StarDestroyer.Net BBS

You've never heard of cultural exchange programs, have you?

Apparently it's been classified only to you that Starfleet typically employs the mentality that any peaceful and productive species is welcome to Earth.

Generally they don't involve posting in a place that is actively toxic to you. As for keeping aliens out... yeah, I'm pretty sure a position that requires being able to establish a bond with the locals might not exactly be open to aliens who are so differant they have to go around in environmental suits.

Starfleet security used transporters to get to Harry Kim's location when he was under house arrest in a Voyager episode. And that's just off the top of my head. So either Starfleet replaced the police forces or the police forces have been shown to use them. Take your pick.

Starfleet security is generally recognized as being part of Starfleet.

I've heard a mass transportation system that requires maintaining roads, production and maintenance of millions of personal vehicles, driver education facilities, insurance laws/facilities, safety laws/facilities and several other interesting ideas is also a complicated idea.

But yeah, I guess potentially one alien police officer is a bit much, huh?

Compared to having it so if the suit breaks down, he teleports away? Definately.

Honestly, you are concocting an extreme complex explanation for a very simple thing. The simplest explanation is that the suit is to prevent you from dying when you go mach 2 or higher on the motor cycle. This is the future

My chief reaction to the trailer? Federation Traffic Cops are scary. They even have ominous and surely unnecessary voice distortion. The guy's practically a stormtrooper.

Personally, I'd rather it was a robot. But I doubt it.

NecronLord wrote:My chief reaction to the trailer? Federation Traffic Cops are scary. They even have ominous and surely unnecessary voice distortion. The guy's practically a stormtrooper.

Personally, I'd rather it was a robot. But I doubt it.

Well, now we know where part of the drive for conformity comes from.

Well, I still say he is Old Spock, but if he is just a normal cop, yeah he very over the top scary.

COP: "Citizen, you performed an illegal U-turn. Come with me for reeducation."
CIV: "Are, are you sure it wa-"
COP: "Do not struggle, Citizen. You will learn to obey the law."
CIV: "I really don't think tha-"
COP: "You are resisting, Citizen" *hoses car with phaser blasts*


As for Spock time traveling, does anyone think that just maybe, when he time travels, he also end up in a different dimension, one that is very similar the current ST one, but with many small differences- thus explaining the different uniforms, history, and space ship designs?

Pulp Hero wrote:As for Spock time traveling, does anyone think that just maybe, when he time travels, he also end up in a different dimension, one that is very similar the current ST one, but with many small differences- thus explaining the different uniforms, history, and space ship designs?

So far I'm under the impression this is more of a re-imagining of Trek rather than just another "it's the same character but different actor" type of thinking.

Incidently, does anyone know what the music is for the latest trailer there is called?

Pulp Hero wrote:Well, I still say he is Old Spock, but if he is just a normal cop, yeah he very over the top scary.

Maybe he doesn't always sound like that; maybe he sounds like that after he finally catches up to someone after being in a high-speed chase with them. Pretty sure most cops don't like it when a suspect runs.

I meant the full face cover mask and gimp suit.

The cop reminds me of one of those cyborg cops from Syndicate, who were drones who's sole job was to say "Move along!" and "Obey the law!" in a deep, threatening voice.
In that sense the cop looks more like a footsoldier for EvilCorp than a cop in an enlightened future Federation.
Then again, those instructors in the hangar scene are dressed like fascists. Makes me wonder if Abrams is going for Starship Troopers instead of Star Trek.

As I understand it, traffic stops can be pretty hazardous. I don't see any problem whatsoever with traffic cops being fitted with scary facemasks and futuristic body armor.

Uraniun235 wrote:As I understand it, traffic stops can be pretty hazardous. I don't see any problem whatsoever with traffic cops being fitted with scary facemasks and futuristic body armor.

Neither would I, except for the whole "let's reduce his natural visual ability by a hazardous amount".

As opposed to 'let's ENHANCE his ARTIFICIAL visual ability by oodles'? For all we know that asinine looking helmet has tons of sight-enhancing gadgets built into it, and traffic cops 1) are usually pretty close to maintenance facilities should those fail and 2) unlike line soldiers AREN'T habitually shot at so they can always take the thing OFF in case it should fail.

Batman wrote:As opposed to 'let's ENHANCE his ARTIFICIAL visual ability by oodles'? For all we know that asinine looking helmet has tons of sight-enhancing gadgets built into it, and traffic cops 1) are usually pretty close to maintenance facilities should those fail and 2) unlike line soldiers AREN'T habitually shot at so they can always take the thing OFF in case it should fail.

Once again, these non proven visual enhancements require a nasty natural vision handicap because...why again?

Am I the only one who understands that advanced built in heads up displays for military combat units while not restricting normal vision is a good thing?

The time travel aspect continues to befuzzle me. If future-spock is coming back to prevent changes to the timeline, then whatever transpires in this film must be considered part of his timeline, i.e. the canon timeline, why try to protect it from changes otherwise? Yet, if it is, the future he has come from will surely be significantly changed anyway if all he does it prevent the destruction of Vulcan but not of the Kelvin which apparently results in an entirely different Kirk and coming together of the crew, etc. But if he does by the end prevent ALL of Nero's meddling, is the end of the film going to have a big magic reset button? I think not- I don't get the need for an in-universe reboot whatsoever, they should have just gone the whole hog.

Bubble Boy wrote:

Batman wrote:As opposed to 'let's ENHANCE his ARTIFICIAL visual ability by oodles'? For all we know that asinine looking helmet has tons of sight-enhancing gadgets built into it, and traffic cops 1) are usually pretty close to maintenance facilities should those fail and 2) unlike line soldiers AREN'T habitually shot at so they can always take the thing OFF in case it should fail.

Once again, these non proven visual enhancements require a nasty natural vision handicap because...why again?

MODERN DAY visual enhancements do so so SciFi ones doing so too isn't much of a stretch.

Am I the only one who understands that advanced built in heads up displays for military combat units while not restricting normal vision is a good thing?

No. You're simply the only one who thinks they'll inevitably be able to actually DO it.

Jon wrote:The time travel aspect continues to befuzzle me. If future-spock is coming back to prevent changes to the timeline, then whatever transpires in this film must be considered part of his timeline, i.e. the canon timeline, why try to protect it from changes otherwise? Yet, if it is, the future he has come from will surely be significantly changed anyway if all he does it prevent the destruction of Vulcan but not of the Kelvin which apparently results in an entirely different Kirk and coming together of the crew, etc. But if he does by the end prevent ALL of Nero's meddling, is the end of the film going to have a big magic reset button? I think not- I don't get the need for an in-universe reboot whatsoever, they should have just gone the whole hog.

See this is why I hate time travel. I'll wager the question of why Spock is doing damage control in an altered universe instead of going back even further and stopping the whole mess to begin with will never be answered.
I very much doubt there'll be a reset button as they're obviously trying to create a new movie series out of this, which is why I say a full reboot would be far better, enough with this altered timelines nonsense. Batman sure as hell didn't need it, why does Star Trek?

That'd be the part that where my actions usually have no impact outside Gotham whatsoever whereas Trek protagonists routinely influence the fate of the entire quadrant/galaxy/universe (as, I might add, do MINE when I'm acting as a member of the JLA and guess what, there's plenty of time travel and alternative universe stories when I do).
And a full reboot would risk irrevocably losing the really hardcore Trekkie audience.

Batman wrote:

Bubble Boy wrote:Once again, these non proven visual enhancements require a nasty natural vision handicap because...why again?

MODERN DAY visual enhancements do so so SciFi ones doing so too isn't much of a stretch.

Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

Am I the only one who understands that advanced built in heads up displays for military combat units while not restricting normal vision is a good thing?

No. You're simply the only one who thinks they'll inevitably be able to actually DO it.

Again, feel free to present examples of modern day heads up display helmets that reduce a wearer's vision to a narrow horizontal slit, with the 'logic' that the artificial feedback system makes natural vision useless.

Bubble Boy wrote:

Batman wrote:

Bubble Boy wrote:Once again, these non proven visual enhancements require a nasty natural vision handicap because...why again?

MODERN DAY visual enhancements do so so SciFi ones doing so too isn't much of a stretch.

Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

Please submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that do so while providing the same enhancements SciFi ones do.

Am I the only one who understands that advanced built in heads up displays for military combat units while not restricting normal vision is a good thing?

No. You're simply the only one who thinks they'll inevitably be able to actually DO it.

Again, feel free to present examples of modern day heads up display helmets that reduce a wearer's vision to a narrow horizontal slit, with the 'logic' that the artificial feedback system makes natural vision useless.

Show me the examples of modern day HUD gear that has access to SciFi sensor technology.

To be perfectly honest, I will be surprised if the cop is anything other than a generic character.

Batman wrote:

Bubble Boy wrote: Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

Please submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that do so while providing the same enhancements SciFi ones do.

You have the Burden of Proof, dipshit. You're the one taking the position that the helmet in question provides artificial visual acuity that renders normal vision useless, in your attempt to justify it's obvious negative impact upon normal vision.

Furthermore I've made no assertion the helmet in question even has artificial feedback features in the first place, you have.

My point is the helmet is badly designed for a human user, as it severely restricts normal vision.

