ENTERPRISE Is The *MIRROR* Universe.
Scotty
I had also just finished reading (again) William Shatner's novel
SPECTRE. (As an aside, has anyone read the sequel?)
In any case, if you follow the theory of the convergent creation of
the "Mirror" Universe (I'll be happy to go over this theory for those
who haven't read the book), then it has to follow that the Enterprise
universe that we are viewing is actually the *MIRROR* universe (as
portrayed in TOS Mirror, Mirror) and not the "real" universe at all.
Forgive me if this theory has been put forth and discussed. But it
was a real shocker for me..
Any holes in this theory??
Scotty
Steve T
"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
> I had an epiphany while re-watching REGENERATION last night.
>
> I had also just finished reading (again) William Shatner's novel
> SPECTRE. (As an aside, has anyone read the sequel?)
>
> In any case, if you follow the theory of the convergent creation of
> the "Mirror" Universe (I'll be happy to go over this theory for those
> who haven't read the book),
Yep, I'd like to hear this, if you don't mind expanding on it. And how Enterprise ties in
as being in the Mirror universe.
Cheers
Steve T
Scotty
wrote:
Not a problem.
I'll use terms like "real" and "mirror" as they apply..
This theory encompasses many Trek aspects. FIRST CONTACT, SPECTRE,
TOS, DS9 and TNG.
OK, in the original timeline, Cochrane built his warp ship, First
Contact occurred, and there was no hitches. Up until this point,
there was one universe. (Granted there were many, but for our
purposes of exploring the "mirror" universe link, there is only one).
Anyways at this point, a divergence occurred. As depicted in FIRST
CONTACT, the Borg showed up and meddled in the happenings of First
Contact. At this point, the universes diverged considerably. In the
real universe Cochrane, after successfully completing the flight of
the PHOENIX, moved to Alpha Centauri and named the lake next to his
new home, Lake Sloane. Presumably after the navigator of the Phoenix.
In the Mirror universe, the Borg were introduced centuries earlier.
(Remember, the *first* contact with the Borg, in the real universe,
did not occur until 2nd or 3rd Season TNG.) So, Earth had an inkling
of what awaited itself out in the universe, and it's evolution was
along decidedly more military lines. Cochrane moved to Alpha Centauri
and named the lake next to his new home, *LAKE RIKER*.
So, the theory is that, in the Mirror universe, it was the Borg's
attempted intervention in the timeline that caused the divergence of
the universes, but still kept them linked, since they were the "same"
for so long. That is why we see a lot of travel between the same
universes, as depicted in TOS and DS9, plus the ST Novels Dark Mirror
and SPECTRE.
Now, as this pertains to ENTERPRISE.
In the episode REGENERATION, Starfleet found the remnants of the
attempted Borg intervention, in the Arctic.
Since the Borg intervention is what created the Mirror universe, if
the remnants of Borg are found, then it MUST be the Mirror universe
that we are witnessing in ENTERPRISE. Because there was no Borg
Intervention in the "real" universe, therefore there could not be any
Borg remnants.
Scotty
Graham Kennedy
According the the multiple universes theory there are
an infinite number of universes, all slightly (or hugely,
depending) different from one another.
Assuming that the Enterprise universe is indeed not part
of the "real" TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager one, what makes you
think that it must therefore be the precise one that Kirk
visited?
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and author, Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
Scotty
This was also explored in SPECTRE.
The theory goes that these two particular universes maintain a
stronger link due to the manner in which the divergence occurred. I
don't have the book in front of me, so I can't give you the exact
explanation used..
But, because of the stronger link, transfers to and from these 2
particular universes is more likely.
Think of it as a "wormhole" theory..
Most wormholes allow instantaneous travel from place to place, but
never the same places. Yet, we have a "stable" wormhole from DS9 to
the same place in the Gamma quadrant.
Multi-Universe travel is random, except for the travel between the
"real" universe and *the* Mirror universe.
