• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Is it ok to have sex with holograms?

Yes. If we're going to use elected men, who have their own agendas, to decide what's right and what's wrong.

If your premise is that all elected men have their own agendas, then you are basically suggesting we should ditch the democratic system.

So what do you propose we replace it with?

And for the record, I agree with you that the current system we have is broken. But it isn't a fault of the system. Its the fault of the people in the system. There are corrupt politicians everywhere in the world, some places more than others, more so in non-democratic states than democratic states. So I see democracy as the lesser of the evils.
 
If your premise is that all elected men have their own agendas, then you are basically suggesting we should ditch the democratic system.

You quit rewarding inertia on the part of public servants. We have a system that is currently rewarding people for not solving problems.

But that's a whole different argument.
 
I love how you're desperately trying to paint this as a black and white issue. There would be multiple factors involved before I could make a decision that could theoretically ruin a persons personal life.

I agree that there are all shades of gray concerning sexual addictions and various fantasies. But I was never interested in discussing those shades of gray.

If you recall, my original argument was always very specifically about the manifestation of the fantasy of rape/torture/murder. My argument is that this area is only black and white, in that these fantasy, if discovered, should never be ignored.

So in my scenario, you want to consider other factors involved. What other factors might you consider? Are you the only person who's thinking about this question? What makes you so sure you would have covered all basis?

If you are going to say "I don't know, it depends." I agree with you, and I would hope you wouldn't be the final authority on what is best for that person and the people around that person. I would hope that in your decision process, you talk to some other people. Perhaps you show those letter/emails whatever to a professional psychiatrist to determine whether there is a genuine threat.

In the end, you may come to the conclusion that this was innocent and benign or you might conclude that it is a genuine threat to the safety of those around the person. The point being, you wouldn't simply ignore what you saw and do nothing.
 
I agree that there are all shades of gray concerning sexual addictions and various fantasies. But I was never interested in discussing those shades of gray.

But the vary nature of the discussion demands that you take those 'shades of gray' into account.
 
So, uh, what's the current legally required response to the hypothetical that you propose? Do you have any idea?

For a public school teacher, the legally required response (at least where I live) is that the teacher talk to a school psychiatrist about it. For a manager in a company, the normal procedure is that HR personnel be alerted to it.

I have friends who are public school teachers who had to deal with such issues, and also, there was a coworker who was discovered to be having explicit sexual fantasies about other coworkers. I don't know what happened to the student because my friend can't tell me. But I know the teacher was required to report it. As for my coworker, he was given two chances to rehabilitate, at the company's expense. He was caught a third time doing the same things, and was let go.

If you are simply a friend, there are obviously no guide lines for you to follow. Though I hope you would still talk to somebody or do something about it instead of simply ignoring it and do nothing.
 
Well, there's your answer in large measure.

Obviously if these holographic generators are privately owned and their use not monitored by authorities - and this would likely eventually be the case - what actions other people could or should take about these kinds of sexual fiction would be very limited.

Also obviously the best current parallel is "anonymous" behavior on the Internet.
 
Well...you know? It's not easy for people to admit they have a serious problem. The less you make a big deal out of it and exagarating blowing it out of proportion the less likely the person will admit they have a problem and seek proper help.

There's always serious side effects when government try to intervene or "being noisy" because they have no wisdom and knowledge about people...they don't know everything. They're not God. Britain has the highest economic growth rate, I think, because it has the least government intervention. Things have a way of working themselves out much better if no one is forcing them to do something, pretending to know what they are doing.
 
The very first thing that happens to a politician when elected... is he starts thinking on how to get re-elected.

Elected politicians are not men of strong convictions.
This made me think of Joe Scarbough, republican from Florida. While running for his first term in office, Scarbough said he believed in term limits, but only self imposed ones. He said he would only serve six years on Congress, three terms in the house.

Despite high poll ratings, he refused to run for a fourth term, a man of principals. Currently he has a morning show on MSNBC, one of the few republicans there.

But you were saying?

:)
 
The very first thing that happens to a politician when elected... is he starts thinking on how to get re-elected.

Elected politicians are not men of strong convictions.
This made me think of Joe Scarbough, republican from Florida. While running for his first term in office, Scarbough said he believed in term limits, but only self imposed ones. He said he would only serve six years on Congress, three terms in the house.

