• 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!

Did Gene Roddenberry make a mistake in Star Trek?

Not even a little bit?

I was being only half serious but it sure seems to me that for at least a few people, it's one of the things they like about the show. Not the only reason, but one of the reasons.

Robert

I’ve been watching Star Trek my entire life. I could not give any less of a shit about what fictional economic system supposedly was or was not portrayed.

Like, it’s almost literally one of the absolute last things I’d think about when I consider why I love the franchise. The yellow button in the middle of Sulu’s helm console probably means more to me.
 
I’ve been watching Star Trek my entire life. I could not give any less of a shit about what fictional economic system supposedly was or was not portrayed.

Like, it’s almost literally one of the absolute last things I’d think about when I consider why I love the franchise. The yellow button in the middle of Sulu’s helm console probably means more to me.

Me too. Except that technically, I haven't watched Star Trek all my life, TOS didn't start until I was six.

I never thought much about it until I joined the TrekBBS and started encountering all these money vs. no money debate threads.

Robert
 
Non fans or casual fans don't even know Star Trek supposedly depicts a money-less society, making it rather hard to be a factor in the franchise's popularity.
 
I suppose you have evidence.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "No money, that's what attracted me to Star Trek". Like Serveaux, I've been watching this thing since day one. :lol:
I've seen many an interview where the actors talk about Gene's Vision of the future and they seem to be at least partially convinced by it (although I wouldn't bet my last shirt that it is sincere).
They, like fans just repeat the party line.
 
No. The idea was good TV.

Even if the idea is unrealistic, I don’t think it drives away anyone. A lot of people love the idea where they can make a living without doing a job they hate. And anyone else just laughs about it and focuses on the adventure.
 
People live in hope that mechanization and robotization will eventually free mankind of all the undesirable, boring, exhausting jobs and that what will be left with are the interesting ones. Is that so unrealistic? I don't know, it's possible that we will find a way to destroy ourselves before that could happen.
 
People live in hope that mechanization and robotization will eventually free mankind of all the undesirable, boring, exhausting jobs and that what will be left with are the interesting ones. Is that so unrealistic?
Some people prefer to work those jobs as opposed to intellectual pursuits progress will supposedly free us up for as opposed to that kind of work.
 
Some people prefer to work those jobs as opposed to intellectual pursuits progress will supposedly free us up for as opposed to that kind of work.

Experience teaches us that there's no manual work that a man can do that a robot can't be programmed to do better. Even the randomness and the little imprecisions that characterize manual work can be simulated by a machine. Eventually, if our species endures till then, there won't be anything for man to do other than these intellectual pursuits you speak of. It's only a matter of time.
 
Experience teaches us that there's no manual work that a man can do that a robot can't be programmed to do better. Even the randomness and the little imprecisions that characterize manual work can be simulated by a machine. Eventually, if our species endures till then, there won't be anything for man to do other than these intellectual pursuits you speak of. It's only a matter of time.
Nope because this presupposes that the end product is the only goal of such labors.
----------
As for the "no money" aspect being appealing to fans, I never really considered it a draw but the related lack of excessive consumerism and in-your-face advertising I've always counted as part of that hopeful future.
 
Experience teaches us that there's no manual work that a man can do that a robot can't be programmed to do better.

Hard to imagine a robot doing things better that have constant changing situations and every case is different like surgery. And when can a machine relate to the will to survive an operation?
 
Hard to imagine a robot doing things better that have constant changing situations and every case is different like surgery. And when can a machine relate to the will to survive an operation?

The machine doesn't have to relate. It just needs to recognize and perform the patterns and motions that end in a completion of its current task. Automatic doctors aren't so mind-boggling.
 
The machine doesn't have to relate. It just needs to recognize and perform the patterns and motions that end in a completion of its current task. Automatic doctors aren't so mind-boggling.

Exactly, A machine is not affected by a personal life like a doctor who could be distracted and make a mistake even when he's done the procedure for years. There have been cases of doctors forgetting objects, like clamps, scalpels... inside patients, this would never happen with a machine.
 
Robo-Calls have gotten so efficient that I get ~six calls per day. I can't wait for the future when they get even more efficient. :mad:
 
Last edited:
Speaking of interesting jobs and robots, I used to work as a lab technician at a research center for a polymers company.

The laboratory I worked in did physical or mechanical testing of plastics, that is I ran machines that would bend, pull apart and impact pieces of plastic to find out how much force it takes to make them fail. One of the most common tests I did was the tensile strength test.

In the late eighties, in fact, about the time of TNG, we got a robot arm that did a menial,routine test instead of a human operator and I had the fun of being assigned to operate the robot itself. So when I got to work in the morning, I would set the robot up to run tests by itself for about six to seven hours while I did other work ddering the day and then near the end of the workday, I would set it up again to run another eight hours before I went home. The robot could only operate up to eight hours without having to be set up again.

What the robot arm did was to grab a plastic test bar from a stack and put it into a testing machine and then when the test was finished, the robot would pick up the bar again, swing to one side and drop it neatly into a trash bucket. For some reason, everybody, including me, always found it funny how the robot would always neatly dispose of the test bars into the trash.

I was lucky to have that job, I really enjoyed working with the testing machines in that lab. Sometimes it was just sheer fun.

Some of the testing machines were called load frames, they were used to perform the tensile strength test, that is it would pull a bar apart that measured 7 in by 0.5 in by 0.125 in.

These load frames had clear lexan bulletproof sheilds because sometimes the material being tested was extremely strong and brittle. The load on this material could get up to 10,000 to 15,000 pounds or even more, before it failed and when it did so, it would literally explode with that much force on it as it shattered; so that's why bulletproof sheilding was needed.

Man it was so much fun, especially when watching how guests in the lab would jump when one of these loud failures would go off. Eye protection was an absolute must, no one was allowed into the lab without it and a rack outside the door was always filled with eye protection glasses.

As another aside, this was during the time TNG was in its first run broadcast, it was shown on Saturdays. A few of my coworkers at the research center also liked to watch the show so on Mondays, we would always discuss the previous Saturday's new episode.

You know that old question, "How do you introduce someone to Star Trek"? Well sometimes that question is answered for you.

On the monday after ""Best Of Both Worlds" part 2 had been shown for the first time, we were talking about the episode. A couple of other coworkers who didn't watch the show became intrigued and when they found out I had recorded both parts 1 and 2 on VHS tape, they asked to borrow it. They had to take turns so they flipped a coin to see who would get the tape first. In fact, I had been recording the series from the beginning so I also lent them the tape with "Q Who?" on it, telling them they should watch it before BOBW.

So I did my part to spread the holy Star Trek word, both of them started watching TNG from then on.

Robert
 
I'm not here to ask about the economics of the Federation, I just have a simple question.
Did Gene Roddenberry make a mistake when he said there was no need for money in trek?
Look at all the examples of people buying and selling things.

James
Since TOS definitely had and used money...your premise is flawed. ;)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top