Scotty
Steve T
>
> Since the Borg intervention is what created the Mirror universe, if
> the remnants of Borg are found, then it MUST be the Mirror universe
> that we are witnessing in ENTERPRISE. Because there was no Borg
> Intervention in the "real" universe, therefore there could not be any
> Borg remnants.
>
Ok, are we saying that all changes in the timeline spawn alternate universes?
In First Contact, when the Borg sphere disappears into the temporal vortex, the Enterprise
suddenly sees the Earth transformed -- high concentrations of methane, carbon monoxide and
chlorine, population nin billion -- all Borg.
So this is now a timeline that exists with the Borg going into the past and interrupting
the Earth's natural evolution. That particular universe
(all borg-ified) probably exists somewhere in the multiverse as well -- but it isn't very
interesting unless you like studying Borg.
When the Enterprise returns at the end of the film, (presumably -- we don't actually see
them return, we just see them preparing to return, with Picard saying "I suspect our
future is there waiting for us")... anyway, when they return at the end of the film, which
universe are they in? They've restored the timeline, but from what you say, 'not quite
enough'. Shouldn't the Enterprise E be returning to the 'Mirror' universe? But they
don't, as subsequent movies clearly are in the Federation universe.
I'm not sure that temporal incursions 'create' parallel universes -- generally going back
into the past creates a situation which 'needs to be corrected' by another time travel
event. This is the case with 'First Contact', 'Yesterday's Enterprise', 'The City on the
Edge of Forever', 'Year of Hell', -- despite all these time travel stories there seems
still to be only one alternate universe that exists and that anybody ever visits -- the
'Mirror' universe.
One alternate take is the 'destined to happen' approach, by the way -- in 'The Voyage
Home' giving the formula for transparent aluminum to the guy who invented it -- or in
'Little Green Men', time traveling Ferengi creating the whole Roswell incident.
Anyway, both of these approaches suggest to me that temporal incursions have nothing to do
with parallel universes.
eath is 'restored'
Steve T
"Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message
news:3f44eb31$0$46013$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net...
>
> Anyway, both of these approaches suggest to me that temporal incursions have nothing to
do
> with parallel universes.
>
Incidentally, I forgot to touch on one of the more annoying side effects of temporal
incursions -- the 'artifacts' that shouldn't exist, like the alternate Tasha Yar on
Enterprise C. That probably *supports* the idea of temporal incursions creating
persistent alternate realities.
Heck, I'm still trying to get my head around the fact that Fry is his own grandfather...
Scotty
It goes to the very heart of one particular issue..
Exactly HOW are the "multi-verses" created?
Is it simply by a "yes/no" "if/then" decision process? If so, then
there are an infinite number of multi-verses. (As evidenced by WORF's
excursion thru some of them. Can't recall the TNG Episode name.)
Or does it take a "major" disruption/decesion to create a parallel
universe? Ever read The Man Who Folded Himself by David Gerrold or
The Infinite Worlds Of Maybe by Lester Del Rey? (Giving away my age,
ain't I?? :^)... )
In any case, if you accept the theory that timeline incursion and/or
disruption DOES create a parallel universe and that *the* Mirror
universe of TOS Mirror, Mirror et al and our universe are irrevocably
linked, then it is inescapable to conclude that ENTERPRISE is actually
in the MIRROR universe.
A lot of ifs, I know... But that's what makes such a discussion
interesting.. :^)
Scotty
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:53:02 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
wrote:
>
Steve T
> Interesting notion, ST...
>
> It goes to the very heart of one particular issue..
>
> Exactly HOW are the "multi-verses" created?
>
> Is it simply by a "yes/no" "if/then" decision process? If so, then
> there are an infinite number of multi-verses. (As evidenced by WORF's
> excursion thru some of them. Can't recall the TNG Episode name.)
