Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Messing Around With The Prime Directive

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the when-the-reporters-and-journalists-come-i-will- dept.

One of the humour sites that I enjoy, SatireWire is back with a look at the daily struggles of the Enterprise orbiting the current Earth. Considering the last reaction to Star Trek, I figured people would like this.

137 comments

  1. Huh? by Kasreyn · · Score: 0, Interesting

    My submission about the UF layoffs gets rejected, but the least funny bit in tonight's SatireWire newsletter is worthy of a front page article?

    -Kasreyn

    --
    Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger /. flamers since 1999.
    1. Re:Huh? by billn · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh, don't even get me started. I'm still pissed about my post about the epoch timestamp tacking on a digit, which was, I felt, marginally more important than the 'Search for the best programmable remote control'.

      I reiterate: Slashdot is not real news. It's a Nintendo with a web interface. If it was real news, little things like 'journalistic integrity', and not rampant yellow journalism, would prevail.

      --
      - billn
    2. Re:Huh? by xQx · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      [Back][Back][Up][Back][Block]
      Sub Zero Wins.

    3. Re:Huh? by Xylothan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well if it's any consolation, UF isn't that funny either so I guess it's a wash.

    4. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >yeah, same thing about @Home going tits up! This article isn't "news >for nerds" or "stuff that matters." @Home filing for bankruptcy fits >both. Who really gives a shit about the wanna-be AOL of the cable modem set (@Home)?

    5. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, now if it was the real AOL then that would be funny.

    6. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, i've been trying to remember that for years.

  2. Re:heh by kinko · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    heh yourself.

    *on-topic*
    They forgot to mention all those loud explosions in space....

  3. It's all sticky! Covered in jam! by billn · · Score: 1

    What, no commentary from the crew of Voyager: Flying Toilet?

    You'd think they'd violate the Prime Directive to at least put an end to Windows XP.

    --
    - billn
    1. Re:It's all sticky! Covered in jam! by bero-rh · · Score: 2

      You'd think they'd violate the Prime Directive to at least put an end to Windows XP.

      This would not be a violation of the Prime Directive.

      See Microsoft Trek for the reasoning. ;)

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  4. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    not even slightly funny. . .
    what gives?

  5. It's 4:20, do you know where... by Telastyn · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Hemos' brain has disappeared to? Apparently some sort of substance was involved to make that funny.

  6. Much funnier... (tangental) by Alakaboo · · Score: 4, Funny

    The previous article [satirewire.com] is much funnier (imho), and probably the best I've read from satirewire in a while.

    1. Re:Much funnier... (tangental) by Alakaboo · · Score: 1

      Gee, can you tell that it's been a while since I've posted...

    2. Re:Much funnier... (tangental) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Makes sense too.

      Did you know that USA made Bin Laden and funded him to kick the Russians out of Afganistan?

      Just like Sadam was sent by CIA to kick out Homeini

      In the same way CIA gave weapons to UCK and encouraged them to start "the revolution".

    3. Re:Much funnier... (tangental) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's funny. Personally, I think its one of their
      more stupid articles. The funniest one I saw there is
      the one about the illusion that you own a house.

    4. Re:Much funnier... (tangental) by fred1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, this article would be better if it were funny at all.

      --
      Gary Dolan Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r1, Kernel 2.5.10 FreeBSD 4.8 OpenBSD 3.3
  7. The Onion by rsidd · · Score: 3, Informative
    If anyone was wondering how a humour site can continue in the face of the recent tragedy, take a look at the current issue of The Onion.


    They used to be an amusing diversion to me. Now I respect them more than most of the mainstream press.

    1. Re:The Onion by rsidd · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And of course, a comment on a humour site, in a story about another humour site, is modded down as "offtopic", perhaps because someone's sensibilities were hurt.


      This is a test of the theory that any post which says "Slashdot sucks" will get modded up.

    2. Re:The Onion by ElDuque · · Score: 1

      They have done some very good work this week. If you need to laugh a bit, visit them. Unless you are my mom or something, you will not be offended.

  8. The only reason the prime directive exists by eclectro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is to supply fodder for inane plots. Don't get me wrong, I like Star Trek. But does anybody have an exact tally to the dozens of times that the prime directive has been violated??

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:The only reason the prime directive exists by Ether+Trogg · · Score: 1
      But does anybody have an exact tally to the dozens of times that the prime directive has been violated??

      Well, let's see, at least as many times as they've used some stupid time-travel/temporal anomoly plot-device, but less than the number of hot space-babes that Kirk "did the Prime Directive" with.

      --
      "The dead do not shoo-bop-aloo-bah." -- Kai, 'Lexx'
  9. 16th post, bi0tch!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DCR Spamcannon!

  10. Re:The Onion - America becomes a bad movie by goingware · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I thought the conclusion of American Life turns into bad Jerry Bruckheimer movie was especially appropriate:

    The collective sense of outrage, helplessness, and desperation felt by Americans is beyond comprehension. And it will be years before the full ramifications of the events of Sept. 11 become clear. But one thing is clear: No Austrian bodybuilder, gripping Uzis and striding shirtless through the debris, will save us and make it all better. Shocked and speechless, we are all still waiting for the end credits to roll. They aren't going to
    -- Shocked and speechless.

    --
    -- Could you use my software consulting serv
  11. Fanboys by BrickM · · Score: 1

    Anyone else waiting for the fanboys to come pooring out of the woodwork in order to correct the errors in this article regarding Star Trek continuity? Or are they all burned out from the last ST thread?

  12. Satire, Slashdot, Star Trek by MartyJG · · Score: 5, Funny

    all rolled into one: Top 90 Ways Star Trek Would Change If Slashdot Replaced Starfleet.

    As usual, you need a login to vote (moderate).

    --
    insignificant sig
  13. Star Trek and geek critics by The+Ultimate+Badass · · Score: 3, Interesting
    One attribute of geeks that I have noticed, is that they cannot sit through a movie without picking the plot to pieces and pedantically attacking every slight deviation from reality. I have nothing in particular against this, when applied to movies that are genuinely bad, such as "Austin Powers 2", but people who apply it to all movies really get up my nose.

    For some reason, however, Star Trek consistently misses out on the "Geek critique". This, despite the fact that Star Trek is guilty of some of the most contrived plots and unscientific pseudo-science.

