HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jreiss@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Joseph W Reiss)
Subject: Re: Why is Data so limited?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:51:50 GMT

In article <9477@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.201544.8075@williams.edu>, 92bbb@williams.edu (Bradford Behr) writes:
>
>> If I recall correctly from the episode "Datalore", Data was purposely
>> made to speak in a halting (no contractions) fashion, so that people
>> could tell he was not human and wouldn't feel as threatened by him.
>
>Let's face it:  Data was constructed from spare parts in a hurry.  He was
>designed for one purpose -- to be a recepticle of memories.  That's why
>he's called Data.  It's amazing that he's good for more than a glorified
>file server! ;-)
>
>His creator didn't even bother to put pigment into his skin the way Data
>put pigment into his "daughter" when Data constructed her.  Yea, it's sad
>to think about it, but Data is just scraped togther from what "junk" his
>creator had sitting in his basement.

Okay, but then why was Lore (who was built first and who Dr. Soong had
plenty of time to find REAL parts for) given the same yellow skin
color?  I mean, besides the evil twin syndrome needed for the Datalore
plot.

And this causes even more of a problem to those who say Data's skin
color was done as it was to make him less human.  Lore was made to be
human-like.  He was TOO human.  So why was he yellow?

Just my 2 Federation Credits.  They're almost worthless now after the
Ferengi takeover :-)

Joe
-- 
__________       |  jreiss@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
  |   |___)      | """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
\_/OE |  \EISS   |  With all due respect, Captain.  Klingons are not
          `----  |  "witty."  And neither are their .SIG's
From: norbert@wpi.WPI.EDU (Timothy James McInerney Junior)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Sirtis' body
Date: 9 Nov 1992 17:33:39 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu
Keywords: Sirtis' bod

In article <92312.215450PAB7@psuvm.psu.edu> <PAB7@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>Marina Sirtis is actually not fat--she's quite thin, as even cursory inspection
>of her protruding collarbones will demonstrate (and God knows, we've had enough
>opportunities to inspect them).  What she is, is short. In a world where Petite
>fashion models start at 5'7" and runway models hit 6', Sirtis's 5'3" is a lot
>less than audiences are used to looking at.  The length-to-width ratio of her
>frame is also much smaller: she looks wider than we perceive as correct as a
>result.  Compare the ratio of the length of her waist (hip bones to bust) to
>the width of her hip bones: it's a lot smaller than, say, Denise Crosby's,
>although Crosby's hips are actually just as wide.  Sirtis could lose weight
>until she was emaciated (she's not all that far from it now) and her butt would
>still look relatively larger than that of a taller, longer-waisted woman. Her
>bones are just proportioned shorter and wider than is now thought most
>attractive. An analogous analysis can be made of the frames of Burton and
>Spiner, one having a much smaller length-to-width ratio than the other. If
>Burton was female, we'd probably hear a lot about his butt (or something)
>looking too big.
>    Sirtis also isn't actually all that busty, though I know that's hard to
>believe; she's not much larger than average.  What she is, is well-supported.
>It is said that at conventions she will give the name of the manufacturer of
>the bustier she wears, which is said to be so tight that she sometimes faints.
>Anyone who has been professionally upholstered in such a garment will look like
>a test tube with something bubbling out at the top, even if there's not much
>natural material to work with. The elevation and curvature attained can be
>altered by changing the upholstery, so she may look more busty in some roles
>than in others.
>     She may be shorter & wider than is now thought most pleasing, but I think
>she's a really beautiful woman.
>                                            --Patty


I will agree with you as to her attractivness, although her new
hair style kinda threw me for a bit...but that is not
what I notice about Sirtis at all.
I think her voice is the most attractive and alluring
thing about her.
I cannot help but stand at attention everytime I hear it!
That combination of accents with a touch of confidence
makes her character in my mind.
Does anyone else look past her physical attributes, (however
much they get in the way) and see a little bit of her?

