Star Trek Prodigy Fan

NOT SAYING that the later seasons were bad or anything, this show is peak all around! But I did sometimes miss the more lighthearted standalone episodes dedicated to fleshing out a concept or character. They were fun and pretty much absent from season 2-onwards.

TNG: and what if we keep going? What if we get past some more prejudices (surprise - we weren’t actually done with that one yet by a long shot, and we may never be actually. But we’ll keep trying)? And what if we get past our consumerism and manufactured scarcity? What if we give everyone what they need to survive and thrive without requiring anything of them in return? What would we become, when we don’t have to be anything? What do people do when they don’t have to?

DS9: and what if these ideals meet more complex situations? What if they meet complex cultural interactions, and the horrors of war? What if they meet people who disagree with them outright? What if we’re confronted with the way that building our ideal little world has isolated and abandoned some of our own people in the process? How can those ideals persist? And should they?

VOY: and what if you’re alone? Truly, utterly alone. With no backup coming, no reputation to carry you. What if it’s just you, one tiny little ship, and your ideals, in a vast quadrant that either doesn’t know them or opposes them entirely? Can Federation values persist? Can we stick to them and survive?

ENT: and what if we’re not even there yet? One day this path may be a major highway, but what if you’re the first one to take a step on this journey? Can we even get there?

DIS: and what if we’re just too far gone? What if you acted against those ideals, and did unspeakable, unforgivable, unredeemable things? What if the people who are supposed to support and represent those ideals the most lose their way, and weaponize them, and weaponize you? What if it’s all been lost? And the worst has happened? What if you find yourself in the aftermath of a war and disaster you can’t hope to understand? What if you aren’t just alone, but you’re alone and everyone here already knows you? Not just that, but they laugh at you when you try to make a difference? What if hope is lost? Can it ever come back? Sometimes today’s world makes me wonder. If we are more far gone than any of us imagined possible, can we still get back to the world that TOS and TNG promised?

SNW: and what if asking all these questions has taken us away from the mission? What if we’ve lost the plot? What if we take all those things that TOS and TNG were trying to do and update them to a modern world? Do they still fit? Is that form of hope, by itself, still relevant to a modern world?

PIC and most of the movies: and what if everyone tells you to step down, to yield to progress, but you aren’t done yet? Should you? Can you?

PRO: and what if you aren’t even there? What if it’s just the ideas and the means to carry them out? Is that enough? Is that enough for someone, even a child, even a group of traumatized and scared children, to adopt those ideals and carry them forward? Do they actually work without you forcing them? Do they have value devoid of cultural context?

LD: and what if you’re not the hero? What if you’re just some dude, just doing a job, just living a life in this world? Is it really all it’s cracked up to be? At the end of the day, can you still build community, and discover yourself, and grow?

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

first of all, Reg Barclay. that's it. that's the whole rebuttal to "why isn't anyone addicted to the holodeck." someone WAS. it was a whole arc. multiple episodes. the show literally explored exactly what holodeck addiction looks like.

second, comparing the holodeck to ChatGPT is not the own it thinks it is. the holodeck is a fully immersive physical environment. you're IN it. you feel gravity. you smell the rain. you touch things. ChatGPT generates text and 2D images. these are not the same anxiety and they are not the same technology.

third, and this one's important:

"a person who learns to play an instrument will always be viewed as an artist over someone who asks a computer to generate music for them"

people said this about photography vs painting. recorded music vs live performance. digital art vs traditional media. synthesizers vs "real" instruments. every single time, the art world eventually landed on "actually both can be valid" and kept moving. this take has been wrong before. repeatedly.

fourth, the post itself admits the real reason Data recited poetry and Riker did stage plays: it was cheaper to film on sets they already owned. that's it. that's the reason. and then it immediately pivots to "but doesn't that speak to something deeply human" as if retrofitting meaning onto a budget decision is the same as the writers being prophetic. it is not.

the emotional core here is real though. the longing for human-made imperfect things. the discomfort with AI creative work taking up space with handmade creative effort. that's worth sitting with. And it's worth having real, nuanced discussions about.

but a feeling being valid doesn't make the argument around it correct. and dressing anxiety up in star trek nostalgia and shaky logic doesn't make it a better argument. it just makes it more rebloggable.

p.s. the holodeck isn't even a fringe scary technology in the Star Trek universe. it's just. a normal thing that exists. like a TV. holodecks are on earth. they're everywhere. they're commonly used infrastructure.

and traditional art didn't die alongside them. Data still paints. Picard still plays his flute. people still create and perform and make things with their hands and their hearts. the two coexist fine.

which is actually the more accurate Star Trek reading, that new technology and human creativity aren't at war. they just both exist.