Ah, yes, I forgot about that episode - 'Parallels' - with Worf being stuck in a Quantum
Fissure (I bet that hurt).
So yes, there are multiple parallel universes, but the easiest one to travel to seems to
be the Mirror universe. I wonder if it's a different order of alternate reality? The
Mirror universe may have its own 'multiple parallel universes'
>
> Or does it take a "major" disruption/decesion to create a parallel
> universe? Ever read The Man Who Folded Himself by David Gerrold or
> The Infinite Worlds Of Maybe by Lester Del Rey? (Giving away my age,
> ain't I?? :^)... )
Can't recall reading them, but I'm no spring chicken myself, so I may have read them when
they came out. :-) I'll add them to my reading (re-reading?) list.
>
> In any case, if you accept the theory that timeline incursion and/or
> disruption DOES create a parallel universe and that *the* Mirror
> universe of TOS Mirror, Mirror et al and our universe are irrevocably
> linked, then it is inescapable to conclude that ENTERPRISE is actually
> in the MIRROR universe.
I missed a step, there, somewhere -- that the Borg intervention created the Mirror
universe. That's what came out of SPECTRE?
In that case, if you accept SPECTRE as canon, then yes, Enterprise is in the Mirror
universe. The trouble is I'm not sure SPECTRE will be accepted as canon by TPTB.
Alternatively, it could be that the devastation in Florida in the season finale (which was
the result of a temporal incursion) -- perhaps *that* is the trigger that created the
Mirror universe -- perhaps Enterprise history from that point onwards, including the
Delphic Expanse and sloths and everything is the forerunner of the Empire and the mirror
universe.
That sort of makes sense to me, as prior to season 3 we've seen keystones laid that would
lead to the Federation we know and love - the rudimentary Prime Directive, Earth being the
pivot point between the Vulcan / Andorian conflict and earning the Andorian's trust, which
may lead eventually to Earth becoming the core of the Federation as it is today.
But suddenly, in season 3, we have a militant earth ship, taking the battle to the enemy,
and they may not stop there -- the foundation for the Mirror Empire?
Matt Huang
no way to be absolutely sure yet, however, the ENT timeline seems to
be the result of the FC intervention
Count 1
Yes. The lack of hardcore leather clad lesbians in Enterprise.
Scotty
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 17:48:08 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
wrote:
>
>"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
>news:s1r9kvg6dees873eg...@4ax.com...
>> Interesting notion, ST...
>>
>> It goes to the very heart of one particular issue..
>>
>> Exactly HOW are the "multi-verses" created?
>>
>> Is it simply by a "yes/no" "if/then" decision process? If so, then
>> there are an infinite number of multi-verses. (As evidenced by WORF's
>> excursion thru some of them. Can't recall the TNG Episode name.)
>
>Ah, yes, I forgot about that episode - 'Parallels' - with Worf being stuck in a Quantum
>Fissure (I bet that hurt).
I dunno.. Had some pleasing aspects. Married to Deanna, for one.. :^)
>
>So yes, there are multiple parallel universes, but the easiest one to travel to seems to
>be the Mirror universe. I wonder if it's a different order of alternate reality? The
>Mirror universe may have its own 'multiple parallel universes'
Good point. The Mirror universe may be quite a bit more than just
another parallel universe.
>
>
>>
>> Or does it take a "major" disruption/decesion to create a parallel
>> universe? Ever read The Man Who Folded Himself by David Gerrold or
>> The Infinite Worlds Of Maybe by Lester Del Rey? (Giving away my age,
>> ain't I?? :^)... )
>
>Can't recall reading them, but I'm no spring chicken myself, so I may have read them when
>they came out. :-) I'll add them to my reading (re-reading?) list.
Gerrold's (of TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES fame) is a major mind-f**k. Don't
read it drunk.. :^)
Speaking of Tribbles, SPECTRE touches on the Kirk/Sisko connection
briefly as well..
