Maybe it doesn't work with living tissue.
Location of Federation HQ post The Burn
- Thread starter mattman8907
- Start date
Trek's level of absurdity has been pretty consistent in this regard.
Bridge modules! They changed bridges.
(...and everything else, but one problem at a time.)
I'm pretty sure it's one of the two dozen options simultaneously in use. It's just that if the intent is to preserve, you don't put all your eggs in Memory Alpha. You replicate some for Memories Beta through Yotta, too, and then make omelette to be served at Kuppa Java, and cross-breed the chicken with the Voth.
Having intact seeds sailing through stars is a surefire thing. You don't compromise that with quantum storage. Instead, you do quantum storage on a suitable planet, and don't compromise that by using a mobile planet. And so forth. The Tikhov is Old School, analogous to analogous storing of data in the digital age...
Might well be many of the "better" options were lost in the Burn and its aftermath, and the dumb little vault sailing from star to star survives due to its simplicity. However, we do see what looks like warp engines on that ship, and she was only months away from SF HQ, not centuries. So why did she not blow up in the Burn? Or, alternately, if the Tikhov-L did blow up, why are the seeds still there?
Timo Saloniemi
I wonder if the existence of the Tikhov-M is just evidence that the art designers didn't exactly agree with the story as exactly conceived by the writers. "It's the same ship since the 23rd century!" the writers say. And "Yeah, not with all these crazy details you keep adding on," was the response.
So, with the addition of a letter, they gave themselves permission to go crazy with another futuristic design, instead of just tossing in another Magee class ship and calling it a day.
So, with the addition of a letter, they gave themselves permission to go crazy with another futuristic design, instead of just tossing in another Magee class ship and calling it a day.
Or a line was cut for time.
Oh, please. There is no grand moral superiority in the show or its fanbase. The fanbase is filled with whiners and bigots. One third of the IMDb reviews for Disco S3E4 expressed bigoted if not outright transphobic sentiments - and that aspect hasn’t even started onscreen yet. This follows the assorted racist, sexist and homophobic aspects of reviews in previous seasons.
Not that this is anything new; Trek fans called in to complain about the kiss in Rejoined, and sent hate male to Fuller over the mere rumour of a gay Voyager character.
Save the sermonising for them.
Trek fans have been flooding social media with negativity about the latest instalments for decades, but it’s got worse in recent years. I’m sick to death of it, and if an acronym happens to be a common theme in such postings, I will gladly use it to quickly filter my feed. That’s not pearl-clutching; no offence is taken, just boredom. Discrimination? More like one aspect of an assessment of whether someone is worth hearing from.
If that's the case, that would be workplace insubordination and incredibly unprofessional behavior. The art designers and visual effects artists are not the people in charge, and overriding the producers on something like this would be a fireable offense.
I'm quite sure the apparent discrepancy between someone saying "the Tikhov is still around" and the use of the "-M" moniker is a production error, not a deliberate act of insubordination from people who forgot who signs their paychecks.
I hear you (although I disagree about the lack of moral superiority in Star Trek... the morality is one of my favorite things about the franchise), and I don't mean to present myself as a defender of the indefensible. There are always repugnant people in this world, there always will be. I personally believe that they represent a vocal minority, even if perhaps a larger minority than I'd like, but a minority nonetheless. Star Trek is, and still is, and always has been, about presenting an optimistic future of a better society, even if it's one that has gone through fire, or is still going through fire, to achieve this.
I just feel that some, not necessarily you, have latched onto this innocuous acronym and are using it as a rallying cry against the indefensible, when it should remain as an innocuous, sophomoric joke, as it was when I first used it back in the day. I don't use acronyms for single-worded shows anymore, because of these incessant, unnecessary attacks (which, yes, are nothing compared to what the groups you mentioned go through on a daily basis), but to a newbie, an outsider, the acronym "S.T.D." or "S.T.P." or even something like "S.T.V." (which used to be common among fan fiction sites) are simple abbreviations of the three names of the television show and don't represent malice unless influenced by those forces that have incorrectly used one of these acronyms.