-- 
--------------
Timothy James Mcinerney 
tmcinern@feds26.Prime.com    "If at first you don't succeed...
norbert@wpi.wpi.edu           Try spooin' on it"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: jereese@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jean reese)
Subject: Re: dubbed voice
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:20:22 GMT

In article <1doc4iINN91l@transfer.stratus.com> det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland) writes:
>In article <1dnkoqINNse@uwm.edu> spice@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James G Spice) writes:
>>Was little Guinan's voice dubbed, or am I stupid?
>
>I only saw one seen where it seemed her voice was dubbed.  It could have
>been that they had a defect in the sound channel there, and dubbed in
>the dialog instead of reshooting the scene.  A bit cheesy, but maybe they
>were running up against the deadline and couldn't get more acting time
>from her because of the child labor laws.
>

Yes, it looked once or twice like it was dubbed, but it SOUNDED dubbed
the whole time.  I figured it was because Guinan's real voice is so
low, that a child's voice would also have to be low, and maybe Isis
Jones' voice wasn't low enough.


Jean


>
>-- 
>det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
>                           |  that doon with."
From: mdp2842@ultb.isc.rit.edu (M.D. Perler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: pad store appearance
Date: 9 Nov 92 23:42:04 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Originator: mdp2842@ultb

In article <1992Nov8.3208.14817@dosgate> "bernie wong" <bernie.wong@canrem.com> writes:
>TO: Peter_A_David@cup.portal.com
>
> -=> On 11-03-92  20:54, Peter A David babbled to All saying: <=-
>
> PAD> For all those interested (and even those not interested) I will be
> PAD> doing two store appearances in the Long Island area on Saturday,
> PAD> November 14. The first will be from 1-2 PM at Flashpoint Comics in Pt.
> PAD> Jefferson.  The second will be from 3-4 PM at Basset Books on Sunrise
> PAD> Highway in Bohemia.
>
> PAD> Visitors are welcome--particularly to Basset, since I've seen other
> PAD> author appearances at bookstores and frequently they're real small
> PAD> turnouts and very depressing.

Does anyone have addresses, phone numbers, and/or directions to these two
stores? If so, could you please post or e-mail them?

Thanks,
Mike
From: jl8p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joseph C. Lappa)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Quick Rascals Comment
Date: 9 Nov 92 04:00:06 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Is it me, or is this the second time that the transporters have become the 
"Fountain of Youth?"


At least Picard could use it to get to an age where he had hair, and
still could be in command!


-Joe
From: rem@btr.BTR.COM (Robert E. Maas  rem@btr.com)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: More thoughts on True Q
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:17:04 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA. For info contact: info@BTR.COM

(No spoilers here, but if you didn't watch the show this won't make
a lot of sense.)

ALWHC@CUNYVM.BITNET said <<I was ... noticing the way that Q would use
his powers at the snap of a finger or just stay still whereas the girl
had to move her arms in sort of a wavy motion...can anyone say
"Bewitched"?>>

I noticed that too, in fact it made such an impression that after 5-10
minutes of the show I decided it should be titled "Tabatha aboard the
Enterprise", all the motions if Samantha's little girl having powers
but not yet responsible for her actions, accidently doing random things
of magic, and always with those Bewitched body motions to activate the
magic.

Fortunately the rest of the show wasn't as bad.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
From: brad@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Brad Barton)
Subject: Re: ST:TNG Uniforms: why the zipper?
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:45:54 GMT
Organization: CompuTrac Inc., Richardson TX

In article <1992Nov6.050148.19034@umbc3.umbc.edu> cs631112@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs631112) writes:
>
>Now, TOS had hidden zippers on the uniforms.  You couldn't get Nimoy's
>shirt off over his head without ripping off his ears.  But the designer
>hid them, so you didn't notice or care.  The same man (William Ware
>Theiss) also designed the original TNG uniforms, and those had hidden
>zippers.  
>
The original TNG uniform zippers were hidden? Funny, I thought they were
directly in front.  I don't remember what season it was that all the 
regulars had their zippers moved around back, but even recently, you can
see the Ensign of the Week has one of the "original" uniforms with the
zipper seam in the front.  I'm not saying either is a great design, just
pointing out where it seems to be.



