Lt. Cheka Wey
Commander
That's a bit unfair. He could had been the son of slave or there are a myriad of other explanations.
How widespread is transporter technology?
- Thread starter Lt. Cheka Wey
- Start date
Fair enough... Although I misremembered: three of the six villains (Marie Marshall and Tom Nibley's characters in addition to Russ) were makeup-free humans.
Then again, many a human colony has shown unwillingness to follow the rules of the Federation. Perhaps these three came from an independent world whose crime statistics don't mar those of the UFP?
Timo Saloniemi
Then again, many a human colony has shown unwillingness to follow the rules of the Federation. Perhaps these three came from an independent world whose crime statistics don't mar those of the UFP?
Timo Saloniemi
For that matter, the stuff around a typical household might not be worth stealing. Why break into someone's home on Earth when pretty much everything there is from a replicator? The time and energy you spend on transporting around could be used to replicate your own thing. It's only when you start stealing stuff like trilithium that it starts becoming worthwhile, and in that sense it may allow you to leap from everyday comforts found on Earth to real value like your own personal spaceship.
Depends on what time period you're talking about. Humans have had the transporter since the mid 22nd century, the replicator since about the early 24th. So the general Human population would have had the possibility of home transporters long before the appearance of the replicator.
And there is the question of just how common the replicator is among the "civilian" population in the second half of the 24th century. From various scenes and stories told by characters in the various series, apparently possession of a replicator in private homes is about fifty-fifty.
Aboard a starship, the replicator pretty much is your only option, that wouldn't be the case on the surface of a planet.
And even today, real (mined from the Earth) diamonds are more valuble that synthetic diamonds (out of a reactor). So in the future, what you might be able to steal, could have more value, than what might be replicated.
In previous discussions on replicators, it was conjectured that civilian replicators might be hardwired not to produce certain items, for example illegal drugs. Purchasing unreplicable and illegal items would require the means to do so.
^ Take the Picard family vineyard, for example. Robert Picard refused to allow replicators in his family's home. I'm guessing that Marie continued this tradition even after Robert and René died. So what's to prevent somebody from stealing some of the wine via transporter? Or the Picard family's possessions? You know they've got to have some pretty valuable stuff, wine or otherwise.
I recall a DS9 episode where Sisko was talking about plucking up the courage to ask a girl out when he was a kid. He went on to say he asked another girl out "before her parents had even finished beaming the furniture in" when they moved next door...
Bear in mind this would have been 15-20 years prior to DS9. I guess it's possible the furniture company had it's own transporter similar to the way a company will deliver sofas today. It's also possible the family beamed their funiture from their old house to the new one, possibly using a public transporter system of some kind.
I'd imagine there are transporter hubs throughout populated areas which are government run and can be used by civilians for approved purposes.
Bear in mind this would have been 15-20 years prior to DS9. I guess it's possible the furniture company had it's own transporter similar to the way a company will deliver sofas today. It's also possible the family beamed their funiture from their old house to the new one, possibly using a public transporter system of some kind.
I'd imagine there are transporter hubs throughout populated areas which are government run and can be used by civilians for approved purposes.
Instead of government run (like public buses), I see the transporter system being more like the world wide telecommunications sytem, interconnected private companies. Or the internet, with various providers providing your transporter service.
On a planet's surface, the majority of transports (imho) would be through cables (wave guides) and not through the air. Unless you wanted to go somewhere really remote, then your matter stream would go by way of one or more satellites.
Beaming furniture in sure would beat moving big couches through narrow hallways with 90 degree turns.
Depends on what time period you're talking about. Humans have had the transporter since the mid 22nd century, the replicator since about the early 24th. So the general Human population would have had the possibility of home transporters long before the appearance of the replicator.
And there is the question of just how common the replicator is among the "civilian" population in the second half of the 24th century. From various scenes and stories told by characters in the various series, apparently possession of a replicator in private homes is about fifty-fifty.
Aboard a starship, the replicator pretty much is your only option, that wouldn't be the case on the surface of a planet.
And even today, real (mined from the Earth) diamonds are more valuble that synthetic diamonds (out of a reactor). So in the future, what you might be able to steal, could have more value, than what might be replicated.
In previous discussions on replicators, it was conjectured that civilian replicators might be hardwired not to produce certain items, for example illegal drugs. Purchasing unreplicable and illegal items would require the means to do so.
Forget illegal drugs, psychopaths with no regards for other people do not need drugs to cause problems. A rapist with transporting tech, can just transport any victim they want to their home, I don't think women or children would be safe if everyone had a transporter.
Even if criminal tendencies were diminished to the point of nearly non-existent and there weren't many psychological concerns, there's still the physical.
What if a house isn't tidy and you were accidentally beamed into a misplaced object? Who wants their kids' toy inside their feet? No matter how careful you are, something stupid's bound to happen some time.
What if a house isn't tidy and you were accidentally beamed into a misplaced object? Who wants their kids' toy inside their feet? No matter how careful you are, something stupid's bound to happen some time.
Transporters must be like air travel is today.
Think about it. One can transport literally in a second from NYC to London. In the real world, a flight would take hours. And obviously it is applicable anywhere in the world, and underground to an extent (say to a depth of 1 kilometre, which is quite deep).
There must also be restrictions in use though. Most likely there are public transporter pads, operated by the Federation and/or planetary government. And private residences may have shields to prevent unauthorised transporter beams.
Think about it. One can transport literally in a second from NYC to London. In the real world, a flight would take hours. And obviously it is applicable anywhere in the world, and underground to an extent (say to a depth of 1 kilometre, which is quite deep).
There must also be restrictions in use though. Most likely there are public transporter pads, operated by the Federation and/or planetary government. And private residences may have shields to prevent unauthorised transporter beams.
Lt. Cheka Wey
Commander
They are probably complicated to operate, why else would you need a transporter chief?
For the same reason automobiles need expensive specialists? Operating them is a no-brainer; keeping them running is hard work for a team of professionals.
We never met anybody in Star Trek who would have been at a loss to operate a transporter. Heck, even the near-caveman Captain Christopher almost got away with it, and Kirk certainly seemed to think his prisoner would be fully capable of using a transporter for his getaway. And that is with military hardware; civilian models would no doubt be much more user-friendly.
Timo Saloniemi
We never met anybody in Star Trek who would have been at a loss to operate a transporter. Heck, even the near-caveman Captain Christopher almost got away with it, and Kirk certainly seemed to think his prisoner would be fully capable of using a transporter for his getaway. And that is with military hardware; civilian models would no doubt be much more user-friendly.
Timo Saloniemi
You would also need people to perform upgrades and other corrective or adaptive maintenance.
It's like in an average company today, I'd bet many people don't know the rudiments of sending an e-mail or the TCP/IP functions involved, but that despite that ignorance there still needs to be an IT staff present to troubleshoot a network if e-mails cannot be sent or perform maintenance and/or upgrades in the event of new hardware and technologies.
It's like in an average company today, I'd bet many people don't know the rudiments of sending an e-mail or the TCP/IP functions involved, but that despite that ignorance there still needs to be an IT staff present to troubleshoot a network if e-mails cannot be sent or perform maintenance and/or upgrades in the event of new hardware and technologies.
Similar threads
