Which will we make first?

[Anonymous No.15320458]

Replicators, transporters, or holodecks?
which would you rather have?

[Anonymous No.15320483]

https://archive.macleans.ca/article/2005/5/30/the-star-trek-connection
>THE STAR TREK CONNECTION
>A surprising number of child sex abusers appear to be Trekkies. Trying to figure out what that means, however, shows how little we really know about pedophiles

[Anonymous No.15320500]

>>15320483
Anecdotal

[Anonymous No.15320776]

>>15320458
>which would you rather have?
There is no spoiler in this text. I'm glad spoiler tags don't work on this board because they're annoying because nobody uses them for spoilers and every time I hover my mouse over one to see what it says it's disappointing
>>15320483
Your link doesn't even work

[Anonymous No.15320885]

>>15320458
Holodecks

[Anonymous No.15320927]

>>15320483
>>15320500
Yes, a very high percentage of pedos arrested by one law enforcement agency were Star Trek fans. That doesn't imply that the converse is true or even that the trend is wider spread than what was seen by that one agency (though it wouldn't surprise me much if it were).
Pedos create a fantasy world in their heads where their perversion is acceptable. Of course they would be attracted to a fantasy world that appears to operate on a different morality than the one we live in now. Even if it doesn't explicitly condone pedophilia, there's not much in the show to condemn it either. This lets the pedos fill in the blank with whatever they want.

[Anonymous No.15320955]

>>15320927
It's an open secret that the early speculative fiction community was rife with pedophiles. To give a few famous examples, Marion Zimmer Bradley and Walter Breen were protected by their peers for decades, and Dahlgren author Samuel Delaney did activism for NAMBLA without ever being disavowed for his pro-pedophilia views.

[Anonymous No.15320990]

>>15320927
It was a highly popular show.
Also you know why they hate Star Trek, right? Hint: the authors talked a lot with von Braun and his team.

[Anonymous No.15321051]

>>15320458
I think all three as portrayed in Star Trek seem scientifically impossible.

I mean maybe the holodeck without the possibility of "disabling safety protocols"(which basically turns a simulation into reality) would be more realistic, but we will likely at some point have fully immersive VR similiar to the holodeck anyway, just that it will be in your head(connecting brain with a computer that simulates the world) and not something you see with your real eyes and walk around in like with the holodeck.

Transporting(Teleportation) is probably the most physics breaking of the three, but depending on its limitations would probably be my favorite.(replicators just seem nice to have, and as I said we will likely have something similiar to the holodeck anyway)

[Anonymous No.15321059]

>>15321051
The transporter isn't teleportation, it's a replicator that kills you on one end and makes a copy at the other.

[Anonymous No.15321074]

>>15321059
I'm not a hardcore Star Trek so I didn't know that.
If that's really canon that's surprising to me that people are supposedly ok with dying as long as a clone gets to live on.
Especially with how casually they use beaming in the shows, it's certainly not something I would be ok with unless there was no other option.

[Anonymous No.15321089]

>>15321074
Gene Roddenberry was a weird guy.

[Anonymous No.15321107]

>>15320955
That's not many people though compared to the probably millions of star trek fans

[Anonymous No.15321122]

>>15321107
These were public figures who led community groups and were celebrated and idolized.

[Anonymous No.15321126]

>>15320927
The eighth episode of the original series is about Kirk flirting with a prepubescent girl but it's okay because she's actually 300 years old.

[Anonymous No.15321131]

>>15321122
If a couple of trekkies were pedos it doesn't make every trekkie a pedo, regardless of their status in the group

[Anonymous No.15321144]

>>15321074
The transporter converts things to data and then uses the data to recreate them elsewhere. There's at least one episode where multiple copies of a person is created after transport, so I don't think atoms are being transported. Very few atoms in your body are there for your whole life anyway, tooth enamel and women's reproductive cells are some, but you're like 99.9% different atoms by the end of your life anyway.

[Anonymous No.15321249]

>>15321051
the VR headset version of holodecks basically already exists minus the advanced on-the-fly programming, which is sure to come with time. but i don't like having an object strapped to my face with images millimeters from my retinas. not only is it uncomfortable, but it's also antisocial in a way since even if you interact with other real people in a game like VRchat, each person has to be physically alone in their headset and can't really see the other people, only their avatars. i'm sure i'm not the only one who feels this way, hopefully there are enough of us to incentivise engineers to develop "holo-emitters" that can project images into real space. and as far as brains linking with computers, i think physical projection would be a whole lot simpler for most purposes, unless you want to project actual sensations, thoughts, and emotions into your brain like the braindances in CP2077. but i personally would not be comfortable with that level of intrusive immersion, i don't even use drugs because its important to me that my thoughts and feelings are my own.

[Anonymous No.15321254]

>>15320458
Holodecks. The best way to learn is to play.

[Anonymous No.15321300]

>>15321249
What I meant has nothing to do with current VR headsets.
More like something like Sword Art online, so you sit or lie down, close your eyes and wake up in another world of your choice.

Maybe you would be fully immersed so you would set a timer or something before entering and wouldn't even know that it's a simulation you are in or maybe it would be just be similiar to the holodeck so you enter a world of your choice have some interesting or fun experiences and then decide to quit and wake up.
It probably would be a bit like "controlled" dreaming.

And I think that's a lot more realistic than anything like a holodeck in Star Trek.

