Things that don't add up:

[Longinus]

I didn't ask you to. You do you.

I don't understand why my enjoyment is so bothersome. I'm not disparaging you.

Your enjoyment is not bothersome, your habit of shrugging off every critique, no matter how reasoned with 'oh, it didn't bother me' however kinda is. Like what's the point? Those plot holes objectively exist, it is really not a matter of opinion. But nothing bothers you, so nothing matters.

 

[fireproof78]

Your enjoyment is not bothersome, your habit of shrugging off every critique, no matter how reasoned with 'oh, it didn't bother me' however kinda is. Like what's the point? Those plot holes objectively exist, it is really not a matter of opinion. But nothing bothers you, so nothing matters.

Yes they exist. Yes, nothing matters. And that's ok.

How would you prefer me to react?

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

No doubt because a galaxy full of fleshbags would have an issue with an evil all-knowing AI hanging around and seek to either control it or destroy it.

I think pretty much that. But as @Amasov said, and others have in the past Control acts pretty dam sentient and self aware even without the sphere data, maybe all that data does is give it an extra edge or two.

 

[Uhura's Song]

While stardates meant nothing in universe (except in the Kelvin Timeline movies where the first 4 digits were the earth year), the TNG era shows were about 90% consistent, they tried to make sure each stardate for each following episode was a higher number than the last. It didn't always workout, but it did most of the time.

Out of universe, the second number of the stardate represented the season in TNG. For example, an episode of TNG with a stardate in the 41000 range is Season 1, 42000 is Season 2 etc.

At first the '4' stood for the 24th Century, but that rule was ignored in later seasons and shows. DS9 and Voyager however did keep up with the second number increasing after every season. Voyager season one was mostly in 48000, Season 2 49000, season 3 50000 etc.

For TOS, the production order and the order episodes were aired in are wildly inconsistent. Keep that in mind when looking at stardates.

Where No One has gone Before was the 2nd pilot, but aired after Man Trap & Charlie X. But it happened before. So even if they were consistent with stardates, which they weren't, it would have been muddled anyway.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I might be excommunicated here but I dislike stardates

 

[Timo]

Oh, I love the way the TOS episodes line up more logically when placed in stardate order, with 1000 SD/yr spacing... By utter coincidence.

Doesn't work for DSC, of course.

And even that last line has me scratching my head. Did we ever find out why, exactly, Control was so hellbent on destroying all life in the universe?

Also, was it? The writing in "If Memory Serves" is a bit careless, with Burnham speaking of "barren" planets in Spock's vision, when in fact what we saw was planets blowing up. So what made the places barren before they were blown up (because they obviously couldn't be barren after ceasing to exist!)? And if the blowing up is the work of Control, then aren't we justified in thinking that them first going barren was never Control's doing? After all, making them barren would be illogical if they were about to be blown up anyway - and blowing them up if they were already barren is not a necessary step in "destroying all life".

Perhaps Control's plans and actions never included erasing all competing sentient life, and it in fact tried to contain a sentience-hunting enemy by blowing up the planets already victimized by that enemy?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Agony_Boothb]

I think pretty much that. But as @Amasov said, and others have in the past Control acts pretty dam sentient and self aware even without the sphere data, maybe all that data does is give it an extra edge or two.

I think Control wanted to literally 'control' everything and become a galaxy spanning AI consciousness. Yeah it was showing that is was pretty sentient, but it was still very limited in what it could do. No doubt having access to information to data about other AI's from thousands of different worlds would have allowed it to become god-like in a very short amount of time.

 

[Timo]

Certainly sentience is a graduated thing: a cat may be more sentient than a common crow, and humans on the average may have them beaten there, while Control might be a bit below or a bit above the human average but certainly striving for more. "Ability to perceive self" is about as far from Boolean as one can imagine.

What Control actually wants is up to speculation, though, because all we hear is hero statements that must be speculative. The entity itself tells a few tales that, given its self-awareness in the Turingian sense and its obvious skill for self-preservation, can be taken for purposeful lies just like any human tale of self-explaining. Whether Control agrees with the visions our heroes talk about is unknown: the AI itself has seen no visions AFAWK, has not probed deep into Spock's skull AFAWK, and may or may not have obtained intel about the future from the probe that struck Pike and Tyler's shuttle.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Amasov]

I think pretty much that. But as @Amasov said, and others have in the past Control acts pretty dam sentient and self aware even without the sphere data, maybe all that data does is give it an extra edge or two.

It's also a big leap, IMO.

They had no evidence that if Control got the sphere data it would gain sentience. Pike just said that it would and everyone freaked out because a threat had been identified, when no evidence was presented up to that point that that would be the case. On top of which, again. Control's intent on destroying all sentient life in the universe.

At no point did anyone even say, "Ok, but...why?"

I'm sorry to do this and I'm not trying to judge Discovery unfairly. I'm REALLY not, because I do like the show. But, if the other Trek shows handled a plot like this, they would have at least stumbled across evidence that the threat Control posed was imminent; perhaps a wrecked ship and a sole survivor. And that survivor would've been the one feeding the crew information about what happened, how dangerous Control is, and that it must be stopped at all costs.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm sorry to do this and I'm not trying to judge Discovery unfairly. I'm REALLY not, because I do like the show. But, if the other Trek shows handled a plot like this, they would have at least stumbled across evidence that the threat Control posed was imminent; perhaps a wrecked ship and a sole survivor. And that survivor would've been the one feeding the crew information about what happened, how dangerous Control is, and that it must be stopped at all costs.

