Treknology infograhic

[Timo]

Umm....that wasn't an example of motion sensor stuff, he was signalling to a female crewman who was seated just off screen.

But since this appalling example of future misogyny isn't actually seen on screen, we could just as well interpret it as motion sensor technology. Which would be seriously out of place aboard a starship bridge in a crisis situation, but would be eminently suited for scientific presentations which typically involve lots of handwaving...

What we see is what we get - but why interpret it the dullest possible way?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[blssdwlf]

I was going to mention something about the lack of motion controlled devices, but then there was Spock from "The Menagerie/The Cage" doing his MS Kinect thing with the screen display. Interestingly, they discarded that use. Starfleet's IT department are just a bunch of oddballs, IMHO

Umm....that wasn't an example of motion sensor stuff, he was signalling to a female crewman who was seated just off screen. The wider shot can be seen at startrekhistory.com on the page concerned with the production of "The Cage".

As Timo points out, the wider shot never aired. Plus, how do we know he was signaling to the female crewman or was the female crewman taking notes? Is there a video of the wide shot in action?

blssdwlf: even if I found an official with a typewriter, you would assume he was another Sam Cogley who had a personal preference for antiques.

Quite wrong. If there was a Star Fleet crewmember using a typewriter for Star Fleet business, then I'd agree Star Fleet used typewriters. That is different from you assuming they used typewriters without direct evidence since they could just be using a typewriter-like font.

If you saw Scotty complaining about the voice in another episode, you could probably assume that the technology was being deliberately limited by Starfleet orders in order to maintain uniform retro aesthetics across starships.

Nope. That would just illustrate that Star Fleet technology was incapable of natural voice synthesis and I would have agreed with your assumption. But since we have "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" then that evidence shows that natural voice technology is available but for reasons unknown to us they do not to use it.

You start by assuming that their technology is more advanced than ours in all respects, which means the only way you can see their buttons and switches is through some kind of retro aesthetics.

I start by seeing if TOS technology can functionally do it. If there is evidence then there you go. If there is no evidence either way, then I would try not to make a determination. If there is evidence that they are incapable of it, I'd be the first to back you up. I don't care too much about the aesthetics when we're discussing function.

The explanation suffers because those are real, physical humans out there, with the same sense perceptions as our present-day humans who needed to evolve those 1960s tools and interfaces for practical reasons.

It suffers because you want to project our modern day values and future predictions on them. I'm not trying to (or at least keeping it at a minimum.)

Thus when I ask you why those humans aren't bothered by robotic voices and typewritten text, the reply is that we don't know what happened in their world. Your explanation requires radical changes in the way those humans think about technology, as opposed to humans on a present-day warship.

My explanation is the simplest in approaching it from an in-universe POV. If they aren't bothered by it, why should we be? It's only radical to you because you are attempting to think for them with our modern day sensibilities and not their sensibilities, IMHO.

I'm proposing a much simpler explanation, which is that the TOS universe is one of myriad fictional worlds whose creators couldn't fully predict the future, so the reason regular humans aren't bothered by rob-o-tic-voi-ces-which-make-it-hard-to-per-ceive-sen-tence-struct-ure is simply that they don't have the technology to implement changes (perhaps the planet from "Tomorrow is Yesterday" had slightly better technology, but they refused to adapt it for another voice or there were minor technical limitations which would soon be overcome). It requires no changes in the way humans think, no retro aesthetics on a semi-military ship, only that you abandon a mere assumption that their technology is more advanced than ours. That is what I mean by applying Occam's Razor in this case: there is no need for the radical assumption that future humans wouldn't be bothered by so much form over function.

You are welcome to your viewpoint on it but since there is no evidence that they are incapable of applying natural voice or clacking away on typewriters I'll stick to my viewpoint.

