Does the computer seem more intelligent?

[FreddyE]

Is it me or does the computer seem to be WAY more intelligent in DSC then it used to be? It sounds much more human and its reactions seem more natural somehow. People are now able to pretty much have almost natural sounding discussions with it. For example: Burnham convincing it to let her out of the brig cell, Saru discussing his comand abilities.

It also seems to be more forward thinking now...like warning about the approaching marathon.

Overall: The computer in TOS / TNG and VOY used to be able to understand most natural language and answer..(although there was the occasional "please rephrase"..)..but it´s more or less only a very sophisticated version of Siri. DSC´s computer on the other hand comes more across as if it´s a real AI.

Thoughts?
And why might Starfleet have decided to change (back) from the AI driven Computer to the "Siri"-Version somewhen between DSC and TOS?

 

[Timo]

The computers of TNG, DS9 and VOY were often answering questions the characters had not actually asked, and furthering the plot that way. They just weren't particularly conversational. Which is understandable because our heroes had little patience with conversational computers - to wit, Data. Indeed, the computer had little patience with Data, and was at least equally rude to him as the DSC computer was polite to Burnham.

Different user settings in the Personality and Verbosity fields, even though the same in the Initiative and Subservience fields, is my guess.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Tuskin38]

It doesn’t seem that more intelligent from TOS.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Yep, it's far more advanced than previously depicted. The Disco ethos seems to be to retcon ALL eras of Treknology into the pre-TOS period and update it to modern expectations.

Burnham talking the computer into freeing her after the USS Shenzhou brig was hit was a highlight of "Binary Stars" for me.

Of course, we know Discovery's computer eventually evolves into Zora from "Calypso"

 

[Tuskin38]

Burnham talking the computer into freeing her after the USS Shenzhou brig was hit was a highlight of "Binary Stars" for me.

I dunno, Kirk did the same in TOS when asking about transporting between universes in Mirror Mirror.

The computer seemed pretty damn smart there

And don’t forget when it had its personality changed it sounded a lot more natural

If anything the TOS era computer was smarter than the 24th century ones, other than getting rid of the lag time between quarries. “Working”

 

[FreddyE]

Different user settings in the Personality and Verbosity fields, even though the same in the Initiative and Subservience fields, is my guess.

Timo Saloniemi

Intriguing...maybe the default setting is the behavior seen in TOS / TNG / VOY and most captains just don´t bother to change it. During the DSC era what we see on the DSC and SHEN might be the default...but something happened so Starfleet decided to change the default to more conservative settings.

 

[Tuskin38]

Has anyone actually talked to the computer since the Saru and Burnham examples have in season 1 of DSC?

 

[FreddyE]

Has anyone actually talked to the computer since season 1 of DSC?

The Burnham example in episode 2 is the only one I can think of.

Hmm...you´re right. They seem to talk LESS to it in DSC overall anyway. Which I actually like..most routine commands are probably faster entered via a keyboard then said. I mean...pressing ctrl+S on the navigation console is faster then saying "Computer: Save currently plotted course and execute course change"...

 

[Tuskin38]

Yeah most of the time the computer talks it’s to tell the crew something, not responding to quarries

 

[F. King Daniel]

Have we ever seen a Trek computer take it upon itself to alert medical of a crewmember's injury as it did when Tilly was hurt?

And how many times have crew come across injured officers who the computer hasn't summoned help for?

 

[Tuskin38]

Have we ever seen a Trek computer take it upon itself to alert medical of a crewmember's injury as it did when Tilly was hurt?

And how many times have crew come across injured officers who the computer hasn't summoned help for?

That just sounds like bad writing in those other shows

 

[F. King Daniel]

That just sounds like bad writing in those other shows

I wouldn't say that. At worst I would say technological illiteracy, which plagued Berman-era Trek (from stacks of PADDs all the way up to and including Nemesis, to turning the Enterprise off and on again in "Contagion")

And I imagine it creates a lot more continuity issues if we wonder why Tilly was saved by the computer but everyone else in other series' is left to be found by their crewmates.

