I know this is how people in the 80s and 90 imagined the future and a lot of concepts were probably too far fetched for them.

BUT… why arent they using drones to explore planets? why are there not more drone-spaceships? why does enterprise need a crew to begin with? Why is there so little automation? Why so few uses of AI in general?

I am saying this as a star trek the next generation person. I’d also expect them to have full video and sensory streams of any surface mission teams.

  • @ApostleO@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    418 months ago

    The in-universe answer re: drones would be that people want to explore. Sure, it’s dangerous, but it’s also exciting, fascinating, and fulfilling. That said, I feel like a responsible captain would make much more extensive use of probes than any of the shows.

    Re: data streams, I don’t have a good in-universe explanation. I have a similar question of why they don’t have security cameras in all the hallways and public areas.

    Also, using the transporter to go down to a planet always runs the risk of some storm or an orbital threat stranding your party. Why not use the shuttle as SOP? It gives your away team more resources, both for their mission and for an emergency.

      • @Countess425@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        228 months ago

        There was an episode of TNG where a “passenger” got onto ship’s comms and was contacting Picard on the bridge. When Picard told the guy that the comms were reserved for ship’s business, the guy asked why they weren’t restricted, if that was the case. Picard said that was unnecessary as people in Star Fleet generally just…behave themselves.

        • @Infynis@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          148 months ago

          That did change overtime though. They mentioned in Lower Decks that they beefed up security after the Pakleds attacks, which leads to Boimler not even being able to open doors (or activate emergency systems lol)

        • @lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

          That’s a totally insane explanation, though. Lots of people are on the ship at all times who aren’t members of the crew, and that’s before you even consider things like hostile boarding parties.

          • @Eccitaze@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            38 months ago

            Most of the civilians present on the Enterprise fall into one of three categories:

            • A non-Starfleet staff member, relative, or passenger, who would already know and respect etiquette regarding ship’s comms.

            • A non-hostile foreign diplomat, envoy, or similar passenger, who doesn’t want to potentially cause a diplomatic incident by being rude.

            I also recall lots of times where civilians used ship’s comms for various purposes, but it was to contact the person directly attending to them, or a friend/relative, not the ship’s captain. (It’s been years since my last rewatch though so I could be wrong here…)

            As for hostile parties, IIRC it’s implied that the computer locks them out automatically, and in emergencies the captain can lock down the entire ship, which is how Data hijacked the Enterprise when he went rogue, and why it was such a big deal.

      • @KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s a military / government ship. There is no real privacy.

        Everyone can read your personal logs if there’s a good enough reason. Anyone can just ask the computer where anyone is at any time. People can just barge into your holodeck program. Anyone, from civilians to bartenders can just call up the bridge and talk to the captain whenever they want. People are just expected to control themselves.

        I think of it like how people don’t need to carry defensive weapons now, while a knife was very common in the past. People are just expected to control themselves and not rob random strangers today.

        • MamboGator
          link
          fedilink
          English
          138 months ago

          An important distinction is that they aren’t military. Government, yes. But SNW recently had an episode establishing that a crew member’s personal log is sealed and it took the crew member’s death and a surrounding investigation to unseal them. The Federation clearly values privacy.

  • @Kyle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    368 months ago

    I can’t remember who said this in the show in Universe; maybe Janeway? But I think a similar question was posed, and the answer was that nobody would have anything to do if exploration was entirely automated. It’s fun and exciting and gives people’s lives meaning.

    My headcanon is that many mundane things are automated, and we don’t see them because they aren’t plot-relevant.

  • experbia
    link
    fedilink
    358 months ago

    I’ve always said that Starfleet is, first and foremost, a jobs program.

    It gives purpose to people who can’t find their own, in a time where your needs are provided-for by default, and seeking personal fulfillment is the purpose for most people’s lives.

    Drones would cut out the human driving a shuttle over to inspect an anomaly or object themselves, robbing them of a sense of accomplishment and achievement. Starfleet is about that stuff, so that’s a no-go unless nobody wants to do it and it needs to be done anyway. We see that a lot, too. They do have probes and sensor stations and stuff, after all, usually in really boring and unfulfilling locations.

    They have excessive, ridiculous redundancy. They have people doing jobs the ship computers could (and often, in times of need, DOES) perform very well on its own. There are several recorded instances of entire starships being successfully maintained for extended periods of time by a single individual (who does go insane due to isolation every time, because plot).