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
|            Brad Barton -- brad@cmptrc.lonestar.org          |
|  "No matter how hard you throw a dead fish into the water,  |
|   it still won't swim."    -- Marian Stevens                |
---------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo)
Subject: Re: Scotty in Transport
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:40:35 GMT


>>In one TNG episode -- the one where Picard and a ?Tammarian? (you know,
>>the dudes who talk in metaphors) are sent down
>>to a planet to kill a monster -- Picard is beamed up just as he's about to
>>strike the vicious beasty.  And he freezes in mid-swing.  That seems to be
>>pretty strong evidence that people freeze during transport.  Unless of 
>>course, episodes are non-canon.

>I disagree.  In the WOK Kirk and Bones actually talk through the entire 
>tranport process.

In that episode, "Darmok", it was kind of weird...Picard did seem to "freeze"
when the transporter was engaged...but before that, when they first attempted
to beam  him aboard, you see him being dematerialized and moving as he is 
screaming "No!  No!".  It could be possible that moving in transport is NOT 
recommended, but it is okay.  I'll have to look it up in the Tech Man and see, 
but I would guess that it is possible to move in transport, but it is probably
not a good idea.


--
| Jeffrey S. Jo				  | "Seize the time.  Live NOW...make |
| tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu		  |    NOW always the most precious   |
| University of Nebraska at Omaha         |    time.  Now will never come     |
| Computing and Data Communications       |    again." - Patrick Stewart      |
From: fin@unet.umn.edu (Craig A. Finseth)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: theory vs. theorem (was Re: time and warp speed)
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:24:52 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Networking Services.

In article <BxKsA6.4xC@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>, kelsey@redwing.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Mike Kelsey) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov11.224923.4705@news2.cis.umn.edu>, fin@unet.umn.edu (Craig A. Finseth) writes:
	...
|> |> I believe that you are confused.  The term "theory" (in this context)
|> |> means that it has been _proven_.  You are probably confusing the
|> |> meaning with that of "conjecture," which means that it has been stated
|> |> but not proven.
|> |>
|> You are confusing a scientific _theory_ with a mathematical _theorem_.  A
|> theorem can indeed be "proven", and until it is it should be referred to as a
|> "conjecture".  A good example of this is Fermat's Last Theorem, which has

I believe that other branches of science (Physics, Chemistry, etc.)
use "theory" in the sense that I do.  If you ask a physicist "is the
Special Theory of Relativity 'just a theory'?" you will find that he
or she will consider it "proven" in any reasonable sense of the word.

|> |> This does not mean that a theory cannot be later shown to be wrong
|> |> (original proof was faulty) or incomplete.  The Theory of Relativity
|> |> has been reproven so many times that it is unlikely that the original
|> |> proof was wrong.  It is quite possible, however, that new observations
|> |> will be made that show that the Theory of Relativity is simply A
|> |> special case of a more general theory.  (Actually this is exactly the
|> |> relationship that Relativity has to Newton's Laws.)
|> |>
|> The Theory of Relativity has *never* been proven.  It has been shown to be
|> internally consistent (there are no logical or mathematical contradictions 
|> in it), and it has been _verified_ by experimental data many times.  However,
So many times, that it can be considered to be proven.

|> there is always the possibility that someone will do an experiment tomorrow
|> that contradicts it.  According to Popper's thesis, it is precisely this
|> falsifiability that makes relativity (and any other _theory_) a Scientific
|> Theory, and not metaphysics.

