Page 26 of 54
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:43 am
by evilsoup
The GM guys were smart, but they didn't have any fighting spirit & gave in to despair
whereas sisko et al decided to kick out logic & make the impossible possible
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:07 pm
by Crazedwraith
Well yes the sisko's balls are so big they warp space and time and probabillity. But i was hoping for a non-retarted memetastic answer
Possibly too much to ask from TV Writers
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:22 pm
by evilsoup
well they were very intelligent but emotionally stunted, right?
So they didn't realise how hard the federation guys would fight, and that the DOminion's allies would not be 100% loyal, and so on. Because they didn't understand emotion, they were missing a vital piece of information, and they failed.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:32 pm
by Crazedwraith
Yeah That makes some sense. Like I said Damar's rebellion may have been a factor they never anticipated.
Yet somehow they convinced Bashir of their view point. He was all 'this is math is INCONTRAVERTABLE!' to Sisko.
And they did have some capacity for the emotional/psychological thing. Remember how they analyzed Damar from a recorded speech of his?
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:39 pm
by Gands
They accounted (somewhat) for the idea of Damar's rebellion:
Statistical Probabilities wrote:Even if something unlikely were to happen that tilted the scales in our favor -- say an anti-Dominion coup on Cardassia -- we'd still lose this war.
Maybe the Romulan entry into the war had a butterfly effect thing? Bashir thought they would abandon the non-aggression pact "next year", but instead the Romulans declare war six months later.
I remember reading that one of the principles of the story was that they could anticipate societal/industrial/etc trends decades into the future, but couldn't account for individual actions and their possible effect.
Who knew Sisko and Garak would kill a Senator in order to provoke a war?
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
by Oxymoron
So they were Asimov's Psychohistorians ?
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:04 pm
by Gands
Pretty much.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:04 am
by Darksi4190
I never got that episode. Bashir clearly stated that their theoretical model became more accurate the further into the future it got, but what kind of statistical model becomes more accurate as more variables are added?
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:52 am
by evilsoup
maybe their model relied on the Dominion's leadership being vaguely competent, when the female changeling was anything but?
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:12 pm
by adr
more accurate into the future happens because random variations tend to cancel out as you add more.
so in the short term, a battle could go unexpectedly well for the federation, thus they are wrong about the casualty count, etc.
but in the long run, extraordinary luck at one battle isn't likely to be repeated consistently. the dominion will probably get lucky at some point. things will even out
thus the prediction gets more accurate
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:21 am
by Crazedwraith
Re-reading The Final Reflection to remind me how klingons are totally boss.
On Federation transporters 'Yes, our engineers will be very interested. They'll want to know why it makes that awful noise'
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:08 am
by timmy
Klingons are shown in canon as being long lived
Is their infighting/love for killing each other a bio-cultural response to this
And have we discussed this before
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:21 am
by Straha
Crazedwraith wrote:Re-reading The Final Reflection to remind me how klingons are totally boss.
On Federation transporters 'Yes, our engineers will be very interested. They'll want to know why it makes that awful noise'
I read that book as a kid and fucking
loved it.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:09 am
by Straha
I just reread it. Still good. Not great but good. Worth reading.
I didn't know how much TNG and DS9 were aware of the novel canon but a lot of things seem to have references here. Including Prune Juice of all things.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:23 pm
by Straha
And behold the nintiesest site of that the ninties ever nintiesed.
http://www.tasigh.org/takzh/index.html
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:50 am
by Darth Tedious
That description seems apt.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:31 am
by Crazedwraith
Ok, that is awful website design. But does make me wonder how much though Ford put into Klin-zha as a game or whether he just knew enough for the parrallels to the story.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:39 am
by Darth Tedious
The site layout looked awesome on mobile internets
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:43 pm
by Phantasee
TNG S8 is still going. Over 160 episodes now.
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:38 pm
by Darth Tedious
Wait, what?
What is this you speak of?
I must know
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:46 pm
by Crazedwraith
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:45 pm
by Darth Tedious
Oh, I remember that thing!
Good to see they've kept it up
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:32 am
by uraniun235
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:48 am
by timmy
Nice
We need an animated gif of that with some kind of snappy phrase
Or maybe a smiley
Re: Trek Thread
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:34 am
by Crazedwraith
what am supposed to be noticing about those images