    For instance:

    • Spock's pure logic: This is literally impossible. Biological brains are based on pattern matching, which necessitates illogical responses.
    • The dilithium crystals: As a fuel source, these are contrived beyond belief. Any good crystallographer knows that crytalline structures are too inert to supply decent energy returns. Try burning a diamond, if you don't believe me.
    • Warp factor 9: The idea that they could exceed the speed of light exactly nine times is ludicrous. As you move further from the speed of light, the rate at which speed increases grows immeasurably larger. It would be impossible to achieve any reasonable system of measurement at these speeds.
    • No plants on the enterprise: Anyone else notice this? You need plants to breathe, fools.
    • Artificial gravity: This was never explained. In any series.
    • Beaming down: There's no way this could possible work. Even if you could reconstruct a body at the other end, without some kind of receiving device, it would be dead on arrival.

      Despite all these obvious flaws, Star Trek gets a free ride from the geek critics. Favouritism? Hypocrisy? Blindness? I suspect the problem is really just that geeks criticise films to demonstrate their superior intellect, over the Hollywood film-makers and the audience. Since Star Trek films are considered to be a product of more thoughtful and knowledgeable writers, it does not occur to geeks that these films could be open to criticism.

    --

    Denial isn't just a river in Italy

    1. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it would be dead on arrival

      And why is that?

      Don't tell me you believe in some intangible "soul" that would not get transferred?

    2. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not quite, but again, we're discussing snake oil: Spock's pure logic: No one, even Spock, ever said that his thoughs are from pure logic. He was trined to do so. He was born half human, half volcan, and he learned to be as much logical as possible. When he mind-melded with McCoy, and then back to his reborn body, he lost much of his human peculiarity, and he was able to be more logical than before. The dilithium crystal: You might be correct, but the low entropy in a crystalline structire could be broken if enough energy will start a controlled reacton. Also, who knows exactly what they do with the crystal? Burning them might not be the correct interpretation, in fact, Scotty was able to regenerate Klingon's crystals by injecting photons collected from a nuclear rector. There might be atom scaled reactions here. Warp factor 9: this means not 9 times the speed of light, but c^9. According to their theory, the upper limit is c^10 anyway. No plants: no tradition kitchens either. They synthetize whatever they need. Implying they have control on atomic and sub-atomic reaction (see dilithium crystals). If they can synthetize a roasted chiken, surely they can the same with oxygen. Artificial gravity: read many (real) publications about the missing 'gravitone' particle. Also don't forget inertia. Beaiming down: cororrect, but see plants and crystals.

    3. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by cheetham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Spock's pure logic
      I agree with that.

      > The dilithium crystals
      I thought they are used to direct the anti-matter, rather than as a power source themself?

      > Warp factor 9:
      errrmm... don't forget sub-space. Also warp 9 is NOT nice times the speed of light. The warp factors are an exponential scale.

      > No plants on the enterprise:
      I can't remember if I've seen any or not to be honest, but can't air be recycled anyway?

      > Artificial gravity:
      IIRC, there are devices that emit gravitons, which are theoretical conveys of gravitation.

      > Beaming down:
      People are working on the problem.

    4. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About Beaming down.
      Doesn't the enterprise have Heisenberg correctors :)

    5. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Minupla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *grins* I'll skip the nitpick of the tech details in your post, because I'm sure there'll be no shortage of people jumping in to pull out their ST Tech Refs out of their bookshelves and quote chapter and verse, and speak to why I think ST gets a free ride from geeks.

      Firstly, in anything resembling a recent generation (ie: 90%+ of the population of /.) some form of ST was likely a very early introduction to SciFi to them. It's a base premise for most SciFi geeks, they don't really examine it because they internalized it before their critical thinking skills were up to scratch (this is also why you will see people arguing that TOS was the best trek. You tend to form your critical opinion of something the first time you watch it, if you watch it the first time when you're 8 years old, you're less likely to consider the lack of a recieving teleport station.)

      B) frankly Trek at least tries, usually :). Voyager had a hydroponics bay, for instance. Most geeks won't nitpick 2001 ethier, for similar reasons. An effort was made to preserve scientific reality (2001 is probably the best movie I've ever seen for that.)

      C) Reality is teaching us that maybe we don't know as much as we thought we did. Teleportation seems much more realistic after the successful teleportation of a photon using quantum entanglement.

      D) Trek isn't (mostly) about the tech. It's a vehicle for making observations on the human condition, ethics, etc. It provides a mirror in which we can view ourselves. As a child I learned a lot by watching aliens in TNG and how they viewed our race.

      E) Geeks, like everyone else appreciate a bit of optimism in their lives, especially now. At least for me, I'm far more likely to tear apart a planet of the apes, we blew ourselves up, sort of movie then I am a movie where the future seems pretty desirable overall. As a human, I want us to go where Trek is.

      For what it's worth, those are my thoughts.

      Minupla

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    6. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by j7953 · · Score: 4, Funny
      ... pattern matching, which necessitates illogical responses.

      You'd better not tell Larry Wall.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
    7. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm
      Well most people have said it all so far, so ive jsut got a few things to add.

      Dylithium Crystals: They are used as a cage to control and contain the matter:antimatter reaction.

      Hydroponics: U can get Rebreathers right now, which scrub the CO2 from the air, and make it breathable. When us humans breath in a lungfull of air, we dont extract all of that oxygen, infact we get less than a third of it, so the rest gets breathed back out. Also, notice theres no plants on Mir/Spaceshuttle/ISS (except for use in experiments.

      Warp factor 9: As someone said, this is actually exponential, but as explained in the series, they are actually bending space so theoretically they arent breaking laws.

    8. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by RobMahan · · Score: 0

      Warp factor 9 is not 9x lightspeed it is 1000x lightspeed

      --
      I wanted a funny .sig but all I got was this lousy T-shirt
    9. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to their theory, the upper limit is c^10 anyway.

      According to their *what*? I think you mean "script."

    10. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a vehicle for making observations on the human condition,

      Who are you trying to kid? Star Trek is to observations about the human condition as McDonalds is to fine cuisine. It takes complex issues and boils them down into a bland mushy paste suitable for slurping up by the kinds of morons who like Star Trek.

      The very worst thing about Star Trek is the sheer conceit of its producers and fans.

