Replicator or Transporter?

[infinix]

Which one would be more useful to you in everyday life situation??

Replicator is your normal sized replicator that you see in crew member's quarters. And no, you cannot use the replicator to replicate a transporter. All of the replicator rules set in the technical manual apply.

I would still choose the replicator. I'll turn that sucker into my personal factory pumping out crap like iphone accessories and make a fortune.

 

[el Chalupacabra]

Replicators would make famine and poverty a thing of the past. Transporters would just make societies more mobile. However, replicators were somewhat derived from transporter technology (matter\energy conversion principles), so i would have to say i'd rather have transporters. You could always reverse engineer them, to create replicators, later.

 

[6079SmithW]

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

 

[Xerxes1979]

seems like keeping a replicator to yourself is kind of selfish, since it has potential to end poverty as we know it overnight.

 

[6079SmithW]

The thread premise is everyone gets to choose one or the other, so its not selfish, just preference. In universe the replicator did just that: end poverty and want. It fundamentally changed society into the utopia one we see in TNG.

 

[infinix]

seems like keeping a replicator to yourself is kind of selfish, since it has potential to end poverty as we know it overnight.

Well, we only have one replicator to work with here...

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

You don't have mortgage or rent payments to worry about? What job do you want?

 

[JarodRussell]

seems like keeping a replicator to yourself is kind of selfish, since it has potential to end poverty as we know it overnight.

Well, we only have one replicator to work with here...

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

You don't have mortgage or rent payments to worry about? What job do you want?

He'd be selling the replicated stuff to starving people for high prices.

 

[BillJ]

I thought replicator technology was built off of transporter technology?

 

[6079SmithW]

seems like keeping a replicator to yourself is kind of selfish, since it has potential to end poverty as we know it overnight.

Well, we only have one replicator to work with here...

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

You don't have mortgage or rent payments to worry about? What job do you want?

I thought the idea was that everyone in the world gets to choose between having either a replicator or a transporter. I agree with the sentiments expressed that replicators would fundamentally change society. You no longer have to worry about basics like food and water so you can apply your income elsewhere, like renting a better apartment, reducing your mortgage, getting an/a better education, have more time to search for a better job instead of groceries, etc. With all those possibilities, I'd go with a replicator.

 

[sojourner]

With a replicator I could replicate a transporter (it's a silly rule that you can't make a transporter with a replicator), so.....

A better limit might be that the replicator can only make things based on current technology, tho that begs the question of how the replicator works and what prevents making advanced computers using parts replicated from the design of the replicator itself.

 

[Orac]

A replicator. As long as it can replicate money, then I won't need to worry about paying bills ever again.

 

[cyranojones69]

i would choose transporter, pop in ...get what i need...pop out...done

Which one would be more useful to you in everyday life situation??

Replicator is your normal sized replicator that you see in crew member's quarters. And no, you cannot use the replicator to replicate a transporter. All of the replicator rules set in the technical manual apply.

I would still choose the replicator. I'll turn that sucker into my personal factory pumping out crap like iphone accessories and make a fortune.

 

[cyranojones69]

come to think about it, a tribble is like a replicator and a transporter is like a drink of romulan ale, if they replicate enough you're buried in little fuzzy balls, but if you drink enough romulan ale you're transported off to happy land.

 

[6079SmithW]

A replicator. As long as it can replicate money, then I won't need to worry about paying bills ever again.

I'm pretty sure that if replicators were invented and put on the market now or in the near future there would be built-in restrictions on what you could and could not replicate. I'm pretty sure money would be one of those things, as well as narcotics and probably medicine. I think it's major operation would be to produce food and drink

 

[sojourner]

^Sorry, technology doesn't work that way. How many people today counterfeit money?

 

[Orac]

A replicator. As long as it can replicate money, then I won't need to worry about paying bills ever again.

I'm pretty sure that if replicators were invented and put on the market now or in the near future there would be built-in restrictions on what you could and could not replicate. I'm pretty sure money would be one of those things, as well as narcotics and probably medicine. I think it's major operation would be to produce food and drink

Like the restrictions built into gaming consoles that can be over-ridden by the simple installation of a chip?

 

[Xerxes1979]

replicating money is pointless all you would be doing is inflating the currency to a worthless level.

Did Alchemists think they would rule the world if gold was as common as lead?

 

[Gotham Central]

A replicator is a far more practical and believable piece of technology than a transporter...and safer as well.

A replicator merely takes raw elements and puts them into the right pattern to create non-living materials. We can do that on a small scale now with simple molecules (like taking oxygen and hydrogen to make water). In this instance you are just making more complex items.

Transporters are FAR more complicated and bring up a whole host of ethical issues. A transporter is required to take a life form...essentially kill it, disassemble it atom by atom and then nearly instantaneously, move said atoms to a new location, reassemble, and then revive...all the while hoping that nothing is lost or misplaced. On top of that is the philosophical question of whether what was spit out is the same entity as what was put in.

It never made sense that replicators were derived from transporter technology since they are far less complex.

 

[sojourner]

^Unless of course you subscribe that replicators create things using patterns just like transporters.

 

[T'Girl]

But transporters don't create things.