I believe that several of the scripts for the first season were dusted off and revamped versions of Star Trek Phase II scripts. So technically they were supposed to be filmed for the TOS cast. I know that some of the models for Phase II did end up being used in TNG episodes as well.
Honestly, I think he wants her dead. Lorca is a fanatic, a complete fruitcake. In the real world, even if his actions were justified, any captain who killed his own crew, even if to prevent them becoming a part of a Klingon menu, would never be given command of a ship again.
I've always felt that European notions of race are a byproduct of how we explored the world. If we had done our exploration over land, we would have seen that populations tend to meld into each other; that there is no clear dividing line between a European and a Central Asian to an East Asian, or between a Mediterranean population, and a Saharan to East African to sub-Saharan African population, but because we literally hopped around the globe, leaping around thousands of miles of territory as we sailed from point to point, populations came to seem distinct. We lost the level of resolution.
I like the new format for story telling. Breaking Bad worked so well because it felt a lot like a novel, with each episode more like a new chapter. I've been watching Fargo and love the serial nature. It only underlines that this form of visual storytelling has made television, when done right, so much better than movies. Providing the writing is good and the actors well picked, it gives a writer and director the ability to tell an expansive story. I love The Expanse for the same reason, and it shows that you can do SciFi in that format.
Honestly, I'd prefer if studios put more resources into 10 episode seasons, in the British format, rather than the standard 24-26 episodes. Imagine how much better Deep Space Nine could have been if they could have got rid of the superfluous filler episodes that are necessary when you're doing a traditional full season television show, and they could have concentrated on the Dominion War. I recently rewatched the entire series, and I had such temptations at some points just to fast forward through the YAFE (Yet Another Ferengi Episode) or YABRE (Yet Another Bajoran Religious Episode), and I figure if they had just concentrated on 10-11 episodes about the war, it would have been a killer series.
Then you don't know what SJW is. The original TOS was definitely SJW, it was very Liberal, showing Asian and African crewmembers, heck even a Russian. It had plots dealing with racial issues and inequity. Roddenberry explicitly chose the science fiction format as a way he could tackle complex social issues that would, at the time, have been far too controversial to ever try to perform in a show placed in the 1960s. TNG did much the same, as did Enterprise (even going so far in the Bush era to have an entire final plot arc about a racist who tries to make all aliens leave Earth, sound familiar, no?)
Voyager tried the same, but I just view it as more hackneyed, or maybe the formula had just grown old. DS9 is a bit of an outlier because it overtly attempts to show the Federation as less than a panacea, and show that it, like any government, has its own dirty secrets. And Sisko was the first captain to be shown as willing to at least set ethical and moral considerations aside when it came to winning the war against the Dominion. But even in DS9, there were plenty of "SJW" episodes, like the liberalization of the Ferengi Empire.
So far as "SJW" goes, Discovery is pretty much just an updated version of Trek, and honestly, so far the only "SJW" aspect is the portrayal of a gay couple, which is hardly revolutionary on TV anyways. We have no idea whether Michael Burnham is LGBTQ, and honestly with our upbringing being raised as a Vulcan, I'd say she's probably spent a good deal of time suppressing any overt sexual displays, so I think people are jumping the gun. But what if Burnham is transexual? It doesn't look like it's going to be a significant plot device. I suspect the ultimate arc is going to be her going against Lorca when he finally does go too far, and it's going to have precious little to do with whether Burnham is gay or trans.
Honestly at this point I don't know why Slashdot just doesn't kill the AC posting. It's becoming rarer that anything interesting is ever posted by ACs, and most seem like refugees from 4chan.
Poor alt-right snowflake. If having social justice "shoved down your throat" is something you don't like, then how is it you ever watched Star Trek? The Kirk-Uruha kiss was just as shocking as showing of a gay couple in this show, and really, they don't do anything but have a bit of "couple banter", that is until one of them is revealed to have an evil mirror twin.
You know what, there are gay people in the world, and whether sad little bigots like you like it or not, they are now allowed to come out of their closet. If you think, in the 23rd century, delicate little alt-right snowflakes like you will have any place in society, then you're even dumber than you are pathetic.
