I don’t think it should be controversial to say that you vote for Nazis and you are a Nazi.
So then our policy can simply be, “Nazis sleep alone.”
I don’t think it should be controversial to say that you vote for Nazis and you are a Nazi.
So then our policy can simply be, “Nazis sleep alone.”
That episode was very good, but had a similarly ludicrous hook, with the evil scientist wanting to rip the child from Data’s arms, which ultimately results in her death.
That’s too bad. Anything involving sentience and how we evaluate it is so fascinating and it absolutely could have been more interesting than that.
I don’t mind spoilers—but use spoiler tags if necessary—what do you mean?
Honestly, the validation means the world to me. The performances were all top notch and I get the idea they’re going for, but how they went there was so painful and contrived.
I think that’s a terrific argument and it is always wise to contextualize it in history.
We have absolutely been binging which certainly gives it a different feel, but I would argue even as a standalone episode it was poorly written if superbly performed.
There are ideas that could have been played with in a way that respects the setting. Perhaps another computer attempting to join Starfleet, but it looks like a box rather than a person and asks Data to argue its personhood.
I don’t know. I’m not a writer and I’m just spitting an idea off the top of my head, but I think there’s a place for internal consistency within a narrative regardless of when it was written.
I'm on iOS, but I gave it a few minutes of swiping to help out.
I don't really understand what this means. Can you explain the implications?
Well hey, thank you! It was a fun prompt, I appreciate the inspiration and the feedback.
Spicy take around these parts.