Ambassador & Galaxy class

[stitch626]

Considering Voyager also had pathetic computer security (how did a gaseous creature take over the computer anyway...), it would be safe to say that computer tech is insecure over all of Starfleet.

[McAvoy]

I agree. Just wonder how hard would it be for them to have physically removed computers for sensitive areas and firewalls.

It also may seem that Cardassian computers may have the same issue too with that puppy probe thingy. Though depends on what modifications O'Brian has done as well. Though same episode he did say something how slow and fustrating the computers were in DS9.

[Mikey]

All true, but you're conflating what's a predictable necessity in ship design - i.e., backup systems etc. - with the idea of the specific failings of the GCS being predictable from the design process. Having a "bad" standard operating platform doesn't mean that they can't predict more general needs, agreed - but it does mean that they don't. This definitely falls in the category of "bad things," but it is a distinct issue from the specific and practical failings witnessed in the E-D (and in one instance the Yamato.)

However, a better SOP in the design stage likely would have mitigated some of the sailings we saw in the E-D.

Mikey, if you can't figure out on your own that being able to safely seal in atmosphere on a space ship is important. Then you shouldn't be involving yourself in talks about the designing space ships in the first place. I get you're a GCS wankboy and thats fine and all. But no matter how much you try to ignore the issues stated. The GCS is still a flawed class and should have spent more time under design.

At the end of it, most of the problems of the class are fully predictable and solvable.

You get it? The only thing you get is a propensity to let your mouth keep running without putting your brain into gear. I never said that the problems with the GCS class are excusable... in fact, I've always been one of the folks who never let the class off the hook for those issues. All of my commentary to this point has simply - and clearly - been to state that without further info, one can't determine the exact stop in the process at which the problems arose. In fact, I seem to recall saying:

The funniest part of this whole business is that in general, I agree with you. The GCS seemed to have far to many issues with fragility a/o instability for my taste. Whether that could or should have been stopped in design, or would have had to lead to a recall/grounding after the flaws were discovered in service, is academic.

Now, I understand that it's easier to act like a tough guy if you ignore the details that are inconvenient to you, but relax. Nobody's making fun of you, and after all you don't have to be stupid to be tough.

[Deepcrush]

You have continued to make excuses about the GCS and SOP and designers. Again it doesn't matter how many circles you try to run, you're still full of shit. And, thats totally fine as it seems to be your happy place. Seriously though, stop trying to shift the topics as its really pathetic even for you.

[Mikey]

Ah, yes. Talking about the GCS' issues in a discussion about the GCS' issues is so obviously "shifting the topic."

Yes, OK, you're a big, bad, tough guy. Happy? Can you start reading the post on which you comment now?

[Deepcrush]

Really, thats your reply... You get called for your crap for the tenth time and all you do is ask to get called on it again? Have you ever at any point in this thread or forum considered trying to be useful? I know its a reach for you but honestly just give it a go.

[Mikey]

Yep, you called me alright - called me on talking about the GCS' problems during a discussion of the GCS' problems. Oh, when will I learn?

Listen - IDK what you need to hear. We're all scared of you, or we all really like you, or there's nothing wrong with the size of your dick, or whatever. OK?

[Tsukiyumi]

I am trying really hard not to let my personal issues spill over into this at the moment, but I really feel like locking this right now, as it has obviously run it's course.

[Deepcrush]

Might as well, not like Mikey has any intention of letting the thread move on anyways.

[Mikey]

Might as well, not like Mikey has any intention of letting the thread move on anyways.

Well, here we go. Once again, we are shown that disagreeing with Deep somehow is the same as "not letting the thread move on" or "trolling" or whatever it is I'm supposedly doing. Since I still don't agree with him - even though for the most part, I actually had agreed - I guess I'm not supposed to post. So, have at it.

[Tsukiyumi]

Nah, f*ck it, keep at it.

[stitch626]

Nah, f*ck it, keep at it.

[Deepcrush]

Nah, f*ck it, keep at it.

Agreed.