Except we know that the Star Trek that we grew up only happened after the Federation fought some major wars against the Romulans and Klingons. You saw it in Captain Sisko a bit, that willingness, when the chips are down and the enemy is sufficiently strong to wipe you out, that morals and ethics have to be pushed aside. Still, Lorca is Sisko on steroids. Sisko at least would wring his hands when he had to do a dirty deed, Lorca literally doesn't seem to care that he's utterly surrendered any notion of ethics. He wants to kill Klingons, pure and simple.
Uh no, he "took that advice" because the Admiral was going to relieve him of command when she got back from negotiating with the Klingons. In fact, i suspect he put forward that she should go in Sarek's place precisely because he suspected it was a trap, and with her a Klingon prisoner, his command was safe.
Lorca is one bad dude, the kind of guy you want on your side when you want to win a war, but dangerous and obsessed.
I was kind of wondering, because the word "fuck" was said twice in a row an episode or two ago. Quite jarring in fact, the most severe dialogue in Trek since a "double dumb ass on you".
That's the part I like the most. Other than the "spore drive", they've returned more to the technical minimalism of TOS. The technobabble in the TNG-era shows just got outragerous, when every problem had a solution that involved a "concentrated tachyon beam burst". I swear, half of Laforge's dialogue was bizarre technobabble terms involving neutrinos and tachyons, and just how many kinds of exotic energy are in the TNG universe now? Has anyone counted?
Of course if you want real hard scifi that takes as few liberties as possible, Expanse is your show.
The way the mini-arc of the uber-tardigrade went certainly had that Trekkian feel to it, but I suspect that Captain Lorca is going to be the real moral lesson here. The man clearly is a monomaniac, extremely damaged goods, who has pretty much crossed the line into pure evil to retain command of his ship. The difference between Discovery and earlier Treks is that it is more firmly based in modern television story telling. The fact that it's fifteen episodes in this series suggests a different kind of story arc than was seen in previous ST's.
I'm not a total fan yet. There are elements I like, and elements I don't. The Klingons are just a wee bit too bestial for me, and dropping TNG-era tech into a pre-TOS show is a bit jarring, but then again I can get why they did it. I just finished watching DS9, and watching them run around with big klunky 10" tablets, when just two decades after it was filmed, we already have far more capable hand-held computers, tells you just how far out of date some of Trek's tech has become. So while I don't think this is a reboot in the same sense that the new movies are, I think they did decide to throw out the book a bit on Star Trek technology.
We had a ransomware infection on our network, and it basically tested every network share it could find, and started encrypting on network shares the user had read/write access to. Of course, we keep very thorough backups so data loss was minimal, but ransomware infections certainly go beyond local profile folders. It would be nice to see this logic more thoroughly extended to cover access to network resources.
I'm not seeing any irrational leaders. There are no Kaiser Wilhelm's here. Pyongyang's chest thumping is as much for North Koreans' benefit as the US's.
Nope, I was just referring to the fact that suddenly in America it's a bad thing to thump a Nazi, when 70-odd years ago, it was one's patriotic duty to blow them into smithereens. The Russians deserve a helluva lot of credit too, as do a host of other nations who joined in the effort to beat up Nazis.
The English-speaking world spent six long years beating the living fuck out of every Nazi we could get our hands. Nazis need good beatings, it seems to be the only thing that finally gets them to settle down.
If you buy space on a social networking site, you're an advertiser. If the advertising is political, then it's political advertising. If it were in a newspaper or on the radio, Federal finance laws would apply. Is there some reason you think Facebook should be immune from what the New York Times has to do?
Advertising and marketing have rather specific definitions, and existing legislation already deals with that. Extending that to Facebook, Twitter, etc. is hardly overreach.
Yes, but it potentially interferes with poor Ivan's ability to use US advertising platforms to spread misinformation. You know, Ivan from St. Peter... er, I mean, America!
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that several of the scripts for the first season were dusted off and revamped versions of Star Trek Phase II scripts. So technically they were supposed to be filmed for the TOS cast. I know that some of the models for Phase II did end up being used in TNG episodes as well.