This is literally just me having an idea, not me trying to make a logical argument that’ll hold up in a courtroom. We are proposing THEORIES and dissecting THEMES. We are having an entirely SUBJECTIVE discussion here.

You understand that when someone just says “computer give me a table” the computer then generates the table based on the prompt, right Now sure you could argue that these are pre-existing models in the computer’s database and it’s just pulling from there… but then there are instances where characters say “computer generate me a scenario based on X and Y” and then the computer generates a scenario it thinks the person wants. That’s… that’s literally how ChatCTP and SORA and other generative ai works.

Likewise we also see multiple times where the holodeck has to “hallucinate” ideas to keep the scenarios running. Most prominently in a Lower Decks episode where Boimler ignores the pre-programed story and follows side characters instead, forcing the holodeck to generate the story on the fly (badly too I might add).

There are also multiple TNG and Voyager where characters realize they’re in a simulation because the simulation doesn’t hold up to scrutiny or can’t generate content fast enough. Most notably in the TNG episode Future Imperfect, where Riker prompts the simulation for answers so fast it can’t keep up with him.

And yes, Barclay. Of course Barclay. But what’s most important about Barclay is that he is an OUTLIER. It is NOT viewed as common for people in the Star Trek universe to retreat into fantasy to such a degree that he does. That’s literally WHY he’s in therapy for it! I can’t stand it when people use these all or nothing statements on what is obviously an edge case within the universe itself.

I don’t think it’s a far leap at all to suggest that the Holodeck is the natural end game for what generative ai will become within the Star Trek universe. And I’m certainly not gonna barge into someone’s threads and tell them how they can or can’t think about ai.

The holodeck as generative AI comparison is also more apt than I initially gave it credit for, that's on me.

"Computer generate me a scenario based on X and Y" is pretty much prompting. Just really super advanced prompting. Though I'd say only when verbal commands are being given. Because writing a holo-program is actually a complicated process in-universe.

That's a good catch.

I can acknowledge good points when they're made.

I'll also acknowledge that my initial tone was probably more combative than it needed to be. The culture war surrounding AI is genuinely exhausting and dehumanizing to live inside of, and that bleeds into how I engage sometimes. That's not your fault and I'm sorry for it.

What I'm less interested in is "are you okay?" as an opener.

I'm fine. I just disagreed with you. Those aren't the same thing. And I don't need to be pathologized for having emotions or for being passionate about something. Or when those things collide.

And

"if this pisses you off so much go elsewhere"

is an interesting choice after writing four paragraphs responding to me. You had the option of not engaging. You engaged anyway. That's fine. I made the same choice with your post. But you don't get to act above a conversation you voluntarily entered. Just as I did.

And well...your post was publicly visible in various tags. Public forum and all that.

The "#stop defending ai" tag also kind of gives the game away. This was never purely about Star Trek theory.

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

first of all, Reg Barclay. that's it. that's the whole rebuttal to "why isn't anyone addicted to the holodeck." someone WAS. it was a whole arc. multiple episodes. the show literally explored exactly what holodeck addiction looks like.

second, comparing the holodeck to ChatGPT is not the own it thinks it is. the holodeck is a fully immersive physical environment. you're IN it. you feel gravity. you smell the rain. you touch things. ChatGPT generates text and 2D images. these are not the same anxiety and they are not the same technology.

third, and this one's important:

"a person who learns to play an instrument will always be viewed as an artist over someone who asks a computer to generate music for them"

people said this about photography vs painting. recorded music vs live performance. digital art vs traditional media. synthesizers vs "real" instruments. every single time, the art world eventually landed on "actually both can be valid" and kept moving. this take has been wrong before. repeatedly.

