StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Did this poll in the SW forum, so I thought I'd try it here, too. Which technology would enhance our current lives if it were introduced tomorrow?

My vote would be on transporters. It would have immediate and practical applications for moving non-living cargo.

Phasers, everything else is too dangerous, or unreliable.

At least with phasers, everyone could have some fun...

The only other thing on the list that is useful is replicators, but you need the raw materials anyway, so they are pretty pointless.

Transporters or replicators. I agree... I think it would be the transporter.

YT300000 wrote: The only other thing on the list that is useful is replicators, but you need the raw materials anyway, so they are pretty pointless.

Modern day factories need raw materials and energy too, and they're not entirely pointless.

A replicator programmed with the specs to produce future high tech would benefit all modern technological fields. I'd like to study one.

Transporters are the technology that defines Star Trek.

It was the last thing Redshirts saw before beaming down to a new strange world, It was the problem, and solution to many problems, and it was the transporter that gave us the INCREDIBLE UBER AWSOME A-! 1337 ending in Nemesis, oh wait.

MR Scott using it to beam up whales though onto a BoP. Nice.

I'd say the Replicator, particulary if they come with specs for other high tech stuff.

BTW the way replicators work suggests that they have something to do with Transporter technology, we might get a two for the price of one deal if we go with replicators.

Question is can our current power generation power replicators and transporters? I'm guessing it probably could, but those small replicators they have on the ships aren't much good if you wanted to make something big. They'd work for microchip production or making high-grade industrial diamonds or some other small high value objects but that's about it.

Transporters would be useful for moving around low volume high value objects, like delivering money to banks or moving the President around to make speeches. Gets rid of the motorcade security issues but then you better make damn sure the transporter doesn't have any glitches.

Phasers would be damn useful for police crowd control and suspect takedowns provided the damn things are made nice & ergonomic with proper sighting devices. They'd finally have a true non-lethal weapon with the stopping power of current firearms. Given a hostage situation they could just stun everyone and sort out the bad guys after, it would open up a lot of options.

Warp and phasers are not feasable without better power generation. M/AM reactors require AM fuel which we do not have. Replicators and transporters are left.

Replicators. As one of the few people here with experience in a manufacturing environment, I'd like to point out that the manufacturing flexibility of a replicator would be a huge benefit to all light industry. The number of man-hours consumed in tooling, re-tooling, and machinery for small-product manufacturing is enormous. Their power requirements are probably not excessively high, since there isn't a lot of heavy generation.

Transporters would be a close second, although most people would be reluctant to get into one themselves. They would still serve as potentially useful devices for transporting material around, although there are so many potential risks and societal issues involved with transporters (imagine the potential for terrorists and ordinary chemical explosive bombs) that we'd almost be better off not having them.

Replicators would be the most positively momentous, but I can't help but think that murders would skyrocket if phasers became generally available. They're quiet and capable of murdering someone with no body, no bullets, no sign of struggle, no nothing. Not only would there be no evidence, but no one would even hear the shot and call the cops in most cases. It would allow basically anyone to kill with impunity. Very bad thing.

We'd be better off without transporters, too. Aside from the terrorism applications that Mike mentioned, anyone stupid enough to enter one would be killed, since it's been made quite clear that it disintegrates and clones, and seeing as how our consciousness is bioelectric brain activity, you enter a transporter and its lights out forever. Having an identical clone continue your legacy is no consolation.

I don't think we would have transporters even if we could. The moral implications alone would be staggering.

YT300000 wrote:Phasers, everything else is too dangerous, or unreliable.

At least with phasers, everyone could have some fun...

The only other thing on the list that is useful is replicators, but you need the raw materials anyway, so they are pretty pointless.

Lets be more specific:

M/AM: explodes if you spill coffee on the reactor. Anyway, we'd need AM for it to work.
Warp: Needs M/AM.
Transporters: As Mordo said, ethical people would stop us from using them.

