|
Duckbag posted:Yeah, Geordi tells Scott they can just recrystalize the dilithium when he freaks out about it. That was a bit weird seeing as how him and Spock came up with it in Star Trek 4. Guess he was just having a Old Engineer Knows Best moment. Evek fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Oct 11, 2016 |
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
McSpanky posted:He just told the computer to make an interface capable of defeating plot holes. This would be an absurd idea, except that we had a whole episode based on "computer make an AI that can best the highest quality AI we already have."
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
My rationalization is that Moriarty wasn't truly sentient himself, the computer just roleplayed him as effectively as possible. Of course, Data's problem was that he already knew every Holmes book, but it doesn't really make sense for people to just ask the computer for brand new content like that. Seems like that'd require an imagination all it's own. Were there no other mystery programs? No new Holmes content made in the 24th century when he's still a celebrated pop culture icon? Seems like there should be some kind of modding community for holodeck poo poo if not an entire industry. It's weird that the only option is "exactly like the pre-existing Holmes books" or "computer, just make up new poo poo on the spot, make the villain really gently caress us up". WickedHate fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:My rationalization is that Moriarty wasn't truly sentient himself, the computer just roleplayed him as effectively as possible. The computer should have taught data about episodes of House.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Again, the issue with Data wasn't being sentient, it's that he is a sentient AI in a humanoid package. Of course the ship's computer could do sentience, it's a future computer the size of a house. But doing that in a package as small as a human head... that's a hell of a thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
The Enterprise isn't really sentient, though. It can't do anything on it's own, it requires input. It's not a thinking individual with any kind of personality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:For in-universe explanations, it's fine. But in TV terms, it's goofy as all get out. Especially Ro and Picard. There are undoubtedly fully adult alien members of starfleet the size of human children. The Binars were that size. So was Nog, but that was later. Anyway, the replicator adjusting a uniform size is beyond trivial. WickedHate posted:The Enterprise isn't really sentient, though. It can't do anything on it's own, it requires input. It's not a thinking individual with any kind of personality. Just the thing that figures out when you really want to go through a door is smarter than any AI today. Not to mention the thing that knows who you're about to talk to on your communicator or how the UT knows when you mean to say something in French or when not to translate a Klingon word.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Phimosissy posted:Just the thing that figures out when you really want to go through a door is smarter than any AI today. Not to mention the thing that knows who you're about to talk to on your communicator or how the UT knows when you mean to say something in French or when not to translate a Klingon word. Well, yeah, obviously. I'm just saying, I think there's more special about Data than the size of his computer brain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:The Enterprise isn't really sentient, though. It can't do anything on it's own, it requires input. It's not a thinking individual with any kind of personality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpKx7Oi0oeM T.C. fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
Okay, I've got nothing there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:The Enterprise isn't really sentient, though. It can't do anything on it's own, it requires input. It's not a thinking individual with any kind of personality. doors will be given to Durandal with indirect control of all other doors going to Durandal. The difference between direct and indirect control primarily has to do with the manner of opening the doors. Durandal will only open a directly controlled door when he is specifically asked to do so. Indirectly controlled doors are automatically controlled by Durandal to open when needed. WickedHate posted:My rationalization is that Moriarty wasn't truly sentient himself, the computer just roleplayed him as effectively as possible. In other words, Moriarty would in this case exist because the Sherlock Holmes software was not built to procedurally generate exciting mysteries, or because the procedural generation was lousy enough that Data was able to break it with his spergeotronic brain. Wasn't the sample adventure that Data speedran made from mixing two Holmes stories together?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
I think it's important to remember that the general knowledge about computers was pretty limited 25 years ago. It's not uncommon to see scifi writers as late as the 90s making basic mistakes about how computers work that John Q. Internet wouldn't make today. AI theory in particular is one of those cases where the more we know about it, the more challenging it seems. These days, there's an understanding that computers as we know them simply do not work like organic brains (people are trying to change that, of course), but older scifi tended to take that analogy very literally. TOS had lots of talk of "thinking machines" and "electronic brains" as you'll remember, and that sort of talk was pretty typical of how computers used to be described. You still see this idea in fiction that if you could just create a computer that was fast enough and "smart" enough, it would become alive, but that's nonsense. Machine learning as we know it bears only a superficial resemblance to real learning and even then, the question of how you could "learn" to be conscious is mostly unanswered (I'm not a computer scientist though, so I'll leave the nitty-gritty to others). I believe true AI is possible, but I don't think it's possible with what we call computers and, given that Star Trek computers are basically just like our computers but more sophisticated, it shouldn't be possible with them, either. Even if you allow for serious advances in self-modifying code, Trek computers still make a distinction between software and hardware that does not exist in our own brains and I'm inclined to think that