We'll just have to agree to disagree

 

[Boris Skrbic]

No, the burden of proof is on you, since you're proposing that our technological advances since the 1960s are mere artifacts of fashion, that in a few hundred years we could easily switch back to the buttons, computer voices, noise, fonts and other artifacts of TOS, only because of changed sensibilities. If you were to be transported into the world of TOS, you would feel the difference immediately. Imagine having to use the bulky tricorder with the tiny curved screen, a few buttons and no voice control. Imagine having to listen to the chatter and robotic voice of the Enterprise computer; even now you can test that it is difficult to discern sentence structure. TOS characters aren't bothered by it because to them it's state of the art; the creators of their fictional world just couldn't foresee anything easier to use. However, we know better, which is why the JJ-verse contains a number of changes in order to bring TOS up to date with our real-world advances.

 

[blssdwlf]

No, the burden of proof is on you, since you're proposing that our technological advances since the 1960s are mere artifacts of fashion, that in a few hundred years we could easily switch back to the buttons, computer voices, noise, fonts and other artifacts of TOS, only because of changed sensibilities.

Not really. You haven't produced any evidence to support that the TOS tech can't do natural voice synthesis. And where is the typewriter again?

Another thing, why are you putting forth the creators in the 60's made these predictions of the future and failed but these predictions look like the 60's aesthetics anyway? Wouldn't that suggest that they just used their contemporary aesthetics and didn't try too hard to imagine what the aesthetics in the future would be like and instead focused on function?

 

[Captain Robert April]

Wouldn't Spock's faked voice recordings in "The Menagerie" be proof enough that natural voice synthesis is not only possible, but rather shockingly easy? As well as Ben Finney's faked log recording showing Kirk jettisoning the ion pod while still on yellow alert?

 

[Boris Skrbic]

The evidence is simply that natural voice synthesis is better, as such a voice is easier to understand, so if the Enterprise isn't using it, Starfleet probably can't make it work (at least for the computer, but it will in a few decades and never look back). The typewriter may or may not be there, but it would be consistent with all the other technology which is less advanced than our own. You must prove that natural voice synthesis and our various fonts are mere artifacts of fashion, and for that you need to research future trends.

Aside from their limited budget, TOS creators couldn't see into the future. As noted earlier, not even 2001 got it all right. And yes, it is also possible that in some instances they didn't try too hard and instead focused on function, but whatever is onscreen remains canon, and we must find the simplest explanation that fits the facts. Your theory of our technological advances being mere fashion just doesn't hold water, since you're trying to convert 1960s limitations into reasonable future developments.

 

[blssdwlf]

The evidence is simply that natural voice synthesis is better, as such a voice is easier to understand,

That's our evidence for our time and our culture. How does that make it as evidence for TOS?

so if the Enterprise isn't using it, Starfleet probably can't make it work (at least for the computer, but it will in a few decades and never look back).

That's an assumption that they can't make it work in TOS. Since they did in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and they went back to the old voice it's still not a technical limitation.

The typewriter may or may not be there, but it would be consistent with all the other technology which is less advanced than our own. You must prove that natural voice synthesis and our various fonts are mere artifacts of fashion, and for that you need to research future trends.

I only need to prove that the capability exists or that there is no indication of proof either way. Natural voice (with a personality!)? Check - "Tomorrow is Yesterday". No typewriters visibly responsible for the typewriter-style font? Check. Then it can come from anything

Aside from their limited budget, TOS creators couldn't see into the future. As noted earlier, not even 2001 got it all right. And yes, it is also possible that in some instances they didn't try too hard and instead focused on function, but whatever is onscreen remains canon, and we must find the simplest explanation that fits the facts. Your theory of our technological advances being mere fashion just doesn't hold water, since you're trying to convert 1960s limitations into reasonable future developments.

I'm just pointing out what they showed that they were functionally capable of. You just happened to pick something like natural voice synthesis which they had an example where it was well within their capability. The simplest in-universe explanation is that they can do natural voice synthesis but they choose not to The simplest out-of-universe explanation is what? They didn't want to hire an extra voice talent for just the natural sounding computer voice since they already set a precedence for natural voice in "Tomorrow is Yesterday"?