While this is true in principle, in practice is is unlikely to happen.
("Unlikely" as in "very extrememly don't-even-think-about-it".)
However, I (opionion) consider it quite possible that new evidence
will show up that shows that it does not handle a _new_ case.  That is
a very different statement than a claim that it handles an _existing_
case _incorrectly_.

|> 						-- Mike Kelsey

Craig
From: dbarber@crash.cts.com (David C. Barber)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: More Relics Wrongo Things of Interest
Date: 10 Nov 92 05:58:41 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA

In <a=n1rtl@rpi.edu> furiop@jec315.its.rpi.edu (Paul Joseph Furio) writes:

>Just something I though interesting about this episode-that-should-be-ancient-history.  When the enterprize enters/exits the Dyson Shpere at whatever teriffic velocity it's moving at it passes through CLOUDS!!!  This infers that it passes through an atmosphere and probably would have been ripped to shreds by th teriffic atmospheric friction.  Of course, we can all say that it had it's sheilds up and would have survived, but still...
>-Paul J. Furio

Not to mention that when you open that big hatch in the "bottom"
of the sphere, all the air would try to rush out.  (Picture a jetliner
when it blows out a door -- this would be worse.)  That rush would
have blown Scotty's ship right back into space.  I'm sure there's
a cute explination for this somewhere -- and that it makes no sense.


Without change,                         *David Barber*
   nothing can ever get better.            @}-->----

UUCP: ucsd!crash!dbarber
INET: dbarber@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: dalton@nevada.edu (William Turlough Cat)
Subject: Re: The Next Class of Starship...?
Keywords: beyond galaxy....
Organization: NCC 1701-F USS Enterprise
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 21:40:39 GMT

In article <1e0lfpINNrod@chnews.intel.com> smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~) writes:
>
>In article <riouxp.721621280@iros1>, riouxp@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Pierre Rioux) writes:
>> happy@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Rusty Soots) writes:
>> 
>> >  Hi all.  Based on the creative juices of the people who read this group,
>> >yeah right :), what in your opinion should the next class of starship
>> >(after galaxy) be like?  What kinds of modifications, advances, etc.
>> >would you like tosee in the next class of starship?  I'm just curious
>> >to hear everyone's two cents...thanks!  :)
>> >								Rusty
>> 
>> All I know is, I'd like these ships to be called "Asimov Class". :-)
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  | Pierre@phaze.CAM.ORG    |      "No, no!" said the Queen. "Sentence     |
>>  | riouxp@iro.umontreal.ca |       first -- verdict afterwards."          |
>> ---------------------------------------------------- The Queen of Hearts ---
>I second the motion!!!!
I second the second!^^^^
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Another Asimov fan!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
From: norton@unixg.ubc.ca (Scott Norton)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Why is Data so limited?
Date: 11 Nov 1992 19:38:25 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <1992Nov10.023154.15997@cs.mun.ca> joseph@odie.cs.mun.ca (Joseph Dawson) writes:
>Why is data so limited.  He shouldn't need a communicator.  He should
>have one built.  Data should be able to talk with the ship without
>talking out loud.  He could also have a phaser built in, and that is
>only a start.

Data requires a communicator and must talk to the computer so we know what he 
is doing.  One may assume that when Data is alone, he does not have to talk
out loud to the computer.  It is also possible to theorize that Data`s 
builder wanted to know what Data was doing.  It is very disconcerting to have
computer related changes occur without hearing the command being given.

Scott E. Norton

Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6147 rec.arts.startrek.misc:11555
From: petitc@vccsouth06.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: The Next Class of Starship...?
Keywords: beyond galaxy....
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 03:46:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.231705.17535@ncsu.edu>, happy@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Rusty Soots) writes:
|>   Hi all.  Based on the creative juices of the people who read this group,
|> yeah right :), what in your opinion should the next class of starship
|> (after galaxy) be like?  What kinds of modifications, advances, etc.
|> would you like tosee in the next class of starship?  I'm just curious
|> to hear everyone's two cents...thanks!  :)

  Well, IMHO, the next breakthrough in Warp technology will occur when they
find a way to spin the warp field, creating a 'tornado' like effect, which
will hurl the E DEEP into subspace, finally permitting velocities around
Warp 9.995 or so, if the torque can be withstood.

  If you want to go DEEP into the E's future, I envision a semi-fluid like
ship which can change its shape to maximize efficiency and manuverability
during Warp manuvers (or in this case, Hyper-Warp).

