Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 127 posts

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#111

Post by tmzt »

yid wrote: post #48
devindotcom wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You went to a recycled franchise expecting something mind-blowingly new? It's an action-oriented big-budget Star Trek blockbuster - you go to see spaceships crashing into each other. Intelligent sci-fi rarely sells enough tickets to justify a budget in the hundreds of millions. I don't really like the reboot either (wrong tone entirely if you ask me) but you can't say you could expect much after the first, right?

I actually didn't think the first one was as awful as this one. Perhaps it was because of the novelty.

Missing the grand thought experiment of an emotion-driven Spock, they just passed over the character development entirely.

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#112

Post by gizmo686 »

AJ007 wrote: post #98
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but it has not necessarily increased the well-being of the average person 2000-2010 was the greatest decade in all of human history for upraising the standard of living of the human race as a whole. The attitude in this entire comments thread sickens me.

Human history is a story of people nostalgic for the past, believing things are going to hell, oblivious to improvements. When I was born two big countries had nuclear weapons pointed at each other with the very realistic possibility of exchange. Everything we built could be eradicated in an hour or two. We are quite better off.

I'm reminded of a history class I had relatively recently. We were talking about the cold war, and the issue of modern terrorism came up. My history teacher made the point that, looking back, many people are nostolgic because in the cold war, the president could pick up the phone to the soviets and talk to someone rational.

I doubt anyone at the time thought that.

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#113

Post by nknighthb »

AJ007 wrote: post #98
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but it has not necessarily increased the well-being of the average person 2000-2010 was the greatest decade in all of human history for upraising the standard of living of the human race as a whole. The attitude in this entire comments thread sickens me.

Human history is a story of people nostalgic for the past, believing things are going to hell, oblivious to improvements. When I was born two big countries had nuclear weapons pointed at each other with the very realistic possibility of exchange. Everything we built could be eradicated in an hour or two. We are quite better off.

> When I was born two big countries had nuclear weapons pointed at each other with the very realistic possibility of exchange.

The only time at which that hasn't been true was a brief period during the early-mid 1990s. India and Pakistan are not small countries.

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#114

Post by trekky1700 »

It's a movie set in an already defined universe, you can't just start adding new technology because we invented the cell phone. There's still a bloody lot we're missing, and just because those things are way above the comprehension of a non-physicist doesn't make them any less inspiring. It'll just inspire future generations to become physicists, to build things like transporters, artificial gravity, phasers, warp drives and huge spaceships. Just because we have tablet computers doesn't degrade the rest of the inspiration Star Trek still provides, and I think that's where this article completely misses the point. If you look at faster than light travel as a 70s idea, there's something seriously wrong with your view of the future.

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#115

Post by saurik »

randallsquared wrote: post #107
saurik wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I suggest you re-watch the 2009 movie.)

It's the major technology that wasn't in TNG, DS9, or Voyager, or the TNG movies... Unless you're arguing that the 2009 movie shouldn't be considered to have any continuity with those, in spite of authorial attempts to ensure that it does? But that doesn't seem to have been your argument. :)

I was trying not to ruin the 2009 movie for people who haven't seen it, but read Steko's response to johnny_eh. This is not some weird timeline inconsistency by the mistake of the writers... this is actually a weird timeline inconsistency by design of the in-universe plot. (If Steko's description then itself seems impossible, re-watch the TNG episode Relics.)

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#116

Post by gee_totes »

erifneerg wrote: post #106
hosh wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of the above are depicted in depth by Peter F. Hamilton's books, such as the Pandora's Star or Fallen Dragon .

I was thinking of Daniel Suarez's Freedom (TM) book when I read this thread.

Greg Bear's Eon trilogy also touches on People-as-VM issues

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#117

Post by kapilkaisare »

snowwrestler wrote: post #15

I guess I was watching a different movie, because I saw: - advanced handheld medical scanners and treatments - a genetically engineered human with super strength, health, and intelligence - suspended animation that keeps humans alive for centuries - artificial gravity - faster than light communication and travel - materials strong enough to maintain structural integrity after falling from space and plowing through a…

I haven't seen the movie, but weren't all the items in your list pretty standard fare for dreamers 30-40 years ago? I mean, the Star Trek TOS series introduced most of those ideas, and the series that followed expanded on them, philosophically or aesthetically.

It's difficult to deny, IMO, that human imagination as far as the future is concerned has not dreamed up anything beyond what was conceived by the early grandmasters of science fiction literature and television.

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#118

Post by dennisgorelik »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #62
snowwrestler wrote: post #15

I guess I was watching a different movie, because I saw: - advanced handheld medical scanners and treatments - a genetically engineered human with super strength, health, and intelligence - suspended animation that keeps humans alive for centuries - artificial gravity - faster than light communication and travel - materials strong enough to maintain structural integrity after falling from space and plowing through a…

The discussion here demonstrates the problem. So lets take a moment and think about what we see vs what we do. So if you take the Internet and extend it to its logical next step we've got 20 - 40gbits of bandwidth between everyone and everyone else. We've got parallel rendering pipelines and physics simulation such that you can render a scene that is indistinguishable from reality to our poor brains, and then you can…

Why "sadly"?

Re: Star Trek, tech companies, and the death of futurism in cinema

#120

Post by scotty79 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #110
tadfisher wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think this isn't our present?

That isn't the question though, once you know you are living in a simulation what happens? This was a very interesting question that was raised in the TV show Caprica (a Battlestar Galactica prequel series). If you know it is a simulation then you can just do what ever the heck you want, reboot/restart when necessary. Doesn't make for interesting cinema or literature as the question of future value / future outcome v…

You still could suffer lasting psychological damage.
Post reply on HN