 

[Boris Skrbic]

But why do you assume that the robotic voice is a cultural thing? I keep telling you that it's hard to understand, as if we were to write without using any punctuation, so your explanation is far from being simple. And they didn't make it work; that was just a temporary addition by the inhabitants of the planet where they stopped over for maintenance, so we have no idea what was needed to make it work on a regular basis. You also assume that the 1960s buttons and switches are a cultural thing, along with the routine use of slide graphic computers, but they were obviously intended to be quite functional within the limitations of 1960s prediction/budget.

 

[Timo]

It's pretty difficult to argue that voice synthesis would be undoable, when convincing voice synthesis actually plays a fairly major role in several TOS plots. The Eminians do it in an attempt to convince Scotty, and it takes another computer to expose the forgery (and even this only happens because Scotty has every reason to suspect a forgery). Spock later convincingly forges orders to facilitate his kidnapping of Pike and hijacking of the Enterprise. And gods know what Finney had to do in order to plausibly frame Kirk for his "murder" - but seamless re-editing of bridge visuals was part of it, and that necessarily calls for seamless re-editing of bridge audio as well, which would be impossible without convincing voice synthesis.

Really, while I can see Boris's point, the voice synthesis example really works against it. Many a futuristic ability was implicit in TOS, sometimes wholly unintentionally; the writers might not have seen far, but various realities of TV production pushed their visions farther. Heck, if not for said realities, we wouldn't even have transporters, which certainly give TOS an extreme futuristic flair - one that makes it almost impossible to believe that the rest of the technology of that era would truly be as "steampunk" as it looks like.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Captain Robert April]

There's also the aspect that the robotic voice they used for the computer is very, very distinctive. Nobody is going to confuse that voice with some crewmember making a report, whereas if Majel simply did the computer voice in her normal speaking voice (like she did for TNG; made for an interesting scene when Lwaxana asked the ship's computer for something) it could very well be confusing to the listener. Annoying for the home viewer, possibly catastrophic for the crewman hearing the report.

BTW, it should be noted that with "In a Mirror, Darkly...", we see that Starfleet did, in fact, change the computer voice to something more naturalistic, with Majel doing the Defiant's computer voice in her TNG computer voice.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

But what if they're having problems with real-time synthesis (unlike Eminiar), so they need to use a "low-res" robotic voice, without the niceties of intonation, in order to save processing power? They are very close to solving the issue and likely did that on the Defiant (which differs from the Enterprise in a number of minor ways). Since they never looked back, I don't agree that the robotic voice was ever preferable.

 

[Timo]

The tin man voice seems to go hand in hand with a very noisy bridge environment. The Kelvin bridge in STXI reproduces that environment - it would have been interesting to hear the computer speak there... Instead, we get graphic interfaces.

Regarding the odd pace of treknology development, let's not forget that humans probably didn't invent a whole lot of it. After interstellar contact became reality, many technologies would probably have been imported, without importing the associated technologies and development paths and spinoffs that the actual developers would natively enjoy. There might well be interesting lacunae there in the human technology pool of the 23rd century, only slowly filling in as UFP cooperation intensified.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Yes, presumably there was more focus on space travel than on consumer technology, so a number of advances were made centuries later than in our timeline. Technology from the 1960s would've been combined with imported or reverse-engineered alien tech; advances in computer AI and voice control might've put LCD displays and touchscreens on the back burner.

 

[blssdwlf]

Interestingly, the TOS Movies showed a range of computer voices from the natural to the natural with robotic tin-ness and using both male and female voices on the same ship. The robotic tin-ness does stand out among the bridge chatter and makes it easier to identify the computer speaking and a background crewmen speaking. The Vulcan test machine Spock was using sounded like a chipmunk run through an autotune The Self-destruct voice in "The Search for Spock" sounded very natural. The bridge computer voice for the Kobyashi Maru test sounded more mechanical. Etc.