    11. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by alen · · Score: 1

      No plants on the enterprise? Ever see plants on the space shuttle or the ISS? How do they breathe?

    12. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by KioNeo · · Score: 1

      To counter some of your points:

      Warp Factor 9 is NOT simply nine times the speed of light. Warp is not a linear scale, but rather increases in an exponential manner.

      Did anyone notice that the Apollo or Space Shuttle missions had no plants? They used oxygen canisters and air scrubbers. If this is possible in our time, then an equally viable solution is possible several centuries in the future.

      --

      - If you can't be promiscuous, what's the point [of sniffing]?
    13. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by rmgrotkierii · · Score: 1

      Warp factor 9: The idea that they could exceed the speed of light exactly nine times is ludicrous. As you move further from the speed of light, the rate at which speed increases grows immeasurably larger. It would be impossible to achieve any reasonable system of measurement at these speeds.

      Warp One = Speed of light

      Warp Nine = 1649 times faster than Speed of light!

      It's not linear, more like asymptotic curve. And it doesn't matter if impossible to measure speeds, it's sci-fi.

      No plants on the enterprise: Anyone else notice this? You need plants to breathe, fools.

      Today, a nuclear submarine doesn't need to surface for months for a time, only to take aboard food, water, and mail! And they don't have any plants aboard either! What about the MIR space station? It was up there for over a decade without any plants either. How do those two things do it? They recycle air! Oh wow, modern technology, perhaps they do that on the Enterprise too! Nope, cannot be, it takes apart your arguement.

      --
      Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction.
    14. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by rmgrotkierii · · Score: 1

      months at a time

      Ugh, need to post after I had my caffeine fix in the morning...

      --
      Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction.
    15. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Jimmy_B · · Score: 2
      Star Trek falls into cliches. It kills off one-appearance characters practically every episode while leaving the major characters alone. It makes up new science whenever it needs a plot device. I personally feel that Trek has gone down hill since Voyager, and I'm not terribly optimistic about the new series. However, Star Trek is not guilty of the complete disregard for science you accuse it of. When possible, the writers do come up with plausible explanations.
      Spock's pure logic: This is literally impossible. Biological brains are based on pattern matching, which necessitates illogical responses.
      Actually, Vulcans are naturally more emotional and illogical than humans are, but suppress illogic and emotion through meditation and training. A human could learn to do this, too, especially given a 200-year lifespan to do it.
      The dilithium crystals: As a fuel source, these are contrived beyond belief. Any good crystallographer knows that crytalline structures are too inert to supply decent energy returns. Try burning a diamond, if you don't believe me.
      The dilithium crystal is not a fuel source, it regulates the reactions which power the ship. The real fuel source is deuterium and anti-matter; reactions of these do release a lot of energy.
      Warp factor 9: The idea that they could exceed the speed of light exactly nine times is ludicrous. As you move further from the speed of light, the rate at which speed increases grows immeasurably larger. It would be impossible to achieve any reasonable system of measurement at these speeds.
      The warp scale is not linear. Warp 1 is the speed of light. Warp 10 is infinite speed; Warp factors approaching warp 10 approach infinite speed.
      No plants on the enterprise: Anyone else notice this? You need plants to breathe, fools.
      When you're light years away from any star, providing the light to keep plants alive gets non-trivial. And, do you seriously believe that photosynthesis is the *only* reaction which can convert CO2 into O2?
      Artificial gravity: This was never explained. In any series.
      True, but just about every sci-fi series has to have it, because it's simply not practical to film in zero gravity.
    16. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      One attribute of geeks that I have noticed, is that they cannot sit through a movie without picking the plot to pieces and pedantically attacking every slight deviation from reality. I have nothing in particular against this, when applied to movies that are genuinely bad, such as "Austin Powers 2", but people who apply it to all movies really get up my nose.

      How can you make fun of Austin Powers 2? I mean sure it was bad, but they specifically say "don't worry about the technicalities, just sit back and have fun"! If a movies says "this is not supposed to be realistic," how can you pick on it for not being realistic?!

    17. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by CleverNickName · · Score: 2

      Don't look at me. I dropped out of Starfleet Academy before we studied this stuff.

      I can tell you how the isolinear optical chips work, though.

    18. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by WhoolaHoop · · Score: 1

      c^9 ? It's meaningless to multiply a speed by itself like that, since the result depends on the units in which you define c!

    19. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by uberdood · · Score: 1

      er, more than once there was a scene in the arboritum of NCC-1701 Enterprise. go back and watch the series again.

      but as has been shown through numerous REAL LIFE examples, plants are not necessarily needed for O2.

      --
      "Population 1,656"
    20. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by markmoss · · Score: 2

      As I remember the tech manual for Kirk's Enterprise, warp was supposed to be a cubic formula. Warp 1 = c, warp 2= 8c, warp 3 = 27c, ... warp 10 = 1000c. (The last number makes sense out of Voyager's 70 years home at almost warp 10: 70,000 light years is indeed a good ways across the galaxy. Not that there is any reason that 1000c should be harder to break than 729c = warp 9.) Of course, this makes nonsense out of all Kirk's puttering around at warp 2 or 3. That's a couple of months to Proximus Centauri, and maybe you'd find one inhabitable planet a year, allowing the producers to compress the "five year mission" into five episodes...

      However, the producers of SNG might have had different ideas, and in general interpreting warp was in the hands of various scriptwriters, most of whom can't do enough math to balance a checkbook.

      Why do us old geeks love Star Trek so much? You should see the other crap that counted as SF in film and TV back then. Wait, that's cruel and unusual punishment -- force Bin Laden to watch it, instead...

    21. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Dolly_Llama · · Score: 2

      Voyager had a hydroponics bay, for instance. The replicators can handle the food, but there's nothing like pure-seed Puna Butter. I suspect Janeway knew that too. It's 420, on SOME planet, right?

      --

      Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan

    22. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by ktakki · · Score: 2
      True, but just about every sci-fi series has to have it, because it's simply not practical to film in zero gravity.


      A weekly series, no. But some scenes in the movie Apollo 13 were filmed in NASA's "vomit comet", a jet aircraft that flies a parabolic profile that simulates zero-g for brief periods of time (~30 seconds, IIRC).

      k.
      --
      "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
    23. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is to Wil, so if the poster here was not him, ignore. Do you realize that while some may bash you, you lived the dream probably for 8-14 year olds back in the late 80's! Anyway, that is all.