[Anonymous No.15321392]

>>15321300
i addressed that part in the last 2 sentences of my post, it has its own issues in addition to suffering from the same issues of current VR, it's antisocial, and can't be used for real physical excercise. you're just one person sitting alone in your room vegetating. the holodecks in ST could be used to simulate create any form of excercise, physical therapy programs, or combat training sequences for some practical uses. and they could also be used with multiple people in the same holodeck enjoying real social interaction in a variety of environments, from playing poker in a 60s casino to reenacting the alimo with the boys. now as far as physical versus neurological projection goes, i'll admit that both have their strengths and weaknesses and are better for different uses, but personally i would prefer the former, and i think it's more doable technologically. currently, a lot more is understood about optics and photonic physics than cybernetic neuroscience.

[Anonymous No.15321408]

>>15321074
It was a story point from time to time for Dr. McCoy in the original series. It pops up from time to time with other characters but most seem to take the attitude that the recreated person is identical to the destroyed person so there's no difference. Without the concept of a soul, that's somewhat easy to believe. Some argue that anytime you lose consciousness (not merely sleeping), you break the continuum of personhood, so you're probably not the same person now you once were.

[Anonymous No.15321484]

>>15321300
Though not a very popular show, 'Caprica' had a pretty good VR world that was full immersive. The most desirable part had a "you die once and you're dead forever" rule.

[Anonymous No.15321501]

>>15320458
Transporters with holodicks, please.

[Anonymous No.15321514]

>>15320776
looks like it was scrubbed fairly recently, archived in 2022
https://web.archive.org/web/20220113001335/https://archive.macleans.ca/article/2005/5/30/the-star-trek-connection

[Anonymous No.15321519]

>>15320458
Why would you want a holodeck when you already have Facebook Horizons©®™. When you're jacked in to Facebook Horizons©®™ you can do anything from put an Eiffel Tower to put on a homosexual shirt. You can even put the huge green tittie ass cheek things. The possibilities are endless with Facebook Horizons©®™

[Anonymous No.15321523]

>sup /sci/
>is muh jewish soience ficition tv show true!?!?

[Anonymous No.15321532]

>>15321523
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.15322504]

>>15321074
>>15321059
No, that one Barclay episode showed there's a continuous stream of consciousness throughout the whole process

[Anonymous No.15322576]

>>15321122
there are pedos in literally every group, that doesn't mean anything. there are pedo singers, pedo priests, pedo politicians, pedo accountants, pedo baristas, etc, etc, whatever. anywhere you get a group of humans you're gonna find the freaks and weirdos.

just because some trekkies were pedos doesn't mean all trekkies are pedos or that its a pedo show

[Anonymous No.15322603]

>>15320458
Would that tunic be unreasonably hot? And what's the flap for anyway

[Anonymous No.15322606]

>>15322504
>Barclay episode
Not canon

[Anonymous No.15322609]

>>15321074
>>15321059
>>15321408
That's false, it's a continuous conscious experience. Even when you get an anomaly and you get duplicated, it's like the Tesla machine in The Prestige, neither one of you "dies", you just get duplicated.

[Anonymous No.15322632]

>>15322603
>Would that tunic be unreasonably hot?
No, it's magitech fabric. (The costume probably was.)
>what's the flap for anyway
To visually signal informality on camera given that there's no collar to loosen and the sleeves probably can't be rolled up.

[Anonymous No.15322770]

>>15320458
Holodecks mainly because it’s a wii with fancy projectors. True holodecks will come if you somehow create hardlight

[Anonymous No.15322787]

>>15320500
You know what the plural of anecdote is? Data.

[Anonymous No.15322788]

>>15321144
Aren't nerve cells essentially immortal too?

[Anonymous No.15322791]

>>15320458
*Literally?* None of them. They're all totally impossible.

Analogously? We already have 3D printing, which is kind of like a replicator. It's slow and limited, but it's improving steadily. There was an article in the news recently about some guys who 3D-printed a slice of cheesecake.

[Anonymous No.15322795]

>>15321059
>>15321074
That's why it's not a replicator that kills you and makes a clone, it's an "energy-matter transfer beam". Roddenberry thought of this shit.

Granted, there's the occasional episode that violates the premise, but the idea is the machine converts your matter to energy and back again elsewhere, so the energy that makes up your original body is conserved, thus it's not death and recreation, but a temporary state change, getting around the whole ship of thesis and original cause problems.

[Anonymous No.15323595]

>>15320458
I dunno, but what we SHOULD make first is replicators.
Literally every problem of mankind could be solved with just that one technology.

[Anonymous No.15323660]

>>15320458
All of those are related technologies...

If you can build a teleporter, you can build a replicator. Holodecks are a natural progression of the previous.

[Anonymous No.15324428]

>>15323595
How would that solve our children being brainwashed into cutting their dicks or tits off?

[Anonymous No.15324435]

>>15320458
>Which will we make first?
>we
which one are you working on?
or is this one of those grandiose "i speak for all of humanity" statements that narcissists with no abilities of their own so commonly make?

[Anonymous No.15324460]

>>15320458
>muh hollywood soience fiction comic book mooooovies are totally real!!!
>i can't tell the difference between TV & IRL
mentally ill sheltered neglected baby
parents stuck in front of the TV for 18 years to keep it occupied instead of doing anything to raise it correctly
>duuurrrrr i wanna be luck skywalker when i grow

[Anonymous No.15326433]

>>15320927
An extremely large number of pedophiles also drink water, so I'm positive you've diddled a few kids yourself

[Anonymous No.15326881]

>>15326433
Unlikely.

[Anonymous No.15327292]

>>15326881
>when you see it

[Anonymous No.15327564]

>>15320927
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilic_infantilism