Honestly, I think he wants her dead. Lorca is a fanatic, a complete fruitcake. In the real world, even if his actions were justified, any captain who killed his own crew, even if to prevent them becoming a part of a Klingon menu, would never be given command of a ship again.
I've always felt that European notions of race are a byproduct of how we explored the world. If we had done our exploration over land, we would have seen that populations tend to meld into each other; that there is no clear dividing line between a European and a Central Asian to an East Asian, or between a Mediterranean population, and a Saharan to East African to sub-Saharan African population, but because we literally hopped around the globe, leaping around thousands of miles of territory as we sailed from point to point, populations came to seem distinct. We lost the level of resolution.
I like the new format for story telling. Breaking Bad worked so well because it felt a lot like a novel, with each episode more like a new chapter. I've been watching Fargo and love the serial nature. It only underlines that this form of visual storytelling has made television, when done right, so much better than movies. Providing the writing is good and the actors well picked, it gives a writer and director the ability to tell an expansive story. I love The Expanse for the same reason, and it shows that you can do SciFi in that format.
Honestly, I'd prefer if studios put more resources into 10 episode seasons, in the British format, rather than the standard 24-26 episodes. Imagine how much better Deep Space Nine could have been if they could have got rid of the superfluous filler episodes that are necessary when you're doing a traditional full season television show, and they could have concentrated on the Dominion War. I recently rewatched the entire series, and I had such temptations at some points just to fast forward through the YAFE (Yet Another Ferengi Episode) or YABRE (Yet Another Bajoran Religious Episode), and I figure if they had just concentrated on 10-11 episodes about the war, it would have been a killer series.
It was a big deal, and several Southern affiliates refused to air the episode.
Then you don't know what SJW is. The original TOS was definitely SJW, it was very Liberal, showing Asian and African crewmembers, heck even a Russian. It had plots dealing with racial issues and inequity. Roddenberry explicitly chose the science fiction format as a way he could tackle complex social issues that would, at the time, have been far too controversial to ever try to perform in a show placed in the 1960s. TNG did much the same, as did Enterprise (even going so far in the Bush era to have an entire final plot arc about a racist who tries to make all aliens leave Earth, sound familiar, no?)
Voyager tried the same, but I just view it as more hackneyed, or maybe the formula had just grown old. DS9 is a bit of an outlier because it overtly attempts to show the Federation as less than a panacea, and show that it, like any government, has its own dirty secrets. And Sisko was the first captain to be shown as willing to at least set ethical and moral considerations aside when it came to winning the war against the Dominion. But even in DS9, there were plenty of "SJW" episodes, like the liberalization of the Ferengi Empire.
So far as "SJW" goes, Discovery is pretty much just an updated version of Trek, and honestly, so far the only "SJW" aspect is the portrayal of a gay couple, which is hardly revolutionary on TV anyways. We have no idea whether Michael Burnham is LGBTQ, and honestly with our upbringing being raised as a Vulcan, I'd say she's probably spent a good deal of time suppressing any overt sexual displays, so I think people are jumping the gun. But what if Burnham is transexual? It doesn't look like it's going to be a significant plot device. I suspect the ultimate arc is going to be her going against Lorca when he finally does go too far, and it's going to have precious little to do with whether Burnham is gay or trans.
Is it really any more "out there" than invoking tachyon beams for every problem? At least fungi exist. Tachyons are at best hypothetical.
Honestly at this point I don't know why Slashdot just doesn't kill the AC posting. It's becoming rarer that anything interesting is ever posted by ACs, and most seem like refugees from 4chan.
Poor alt-right snowflake. If having social justice "shoved down your throat" is something you don't like, then how is it you ever watched Star Trek? The Kirk-Uruha kiss was just as shocking as showing of a gay couple in this show, and really, they don't do anything but have a bit of "couple banter", that is until one of them is revealed to have an evil mirror twin.
You know what, there are gay people in the world, and whether sad little bigots like you like it or not, they are now allowed to come out of their closet. If you think, in the 23rd century, delicate little alt-right snowflakes like you will have any place in society, then you're even dumber than you are pathetic.