    24. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by susano_otter · · Score: 2

      Interesting. I think the post below which talks about development of critical analysis &c. is useful in explaining this phenomenon. Meanwhile, I've rationalized the 99% preponderance of humanoid aliens with silly forheads as follows: aliens as presented are /symbolic/. They aren't meant to be literal interpretations of alien life forms, but simply symbolic (low-budget) pointers to alien customs, thought patterns, and social structures. Since the show(s) are much more about "human" interactions than anything else, the lack of realistic physical representations (or accurate technical details, for that matter) doesn't bother me much in Star Trek.

      What's interesting to note is that I often have difficulty applying the "Symbol Paradigm" to other sci-fi movies and shows - instead judging them on their literal characteristics.

      Clearly, Star Trek would be an abysmal failure if it was judged on its literal implementation!

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    25. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that the whole 'beaming down' thing essentially involves 'faxing' a copy of a person to the destination, destroying the original in the process. Every time someone beams anywhere, they're killed and a copy of themselves is constructed at the endpoint.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    26. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't breathe. Training at NASA involves being able to hold one's breath for extended periods of time. That's why the space shuttle has to land in the ocean, because water is 1/3 oxygen, so the astronauts can breathe when they get out.

    27. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Kalani · · Score: 1

      c is defined as ~2.99792*10^8 meters per second

      --
      ___
      The ends are ape-chosen, only the means are man's. -- Aldous Huxley
    28. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by jx100 · · Score: 1

      it's a Heisenberg ~compensator~

    29. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Galvatron · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think it's c*(w^5), where w is the warp speed, in TNG. In TOS, they used a different scale, where the speed is c*(w^3). This is why the Excelsior could hit warp 12 no problem, but the Enterprise D can't.

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
    30. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by armb · · Score: 1

      > For some reason, however, Star Trek consistently misses out on the "Geek critique"

      At least one science fiction convention panel on "Bad Science" that started "we'll ignore Star Trek, because there are far too many fish in that particular barrel", but that's not exactly missing out on geek critique.

      Lots of geeks know the "science" in Star Trek sucks hugely. Some of them enjoy it anyway - Stephen Hawking was prepared to play himself, commenting (AFAIR) that getting people interested in science and space was more important than the details of a TV show.

      See http://ssdoo.gsfc.nasa.gov/education/just_for_fun/ startrek.html for some more geek critique.

      --
      rant
    31. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 0

      Oh please. All these problems you pose are so easily solved by simply reversing the phase. Sheesh, any first year cadet knows that much.

    32. Re:Star Trek and geek critics by mscout1 · · Score: 0

      Actually, I love to NitPick startrek! So do a lot of other nerds/geeks/ect who also like the show. look for the books titled "the Nitpickers Guide to ST:xxx". ST:TOS has one. ST:TNG has 2. I am a proud member of the Nit-Pickers guild. I also love to pick holes in other sci-fi.

      Also, a story or tv show (espesialy sci-fi) is allowed to propose an alternate theory of reality as long as it is consistent.

      --
      ------- I saw a VW Beatle the other day. The vanity Plates said "FEATURE"
  14. Gen X irony far from dead by The+Ultimate+Badass · · Score: 1

    I'd like to assure everyone that Generation X's cynical outlook has merely been restrained, rather than decimated by the WTC collapse, and ensuing media appearances. As an affirmed member of generation X, (aka the "cool" generation), I feel as ambivalent as always, and the primary emotional response this disaster provoked was contempt for TV anchorpersons.

    Of course, posting this assurance on slashdot is meaningless, as most of the readership was born too late to be part of generation X.

    --

    Denial isn't just a river in Italy

    1. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by Danse · · Score: 1

      and the primary emotional response this disaster provoked was contempt for TV anchorpersons.


      Roger that.


      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    2. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The silence is partially because of the fear. Just try say something positive in public about Islam or the Muslim cultures in general (for instance, their civil treatment of the conquered nations and large contributions to the basis of the modern "western" science) or how 4000-6000 people dead is an insignificant number when compared to the number of the people dying in car accidents every year, and you'll be lucky to escape with verbal abuse only.

    3. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by DGolden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One wierd thing I think I noticed (but which I can't prove - never made tapes), was that the soundtracks of the camcorder-footage of the attacks was dubbed - the first few times Sky News (via Fox) here in Europe showed the videos, people were shouting "Shit! Fuck! Fuck!", but then, later the same footage had different people (with a higher proportion of female voices in the mix) going "Oh my God, Lord Help us" and crap like that.

      I think that's appalling, if it's true. Much of western society is on the path to finally freeing itself from the shackles of religion, and the empty promises of religion were most likely the means used by the leaders of the terrorists to motivate the idiots carrying out the attack to commit suicide.

      The original sounds more accurately reflected the current mindset of the vast majority of westerners - there weren't appeals to nebulous higher powers, just exclamations expressing shock.

      Those currently in power, however, would have you believe that many more people follow irrational old belief systems than in reality - in reality, the religious nutters, in both Western and Muslim society, are a small, but vocal and powerful, minority.

      FAITH IS NOT A VIRTUE.

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
    4. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Wow. So you really buy into all the marketing crap that's been thrown at you about what your generation is?

      Take it from me boy, I'm around self-declared "GenX" types all the time and I detect no particular difference in either attitude, diversity, or cluefullness than was apparent twenty years ago when I was the same age.

      BTW, look carefully into the history of the term "Generation X" - it didn't start out as a pointer to your generation. Properly speaking, I'm early Generation X (37 now). It was a label for the post-baby boom and pre-echo boom generation (born circa 64-74). The advertisers shifted the definition over to you lot once the realized that by and large as a consequence of our generational positioning we didn't have all that much money. Which is actually ironic, in that the "X" label was originally intended to emphasize our poor placement for recognition, success or career advancement.

    5. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by dangermouse · · Score: 2
      Well, not to poke a hole in your conspiracy theory or anything, but I think it's far more likely that they just replaced a handful of expletives with something less "offensive". (How anyone could be offended by someone blurting out "fuck" in response to five thousand people being killed before their eyes, I don't know...)