fourth, the post itself admits the real reason Data recited poetry and Riker did stage plays: it was cheaper to film on sets they already owned. that's it. that's the reason. and then it immediately pivots to "but doesn't that speak to something deeply human" as if retrofitting meaning onto a budget decision is the same as the writers being prophetic. it is not.

the emotional core here is real though. the longing for human-made imperfect things. the discomfort with AI creative work taking up space with handmade creative effort. that's worth sitting with. And it's worth having real, nuanced discussions about.

but a feeling being valid doesn't make the argument around it correct. and dressing anxiety up in star trek nostalgia and shaky logic doesn't make it a better argument. it just makes it more rebloggable.

p.s. the holodeck isn't even a fringe scary technology in the Star Trek universe. it's just. a normal thing that exists. like a TV. holodecks are on earth. they're everywhere. they're commonly used infrastructure.

and traditional art didn't die alongside them. Data still paints. Picard still plays his flute. people still create and perform and make things with their hands and their hearts. the two coexist fine.

which is actually the more accurate Star Trek reading, that new technology and human creativity aren't at war. they just both exist.

This is literally just me having an idea, not me trying to make a logical argument that’ll hold up in a courtroom. We are proposing THEORIES and dissecting THEMES. We are having an entirely SUBJECTIVE discussion here.

You understand that when someone just says “computer give me a table” the computer then generates the table based on the prompt, right Now sure you could argue that these are pre-existing models in the computer’s database and it’s just pulling from there… but then there are instances where characters say “computer generate me a scenario based on X and Y” and then the computer generates a scenario it thinks the person wants. That’s… that’s literally how ChatCTP and SORA and other generative ai works.

Likewise we also see multiple times where the holodeck has to “hallucinate” ideas to keep the scenarios running. Most prominently in a Lower Decks episode where Boimler ignores the pre-programed story and follows side characters instead, forcing the holodeck to generate the story on the fly (badly too I might add).

There are also multiple TNG and Voyager where characters realize they’re in a simulation because the simulation doesn’t hold up to scrutiny or can’t generate content fast enough. Most notably in the TNG episode Future Imperfect, where Riker prompts the simulation for answers so fast it can’t keep up with him.

And yes, Barclay. Of course Barclay. But what’s most important about Barclay is that he is an OUTLIER. It is NOT viewed as common for people in the Star Trek universe to retreat into fantasy to such a degree that he does. That’s literally WHY he’s in therapy for it! I can’t stand it when people use these all or nothing statements on what is obviously an edge case within the universe itself.

I don’t think it’s a far leap at all to suggest that the Holodeck is the natural end game for what generative ai will become within the Star Trek universe. And I’m certainly not gonna barge into someone’s threads and tell them how they can or can’t think about ai.

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

Data is always trying to mimic humanity and learn, but often he’s hampered by his programming. People fall asleep at his poem recital, don’t enjoy his music or paintings, and even playing Sherlock became boring… all because he kept defaulting to an algorithmic perfection. Both his poems and much were technically flawless, but they had no soul. His paintings could only imitate other artists styles. And because he memorized all the Sherlock novels he was able to instantly solve the mystery before it even began.

It's part of the utopianism of Star Trek that the arts, not just as performed by professionals but as practised by amateurs and hobbyists, are portrayed as just as important for a thriving human future as medical and technological advances. We need to develop our minds in a varied and well-rounded way because a mind that only studies STEM is like a body that goes to the gym but always skips leg day. When we understand and embrace this balance, Star Trek says, we'll really start to achieve our potential (that and getting into socialism). A future society that didn't show us that wouldn't be utopian in the Roddenberry style.

What's more, all the music and drama and art are essential to the mental health and community relations of a relatively small population who spend a lot of time together en route in space. And everyone's part of it in some way. It's just normal. This is how it should be, how the writers believe it would be if we all had sufficient free time and energy and health and access to materials and instruction.

But there’s also no way that the writers of the time could know how detrimental generative ai (as it exits with us today) would be, so looking BACK on what they intentionally put into the show makes the foresight to focus on the arts quite prophetic imo. It retroactively explains away what a lot of fans often criticize about the show.

Star Trek does this a lot. They make things for convenience for the show, and then it becomes a reality. Sometimes that’s intentional, sometimes it’s not. Data pads are a good example. Nobody in the 90’s could’ve known how iPads would impact life in the 2010’s.