sapience is impossible without true neural plasticity. However, that doesn't make a sapient Moriarty hologram impossible (just preposterous). The "brains" in Data and the various sapient holograms we see are not computers, as we know them, but are rather synthetic recreations of human brains. They do seem to have neural plasticity (even if they still couch everything in an nonsensical hardware/software framework). Obviously, the holodeck is able to recreate organic life with ludicrous fidelity, and we know that the transporters, at least, can precisely reassemble a human brain (presumably the replicators can make one, too, albeit a dead one). My theory, then, (and really the only interpretation that fits what we see) is that the sapient holograms are basically running around with exact replicas of human brains inside them. The computer "programs" them by shaping their brains in a specific way, and, they're not alive, as such, but it does seem like they're basically synthetic humans and the only thing standing in between certain (perhaps even all) holograms and true sapience and free will (at least free will as we know it) is that, unlike organic humans, their brains can be reshaped externally at any time, and they happen to be the play things of capricious gods who reshape their minds and realities on a whim. Basically, it's not that the computer creates something more intelligent than itself (because the computer has no intelligence to begin with), but rather it's merely taking an image stored in its memory (a big squishy brain) and recreating it in a physical (well, hard light) medium, sort of like a 3D printer. How it came up with the "brain" for Moriarty and who thought it was a good idea for it be able to do that in the first place, however, is another story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
Andy Capp's Hot Fries Recipe not available on ships replicators Sigh. Computer, create a holodeck program capable of manufacturing Andy Capp's Hot Fries. Acknowledged.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Been out of the temporal causality loop for a bit. Do we know anything new about the upcoming Trek series in the last couple of months? Last I saw was the really ugly-lookin' ship reveal this summer around the time Beyond came out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Drone posted:Been out of the temporal causality loop for a bit. Do we know anything new about the upcoming Trek series in the last couple of months? Last I saw was the really ugly-lookin' ship reveal this summer around the time Beyond came out. They pushed back the premiere to May because the production isn't starting until next month.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:I think it's important to remember that the general knowledge about computers was pretty limited 25 years ago. It's not uncommon to see scifi writers as late as the 90s making basic mistakes about how computers work that John Q. Internet wouldn't make today. If anything, they've only gotten worse. Duckbag posted:You still see this idea in fiction that if you could just create a computer that was fast enough and "smart" enough, it would become alive, but that's nonsense. Machine learning as we know it bears only a superficial resemblance to real learning and even then, the question of how you could "learn" to be conscious is mostly unanswered (I'm not a computer scientist though, so I'll leave the nitty-gritty to others). If only Schoolhouse Rock had released this (somewhat depressing) song. WickedHate fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
So I keep chugging through Enterprise, about half way through season 2. Other than the really boring and unfulfilling temporal cold war poo poo it's really not too bad at all. I wish we got to see more classic races and learn about first contact with them rather than the bumpy face of the week that we never see or hear about in any other trek ever again. These are all the humanoids right near earth, all these idiots probably end up getting absorbed into the federation. Also holy poo poo Archer does get captured a lot. It honestly seems like every 2nd or 3rd episode is just him getting captured in some form. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:These days, there's an understanding that computers as we know them simply do not work like organic brains Well, the main problem is that we have absolutely zero concept of how organic brains work
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Well, the main problem is that we have absolutely zero concept of how organic brains work I'm gonna go in to work tomorrow and absolutely own the neurobiology department with this hot take
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
WeAreTheRomans posted:I'm gonna go in to work tomorrow and absolutely own the neurobiology department with this hot take This is according to some neurobiologists I know
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
The long version is that the main problem in neurobiology is that we have essentially no capability of describing how an organic brain works from the ground up. We can point to things that it does and make suggestions over how these things happen but there's no holistic model - it's like 1940's scientists being given a modern laptop, "If we damage that bit the screen goes all funny"
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Well, the main problem is that we have absolutely zero concept of how organic brains work Julian Bashir super doctor in an episode I saw just last night talked about how humans only use 1% of their brain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Julian Bashir super doctor in an episode I saw just last night talked about how humans only use 1% of their brain. Well that's one thing that we do know is wrong
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:The long version is that the main problem in neurobiology is that we have essentially no capability of describing how an organic brain works from the ground up. We can point to things that it does and make suggestions over how these things happen but there's no holistic model - it's like 1940's scientists being given a modern laptop, "If we damage that bit the screen goes all funny" Nah that's not true either, but at least it's more reasonable. We absolutely understand what's happening at the synaptic level, it's just that modelling the entire human brain is insanely computationally intensive right now. Please do not elaborate further
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