  Also, as for crew support, I believe it may be Borg-like.  Not in a de-
humanizing fashion, but simply direct mental interfaces which would be much
faster and more efficient (and easier to use) than the keys and even spoken
communications.

  Cool, eh?

  Now all I need is a good Warp Nacelle and M/A reaction engine, and I'll
make the Hyper-Warp work! :&)

-- 
Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
scarcity.
MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)




Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley)
Subject: Re: Holodeck Hijinx
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:06:22 MST
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

<JAL127@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
 [next time, try putting in carriage returns]
>Please correct me if I am wrong but the wall is an integral part of
>the ship th erefore can not be beamed out to some other location.

I don't particularly favor the idea of the transporter beaming pieces
of the ship around just for holodeck recreation, but the idea is by no
means unfeasible.

The Technical Manual refers to shipyard transporters which are used to
beam large portions of the ships' machinery in and out of their place
within the spaceframe.  There seems to be no technical reason why this
can't be done.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Jay Windley * University of Utah * Salt Lake City
                  jwindley@asylum.cs.utah.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: km2011@andy.bgsu.edu (K. Errick Mebane)
Subject: Klingon Home World???
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Organization: bgsu
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:03:18 GMT

A serious question.

Where is the Klingon homeworld after ST:TUC?  I mean, in the novels, it's
called all types of names (Klingon, Klinzhai, Kling, etc), which one is it?
 And did the Klingons actually relocate to a differnt homeworld after
ST:TUC?  This question has been bugging me for a long, long, LONG time. 
Can someone please give me an answer?

K. Errick Mebane - The Mebane Madness 
"Commanding a starship is your first, best destiny."
Spock
ST II:TWOK
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.tech:6218 rec.arts.startrek.current:18329
From: shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu (Sergey Shimkevich)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Rascals
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:21:51 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Organization: Boston University Chemistry Department

One more thing about "Rascals": the garbage about RNA and DNA was too painful
to listen to.

I can only sympathize with physicists who are watching the show on a regular
basis :-) :-) :-) :-)

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Ryan: What is it to you, demon?       //// Sergei Shimkevich             //
// Lune: It is Sir, Demon to you, worm!  //// shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu        //
// -Phantasy Star III                    //// shimkevich@A1.tch.harvard.edu // 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: petitc@nuge115.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: kiloquad????
Reply-To: petitc@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:52:56 GMT

If anyone knows Data's memory capacity in kiloquads, I have useful info...

In one episode (the one where he's on trial so he can be taken apart), he
says his memory capacity is 630 trillion bits.

-- 
Trust:  A very precious social commodity, due both to high value and terrible
scarcity.
MATWDTM:  Mothers Against Teenagers Who Drink Too Much (failed name for MADD)




Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech,rec.arts.startrek.current
From: wildcard@nevada.edu ( WildCard !!)
Subject: Re: Why is Data so limited?
Organization: KAOS
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:31:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.113856.29888@aston.ac.uk> evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:

>Why not have communicators wired up to all starfleet presonnel, after all
>it's just a case of hooking then up to the appropriate neuones (the
>same level to technology as the VISOR)
>Or build in a phaser into everones hands. 
>-- 

I have a feeling we have a Borg sympathizer in our midst! :)

Only a "borgie" (as we call them) would suggest that our "Human" qualities
should be replaced or augmented with technology.

:)

Really, though. There seems to be alot of anti-cyber sentiment in ST:TNG. 
Polaski kept on bugging Geordi to get his eyes fixed and Crusher offered to fix
them too I believe. Most people feared/hated Data (esp. Polaski) except his 
close friends. Everyone was shocked at the Borg, acting like "Oh, ghod! This is
the most blasphemous thing we have ever encountered! They are humans that gave 
up their "humanity!" and sh*t like that.

I personally think Data's should be mass produced and all Starfleet officers
should be heavily cyborged with *at least* a Visor and internal communicator.

From the samplings on the Enterprise, I'd conclude that people like technology
so why fear one aspect of it!??

Just some ramblings from...

                              - WildCard !!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech