In case you don’t know, they explicitly use the term socialist to describe the Federation economy in SNW. I was wondering if ppl liked or hated it? I like it personally since it’s not a dodge like “new world economy”

  • MudMan@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    You know the irony of this interpretation? By canon, replicators are energy to matter conversion devices. Basically a 3D printer using relativity to poof atoms into existence from an energy source.

    Replicators are straight-up the most expensive way to make anything. Using that technology to make you a cup of tea is the most inefficient use of any resource put on screen in media history. It’s absurd. The notion that instead of heating up water you would go ahead and make the atoms out of energy is so much worse than just filling in a space station’s worth of water and carrying it with you into space just to keep Picard’s Earl Grey habit going.

    It’s not the replicator at all that drives the post-scarcity, it’s whatever nonsense antimatter generator stuff dilithium is enabling where they get infinite energy forever. Although we know dilithium is a limited resource, since they don’t seem to just replicate some when they need it, so… somebody should do the math there and figure out how expensive all those Janeway coffees actually are.

    • EarMaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Maybe it’s a combination of both the sheer abundance of energy and the ability to create almost everything out of it…

    • AwesomeLowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      My headcanon is that they have feedstocks and are just teleporting atoms around and gluing them together, maybe adding and electron here and there. If anything it’s the most consistent use of their transporters.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        But we know that’s not how transporters work. If that was the case you wouldn’t be able to get “accidents” where you end up with two copies of the same guy. The transporter must work like the replicator, not the other way around.

        Also, that doesn’t work with some of the stuff they say, like how they don’t replicate anything alive, and so food does taste noticeably different. Plus… you know, no massive farm deck anywhere on the Enterprise and no transwarp to beam that in from a planet, so… we’re going to have to accept this stuff may be just handwavy bulls#!t at some point.

        • AwesomeLowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          But we know that’s not how transporters work

          Do we? Transporters are magic. They’ve never been logically consistent. Half the episodes either would have resolved in 5 minutes or never happened if they were.

          this stuff may be just handwavy bulls#!t at

          Fully agreed. Just like transporters :P

          • MudMan@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh, yeah, it’s ALL handwavy bulls#!t. It’s a 60s sci-fi TV show. A great one, but… you know.

            I’ll say that the transporters are some of the most consistent pieces of tech they came up with, though, at least as they get explored over time. They need a beam, they are disrupted by shields and interference, they turn people into a data buffer “pattern” that seems to follow the way data would behave, in that they can add and substract to it. You need to assume they don’t use them as full-on cloning machines because of regulations, rather than tech limits, but it mostly makes sense.

            Unfortunately the version that makes sense is the most disturbing interpretation, so they still need to handwave the crap out of it.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Right but they get all that energy from atom to energy conversion. The starships get that from antimatter reactors but I’m pretty certain that planet-based installations probably just put a bunch of trees and gravel in as base material, convert that to energy and then convert that back into useful atoms.

      If you can do matter conversion, then power generation is almost certainly trivially easy.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, I think in canon the curvy bit at the front of the ship (or the nacelles, sometimes) is just gathering dust to then burn into energy. It gets trickier with the transporter, because in theory the dust is going into a matter/antimatter thing, but if the transporter is fueling itself from the body it’s disintegrating… well, where’s the antimatter?

        I think in their minds the transporter isn’t doing that, and is instead taking energy to both turn a person into a pattern and then build the pattern back into a person. Seems like a waste, but I guess the raw matter isn’t the real concern here.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The transports don’t use antimatter. And too much or is just used for power generation the transport has just run on that power.