  • arquebus_x
    link
    fedilink
    238 months ago

    No one’s going to watch a realistic exploration sci-fi show about small unmanned ships quietly going about their jobs with no drama.

  • @bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    188 months ago

    They tried to, but the exocomms became sentient and they couldn’t be used as slave labour anymore.

  • finthechat
    link
    fedilink
    168 months ago

    You forgot to add “Are they stupid?” at the end of the post title

    • @BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      68 months ago

      I mean i just watch a the next gen episode where some science guy had created a rift in spacetime and instead of sending in a drone/probe they almost got Lieutenant Data killed. Another thing I was wondering why aren’t they backing up Lieutenant Data?

      • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Having also recently seen that episode, they send Data in because he’s the only one who wasn’t confused by the time weirdness. Picard even tells him sending others would only slow Data down and if they should get hurt it would make the time sensitive mission even more difficult.

        As for why they don’t have more Datas: They don’t even know how he works. The dude who made him and Lore died without sharing his research.

        • @BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          48 months ago

          Oh I didn’t get that far, I do remember Data’s whole exploring his roots/dad episode from back in the 90s when I watched at the time. But haven’t gotten that far in rewatches yet. That would explain why they can’t back him up to hdd. They probably wouldn’t get all the permissions for all the folders right so a restore from backup would probably not work.

          • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Actually… That kind of backup may be possible… 🤔

            I mean, if they can accidentally backup real humans (second Riker, Scotty in the transport buffer, Broccoli turning himself into a super computer, etc), surely they could purposely backup the android. lol

            • @Eccitaze@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              28 months ago

              The one time they purposely “backed up” a human via the transporter it took up so much space they had to dump the backup into the holosuite and it still nearly brought the entire station’s computer to its knees.

      • kamenLady.
        link
        fedilink
        English
        28 months ago

        One thing to remember, is that the concept of drones and AI, how we are currently developing and improving those, was not something people back then had on the radar.

  • Phillip J Phry
    link
    fedilink
    English
    138 months ago

    In a similar vein, I’ve been rewatching TNG and find myself thinking that they really should have put a cctv camera in engineering. Could have saved them a lot of trouble.

    • @Waltzy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18 months ago

      I mean, given the current trajectory of software and hardware, they probably could.

  • @crusa187@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    108 months ago

    They aren’t?

    Enterprise sends out probes (drones) just about every other episode, especially in TNG. Almost everything is automated on the ship, controlled through the computer interface.

  • Blackout
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    98 months ago

    The Amazon drone wars of 2032 is still a touchy subject in the future

  • The Picard Maneuver
    link
    fedilink
    English
    98 months ago

    In the original series episode I just watched, they reference that they’ve sent out tons of unmanned drones/probes to map out systems and planets, but starships are enormous and better equipped, so they follow up on any readings from the probes that seem interesting. If there’s an in-universe answer that isn’t “it makes better television”, I’d say it’s a combination of:

    1. Space is really, really big, so probes are only covering small areas anyway.

    2. Their mission is to explore and contact new life, which is more likely to be successful with a human touch.

    • @lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      38 months ago

      Space is really, really big, so probes are only covering small areas anyway.

      That’s backwards. Probes can always cover a vastly larger area than manned ships, so needing to cover more area is always a reason to invest in more probes rather than dumping resources into a handful of very expensive ships.

    • arquebus_x
      link
      fedilink
      38 months ago

      Their mission is to explore and contact new life, which is more likely to be successful with a human touch.

      Have you met us? ;)

    • @RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      which is more likely to be successful with a human touch.

      Andorians and Tellarites: “Are we a fucking joke to you!?”

      Vulcans: “We must expend great effort to suppress our feelings of amusement at all of you.”

      *Federation civil war begins

    • Cylusthevirus
      link
      fedilink
      28 months ago

      Also, a lot of the niches served by drones are already covered by AI driven holograms. If you’re not worried about bulky hardware and can supply holo-emitters on the cheap via replicators why wouldn’t you?

  • Snot Flickerman
    link
    English
    9
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I know this is how people in the 80s and 90 imagined the future and a lot of concepts were probably too far fetched for them.

    You also have to consider that TV executives were also considering this, and punting any ideas they thought wouldn’t be accepted by a TV watching audience of the 80’s/90’s. Like the planned gay characters who were scrapped.

