He just wanted a copy of his son.
Q's return but Picard is different now.
- Thread starter Vasquez Rocks
- Start date
Again, at a given point it’s hard to say what’s real and what now.
The interesting thing (I seem to remember that you find it scary) is that this will be a question we’ll have to ask ourselves in the real world in a few decades, with the coming of mind transfer into machines.
The interesting thing (I seem to remember that you find it scary) is that this will be a question we’ll have to ask ourselves in the real world in a few decades, with the coming of mind transfer into machines.
Scary? The only thing I find scary is the removal of human choice in a machine process. Beyond that, while not for me I won't fear mind transfer unless forced.
So...you find automatic transmission scary?
That's...not the same thing. Though, I will clarify. In an automatic transmission there was human engineering and processing in the timing. What I see people wanting is machines to make up their own minds on things and let technology go wherever it might go. Now that if that is a misunderstanding of expectations then perhaps I misunderstand. But, that's my impression.
So what we’re doing with neural networks then, with machines that have to be *trained* and don’t have a program that was written by a human beforehand?
More skeptical than anything else. It sounds completely ridiculous to my limited understanding. But, as long as a human is involved, and there is ability to make choice as to what the machine does I'm less anxious. When I read futurology posts its always like "humans won't have to do X" when it comes to machine development. Which, OK, fair enough, but it limits the value for my part. Doesn't inspire me.
Last edited:
A human is involved in feeding the program the training model, basically, everything else is really pretty much automatic and often beyond what we’re able to do with traditional programming.
I’ve been using something based on this kind of technology for a year now and it already does something that back in 2019 was deemed impossible: it allows the computer to distinguish and separate musical instruments in a mix. Older software that tried this didn’t really work and most humans aren’t very good ai it either.
also, just because we won’t *have* to do something one day doesn’t mean we won’t be able to chose to do it anyway. And there are many tasks that right now we HAVE to do that most people would gladly have a machine do instead (and many wealthy individuals pay someone else to do).
I’ve been using something based on this kind of technology for a year now and it already does something that back in 2019 was deemed impossible: it allows the computer to distinguish and separate musical instruments in a mix. Older software that tried this didn’t really work and most humans aren’t very good ai it either.
also, just because we won’t *have* to do something one day doesn’t mean we won’t be able to chose to do it anyway. And there are many tasks that right now we HAVE to do that most people would gladly have a machine do instead (and many wealthy individuals pay someone else to do).
And? As I said, I would prefer the involvement of choice, something which is not always identified as part of this process from what I occasionally read. You keep choice inside there and that's fine. You eliminate that and I have concerns. Which is usually what I see is that I'd rather have a machine do it because I don't want to and am apathetic towards the process of how it gets done. That sort of laziness makes me more concerned.
But there is choice: you can chose to do wash your clothes yourself or have a washing machine and concentrate on some other thing. You can chose to learn how to fix the washing machine yourself if it breaks or pay someone else to do it and concentrate on other things.
I’m a musician and you work in psychology, we wouldn’t have these options if we couldn’t chose to have someone else find food for us.
I’m a musician and you work in psychology, we wouldn’t have these options if we couldn’t chose to have someone else find food for us.
Choice in the process of how technology develops. Not choice in terms of whether or not I use it, thought that is also a concern.
I think Q would be even more fascinated with Picard being a clone and possessing the same mentality as Old Picard. Not to mention the makers of Picard's Clone. Q might even have more respect for humans now, unlike he had, before.
I'm guessing it won't even be addressed,
Yet if it is at all, it may be in the form of an offhand Q quip, like:
- "So I see you copied your consciousness into a synthetic, I still know what you really are, you can't escape being human Peeecard"
Which serves to both acknowledges he would recognize the otherwise unrecognizable change, yet also simultaneously dismisses it as not demanding any further exploration, which the lazy writers (who just needed a- look he's dead! ...surprise no he's not! moment), have already announced they don't want to explore or deal with any actual psychological / metaphysical implications , and just move on without thinking about it.
Last edited:
The only exploration possible would be psychological, which might be interesting, but under all other points of view the new Picard is pretty much human.
Here's what Stewart himself had to say about it:
https://trekmovie.com/2022/02/25/in...ght-him-to-tears-on-star-trek-picard-season-2
https://trekmovie.com/2022/02/25/in...ght-him-to-tears-on-star-trek-picard-season-2
Oh yes, I’m sure Picard is very irritated of being a synth.
Will it be revealed thT guinan is Q’s Mother?
Q seems to really fear her in an infantile way
Q seems to really fear her in an infantile way
Similar threads