Not exactly. The art designers and the writers are on an equivalent status, so it would just be a disagreement between co-workers. The episode director, showrunner, and executive producers would be the one on the higher tier who would make the decision on which path to take. And, in this case, they took both paths for some reason (lack of proper oversight? A cut line explaining it? Just added vagueness because it's the future?)
He said there was no moral superiority to the fandom, not to Star Trek itself.
See:
I humbly disagree with both. Star Trek has helped shape my morality, I'd like to think, for the better, and hopefully the morality of many others. Perhaps it hasn't, and has led to the degradation of society in some way. That's a depressing thought, as I'd like to think the supposed degradation of society is a symptom of something else and will soon pass.
Eh...
ETA: Never mind. Ninja'd.
Double ETA:
See, this is where I struggle. I don't want Star Trek to shape my morality beyond being stories were I can see morality played out. I feel like leaning on an entertainment franchise, as noble as it can be, is dangerous for morality.
I think this has led to a lot of misunderstanding and conflict, where Trek leans in to the drama of interpersonal conflict and members of the audience (no one specific in mind here) expect it to be perfectly morally upright soliloquy.
Touche! But the bulk of donners22's comments focused on fandom behavior, not the shows.
I think the ideals Star Trek espouses are broadly moral, and I think Star Trek can broadly be said to foreground its moral sensibilities more than most shows. But I also think its level of morality is often overstated. Like it or not, Star Trek is a product of its times, and has often reflected oppressive attitudes of the era in which it was made -- from depicting women as emotionally weak throughout TOS, to implicitly arguing "both sides are bad" in response to black liberation leaders in "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield," to TNG, VOY, and ENT totally ignoring gay people, to the horribly racist "Code of Honor," to engaging in constant "species essentialism" throughout TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT ("Klingons were born to do battle!") even as alien species are used as an analogy for race, to DS9 portraying sexual harassment as much less damaging than it is (including a scene where Quark demands an employee to give him the Ferengi equivalent of a handjob to avoid being fired, but then somehow she's into it?!?!), to VOY's constant sexual objectification of Jeri Ryan, to ENT's fetishization of sexual slavery in the form of the Orions, to VOY's infamous "accusing a man of rape is worse than being raped!" episode, to the implicit "revisionist history is always wrong, don't trust oppressed peoples to present history to us" aspect of the Future!Doctor episode, etc etc etc.
And that's to say nothing about episodes like "Dear Doctor" that depict passive genocide as a good thing.
Star Trek is good, but let's not put it on a pedestal.
Someone on Facebook says the future in Discovery looks like the inside of a washing machine and I am gonna think of that every time I see the roof of that Starfleet HQ set
Someone on Facebook says the future in Discovery looks like the inside of a washing machine and I am gonna think of that every time I see the roof of that Starfleet HQ set
A washing machine, an 80s hotel lobby, an overlit submarine...
From TrekCore.com's twitter account:
"NOT A SPOILER: Thanks to a momentary glimpse of Starfleet's map of the Alpha Quadrant, we can see that the secret Starfleet HQ base is somewhere about halfway between the Terra Nova colony (ENT) and Subspace Relay Station AR-558 (DS9)."
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1329437898630975489
"NOT A SPOILER: Thanks to a momentary glimpse of Starfleet's map of the Alpha Quadrant, we can see that the secret Starfleet HQ base is somewhere about halfway between the Terra Nova colony (ENT) and Subspace Relay Station AR-558 (DS9)."
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1329437898630975489
From TrekCore.com's twitter account:
"NOT A SPOILER: Thanks to a momentary glimpse of Starfleet's map of the Alpha Quadrant, we can see that the secret Starfleet HQ base is somewhere about halfway between the Terra Nova colony (ENT) and Subspace Relay Station AR-558 (DS9)."
https://twitter.com/TrekCore/status/1329437898630975489
that explains the Bajoran exchange, and the Cardassians we saw in the episode. We are in close proximity to Cardassian space. Btw - looks like the Ferengi Alliance got bigger!
It's interesting that the charts in "Scavengers" show a klingon and a cardassian zone for example and not the Klingon Empire or the Cardassian Union. Perhaps it's a hint that they are Federation members.
Similar threads