    I mean, think about that, being gay in the future was too much for some television executives to accept, I really wouldn’t be shocked if they gave thumbs down on lots of more esoteric and abstract episode concepts simply because they thought it would be too above the heads of a 90’s TV audience.

    And to be fair, they were probably right. The communicator seems less amazing now that we live in a world with cell phones, but back then a personal communications device that was on your person at all times seemed definitely in the realm of sci-fi. Now we all have a near-equivalent in our pockets, as well as it being general purpose computing device that can be used as a personal communicator and much more. Our communicator is also a primitive tricorder.

    Some of the ideas they did let pass were either already accepted tech from the original series or were close to existing civilian or military hardware that was in it’s infancy.

    So a combination of “this was the extent of human imagination about these concepts back then” combined with “television executives are keenly aware of ideas the general public won’t understand, and doesn’t like confusing audiences, and thus will cut any content they deem too abstract or confusing” is what I think actually happened. One part actual limitation of imagination, one part purposeful limitation of imagination as to not to confuse the audience.

    Which, honestly, is fair. Do you think sci-fi series like Rick & Morty would exist as they do without all previous sci-fi series laying down frameworks we understand for it to be based on? Human knowledge and ideas do build on themselves, and so, in a way, the TV executives are half-right that you can’t overexpose an unexposed audience. You kind of have to slowly spoon feed them ideas over time.

    Like, what if we tried sending Rick & Morty as a show back to the 1960’s, and how many of the ideas would be entirely over the audiences heads? Simply because they didn’t have 60 years of sci-fi media relating different iterations of these various ideas until “the multiverse” is just talked about like it is just a given thing that exists, and nobody questions it. At least a few would have trouble wrapping their minds around it, because while many of these ideas were pioneered in the Original Series, their lack of depth might leave audiences back then really confused about some of the ideas presented.

    • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      To further add to the idea that the concepts themselves were not foreign to people at the time, just read some classic scifi from Isaac Asimov or Ray Bradbury. Or even older than that, and check out some of Da Vinci’s ideas. There are even ancient Greek writings clearly describing the idea of many modern inventions we take for granted today. People are rather imaginative and inventive, and can generally take a simple idea to extreme heights long before we have all the necessary knowledge and tooling to make it reality. Even now, we know how we might do a lot of stuff only seen in fiction like warp travel and Dyson spheres, nanotechnology, etc. We just haven’t got some of the requirements to actually do those things nailed down yet.

      • Snot Flickerman
        link
        English
        28 months ago

        Too right, exposure to those kind of ideas has grown over time, and thus given the modern era the ability to take those ideas mainstream, because of the simple breadth of media available. We often take it for granted that even a hundred years ago, it wasn’t super easy to get a hold of books, let alone catch every film release. Now a near infinite stream of media is literally available at people’s fingertips. The speed and amount of media that exist has contributed heavily to a more informed modern audience that can digest these ideas more easily, because they’ve simply been exposed to more media explaining the basics underlying such ideas.

    • Bizarroland
      link
      fedilink
      48 months ago

      No human being alive in the 1960s could have survived the amount of drugs they would have needed to ingest to create Rick and Morty in the 1960s.

      I feel like if you built a time machine and took Rick and Morty back to the 1960s, it would have just looked like flashing images on a screen or a nightmare straight out of hell to them, their minds would have not been able to process what was going on not because there’s any real depth to the series but just because we have so much exposure to the topic content that we are able to process it where is the closest person in the 1960s would have had is a few episodes of the black and white Lost in space or a little bit of Twilight zone maybe.

      • Snot Flickerman
        link
        English
        38 months ago

        Exactly, media moves so much faster now, so they literally had a smaller frame of reference and were exposed to far fewer of these ideas than modern audiences. We take it for granted now, but it used to be difficult to get your hands on media that was more obtuse or complicated, because often they didn’t have copies at your local library, and as such, audiences back then just wouldn’t have the frames of reference that we do in allowing us to understand the concepts and references to other existing media.

        • Bizarroland
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Well I think it’s fair to say I’ve not been exposed to much pre 1960s foreign and independent film, although I do feel there might have been a nicer way to broach the topic what would you recommend to get me familiar with it?

          Specifically anything that would prepare my imaginary 1959 brain for the horrors of Rick and Morty would be most appreciated.