I first heard this in an NPR article talking about how ineffective DARE was.

Don’t forget this monumental achievement in post-modern music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS88-n4Ek0s

The Borg assimilate buffer time from Scotty; that makes the entire collective several percent more efficient and turns out to be the secret to the Borg taking over the entire galaxy.

I think PRO should rank above ENT just because ENT cranks the horniness to 10 to the point of interfering with characterization and character development. True, Prodigy is kid-oriented, so it can’t be that horny, but still.

However, I can understand PRO ranking lower overall because the classic series and LD are so good and PRO, for all its virtues, does have its flaws.

I mean, I can’t even stand Jankom until season 2; Rok’s similarly a bit a annoying, but becomes a bit more bearable after the timeline. Also, the style’s a bit inconsistent; most of the main cast looks fine (Rok’s eyes could do to be a bit smaller), but real Janeway looks a bit out of Shrek, the Doctor just looks strange, and many of the background and minor characters looks really uncanny valley.

Also, although I think the plots are better than DIS, the whole “big bad”, “let’s save the entire universe twice” thing is still a bit tiring.

I think Mr. Tysess is absolutely beautiful with his gigantic chin, though, and I am astonished how much of that beautiful “random Ensign on Picard’s bridge” quality Daveed Diggs’s voice has (Thomas Jefferson is not very Starfleet). I need more Daveed Diggs in Star Trek!

I recently watched Galaxy Quest for the first time, and I thought the first half was okay, but then it suddenly got real good with the “By Grabthar’s Hammer, I shall avenge you” moment, which almost made me cry.

As for ST09, I find it a fun enough film. It’s not classic Trek, but I still think it’s a decent film; I’d probably have to do another rewatch to give my full take. In some ways, I still think Pine was a better Kirk than Shatner himself.

We’re wobbly, spinning, confused little people spinning round and round.

I don’t know why, but I feel cheated that we don’t get an Enterprise J model - what else am I going to use as my weirdly-shaped dinner plate?

True. It really drives me nuts when people whine, “I DOEN’T WACH NUTREK CUZ IT SO POLITICAL”, not realizing the only reason older Trek doesn’t seem political is they watch it out of its contemporary sociopolitical context.

Is there an old AARCH64 laptop (sub-$100, preferably closer to $50) that can be picked up for a song for playing around with crap like this?

From what I can tell, there’s a lot of crappy old ARM Chromebooks; I wonder if they perform sufficiently faster than an RPi and work well enough with a Linux distro to mess with them. I do wonder, though, if any Windows-on-ARM ones are old enough to also be cheap used (and not be some sort of Windows RT terror or something).

Actually looking at it, my impression has softened a bit. I think I just was struggling with the perspective.

I like the proportions of the earlier concept better - I like big nacelles.

That… is kind of ugly. It’s unimaginative - feels too much like an airplane or a cheap-as-heck shuttle model. It brings up the worst of late-90s/early 2000s blobject design.

It would definitely feel more at home as background ship, but this is not the design of a hero ship. It doesn’t even have to be the traditional Roddenberry-type design; something looking more like the Dove from Lower Decks would be better than this.

And another comment, since my other comment is so long: your criticism of the availability heuristic (making conclusions based only on what you’ve seen) is pretty based.

It’s the availability heuristic and the concept of in-group homogeneity that I think have caused a lot of our societal problems; quite honestly, it’s probably the source of almost every human-made problem in history.

Thank you for reminding me not to succumb to that.

When I say “demons”, I mostly mean the kind of people who you wish you could go get a time machine and kill Hitler when he’s 5 or something because his actions are so horrifying (a criteria I think most Republican elected and appointed leaders have been fulfilling for a long time now).

And of course, the kind of Republican voters who kick their kid out of the house because they’re gay or trans are likely on that list (well, except maybe you want to avoid erasing some queer people from the timeline with the aforementioned time travel method, but you get the idea).

I can see what you’re saying, so I want to be clear that I do not absolve Republican voters of their crimes, and my concession is neither a denial that action needs to be taken nor a suggestion that a lot of people don’t deserve consequences. “Not demons” is pretty much the bare minimum for me, of having the minimum shred of decency left in you that allows you to still deserve life.

If my initial words appear to falsely morally equalize both sides, that is not my intent.

I also just view a lot of these people as stuck in a Plato’s cave; they’ve been conditioned by their environment to do what they do, and while it doesn’t make what they do right, it is nonetheless sad to know maybe they never had a chance at doing the right thing and never will.

(Of course, it is incredibly arrogant to assume I’m not in some Plato’s cave of my own; perhaps I am.)

To be fair, my intent was less because of that and more because at times, some people just want to go to c/TenForward for a bit of escapism, and dark memes may not fit that.

Though you do bring up a good point about a major side effect, and I worry a bit that I’ve succumbed to self-censorship.

Yeh, I feel that. As much as I try to be hippy here, I can’t disagree with that.

I agree with all your points. I don’t deny or absolve them of their wrong; they should very much be aware they’re hurting people.

My definition of “demon” is Hitler/Stalin/Mao/Pinoche level, and despite the evil they do and the fact that they collectively enable “demons”, I don’t think they themselves rise to that level of evil. There are shades of gray.

When I say, “It is difficult to think of how they could coexist”, I mean if they refuse to be kind and coexist with others, meaning that they’ve truly refused to coexist and thus renounced that right.

I agree there need to be consequences for being horrid, I just think human rights need to be considered in those consequences as not to become horrid.

Also, I sort of view human civilization as a whole through the lens of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. In many ways, we’re still in the pre-conventional stage where we still behave based on punishment and reward, and for humanity to survive long term (if we can), we need to strive as a society towards the post-conventional stage where we are largely beyond pain and punishment. We will likely never attain the post-conventional stage much like a circle can never be perfectly round, but we must approach it the best we can.

“What stuff? Stop that! When I find you, I’m gonna kill you with a flake of my power! I am a skin of evil.”

Lower Decks! Lower Decks!

I somewhat rebut that notion, but still, that is brutally funny, so I have to upvote. I have known a decent amount of jerk Republicans as well; one of my university classes is in a room next to where the campus Turning Point meeting is held, and it boils my blood a bit.

Honestly, my response to a comment on the c/risa version of this post pretty much sums up my point, so I won’t write it up again: https://startrek.website/post/30091443/19306453

Yes and no. I think some people are intolerant out of true hatred and will choose to always act in bad faith. It is difficult to think of how they could coexist.

But also, a lot of people are just intolerant because they don’t actually know the people they’re hurting, only what they’ve been told. If they actually got to know the people their vote affects, they might have second thoughts - maybe not change their votes, but at the least be more prepared to live in a tolerant society. Automatically taking away this sector of the intolerant’s “right to coexist” (assuming this is an accurate interpretation of your point - I don’t intend to sealion, so correct me if I’m wrong) denies them the opportunity to learn and evolve as people and turns us into the intolerant in a sense.

This does not absolve them of their wrong, this does not mean we don’t take concrete action against intolerance in society (and unfortunately, sometimes it does mean taking away people’s “right to coexist” if they refuse to coexist, although we should avoid it as much possible), and this does not mean these people shouldn’t face the consequences of their actions.

Honestly, I often very angry about the intolerant, and part of me wants to feel they’ve renounced their humanity (the good part, anyway) in some sense, but at the end of the day I have to remind myself such thoughts are not conducive to building a good society (that is, assuming we still have a chance for one, which is not a given).