      I have to say, too, that I didn't notice any such defucking on the CNN stream or radio stations I was listening to at the time.

      But if what you say is true, it's certainly not a good thing. If I go back to a tape archive in twenty years, I'm not going to be interested in how people might have reacted if this was a Disney movie...

    6. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FAITH IS NOT A VIRTUE.

      Faith is what hold society together. When you go buy a box of something at the store, you have faith (in the seller) that it is labelled correctly. When you walk into the store, they have faith (in you) that you won't steal stuff. (ok, well not always) Faith is the belief that someone will do what they claim, trust.

      Fatih does not have to have anything to do with religion, and as I see it, most religious people don't understand the concept themselves.

      Posted anonymously because /. hates anything that sounds remotely pro-religion.

    7. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a dictionary.

      Faith is belief sustained in the absence of evidence - i.e. the core of most religions,
      which say "take this claptrap on faith, and everything else will make sense to you" - kind of like taking as axiomatic that every bridge stays up, then announcing that "no bridges fall down".

      Faith has everything to do with religion.

    8. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by DGolden · · Score: 1

      Well, not to poke a hole in your conspiracy theory or anything, but I think it's far more likely that they just replaced a handful of expletives with something less "offensive"

      Yeah, I wasn't all that seriously suggesting it was a deliberate christian plot, of course - especially since real christians should be more offended, according to their religion, by swearing on God, than by swearing on a mere bodily function...

      It just irritated me, really - I've never really understood what makes a word "bad" or "shameful" - I was punished for using certain words as a child, so I learned not to use them - but I never really did learn why I was not to use them.

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
    9. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by dangermouse · · Score: 1
      It just irritated me, really - I've never really understood what makes a word "bad" or "shameful" - I was punished for using certain words as a child, so I learned not to use them - but I never really did learn why I was not to use them.

      Certain words have to be "bad" or "shameful" so that they have impact. Sometimes you need such words to adequately convey your thoughts or emotions, and it would suck if they weren't there at your disposal.

      I think the reason "fuck" and "shit" fall into that category, as opposed to "puppy" and "cornbread" is pretty obvious... ;)

    10. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by DGolden · · Score: 1

      I think the reason "fuck" and "shit" fall into that category, as opposed to "puppy" and "cornbread" is pretty obvious... ;)

      No, not to me. I genuinely have difficulty understanding what makes them "bad" or "shameful". Calling the words "harsh", yes, I can understand that - but again that's only because they're associated with negative reinforcement in my mind.

      I'd find someone shouting "Die, you!" much more upsetting than someone shouting "Fuck you!" - yet someone saying the former on t.v. is unlikely to be censored, while the latter routinely is (and, in my experience, a fuck is something to be enjoyed...)

      When I'm surprised, or my emotion glands have kicked in, I tend to go for exclamations like "aaaarghhh!!!!" anyway...

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
    11. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by dvk · · Score: 2
      Actually, in your quest to blame religion, you got your facts wrong.

      I WAS there, starting with being on the second floor of WTC1 when #1 hit; to walking around both buildings to get to work [ first workaholic thought: "ouch, gotta get to work ASAP, in case out servers in WFC will be affected" ]; to being right under the path of a hitting plane #2, near the wall of WTC2, about 100 feet horisontally from the point of impact. To trying to get across the river to work, with hordes of people trying to escape the City.

      Throughout this all, there were FAR more people saying stuff like "OMG" than people who were swearing. [ i was silent and planning for the short-term and long-term future :) ]

      -DVK

      --
      "The right to figure things out for yourself is the only true freedom everyone shares. Go use it"-R.A.Heinlein
    12. Re:Gen X irony far from dead by DGolden · · Score: 1


      Throughout this all, there were FAR more people saying stuff like "OMG" than people who were swearing.

      Maybe. I was on another continent at the time -

      but, as far as my memory recalls, the original soundtrack reveals the people near the camcorder were swearing... and then in later playbacks some audio technician somewhere presunably mixed in a different soundtrack, possibly recorded nearby, not necessarily staged, of "cleaner" stuff.

      I really don't like that sort of crap.

      Unfortunately, I cannot prove this definitively - though my brother says he also noticed, neither of us made recordings.

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
  15. Prime Directive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The prime directive was established by the federations, which isn't supposed to have formed yet during the time where enterprise is is set.

    1. Re:Prime Directive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Federations are evil.

      The Europe is slowly turning into a federation.

      Good bye, national independence.

    2. Re:Prime Directive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that was the Prime RIB directive you idiot!

  16. They can't interfere! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    How can they interfere? We're right on schedule. Enterprise is 150 years from now, and in the series premier they complained that the Vulcans had been keeping the humans tied down for a hundred years. That only gives us 50 years to get WW3 out of the way and have that drunken leach invent warp drive. If the nukes don't get me I might even live to see it. Woo hoo!

    1. Re:They can't interfere! by AndroidCat · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that we have to have the Eugenics War too (Khan) -- however, we might be able to get a two-for-one special on that.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:They can't interfere! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't that happen already?

  17. ask Schr�dinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The cat doesn't take on an existence (or lack thereof!) until it's observed!

  18. Hmm... by NickisGod.com · · Score: 0

    Since I don't have time to read the article...let me pose this slightly off-topic question. Do you think Capt Archer will die on the bridge...or under it? ;)

  19. Here's Mine by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

    Captain Jean Luc Picard is sitting impatiently in his chair. He adjusts his uniform.

    PICARD
    Ensign. Take us to planet Earth, Maximum warp.

    He motions forward with his index finger.

    PICARD
    Engage!

    Silence. Stillness.

    PICARD
    Ensign?

    WESLEY
    The ship is not responding, sir.

    Picard activates his communicator.

    PICARD
    Picard to Laforge

    GEORDIE
    Yes captain?

    PICARD
    Geordie... is there something wrong with the engines?

    GEORDIE
    We're experiencing difficulties with the neon lights chamber.

    PICARD
    The what?

    GEORDIE
    The neon lights ch... I mean the dilithium chamber.

    PICARD
    Do you think you might have it repaired?

    Geordie chuckles.

    GEORDIE
    Why wouldn't I? Frankly captain, I don't know why you even bother to ask such questions. I can repair just about anything by rerouting... oh wait, no that wont work.

    PICARD
    What won't work?