WeAreTheRomans posted:We absolutely understand what's happening at the synaptic level, No we don't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Yay I started an argument outside my field
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:As someone working in the field, Pfft, nah, we do. I'm not saying we have characterised every interactor protein in a quantitative systems biology model, but we have decades of publications in journales like Nature Neuron and Neuron etc covering all the fundamentals. Like I've recently worked on expressing a protein for crystallography which probably has a role in synaptic plasticity, so I know theres more classification to be done, but there's no black box out there
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
WeAreTheRomans posted:Pfft, nah, we do. I'm not saying we have characterised every interactor protein in a quantitative systems biology model, but we have decades of publications in journales like Nature Neuron and Neuron etc covering all the fundamentals. Like I've recently worked on expressing a protein for crystallography which probably has a role in synaptic plasticity, so I know theres more classification to be done, but there's no black box out there There's a huge difference between having a decent idea of what usually is going on in most cells and having an absolute understanding of the mechanisms involved. As you brought up, once we look at long term modification of synaptic strength, it turns out it's accomplished through a lot of different mechanisms which range from partially-understood to totally unstudied. Sorry if I knee-jerked, but there's a hell of a lot of people who think the entire problem is 'we can only perfectly simulate 'n' neurons, and 'n' is too small'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:There's a huge difference between having a decent idea of what usually is going on in most cells and having an absolute understanding of the mechanisms involved. Agreed to all of this. Remember, I was only taking issue with MrL_JaKiri posted:Well, the main problem is that we have absolutely zero concept of how organic brains work which is too idiotic for any biologist to allow stand. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
bbbuttt neural nets in the emergent cloud behavior ditch the turing chinese room
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXYfnWRp1Q0 lol u morans just watch sci fi if u want to know poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXYfnWRp1Q0 literally the only reason I'm a scientist is because of Star Trek, Red Dwarf and Arthur C Clarke (plus ya boy Carl Sagan one love) Then I became a researcher and it's a depressing soul-suck like every other job, you just have to use your brain all the time 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Also holy poo poo Archer does get captured a lot. It honestly seems like every 2nd or 3rd episode is just him getting captured in some form. Captured or beaten up or both, yeah. Archer's theme song should've been "Tubthumping." I kinda like that though. 22nd century Starfleet probably had no reason to think, "hey, maybe we should put our captains though combat training" until guys like Archer kept getting clowned on. By the 23rd century they've finally upgraded to judo chops and double axehandles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Man some of the CG in enterprise is really bad, like when ever they're too cheap to composite live action with CG and just use CG people that look like 90's video game cutscenes without even motion capture or anything. Just, really bad. oh poo poo archer has been captured again and only General Martok lawyer can save him! Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
I just watched A Taste Of Armageddon, rather interesting. The setting stuff seems to get solid here with the United Federation Of Planets; looks like the writers are still sticking with deflector screens instead of shields - shame they changed, I've always like screens as a term. The theme is a lot more contemporary than most stuff so far, which I think is nice on occasion. You rarely see a Star Trek story that deals so directly with a topic like cold war and proxy conflicts which was such an issue of the day, and had at the time no answer or end. It's honestly impressive they even managed to put out a story so starkly opposed to the Vietnam War. You get a strong sense of desperation in the solutions, that the writers knew there was no easy answer but that one had to be found somehow. It's so difficult to look back and image watching the episode while the specter of unending conflict and potential nuclear war loomed overhead. To us today, Kirk's choice to spark outright warfare and force the societies to confront the true human cost of their conflict seems unthinkable. Less than a year later, North Vietnamese forces launched the Tet Offensive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Man some of the CG in enterprise is really bad, like when ever they're too cheap to composite live action with CG and just use CG people that look like 90's video game cutscenes without even motion capture or anything. Just, really bad. I don't think it's bad, it's just par for the course for a show that started in 2001. I can remember BSG would occasionally do CG people a few years later and theirs never looked right either despite being able to better hide their imperfections better with the shakeycam.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
A Taste of Armageddon is one of my favorite TOS episodes and could just as well be made today about drones. There's a quote similar to Kirk's by General Lee, wherein he said "It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we would grow too fond of it".
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
I really hope an episode of the new show involves someone pretending to be affected by a space anomaly/being to get away with doing or not doing something. "I didn't show up to my post yesterday because a big green hand grabbed me" and then it just blows up from there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I really hope an episode of the new show involves someone pretending to be affected by a space anomaly/being to get away with doing or not doing something. "I didn't show up to my post yesterday because a big green hand grabbed me" and then it just blows up from there. It's Always Sunny On Andoria
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
"I'll just say an omnipotent being transported me to another dimension and that's why I wasn't at work. What's the worst that could happen?" Ensign Ricky causes an intergalactic incident
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 02:39
|
|