Show me the examples of modern day HUD gear that has access to SciFi sensor technology.

So I take this as a concession you are unable to submit an example of modern day head gear that reduces normal vision to the degree as demostrated in the trailer in order to justify 'enhancements'.

Guess what...there's a reason we don't do this. Or are you so technologically uneducated you don't realize we can in fact today construct helmets that drastically reduce normal vision in order to display artificial feed?

We can do this, but we don't. Care to rack your brain and think of a reason why?

Bubble Boy wrote: Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

I love how you have to narrowly define it like this to avoid admitting you are wrong.

Again, feel free to present examples of modern day heads up display helmets that reduce a wearer's vision to a narrow horizontal slit, with the 'logic' that the artificial feedback system makes natural vision useless.

Again, such a narrow, moving the goal posts definition. Telescopes restrict your field of vision to what can be captured by a small lens, but apparently this is no good here because that is not a "narrow horizontal slit". Yeah, your behavior here isn't a textbook definition of debating dishonesty

Technological vision enhancers restrict natural abilities but make up for it in artificial abilities. Happens with everything we have. You decided to use this as a chewtoy and have narrowly defined it as a result because you think you have some right to an ego. You don't. You made a stupid statement, and are wrong.

Bubble Boy wrote:

Batman wrote:

Bubble Boy wrote: Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

Please submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that do so while providing the same enhancements SciFi ones do.

You have the Burden of Proof, dipshit. You're the one taking the position that the helmet in question provides artificial visual acuity that renders normal vision useless, in your attempt to justify it's obvious negative impact upon normal vision.

Furthermore I've made no assertion the helmet in question even has artificial feedback features in the first place, you have.

My point is the helmet is badly designed for a human user, as it severely restricts normal vision.

Show me the examples of modern day HUD gear that has access to SciFi sensor technology.

So I take this as a concession you are unable to submit an example of modern day head gear that reduces normal vision to the degree as demostrated in the trailer in order to justify 'enhancements'.

Guess what...there's a reason we don't do this. Or are you so technologically uneducated you don't realize we can in fact today construct helmets that drastically reduce normal vision in order to display artificial feed?

We can do this, but we don't. Care to rack your brain and think of a reason why?

The helmet is supposed to look authoritarian and kind of scary. Maybe Abrams decided he wanted to play with making the Federation not-so-shiny-happy, and decided that a faceless, computer-voiced highway cop would be a good symbol of that.

Maybe it IS an android. Who knows? We certainly don't - we can't in the six seconds of film that the traffic cop appeared in during the trailer.

Ender wrote:

Bubble Boy wrote: Please, by all means, submit some examples of modern day visual enhancement helmets that reduce the wearer's natural vision to a narrow horizontal slit.

I love how you have to narrowly define it like this to avoid admitting you are wrong.

Yeah, I kept the definition limited to the idea of a helmet design which is what I'm talking about, so no fucking moron would bring something up like binoculars or telescopes. Because anyone with half a brain cell knows there's no valid comparison there. But perhaps I spoke too soon...

Again, feel free to present examples of modern day heads up display helmets that reduce a wearer's vision to a narrow horizontal slit, with the 'logic' that the artificial feedback system makes natural vision useless.

Again, such a narrow, moving the goal posts definition. Telescopes restrict your field of vision to what can be captured by a small lens, but apparently this is no good here because that is not a "narrow horizontal slit". Yeah, your behavior here isn't a textbook definition of debating dishonesty

And you're a fucking idiot who seems to think driving a high speed vehicle with a pair of binoculars or telescopes strapped to your eyes is a great eye, because hey, it's not restricting one's vision to exactly the definition I submitted, right?

Technological vision enhancers restrict natural abilities but make up for it in artificial abilities. Happens with everything we have. You decided to use this as a chewtoy and have narrowly defined it as a result because you think you have some right to an ego. You don't. You made a stupid statement, and are wrong.

See above. The moron here is you, unless you think you can drive with binoculars strapped to your eyes.

If the helmet in question is designed for a human user, it's a pitiful one. That's why I went and suggested maybe it's a necessary evil for a non human user. At least that would be a more understandable decision.

Given the upcoming comic prequel to the movie is 'Official' I wonder whether it will be considered canon to the film. The cover is interesting.

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/merchan ... down_b.jpg

Jon wrote:Given the upcoming comic prequel to the movie is 'Official' I wonder whether it will be considered canon to the film. The cover is interesting.

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/merchan ... down_b.jpg

If this is akin to the Transformers prequel - and given that Trek uses the same writers and same comic publisher, it looks like it - I doubt it'll be a seamless fit. The TF prequel comic shifted around bits of plot and backstory if memory serves.