    GEORDIE
    Nevermind... the dilithium crystals must be replaced.

    WESLEY
    Oh is that all? We'll beam down to Coridan and steal...

    PICARD
    Silence boy. It's not that simple... you see, there's a little thing known as the Prime Guideline, which is one of our most im...

    WESLEY
    Spare me, captain... I've heard it a million times...

    PICARD
    Well, nevertheless...

    RIKER
    Captain...

    PICARD
    Number One?

    RIKER
    I believe we might be able to obtain...

    Picard chuckles. Riker looks offended.

    RIKER
    Captain?

    PICARD
    Oh, sorry Number One, I was just thinking that it's lucky for you that you aren't second in command...

    Riker makes an angry face as the camera closes up on him.

    CUT TO:
    Commercial

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Here's Mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that is funny.

  20. Their final decision... by QwkHyenA · · Score: 1
    After some thought and one hot Earl Grey tea, Capt. Jean-Luc Picard approaches the crew on his decision...

    "After much thought and consideration, I've decided that we need to intervene and put a stop to this endless bickering!"

    Capt. Picard looks to Lt. Cmdr. Worf, "Arm torpedos!..Raise shields"

    Worf still not knowing whom to attack says,"Captain, who did you decide to attack?"

    Which Picard responds with,"I don't care! If our 401K accounts are to recover and I'm to retire next session for some other series called 'DS9', we need to put a stop to this horrific, roller coaster of a ride on the stock market!"

    *Worf presses the big red button labeled 'attack bad dudes'.*

    *A bright flash occurs as the Enterprise fires it's weapons*

    Picard yells to Riker," Quit starring at Deanna's chest and tell me what the 'Temporal imaging sensor' reads!"

    Riker sheepishly replies,"You did it Captain! Our retirement funds are stabilizing and returning to normal"

    Picard,"Excellent Number One, let's get out of here. This spinning globe is making me dizzy"

    Doctor Crusher states,"Captian? How did you remember about our retirement funds? I'd totally forgotten about them."

    Picard replies,"Easy Beverly, I'm a bald, old, white dude. It's my job to be up tight and think about money."

    --
    LFS. Have you built your system today?
    1. Re:Their final decision... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1, Retarded

  21. You're right! WAS:ask Schr�dinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [j@bethmoora j]$ cat Schrödinger
    cat: Schrödinger: No such file or directory

  22. Sexy ST by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

    "I mean, look, it's really cool to sit up here in our sexless spandex uniforms, downing Klavorian Synth-Ale and pretending we're not all running the Caligula program on the Holodeck

    This is just genius. A future where all your needs are met? Yeah, its going to be a hedonistic orgy.

  23. dramatic license by Goonie · · Score: 2
    Firstly, I'd make the point that, although I qualify as a geek as much as most here, I don't particularly like Star Trek. Secondly, your specfic examples and justfications are bunk (but I'll save my counterarguments till later).

    What I'm really trying to say, though, is just because the physics doesn't always match with our current understanding doesn't necessarily make the show bad. Buffy The Vampire Slayer's entire premises are in blatant contravention of just about everybody's personal beliefs about the true nature of the universe, but many here would still reckon it's a cool show.

    Star Trek is clearly sci-fi/fantasy rather than hard sci-fi. If viewed as such, the kind of hand-waves and dramatic license that you've pointed out are entirely acceptable.

    My personal objection to Star Trek is that it uses such fantastical dodges as ways to cover holes in the plot, rather than putting in the effort to write more plausible scripts.

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  24. State of the Art by zoydoid · · Score: 1

    "State of the Art" by Iain M. Banks... much funnier and covers the same ground.

  25. Official explanations by Markonen · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here we go:

    1. Spock's logic. The Star Trek Encyclopedia states that "Spock was raised with an older half-brother, Sybok, until Sybok was ostracized from Vulcan society because he rejected the Vulcan dogma of pure logic." This means that the "pure logic" isn't a feature of the Vulcan brain per se, but a norm of behavior in the Vulcan society. In other words, they just *try* to be as logical as possible.

    2. Dilithium crystals are not used a power sources in the Star Trek universe. It is used to *regulate* the matter/antimatter reactions that provide the energy necessary to warp time-space.

    3. Warp speed. Here's a quick roundup of warp factors' correlation to the speed of light:
    • Warp factor 1, 1 c
    • Warp factor 2, 10 c
    • Warp factor 3, 39 c
    • Warp factor 4, 102 c
    • Warp factor 5, 214 c
    • Warp factor 6, 392 c
    • Warp factor 7, 656 c
    • Warp factor 8, 1024 c
    • Warp factor 9, 1516 c
    • Warp factor 9.2, 1649 c
    • Warp factor 9.6, 1909 c
    • Warp factor 9.9, 3053 c
    • Warp factor 9.99, 7912 c
    • Warp factor 9.9999, 199516 c
    • Warp factor 10, infinite c

    Of these speeds, factor 5 is the cruising speed of Enterprise-D. Its maximum rated speed is factor 9.6, although 9.9 can be maintained for 10 minutes. Warp factor 9.9999 is the propagation speed of subspace radio, and factor 10, obviously, can never be reached.

    4. Plants on Enterprise. Someone already answered this one correctly. The ships life-support systems are fitted to provide breathable air without any biological components.

    5. Artificial gravity. Starfleet vessels are fitted with gravitational units that generate the synthetic gravity field aboard the vessel. A key component of the unit is the graviton field generator, which, obviously, generates a field of gravitons; the elementary particles that transmit gravitational force in the Star Trek universe.

    6. Beaming down. It is true that the physics of the transporter are pretty much out of this world. Without going into details, all the different physical problems of the concept seem to be taken care of by a separate component to the transporter system: some of the funniest components are the Heisenberg compensator (go figure) or the transporter's "pattern enhancer". The true story is that The Original Series' effects budget couldn't possibly cope with landing the Enterprise or even a shuttle in every episode. The transporter's instantaneus speed also helps to keep out mundane tasks like shuttle travel out of the show.
    --
    Marko Karppinen
    1. Re:Official explanations by lazarius · · Score: 1

      Of these speeds, factor 5 is the cruising speed of Enterprise-D. Its maximum rated speed is factor 9.6, although 9.9 can be maintained for 10 minutes. Warp factor 9.9999 is the propagation speed of subspace radio, and factor 10, obviously, can never be reached.