What we have is natural voice technology along with a personality that existed and was implemented in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and Kirk had it/her uninstalled after the episode not because it took too much processing power but because they didn't like the personality. And we also have other episodes where the natural voice technology plays a role in the plot like "Court Martial" and "A Taste of Armageddon". As long as the capability is there, it is unlikely that it is a technical limitation and other explanations should be looked at, IMO.

 

[Timo]

It's still a bit difficult to argue that 1960s tech would have survived till the warp age, when we do see the 1980s come and go much as they were from the consumer viewpoint, and by the 1990s we get things that are slightly in advance of the real world in the consumer sense (thanks to time travel, admittedly, but it's time travel that happened in the past of our regular heroes and is part of their history).

It's quite possible that the 1980s of ST4 were subtly different from ours; the 1990s certainly were, because spacecraft had antigravity even if Rain Robinson still drove a non-hovering VW Kleinbus. Such subtlety might have preserved some 1960s relics through the late 20th and early 21st centuries, but primitive computing technology wouldn't seem to be one of those...

Even strictly in the context of TOS, the writers seemed to be assuming that the future would come - hence 1990s interplanetary travel and 2000s interstellar probes, without alien help. So it's no good arguing that the TOS movies and later shows take place in a wholly different universe.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Boris Skrbic]

I would argue that the various incarnations of Trek each take place in slightly different universes; it's just that so far they've managed to sweep the hard questions under the carpet. TMP was one major reboot, FC was another (and then served as the basis of ENT).

 

[blssdwlf]

I would argue that the various incarnations of Trek each take place in slightly different universes; it's just that so far they've managed to sweep the hard questions under the carpet. TMP was one major reboot, FC was another (and then served as the basis of ENT).

I would agree with that However, "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" is still a TOS episode...

 

[Boris Skrbic]

...which doesn't prove that just because Signet 14 could install such a computer voice, Starfleet can as well.

The problem is that you're trying very hard to keep TOS current and technologically relevant, by viewing it through your knowledge of 2011. What if we were having this discussion in the 1960s? Would you assume retro-aesthetics, or would you simply state that yes, they're using typewriters (as you would be in the 1960s), yes, they're using slide graphic calculators (as you would be in the 1960s), and so forth. TOS should be viewed through the eyes of the audience for which it was made, because that's the only way to make sense of the backward pieces of its technology.

 

[BK613]

Wasn't it Isaac Asimov that wrote a story about a highly-computerized future in which a technician reinvents the pen and notepad and changes the world?

 

[blssdwlf]

...which doesn't prove that just because Signet 14 could install such a computer voice, Starfleet can as well.

Then why would Star Fleet let Cygnet 14 be a place where the Enterprise can put in for "general repair and maintenance" and Cygnet 14 be given full access to all of the ship's computer and interlinking systems?

The problem is that you're trying very hard to keep TOS current and technologically relevant, by viewing it through your knowledge of 2011. What if we were having this discussion in the 1960s?

Me - "Whoa, listen to that sweet computer voice with the personality in that time-traveling episode. That's pretty cool."

Would you assume retro-aesthetics, or would you simply state that yes, they're using typewriters (as you would be in the 1960s), yes, they're using slide graphic calculators (as you would be in the 1960s), and so forth.

If I'm not mistaken, in the 60's they also had typewriters (or the keyboard portion) hooked up to computers with big honking printers as well. (Ok, well, I'd ask where the punch cards were in TOS ) The slide graphic calculator I'd probably not notice as I would have been only familiar with the ones without the circular piece in the middle.

TOS should be viewed through the eyes of the audience for which it was made, because that's the only way to make sense of the backward pieces of its technology.

I would think to make sense of the technology in TOS was to view what they actually can do with it, IMHO.

Wasn't it Isaac Asimov that wrote a story about a highly-computerized future in which a technician reinvents the pen and notepad and changes the world?

LOL. FWIW, this is an interesting opinion on touchscreen UIs:

http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/