Despite high poll ratings, he refused to run for a fourth term, a man of principals. Currently he has a morning show on MSNBC, one of the few republicans there.

But you were saying?

:)

Two points:

1. How quickly would this guy had given up his seat had he not had lucrative opportunities in the private sector?

2. How many of his Republican brothers made and kept the same promise? Not many.

I use to be anti term-limits... until I saw many of these clowns continue to use rhetoric designed to divide the voters and guarantee multiple terms and the fact the general public seems to be too inept to realize what politicians are doing to them.

I'm now of the opinion if you can't get it done in one term... it doesn't need to be done. YMMV.
 
The very first thing that happens to a politician when elected... is he starts thinking on how to get re-elected.

Elected politicians are not men of strong convictions.
This made me think of Joe Scarbough, republican from Florida. While running for his first term in office, Scarbough said he believed in term limits, but only self imposed ones. He said he would only serve six years on Congress, three terms in the house.

Despite high poll ratings, he refused to run for a fourth term, a man of principals. Currently he has a morning show on MSNBC, one of the few republicans there.

But you were saying?

:)

I'm throwing a flag for further review...

Scarborough announced his intent to resign to spend more time with his children five months into his fourth term in Congress. "The realization has come home to me that they're at a critical stage of their lives and I would rather be judged at the end of my life as a father than as a congressman," Scarborough said.[19] A special election was held to replace him.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Joe_Scarborough
 
you guys are getting drawn into a hypothetical that is not relevant to the thread topic. Holodeck fantasy scenarios are more like complex games than they are written-out violent fantasies of intent from a school kid.




It's more relevant to the thread to ask: if you found out someone was choosing the option of killing hookers in "grand theft auto," would you report them to the authorities because you thought they were a danger to real-life prostitutes?
 
It's more relevant to the thread to ask: if you found out someone was choosing the option of killing hookers in "grand theft auto," would you report them to the authorities because you thought they were a danger to real-life prostitutes?

Who hasn't killed a hooker, out of those who played, in Grand Theft Auto? That's the better question. :p
 
It's a very fine line- blasting people in video games, and blasting people in video games before you blast people, period.

I agree that most of the time it's completely harmless.

I have to admit everyone would be guilty of blasting or slicing at least some type of thing in a video game.

But what about times when something should have been regulated and wasn't and people later paid the price?

It has been said that if a certain financial industry was regulated, we wouldn't have had the economic crisis that occurred.

Now no one cares much about intrusion, only that they wish it were done in the first place, if it would have saved jobs.

This how Riker felt about it:

RIKER: This is a violation of protocol. Crewmembers should not be simulated in the Holodeck...

GEORDI: Ah, Commander... I don't think there's any regulation...

RIKER: Then there should be... computer,
discontinue program and erase...

And Riker was something of a freak himself.

People in the 24th century may not be too different..
 
Every time we have a recession, or the depression, the inflation rate skyrocketed through the roof. The inflation rate is so high because the government spends too much.
 
It's more relevant to the thread to ask: if you found out someone was choosing the option of killing hookers in "grand theft auto," would you report them to the authorities because you thought they were a danger to real-life prostitutes?

Who hasn't killed a hooker, out of those who played, in Grand Theft Auto? That's the better question. :p

I haven't. :)



All this discussions about movies or games making children violent is bullshit in my opinion. You are already like that before you play a game. GTA is a good example. The game doesn't force you to kill hookers or run people over with a car. You choose to do that all on your own. I myself am playing FPS shooters with the aim of killing the least amount of people, and I stopped playing them because of that. And I would love to see such a game where you actually have the possibility to knock people unconscious, tie them up, etc... to let them stay alive. I liked Red Dead Redemption very much because it gave you that choice.

So if you had a holodeck and would use it to rape simulations, then there's definately something wrong with you. The more realistic it gets, the greater is the inhibition threshold. So people who rape realistic holografic projections would be only a very tiny step away from raping real people.
 
So if you had a holodeck and would use it to rape simulations, then there's definately something wrong with you. The more realistic it gets, the greater is the inhibition threshold. So people who rape realistic holografic projections would be only a very tiny step away from raping real people.

*cough*Bullshit*cough*

Next thing you'll be telling us is that those who play paintball are one step away from going out and hunting people.

I've played a ton of violent video games over the years, including Red Dead Redemption (which is quite violent), killed hookers and shot people in the head... and I've never once had a violent impulse against another human being.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top