All that's left is phasers and replicators. I think phasers would have a bigger impact, as replicated items are worse quality, need raw materials anyway, and are net-loss devices.

Matter/Anti-Matter Technology

We've been talking about 'clean energy production' for years... and despite the flaws, M/AM is clean tech...

LadyTevar wrote:Matter/Anti-Matter Technology

We've been talking about 'clean energy production' for years... and despite the flaws, M/AM is clean tech...

Too unstable. Now, scalable, flexible Fusion cores, that's something that would be perfect.

Not listed, but practical hydrogen fusion power generation.

What? No Holodeck? Think about it! Obviously, there are entertainment uses. And military uses; it's the ultimate training device. Hell, it could be used to train everyone from the SAS to the guys at the local auto plant. You could net yourself a fortune if you monopolize the tech.

LadyTevar wrote:Matter/Anti-Matter Technology

We've been talking about 'clean energy production' for years... and despite the flaws, M/AM is clean tech...

No dice. Its net-loss technology. You need to put more energy into AM to make it than you will get out of it.

Fusion is net gain. Hence why its used by Feddies to make AM.

Darth Wong wrote:Replicators. As one of the few people here with experience in a manufacturing environment, I'd like to point out that the manufacturing flexibility of a replicator would be a huge benefit to all light industry. The number of man-hours consumed in tooling, re-tooling, and machinery for small-product manufacturing is enormous. Their power requirements are probably not excessively high, since there isn't a lot of heavy generation.

Transporters would be a close second, although most people would be reluctant to get into one themselves. They would still serve as potentially useful devices for transporting material around, although there are so many potential risks and societal issues involved with transporters (imagine the potential for terrorists and ordinary chemical explosive bombs) that we'd almost be better off not having them.

Mike, imagine the economic impact of either of these. Suddenly every manufacturing plant in the world is deemed useless. Farms are deemed useless. With transporters the entire transportation indistry would be deemed useless. either way we are looking at tremendous economic turmoil.

aerius wrote:I'm guessing it probably could, but those small replicators they have on the ships aren't much good if you wanted to make something big. They'd work for microchip production or making high-grade industrial diamonds or some other small high value objects but that's about it.

Modern technology is based on componentization.

ie making big things out of lots of small things.

Also if replicators can replicator chunkcs of stee/other metals in preciece shapes (even if they arent huge), that alone would revolutionize manufactoring.

Also I wouldnt call the computer and/or electronic industry small or insignificant.

Frankly, most industry these days isnt about biulding massive monolithic stuff, but biuld lareg items form lots of small stuff.

So what if it can replicate a car in 1 go. You can instead have them replicating enmass the components, and using existing technology to assemble them.

Not listed but ST medical science would probably have an enormus impact on the world.

Warp transport. Viable economic exploitation of galactic regions and viable interstellar commerce. Spread of species viably beyond a single star-system. This is massive in consequence. It means, for instance, that changing solar conditions cannot exterminate the human race--nevermind our curent danger with mass extinction events.

Its not possible (let alone practical) with current power generation. And its worth little when we still depend on chemical rockets to get into orbit.

ggs wrote:Modern technology is based on componentization.

ie making big things out of lots of small things.

Also if replicators can replicator chunkcs of stee/other metals in preciece shapes (even if they arent huge), that alone would revolutionize manufactoring.

Also I wouldnt call the computer and/or electronic industry small or insignificant.

Frankly, most industry these days isnt about biulding massive monolithic stuff, but biuld lareg items form lots of small stuff.

So what if it can replicate a car in 1 go. You can instead have them replicating enmass the components, and using existing technology to assemble them.

You're totally right. What I was trying to say is that replicators are best used for making small things that are worth a lot or hard to make, such as chips, circuitboards, tooling or other such things. On the other hand using replicators to make toothbrushes or toothpicks for example wouldn't be to smart since modern factories can churn them out way faster and cheaper than a replicator can.

I would say replicators. They could wipe out world hunger. Just replicate
enough food for the starving people of the world.