      I really liked that cool episode of Voyager where they reached Warp 10. For some reason, travelling that fast causes biological de-evolution over the span of 1/2 an episode.

      6. Beaming down. It is true that the physics of the transporter are pretty much out of this world. Without going into details, all the different physical problems of the concept seem to be taken care of by a separate component to the transporter system: some of the funniest components are the Heisenberg compensator (go figure) or the transporter's "pattern enhancer". The true story is that The Original Series' effects budget couldn't possibly cope with landing the Enterprise or even a shuttle in every episode. The transporter's instantaneus speed also helps to keep out mundane tasks like shuttle travel out of the show.

      Further to that, in TNG, there was an episode where Barkley (sp?) was beamed down in some kind of weird blue thing. That was the one with the strange transporter monsters... (I don't remember more than that, tho)

      MIKE
      ---------------
      Beware the JabberOrk!

      --
      Beware the JabberOrk.
    2. Re:Official explanations by Evro · · Score: 1

      The true story is that The Original Series' effects budget couldn't possibly cope with landing the Enterprise or even a shuttle in every episode.

      Not to mention how long these sequences would take. They landed Voyager a couple of times and each time there was a big hubbub, and I think it took about 2-3 minutes to land the ship. When a program only has 46 minutes per episode, 2 minutes is a hell of a lot to waste. Granted, they could cut it down if it was every episode, or just say "land the ship" and cut to a pic of the ship on the planet, but transporters opened up a whole other avenue from which to draw stories. Among all the ST series there have probably be at least 20 episodes that revolved around "transporter mishaps". Like when Geordi and Ro got transported into another phase of existence and everybody thought they were dead. They could walk through walls, but how come they didn't fall through the floor off the ship? How did they get in a shuttle and fly to the Romulan ship? Or how about when Dr Pulaski got that old-age virus thing and they used the transporter to re-sequence/filter her DNA with a hair follicle from a brush of hers? If they can do that, why don't they do that every time somebody has screwy DNA problems?

      These are just a couple of the little mistakes that I love to find and laugh at, but don't really subtract from my enjoyment of the show.

      --
      rooooar
    3. Re:Official explanations by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 0
      They could walk through walls, but how come they didn't fall through the floor off the ship?


      Yeah. This same deal comes up in a lot of ghost moves. For instance, Ghost, where Patrick Swayze's character is suprised to find he can't touch anything without passing right through it, and yet has no trouble at all walking around, going up stairs, and even landing on the ground when knocked down by the angry train ghost guy.

  26. Enterprise: no prime directive by peter303 · · Score: 2

    In the new series, Erath does not yet have a prime
    directive. However, Vulcan may have, which the
    reason for their reticence.

  27. Just out of interest... by The+Ultimate+Badass · · Score: 1

    How old do you think I am?

    --

    Denial isn't just a river in Italy

  28. Slashdot Upgrade Request by Quazi · · Score: 1

    Instead of just being able to moderate the replies, I'd like to be able to mod the Slashdot news article itself..

  29. Warp 9 is waaaaay more than 9xC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's proabally more like 10-20k the spped of light. It's a logramithic scale.

    I also thought Data had a Rubber Tree plant, IIRC.

  30. Your Pointer Sucked - go here instead by Raven17 · · Score: 1

    The Keeper of Lists site is WAY funnier than the pointer you put up. LAME!!!!!

    http://keepersoflists.org/index.php?lid=610

  31. Warp 13 by John+Harrison · · Score: 2
    This is the sort of nitpick that proves that I am a geek. However, I'm not that big of a geek since I don't know the answer.

    Didn't the "Enterprise of the Future" commanded by Riker in "All Good Things" go Warp factor 13?

    In any event, it seems like capping it at 10 leads to making advances from 9.6 to 9.7 cause for excitement. In any case, I doubt that an increase of that sort is as impressive to viewers as Warp 13!

    --
    Lasers Controlled Games!
    1. Re:Warp 13 by zephc · · Score: 2

      okay, heres another geek to explain it:
      in TOS, they had a warp scale where warp 10 and over was very fast, but stil possible, then in TNG it was made so warp 10 was infinie speed, and then for "All Good Things" i think it was explained in some official or quasi-official source that the warp scale was once again redone... no idea why :P

      --
      "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    2. Re:Warp 13 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Q has 'thrown' them faster that warp 13, but maybe thats just because he can bend all the laws...

    3. Re:Warp 13 by bero-rh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Redefinition of the scale. Imagine:

      Worf: The Borg ship is following us and catching up!
      Picard: Increase speed to warp 9.99999999999999999999999999999345671235...
      [Borg ship destroys enterprise before Picard could finish stating the speed]

      Similarily, I can easily tell you my old small car can go 180, and most British and American people won't believe me (because they'll think in terms of mph while I'm talking about kph).

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
    4. Re:Warp 13 by Evro · · Score: 1

      I'm just making this up, but maybe warp 10 is like an asymptote and it can be approached from either direction but never reached. Though I guess you have to go warp 10 before reaching warp 13... unless they find a way to jump from warp 9.999999999999999999999999999... to warp 10.000000000000000000000...00001, maybe with a huge transporter...

      Like I said, I made it up.

      --
      rooooar
    5. Re:Warp 13 by Bob+McCown · · Score: 2, Funny

      So, could NCC-SpinalTap go to warp 11?

  32. Re:You, Sir, are a flaming piece of shit! by smack_attack · · Score: 1

    We're at war with terrorism and seditionist trash talk like "understanding muslims" should not be tolerated.

    Understanding what you are up against is different than empathizing with them. you need to look up the definition of sedition in this case. Look back at WWII when we really didn't get up to the minute details about the enemy and their motives. An entire industry of documentary-minded people cropped up. The major difference in the current scenario is that we are compacting that information into a smaller time-span and are more readily informed not only about the enemy but our own government.

    --

    Hammer of Truth
  33. I don't hate Star Trek, I hate Michael by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do us a favor hemos, shit can that dumb ass michael.

  34. Gagpipe by ronny_magic · · Score: 1

    There's a new site, Gagpipe [gagpipe.com], that sifts through the best comedy sites around (e.g satirewire, the onion) and allows you to navigate them all. It's in beta now, but is shaping up to be this: rather good.