 

[Timo]

Hmm. When would somebody have been hurt aboard a 24th century starship and the computer would have failed to inform the authorities? I can only think of examples involving the characters' personal cabins, where privacy settings might stop the computer from snitching when the hero struggles for his or her life against a devious intruder or is knocked out cold by a tri-isophasic anomaly.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Apparently, Sirius Cybernetics Corporation is still around in the 23rd century, making computers with [shudder] Genuine People Personality [/shudder]. The commany must have gone tits up by the 24th century, or at least was bought by the Ferengi.

 

[Mudd]

Look, how is it supposed to seem futuristic if they don't let the computer sound at least as human as Alexa?

Eventually Trek will have to let go of some of the carry-over 1966 stuff. If they want to get good again, anyway.

 

[dahj]

I'm just glad it doesn't put "dear" at the end of every sentence, dear.

 

[Campe]

Again, this all comes down to: What do you want? A series based on 1966 technology ("Wor-king..." <clickclickclickclickclick>) or something based on 2017 forward technology which way outdoes that 1966 technology? We have watches now that can tell when you fall and alert the authorities. We have motion sensors and cameras in everyday places that can help with security issues in homes and offices. Honestly, with current drone technology and robots, I would be surprised if a late 2150s computer wouldn't just call for assistance but could actually provide emergency medical attention if needed. There just has to come a point where you say, "Okay, this is different than the show I watched from 50 years ago. The technology is more modern." You accept it. Or you don't. Call it a reboot if you want. Doesn't matter.

 

[zar]

it´s more or less only a very sophisticated version of Siri. DSC´s computer on the other hand comes more across as if it´s a real AI.

I don't understand the distinction you're making. What is "only" a "very sophisticated" version of Siri, and how is that not a real AI? Siri is just a very unsophisticated AI. It's hardly an improvement over what already existed as voice activated personal computer software in the 90s, it's just a lot more popular now that people routinely carry a microphone and internet connection with them everywhere.

The AI on Trek has always been far more intelligent. It didn't just spit out search results and take food orders. It could take questions that had yet to be answered and synthesize independent conclusions based on information that was presented, and has done that since TOS. If anything, the argument about being let out of the cell was dumber than what we've seen before. Consider some of the problems the computer has solved so far:

TOS:
"Correlate hypotheses. Compare with life forms register. Question. Could such an entity within discussed limits exist in this galaxy? ... Computer, extrapolate most likely composition of such entity."

TNG:
"Computer, in the Holmesian style, create a mystery to confound Data with an opponent who has the ability to defeat him."

By comparison, figuring out that a door should be opened so someone can live is pretty darn basic, wouldn't you say?

 

[mos6507]

Again, this all comes down to: What do you want? A series based on 1966 technology ("Wor-king..." <clickclickclickclickclick>)

Yes. That's what I want. Star Trek isn't a documentary. If you decide to extend a 50 year old franchise I think you should just embrace the anachronisms. Most tech trends, if they were to continue for the next couple hundred years, would likely spell the end of humans we know it in favor of some Kubruck A.I. lifeform or some CRISPR-style genetically engineered immortal humans. It's unlikely we'd be tooling around starships with a captain barking orders like Horatio Hornblower.

 

[fireproof78]

Again, this all comes down to: What do you want? A series based on 1966 technology ("Wor-king..." <clickclickclickclickclick>) or something based on 2017 forward technology which way outdoes that 1966 technology? We have watches now that can tell when you fall and alert the authorities. We have motion sensors and cameras in everyday places that can help with security issues in homes and offices. Honestly, with current drone technology and robots, I would be surprised if a late 2150s computer wouldn't just call for assistance but could actually provide emergency medical attention if needed. There just has to come a point where you say, "Okay, this is different than the show I watched from 50 years ago. The technology is more modern." You accept it. Or you don't. Call it a reboot if you want. Doesn't matter.

I think it's a matter of suspension of disbelief. For some, that involves the technology, anachronisms and all, lining up. For others, it is as you described-that expectation that technology be presented in a believable manner.

For me, it seems contrary to 2010s production values to continue with 60s era tech. Largely because there are current generations of viewers who do not recognize such tech as tech. So, to that end, if CBS' goal is to expand the viewing base, then retaining the computers of past eras is not going to fly.

Unfortunately, as is common with many franchises, rather than looking forward there is a tendency to look to the past. And, I say this as a fan of the recent iterations of Star Trek.