What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Ovation]

Controversial Trek opinion (since I helped derail the thread): I prefer the SNW theme to the original TOS one.

 

[Jayson1]

Not sure if mine is THAT controversial but I like the TNG theme over the TOS one.

 

[kkt]

Here is a controversial opinion. Wesley Crusher was not that bad of a character. His most annoying moments come in season 1 before the show really found itself. He has been the lead in several episodes I like, though two of them I do have to admit happened after he was no longer a series regular.

Wesley Crusher became a better character after he was no longer in every episode, and they only brought him in when he had something important to do.

 

[kkt]

By television standards, twelve to fourteen days to do one episode is downright luxurious.

But a lot of TV is soap operas or police or hospital procedurals. More or less familiar situations, minimal new sets, minimal special effects....

 

[cooleddie74]

The Bills have lots of Canadians on the team? Poor Josh Allen. Will the Deep State never end it's efforts from keeping them from a Super Bowl victory? This new vertical format offense just isn't going to be enough to get past the Chiefs.

Oh, RUB IT IN.

 

[kkt]

Did someone mention the M-5?

Let's look at the Antares, versus the Enterprise.

The Antares had a crew of twenty.

Attached various points along TOS, various crew sizes were mentioned - 203, 428, 430...why?

The Antares is described as a transport, a survey ship, and a science probe...

The Constitution is described as a space cruiser, a heavy cruiser, and an exploration and research vessel.

Why?

Simple automation should be able to do most jobs. Smart automation, would be able to handle far more. Defining 'smart' as able to make use of sensor data to modify programmed behavior.

Larry Niven, anticipated a set circumstances where smart systems would fail in some unanticipated ways (A Gift From Earth)

So, a level of true Artificial Intelligence is required.

Problem: not the M-5, but Nomad. As is: where did a Nomad type Artificial Intelligence fail?

Answer: it didn't. It just wasn't fast enough to run at the speed required.

Why?

In a moment of time, far, far briefer, than a straight up Nomad could handle, and therefore far simpler in its independent logic, was now permitted. Speed equals simplicity. Smaller required database.

Nomad got its brains all scrambled with the Others... mixed up the two missions.

The odd thing about "The Ultimate Computer" is that the M-5 was well-programmed in combat, if a bit fuzzy on who the enemy was, but we didn't see anything about how it could handle exploration tasks and lab work. For first contact I'm thinking lots of new civilizations would rather meet a representative face-to-face instead of one of its computers. To break new ground in lab work you need someone doing creative thought. Taking a bunch of data, sure, but you need someone to make sense of what the data means.

Part of the Enterprise's large crew was to provide a lot of subject matter experts as they were exploring. Part was also for companionship as the ship was on a five-year mission; you'd need more than a few people just to avoid driving each other crazy.

For a pure warship, you'd want something more like the Defiant. Hits hard, the ship is as small as possible so that it's maneuverable, the crew is small and not expected to be out for months without crew rotation or lengthy leave at a pleasant base or shore leave somewhere.

 

[BillJ]

Controversial Trek opinion (since I helped derail the thread): I prefer the SNW theme to the original TOS one.

You may have to go into hiding!

 

[Jayson1]

Oh, RUB IT IN.

Hey I feel bad for you guys. Nobody should suffer that much. Especially poor Josh Allen. One more failed season and Hailee Steinfeld is out the door!