It’s something that has bothered me since I realised
Or if they don’t have onboard sensors designed to do that then why not do that
Because someone who is unconscious or unable to move isn’t going to be able to call for help
Because unlike our world, the Star Trek world actually respects people’s privacy. Ever noticed how people just vanish from the ship and the computer never alerts anyone until someone asks for their location? When Trek was written, the idea of constantly monitoring and reporting on individuals was abhorrent. It’s disgusting how willingly people just accept that now.
That’s pretty much exactly how it seems to me. I guess I understand how American fans who were born after 9/11 and Facebook might have a different perspective, because privacy means something different now–but it’s cognitive empathy, which means I understand their feelings, not the sympathetic empathy of someone who shares it.
Ironically, I learned these cognitive empathy skills from Captain Picard, and still consider TNG possibly the best way to expose young people to the skill. :-)
But like, they can still track you. And removing the badge that lets them track you is basically a crime. Also section 31 exists basically just to track and monitor people.
They can locate you. They don’t actively monitor you. That’s a big difference.
I do have a gun aimed at your head, but I’m not gonna fire it
Section 31 were created as the bad guys! Genocidal maniacs who Sisko and crew fought against every step of the way.
And I don’t use the phrase “genocidal maniacs” lightly, but they were literally xenocidal and Sloane was, as a spy, less of an Ian Fleming James Bond type and more of a John le Carré type—an actual maniac in the piece of human wreckage who’s been turned violent and crazy by the stress of war.
(I really wish his end had come at Sisko’s hands, and involved contrasting Sisko’s actions in Pale Moonlight with Sloan and 31’s degeneration in to xenophobic crimes of extermination, and how both shared the same origin but ended up in very different places.
Be that as it may, he made some valid points talking to Bashir.
"The Federation needs men like you, Doctor. Men of conscience, men of principle, men who can sleep at night. You’re also the reason Section Thirty one exists. Someone has to protect men like you from a universe that doesn’t share your sense of right and wrong. "
Nah. ‘Oh you can be nice, but those people over there aren’t nice, so we need to be even less nice to protect you!’
Race to the friggin bottom
The most awesome thing about those episodes for me is that there’s no clear answer. It’s thought provoking and leaves you considering the perspectives of both men. I didn’t say he was right, I said he made some good points. Star Trek of that era was generally idealistic and DS9 was the first foray into considering the harsh realities of idealistic perspectives in a universe that will violate any ideal against you to achieve advantage. What do you do? There’s not really a clear answer IMO, it’s a philosophical quandary.
well, Sisko was pretty clear “We don’t do that shit”
Which might sound hypocritical with some of the actions he took, but actions of an individual that would face consequences vs actions of an institution that are beyond oversight are very different beasts
I completely agree. I think that’s the closest they come to a conclusion on the matter. They recognized that sometimes they have to make choices they wouldn’t otherwise make, or that they’d condemn under better circumstances, but they stand ready to face the consequences once the choice has been made. They generally make them out in the open, or reveal them after the need for secrecy ends.
GDPR
Also
HIPPAHIPAAHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
HIPAA
Ty. Not American
I think the canon reason given for this and other “why didn’t the ship’s computer just stop them?” situations that it’s a privacy violation to just go around scanning people without their permission.
Although they do seem to do a lot of “scanning for life-signs” so who knows?
Since when was there an expectation of privacy on a Starfleet ship?
Starfleet is not the military as they are so often having to remind everyone
First thing I’d do when boarding a Federation ship is tell the computer it’s authorized to keep an eye on my vitals.
scanning for life-signs
Yeah, and I’ve never figured out the security feature that makes scanning for life-signs more effective when you sign a little song to the computer. But sometimes I guess it’s just more urgent to know, little life signs, where are you?
It’s based on the same technology that makes you turn faster in Mario Kart if you tilt your head and turn the controller like a steering wheel.
On the good side people could just be teleported into medbay if their metrics are out of bounds. Though probably teleporting a lot of people exercising or having sex. It would be a hilarious plot point
On the bad side, O’Brien could just teleport in a new copy of you from the pattern buffer of your last teleport when you die
Yes, he could teleport a copy of myself but I would still be dead then, my soul sipping tea with the interdimensional koala while watching my copy do all the stuff I no longer can.
That happens the first time you use a transporter. Those things kill you and print a copy elsewhere that thinks it’s you
That’s not how the pattern buffer works. It’s extremely unstable. And patterns can neither be copied, nor scanned without destroying a person
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Relics_(episode)
That’s just what they want you to think.
Scotty is a genius and he was doing something that had never been done before. Continuously transporting himself to preserve the buffer. Not the same as just keeping a pattern in storage.
Besides, patterns can’t be duplicated by a computer. It’s not like a CD you can copy and burn. It’s more like a vinyl record governed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
He demonstrated it was possible, and once a military knows something is possible they will develop the capability to make it a strategic one.
We’re talking about hypotheticals, in this scenario anyway.
Okay, so the hypothetical is that the Enterprise is now equipped with 1000 transporters each cycling the pattern of one crew member… Except it still doesn’t work anyway, because if the crew members are in transporter buffers they can’t be out doing their jobs at the same time.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Transporter_duplicate
It’s been done before :)
Okay, so the Enterprise installs 1000 transporters, enough power systems to run them all continuously, goes to the Thomas Riker planet, waits for a freak weather storm, duplicates the entire crew, puts all the duplicates in transporters, holds them there as backups… And then all of the transporter clones die as soon as there’s a battle and an EPS relay blows.
That’s not how the Federation does things. They’re the good guys.
Apparently they didn’t, the man canonical continues working after they rescue him
The computers in star trek have no real intelligence, everything needs user input. I mean, their weapons don’t even auto aim.
Except for that time the enterprise became intelligent in emergence and birthed a new lifeform
And someone just needs to program that function in
Edit: to clarify I’m talking about programming a function in for medical emergency detection and not computer intelligence
A lot of my head canon around this and the notable lack of automation prevalent in Starfleet: it’s a futuristic, post-scarcity jobs program. Yes, it’s about exploration and rendering assistance and all that. But it gives people something to do, a way to serve the whole. Picard said as much to Geordi when Scotty was aboard. I’ve of the many things Starfleet does is give people a sense of usefulness.
Almost, but quite to point of human “jobs” in The Culture books, where benevolent AIs actually run everything. Humans are considered by the AIs as pets.
Rick Sanchez’s garage could do that.
