A minor way that Trek sucks

[Captain Seafort]

I doubt they originated somewhere and slowly spread. Given how revolutionary a technology it is I suspect that they started showing up everywhere all at once. It's just too useful.

Why would they suddenly appear everywhere at once? Nothing else has.

[Tyyr]

Precisely because of how useful it is. It's not a technology that people are going to look at and go, "Hmm, nice toy." It's usefulness for things like training and relaxation, especially in space limited applications is obvious. It's something that as soon as the technology is even close to mature it would be installed anywhere and everywhere. Starships, bases, even civilian use. The limiting factor would be how quickly they could build them not if people would think they are useful or not.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Precisely because of how useful it is. It's not a technology that people are going to look at and go, "Hmm, nice toy." It's usefulness for things like training and relaxation, especially in space limited applications is obvious. It's something that as soon as the technology is even close to mature it would be installed anywhere and everywhere. Starships, bases, even civilian use. The limiting factor would be how quickly they could build them not if people would think they are useful or not.

I am trying to think of a technological wonder that integrated rapidly the society once made available, and didn't needed social integration. Only the technological aspect limited it.

Hmmm... cellphones? Internet?

[Tyyr]

Personal computers. Once they were compact enough and powerful enough they just exploded.

Cell phones took off pretty quick. MP3 Players, smartphones, Blueray, Flatscreen TVs. Things that went from rich boy toys to default standards in a decade or even less.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Personal computers. Once they were compact enough and powerful enough they just exploded.

Cell phones took off pretty quick. MP3 Players, smartphones, Blueray, Flatscreen TVs. Things that went from rich boy toys to default standards in a decade or even less.

MP3 players takes the cake, I think. I remember the speed at which the technology spread.

[Captain Seafort]

Personal computers. Once they were compact enough and powerful enough they just exploded.

Exactly. Once they were compact enough and powerful enough. It took them decades to reach that stage from Colossus.

Cell phones took off pretty quick. MP3 Players, smartphones, Blueray, Flatscreen TVs.

They all took time, and all of those are simply variations on a previous theme. Only mobile phones can really be called revolutionary, and even they grew fairly slowly during the 80s and early 90s.

[Mikey]

@ Solka - Usages on DS9 don't really comment on usages inside the UFP. Chances are that the Starfleet personnel merely adopted the propieter's terminology.

[Tyyr]

Exactly. Once they were compact enough and powerful enough. It took them decades to reach that stage from Colossus.

Yeah, but this is also Trek, where energy and computing power are not really hold ups. Think about how much space training grounds take up, simulators, rec facilities, etc. And they all take time to set up, alter, and aren't that adaptable. Now even if early holodeck technology was clunky and oversized why would you still not want it? Instantly customizable training scenarios, rec facilities that can accommodate whatever the crew wants to do? Even if the tech is oversized and limited when you're as pressed for habitable volume inside a ship or station why wouldn't you want that tech even if it is limited?

And even when early computers were big and clunky they were being built and used the military, industry, and even academia because of just how useful they were. They were huge, but everyone wanted them. Personal computers like the Apple didn't take long to rocket off once they came around.

[Captain Seafort]

Think about how much space training grounds take up, simulators, rec facilities, etc. And they all take time to set up, alter, and aren't that adaptable. Now even if early holodeck technology was clunky and oversized why would you still not want it? Instantly customizable training scenarios, rec facilities that can accommodate whatever the crew wants to do? Even if the tech is oversized and limited when you're as pressed for habitable volume inside a ship or station why wouldn't you want that tech even if it is limited?

Sure. Wanting and getting are, however, quite different things. You mentioned yourself the issues with space, and possibly energy and computer power. On top of that you've got the issue of shoehorning the things into existing stations and ships, some of which might be able to rearrange existing internal volume to accommodate the holodeck, others will not. We also know that the early holodecks were somewhat less capable than those that turned up later on - Data was able to touch the wall in Farpoint, for example, something that's never been since.

In other words, holodecks would initially appear in those locations that could a) accommodate them and b) find them most useful - i.e. large, independently operating warships. The Galaxy class.

And even when early computers were big and clunky they were being built and used the military, industry, and even academia because of just how useful they were. They were huge, but everyone wanted them.

They started off at a single site, and slowly multiplied as technology advanced. They did not immediately become ubiquitous.

[thelordharry]

Take Vulcan and Kronos. Are you honestly telling me that a civilisation can get by when individuals only have one name? If the population of these planets is similar to Earth now, 6.5 billion, surely there must be hundreds of millions of Spocks and Worfs

[Lazar]

I think when necessary, Klingons and Vulcans identify themselves by their fathers (grandfathers, etc) - e.g. "Worf, son of Mogh", or "Spock, son of Sarek, son of Skon, son of Solkar" from TVH. I'm not sure what females do.

[thelordharry]

Yeah, to be fair as well, Vulcan names have apparently been 'humanised' for our benefit and would otherwise be unpronounceable to us...maybe it's the same for Klingons...so for all we know their 'proper' names are John Spock and Percy Worf in their own languages

[Mark]

Well, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out, if there is only one Klingon with that name in the house. I mean, "Worf, son of Mogh" isn't bad, since he's the only Worf.

But on the Italian side of my family, can you imagine referring to "Vinnie, son of Tony"?

Or, in another hundred years, the Klingons will be so humanized, they'll be, Alexender Worfson.

[Mikey]

I don't see the Klingon usage being much different from modern Russian usage. A guy named John Smith, whose father was named Gregory, would in modern Russian be referred to as Ivan Gregorovich Smit. Likewise, his sister Olga would be called Olga Gregorovna Smit.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Well, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out, if there is only one Klingon with that name in the house. I mean, "Worf, son of Mogh" isn't bad, since he's the only Worf.

But on the Italian side of my family, can you imagine referring to "Vinnie, son of Tony"?

Or, in another hundred years, the Klingons will be so humanized, they'll be, Alexender Worfson.

Gulf Arabs still use these kind of denomination. My best friend is Omar bin Moosa, the rule of Abu Dhabi is Khalifa bin Zayed.

If there is only 1 Omar relevant to the conversation, they won't specify his family line. If there are 2, they simply use their father's name to differenciate. If, for some reason, one of them has a renown brother/son/uncle, he will be named "Omar father of Muhammad" or "Omar brother of Issa", since it's gonna be easier to make the specification.

If there are 2 Omar sons of Moses, then they will go farther up, until a clear difference can be made.