Except we know that the Star Trek that we grew up only happened after the Federation fought some major wars against the Romulans and Klingons. You saw it in Captain Sisko a bit, that willingness, when the chips are down and the enemy is sufficiently strong to wipe you out, that morals and ethics have to be pushed aside. Still, Lorca is Sisko on steroids. Sisko at least would wring his hands when he had to do a dirty deed, Lorca literally doesn't seem to care that he's utterly surrendered any notion of ethics. He wants to kill Klingons, pure and simple.
Uh no, he "took that advice" because the Admiral was going to relieve him of command when she got back from negotiating with the Klingons. In fact, i suspect he put forward that she should go in Sarek's place precisely because he suspected it was a trap, and with her a Klingon prisoner, his command was safe.
Lorca is one bad dude, the kind of guy you want on your side when you want to win a war, but dangerous and obsessed.
I was kind of wondering, because the word "fuck" was said twice in a row an episode or two ago. Quite jarring in fact, the most severe dialogue in Trek since a "double dumb ass on you".
That's the part I like the most. Other than the "spore drive", they've returned more to the technical minimalism of TOS. The technobabble in the TNG-era shows just got outragerous, when every problem had a solution that involved a "concentrated tachyon beam burst". I swear, half of Laforge's dialogue was bizarre technobabble terms involving neutrinos and tachyons, and just how many kinds of exotic energy are in the TNG universe now? Has anyone counted?
Of course if you want real hard scifi that takes as few liberties as possible, Expanse is your show.
The way the mini-arc of the uber-tardigrade went certainly had that Trekkian feel to it, but I suspect that Captain Lorca is going to be the real moral lesson here. The man clearly is a monomaniac, extremely damaged goods, who has pretty much crossed the line into pure evil to retain command of his ship. The difference between Discovery and earlier Treks is that it is more firmly based in modern television story telling. The fact that it's fifteen episodes in this series suggests a different kind of story arc than was seen in previous ST's.
I'm not a total fan yet. There are elements I like, and elements I don't. The Klingons are just a wee bit too bestial for me, and dropping TNG-era tech into a pre-TOS show is a bit jarring, but then again I can get why they did it. I just finished watching DS9, and watching them run around with big klunky 10" tablets, when just two decades after it was filmed, we already have far more capable hand-held computers, tells you just how far out of date some of Trek's tech has become. So while I don't think this is a reboot in the same sense that the new movies are, I think they did decide to throw out the book a bit on Star Trek technology.
We had a ransomware infection on our network, and it basically tested every network share it could find, and started encrypting on network shares the user had read/write access to. Of course, we keep very thorough backups so data loss was minimal, but ransomware infections certainly go beyond local profile folders. It would be nice to see this logic more thoroughly extended to cover access to network resources.
I'm not seeing any irrational leaders. There are no Kaiser Wilhelm's here. Pyongyang's chest thumping is as much for North Koreans' benefit as the US's.
Don't feel that bad. They made their deal with the devil just like Britain did.
Nope, I was just referring to the fact that suddenly in America it's a bad thing to thump a Nazi, when 70-odd years ago, it was one's patriotic duty to blow them into smithereens. The Russians deserve a helluva lot of credit too, as do a host of other nations who joined in the effort to beat up Nazis.
No BLM has not, and has decried such attacks.
The English-speaking world spent six long years beating the living fuck out of every Nazi we could get our hands. Nazis need good beatings, it seems to be the only thing that finally gets them to settle down.
If you buy space on a social networking site, you're an advertiser. If the advertising is political, then it's political advertising. If it were in a newspaper or on the radio, Federal finance laws would apply. Is there some reason you think Facebook should be immune from what the New York Times has to do?
Advertising and marketing have rather specific definitions, and existing legislation already deals with that. Extending that to Facebook, Twitter, etc. is hardly overreach.
Yes, but it potentially interferes with poor Ivan's ability to use US advertising platforms to spread misinformation. You know, Ivan from St. Peter... er, I mean, America!
How is this proposed law abridge speech?
Because forcing accountability on advertiser's is just the evilest thing ever