's Avatar
 
Location: maneth
Re: Reality of Data

Interesting question.

Data's probably the best developed character in TNG, part of what makes him so interesting. He's also advanced enough disobey a direct order (Clues) even if there's a catch, since Picard told him to do it when they first encountered the Palaxians, even if his memory got wiped. In "The Most Toys" Data also showed himself capable of a direct lie, he had just fired his phaser at one of the bad guys when he was transported back onto the Enterprise. The transporter trace showed his weapon had been fired, but he shrugged it off as a transporter malfunction, and the rest of the crew bought it. If that happened in real life, it would be pretty scary.
__________________
Live long and prosper
IDIC
Mama Claus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6 2014, 01:40 PM   #29
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Reality of Data

Triskelion wrote: View Post
Here's a funny question - what if all life on Earth is the product of artificial intelligent robots that evolved and seeded the galaxy with biological analogues of their "immortal" intelligence? What would humans be then?
Can't you understand? Don't you realize? Even resorting to the absurdity of this outlandish theory to support such an argument only underscores its weakness? TNG established that Data was living and we can simply accept that, because it's part of the story. Unfortunately, they did make the mistake of casting a live actor with carnival make-up on his face to represent that. Because now, Brent Spiner, the actor, is actually responsible for Data's human qualities and the attraction that some of female fandom feel for him.

In other words, had Data been realized by a STAN WINSTON robot modelled after, puppeted and voiced by Brent Spiner, then the numbers of female fans wanting to run off for a romantic interlude with Data would've - most decidedly - gone South ... like a Duck in Winter! Or had Data been, as suggested Bruce Maddox, "a box on wheels," instead, then the debate over a sentient android would've been much less lively. But presenting a live human and saying - "look at this guy, he's an androild, alright?" makes it very hard to be objective about the issue, when his Humanity is abundantly evident, aparent and only too real.
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6 2014, 03:09 PM   #30
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Reality of Data

Star Trek erred on the side of caution in regards to AI and robots. We are likely to have AI just as capable in 30-40 years, not centuries. There is even no need for a fancy leap like "positronics" to make them possible. Just look at the robots in "Brothers", "Schizoid Man". We already have robots more sophisticated in the real world in 2014.

As for Data..when he designed Lal, it was a shapeless neutral form. Did anyone feel uncomfortable with that? Probably. In TOS it was always assumed that despite their technical sophistication, androids/AI would never have feelings, etc. This is no longer true, a sufficiently advanced AI should have no reason to be unable to mimic or duplicate the human mind, in fact, the two may meld seamlessly. In much of science fiction literature (think Benford, Brin, Iain Banks, et al) machine civilization supplants the biological as a natural evolutionary progression.

I believe there will definitely be a point where the increasing capabilities of AI will make us uncomfortable, robots will be awkward like Data is. Eventually they will move beyond that, and so will we. We will likely even meet them part of the way, and then fully.

I give major kudos for JJ Abrams introducing an android in the alternate history's timeline WAY before what we would think of as STNG's timeline.

As for machines taking our jobs, in the past, automation and computers have led to them taking over old jobs and has created new ones, even more than they took away(contrary to TOS's paranoia)...now, in the near future, they may reach a critical mass, whereby we lose more jobs than we gain. But it's not so bad...they will create wealth or "abundance" and likely make capitalism obsolete in favor of a post-scarcity economy. There is also the idea that in the early stages of this change, a sort of general stipend for the general population can be created.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-r...d-thing-2014-3
http://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2014/03/...-a-good-thing/
http://positivefuturist.com/archive/381.html

RAMA
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 AM.

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