We also just need to be realistic? It’s okay to admit that this show we loved did things to save money. Filmmaking in general is a strange mix of expensive stuff mixed with really cheap stuff. Peter Jackson once called The Lord of the Rings trilogy “the most expensive low budget film I’ve ever made.” It shouldn’t be controversial to say that the Holodeck gave the writers an excuse to use locations and sets they had available to help get away from those aforementioned bottle episodes.

I guess I don’t understand what the problem is? I love Star Trek. But I’m also realistic about it? I understand the process of quirky behind the scenes shenanigans going on. Pointing that out shouldn’t invalidate anything the writers did put into the show. If anything, the utopian aspect of Star Trek should give us a better understanding of how to combat the horrors of generative ai NOW.

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

Data is always trying to mimic humanity and learn, but often he’s hampered by his programming. People fall asleep at his poem recital, don’t enjoy his music or paintings, and even playing Sherlock became boring… all because he kept defaulting to an algorithmic perfection. Both his poems and much were technically flawless, but they had no soul. His paintings could only imitate other artists styles. And because he memorized all the Sherlock novels he was able to instantly solve the mystery before it even began.

Please everyone! I’m not dissing on “Ode to Spot!” I love it just as much as all of you do! It’s hilarious and one of the best bits from the series.

But while you and I may like it, the reality in the show is that it is seen as long and (while technically adept) boring. There’s a whole scene where Data asks Geordie for criticism and the best Geordie can come up with is that it’s “fine.”

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

Data is always trying to mimic humanity and learn, but often he’s hampered by his programming. People fall asleep at his poem recital, don’t enjoy his music or paintings, and even playing Sherlock became boring… all because he kept defaulting to an algorithmic perfection. Both his poems and much were technically flawless, but they had no soul. His paintings could only imitate other artists styles. And because he memorized all the Sherlock novels he was able to instantly solve the mystery before it even began.

And that, I think, is the most significant.

And I also think that’s why Starfleet folks are realistic about the holo deck, too. It’s there to govern experiences during long deep space exploration so that you can get a hit of not being confined to a ship, but it can’t replace real life. They are taught boundaries and limitations of everything.

Because in that episode Worf asks the computer to generate a table with one side lower than the other.

And it goes from looking like this:

To looking like THIS:

And then generative ai was created.

And now I get it. I get why nobody on Star Trek spends all their free time in the holodeck. I get why all the crew are putting on stage plays, and holding music recitals, and building models, and playing poker. I get why everyone was so skeptical and mean to the Doctor on Voyager. I get why the ONE TIME we see someone obsessed with the holodeck it infringes on people’s likeness rights and permissions.

Because fundamentally at the end of the day we are human beings and we ENJOY working with our hands and making REAL human connections. A person who learns to play an instrument is always going to be viewed as an artist over someone who asks the computer to generate music for them.

Even as recent as Lower Decks they were making fun of the fact that the crew were putting on amateurish plays and holding music recitals. But after living with Ai for so long and seeing how detrimental it’s been to the world… I’d much rather watch my friends put on a stage play than “participate” in a holodeck movie.

What’s most amazing about this is that it was completely unintentional. I do not for one second think that the writers of the time in the 90’s were really thinking about the larger issues that generative ai and chatGTP would cause. How could they? Text to speech back then was still robotic as heck. More likely they wrote that stuff in because it was cheaper to film on sets the owned than try to build, film, or rent out different locations each week.

That’s the down to earth logistical real reason Data is reciting poems about his cat or Riker is in a play put on in ten forward. It’s just cheaper to do that than to build a whole new set or move production to a new location.

Yet at the end of the day, I think that unintentionally speaks to a very human need that ai is making more and more prevalent to us day in and day out.

Data is always trying to mimic humanity and learn, but often he’s hampered by his programming. People fall asleep at his poem recital, don’t enjoy his music or paintings, and even playing Sherlock became boring… all because he kept defaulting to an algorithmic perfection. Both his poems and much were technically flawless, but they had no soul. His paintings could only imitate other artists styles. And because he memorized all the Sherlock novels he was able to instantly solve the mystery before it even began.

TOS: People died.

TNG: People died.

Voyager: People died.

Disco: People died.

Picard: People died.

Lower Decks: People died.