  35. Re:Exterminate Islam. Death to Muslims. Destroy. by polar+red · · Score: 1

    way to go ! very intelligent post ! Did you ever think for yourself instead of absorb tv-rays ?
    Didn't you wonder how many underpaid kids worked on your nike's ? Didn't you ever notice HOW IGNORANT YOU SOUND ??? I thought America was the most democratic and just country in the world ? Well, why is it I always get the feeling this democracy amd justice is VERY SELFCENTERED ???

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  36. Doesn't the cat count? by Bitmanhome · · Score: 1

    Why does a human need to peek in the box? The cat can observe itself while it's alive. After it's dead, it's too late to matter.

    -B

    --
    Not that this wasn't entirely predictable.
  37. Fun in the decontamination room by Bitmanhome · · Score: 1

    ObFunny: Brunching Shuttlecocks has a great spoof of the decon gel.

    BTW, will crew members always decontamination in pairs?

    -B

    --
    Not that this wasn't entirely predictable.
  38. Troi strikes out again. by fm6 · · Score: 2
    There is widespread relief that there now may be no more Die Hard movies.
    Poor Troi. Wrong again.
  39. Layoffs??? by Quasar1999 · · Score: 1

    Who gives a damn about layoffs??? If it happens to you, or people you know, then of course it sucks, but I don't know anyone at any of the places that have recently been hit by layoffs, and I really don't think it's worthy of front page news for the geek world...

    Suck it up son, and find another job... don't sit here and try to use slashdot to get sympathy... Those who care, can't do much, and those like myself, who couldn't care less, are simply annoyed by this sort of crap, and thus the little sympathy you would have had just went down the drain...

    BAH!!!

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
  40. vulcan star system tits by hairy+mary · · Score: 1

    Okay I know a girl vulcan got to have some breaties but give me break did they have to look like she could float in a black hole for the duration of eternity? I mean is that what it comes down to a girl and the measure of her beauty even on Vulcan? I did not see the male vulcans wearing penis enhanced leotards to make all the girls cream their pants?

    1. Re:vulcan star system tits by dbolger · · Score: 1

      No no no, you just don't get it do you? Trekkers like her breasts for their /personality/!

  41. They missed one... by jawad · · Score: 1

    "Torpedoes have to be shot 2 minutes apart, or risk the wrath of the 'Lameness Filter'"
    ~jawad

  42. Umm... by Kasreyn · · Score: 2

    ...did I *say* I worked at UF? NO.
    ...DID I work at UF? NO.

    ...where did you get this IDEA that I worked at UF?

    God only knows.

    -Kasreyn

    --
    Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger /. flamers since 1999.
  43. Like newspeople who never cover plastic surgery... by perdida · · Score: 1

    Slashdot prefers not to cover uncomfortable topics close to home.

    It is run by snotty nerds just like us, who have no journalistic training what soever.

    This is not to say that "journalists" won't do the same thing.

    Are you still doing the Naked Nerd Girl by the way?

    --
    Goat sex free since 2001
  44. Re: faith is not a virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Faith is what hold society together.
    Faith is doing a pretty shit job then

    When you go buy a box of something at the store, you have faith (in the seller) that it is labelled correctly.
    No I don't

    When you walk into the store, they have faith (in you) that you won't steal stuff. (ok, well not always)
    not always? never. or they wouldn't pay for security. why? because people steal stuff, people aren't very nice in case you hadn't noticed

    Faith is the belief that someone will do what they claim, trust.
    No, it is not. Faith is belief without proof. I do not believe that sellers always label things correctly. Even if I had the faith that they meant to do so (which I do not), human error is still there.

    Fatih does not have to have anything to do with religion, and as I see it, most religious people don't understand the concept themselves.
    Faith is the basis of religion, there is no religion without faith. Believing (without proof) in the existence of a "higher being", and that that entity allows only certain people to speak on their behalf (eg the Pope).

    Posted anonymously because /. hates anything that sounds remotely pro-religion.
    you may find this odd, but since a lot of /. likes proof in all things, they're not exactly prime candidates for believing in things without proof.

    If faith was used as evidence in a court of law, it would be ridiculed.

  45. ugh by Ithil · · Score: 0

    Define 1 foo to be the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1 second. Therefore, c = 1 foo/s.
    Does that make c^2 1? Sure. It depends on the units c is expressed in terms of. It is meaningless to speak of c^2 as a speed, it's SQUARE meters per SQUARE seconds, which is NOT a speed.

    No one will probably see this, since I'm posting over a day late. Oh well...

    - Ithil

    1. Re:ugh by Kalani · · Score: 1

      I was trying to point out the difference between meaningless units and impossible values. There's nothing wrong with saying that the speed of something is proportional to the value c^2 (although that's an impossible speed). You're right that it's improper to say that a speed is c^2. I thought that you were making a different point originally, thanks for clearing that up.

      --
      ___
      The ends are ape-chosen, only the means are man's. -- Aldous Huxley
    2. Re:ugh by mscout1 · · Score: 0

      SQUARE meters per SQUARE seconds, which is NOT a speed

      It would be the the rate in 2 dimentional time of a change in area.

      2d Time! wow what a funky concept! "my meeting is at (5:00 am x 7:00 pm)"

      --
      ------- I saw a VW Beatle the other day. The vanity Plates said "FEATURE"
  46. There are other (ahem) intangibles to consider by why-is-it · · Score: 2

    Buffy The Vampire Slayer's entire premises are in blatant contravention of just about everybody's personal beliefs about the true nature of the universe, but many here would still reckon it's a cool show.

    Yes, but is it cool because of the stories and characters, or is it cool because Buffy, Willow, Anya, Harmony, etc. are way hot?

    Mind you, the Vulcan Science Officer is nothing to sneeze at either. I'd gladly rub lotion onto her!

    --
    *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
    1. Re:There are other (ahem) intangibles to consider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It rubs the lotion on the skin or it gets the hose again!

  47. count of violations by hawk · · Score: 2
    >But does anybody have an exact tally to the dozens of times that
    >the prime directive has been violated??


    Lesssee. Take the total number of episodes, multiply by one, divide by one, add 0, and raise to the first power. That should give a reasonably active count . . .


    :)


    hawk