It's a completely fair observation on this one.

 

[Timo]

How so? DSC had its own witness feeding the crew information: right there, right after Pike makes his doomsday prediction, the words "Yes, that's what Spock saw in his vision" were uttered.

Pike isn't predicting. He's quoting Spock, and pointing out that the heroes are now observing a possible way for Spock's vision to come to be.

Sure, we never actually heard Spock specifically say that a vicious AI was the force destroying all life, say. But we don't really need to hear this: all we need to know is that Spock knows things, thanks to having had this vision of his. And the vision must have provided information beyond the pretty but ambiguous visuals the audience saw - there must have been a comment track to Spock's meld with the Red Angel, or else Spock couldn't even tell his vision is about the future.

The season is all about trusting visions and seeing design to an initially baffling series of Red Events. Pike's leap of faith isn't unfounded here at all: Control is not just a random foe that happens to emerge when the heroes are studying this Armageddon design, but a foe that specifically tries to block Spock from proceeding with said study.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[F. King Daniel]

Present Control was infected by Future Control which was already sentient, via the probe and Airiam. My understanding is that events were brought hundreds of years forward. It got a taste of it's future and would stop at nothing to bring it about.

 

[Timo]

Whether the Future Probe had anything to do with Control is unknown, and not directly speculated upon even by the heroes. Whether the blowing up of Earth, Andor, Vulcan etc. had anything to do with Control is open to speculation, and our heroes readily speculate that Control was behind it, because Control is the force that tries to stop Spock, who in turn tries to study the Red Angel, who in Spock's opinion is, if not exactly a Good Guy/Gal, then at least a nonhostile messenger whose main message is a warning about the future doom.

Might be Control is a random threat that goes to high gear when getting its own "vision" from its own "angel" (the Probe) and subsequently blows its chances forever. Might be Control is a central threat that already has longterm plans about erasing mankind and other infestations when it learns of Spock's vision and realizes it is all about those plans and therefore must not be made public.

The one alternative that does not make any real sense is that Control only first gets ideas about erasing all other sapience from the galaxy after facing the key Season 2 events. Why would it recognize Spock or the Red Angel as threats before getting its own vision from the Probe if it only gets power-mad after the Probe?

FWIW, the story has at least four distinct threat forces: Control before any of the events (because even back then, it wants to frame Spock for murder); the Three Red Dots entity that co-opts Pike's probe and then Airiam and assists Control in getting the Red Sphere Data; the folks who blow up all those planets; and Control after getting a taste of the Red Sphere Data and/or of the Three Red Dots entity and going all-out with this murderous flaying thing. How are the four dots connected? Via the Three Dots? Is Control after "Project Daedalus" even Control any longer, or just a semi-innocent AI co-opted by the actually murderous Three Dots entity? Are the planet-busting things related to Control or to the Three Red Dots at all? The story really doesn't tell. Which isn't a fault as such...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Or maybe Mamma Burnham was an agent of Future Control. Da da dum..... But we're never told that. Someone had to start Control off on its destructive path.

OK I'm doing a rewatch of TNG and for the love of all things sacred season 1 is rubbish. I just don't know what to make of it and why I liked it when it was brand new.

The thing I don't get is the Ferengi in "the last outpost" they were jumping around and making noises like comical monkeys, which made me think they were only on the show as some kind of comic relief. I just don't know what the writers were thinking with them in the first season.

 

[Jadeb]

OK I'm doing a rewatch of TNG and for the love of all things sacred season 1 is rubbish. I just don't know what to make of it and why I liked it when it was brand new.

It was the first new televised Trek since TOS, sci-fi was scarce on TV in general and the bar was lower then. That's why I didn't buy the argument that we should excuse Discovery's first season because TNG was bad too. Completely different environment today.

 

[fireproof78]

OK I'm doing a rewatch of TNG and for the love of all things sacred season 1 is rubbish. I just don't know what to make of it and why I liked it when it was brand new.

I couldn't stand it from the word go. It is so irritating that I gave up on TNG and didn't watch it until the series finale.

It was the first new televised Trek since TOS, sci-fi was scarce on TV in general and the bar was lower then. That's why I didn't buy the argument that we should excuse Discovery's first season because TNG was bad too. Completely different environment today.

For me DSC season was different from TNG season 1 in one important aspect-characters. In season 1 I was at least engaged with Burnham, was invested in her plight and her character and wanted to see what happened.

TNG season 1 opens up with enough pretentiousness to start its own new aristocracy. There was little I liked about the characters and so I didn't stick around. I only watched the series finale because of a friend of mine was like "This battle scene is awesome!"

The TV environment may be changed now, but I'm still very picky about what I watch.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The thing I don't get is the Ferengi in "the last outpost" they were jumping around and making noises like comical monkeys, which made me think they were only on the show as some kind of comic relief. I just don't know what the writers were thinking with them in the first season.

"Why the f---do Gene and his lawyer keep changing things?"

SUPPORT TICKET CLOSED.

 

[fireproof78]

The thing I don't get is the Ferengi in "the last outpost" they were jumping around and making noises like comical monkeys, which made me think they were only on the show as some kind of comic relief. I just don't know what the writers were thinking with them in the first season.

That capitalists are unevolved monkeys.

And somehow we are to take them seriously as villains.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

But by the time DS9 comes around the Ferengi are much better. Still in TNG I just couldn't stand them.

 

[fireproof78]

But by the time DS9 comes around the Ferengi are much better. Still in TNG I just couldn't stand them.

Because there is no character to them. It's a farce to make the heroes look better and more noble. .