>
>>
>> In any case, if you accept the theory that timeline incursion and/or
>> disruption DOES create a parallel universe and that *the* Mirror
>> universe of TOS Mirror, Mirror et al and our universe are irrevocably
>> linked, then it is inescapable to conclude that ENTERPRISE is actually
>> in the MIRROR universe.
>
>I missed a step, there, somewhere -- that the Borg intervention created the Mirror
>universe. That's what came out of SPECTRE?
That is not the MAIN point of Spectre, but that is the theory that
Spock and Mirror-Spock came up with. If you have the book, it is on
page 369-370. If not, I can lay out the theory, word for word, as I
found my copy.
>
>In that case, if you accept SPECTRE as canon, then yes, Enterprise is in the Mirror
>universe. The trouble is I'm not sure SPECTRE will be accepted as canon by TPTB.
True enough. One thing I enjoy about the Trek universe is it's
consistency. Writers tend to incorporate previous works into current
novels. Granted there are exceptions (Ex: The explanation of FIRST
CONTACT in STRANGERS IN THE SKY). But these exceptions are quite
rare.
While SPECTRE is no more or less "binding" then any other TREK novel,
I found how it dove-tailed with so many other Trek adventures to be
fascinating.
>
>Alternatively, it could be that the devastation in Florida in the season finale (which was
>the result of a temporal incursion) -- perhaps *that* is the trigger that created the
>Mirror universe -- perhaps Enterprise history from that point onwards, including the
>Delphic Expanse and sloths and everything is the forerunner of the Empire and the mirror
>universe.
Unfortunately, I have missed more ENTERPRISE episodes then I have
watched. :^( If anyone has any .ty files of the episodes to share, I
would be most appreciative.
>
>That sort of makes sense to me, as prior to season 3 we've seen keystones laid that would
>lead to the Federation we know and love - the rudimentary Prime Directive, Earth being the
>pivot point between the Vulcan / Andorian conflict and earning the Andorian's trust, which
>may lead eventually to Earth becoming the core of the Federation as it is today.
>
>But suddenly, in season 3, we have a militant earth ship, taking the battle to the enemy,
>and they may not stop there -- the foundation for the Mirror Empire?
According to what I have read on the FNC web site, the upcoming
season should be especially interesting.
Scotty
wrote:
That's what I see as well..
But, as Steve pointed out, that is only if you accept the SPECTRE
theory as valid.
But, since SPECTRE dovetails so nicely with so many other TREK
instances, it lends more to the credibility of the theory in my
opinion.
Only one other novel that I can recall has made so many different
connections and tied so many TREK aspects together.
That was Q-SQUARED..
Scotty
Well, that's a given.. :^)
Tamara
Yummy!!
I am liking this the more I read. Talk about a reset button! The entire
show is the parallel universe. It sure would be a lot easier for B&B from
this season on. No need to adhere to canon, 'cause it is all unknown
territory.
Now I just hope they don't make the mistake of TRYING to stick to what is
canon (from the others series) and burst this lovely bubble I have :)
Tamara, la la la-la la, la la la
"Well, it's a type 'M' planet, so it should at least
have Rodenberries."
-- Leela, Futurama
Tamara
"Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bi2vee$4cqms$1...@ID-130993.news.uni-berlin.de...
Here, here!!
A new "look" for Hoshi...?
:
:
:
Tamara
"Well, the truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination."
-- Garak, DS9
>
Count 1
Tamara <themp...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:DP71b.799977$3C2.18...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
I could only wish. <pant pant>
Snake
> Yummy!!
>
> I am liking this the more I read. Talk about a reset button! The entire
> show is the parallel universe. It sure would be a lot easier for B&B from
> this season on. No need to adhere to canon, 'cause it is all unknown
> territory.
>
> Now I just hope they don't make the mistake of TRYING to stick to what is
> canon (from the others series) and burst this lovely bubble I have :)
Snake, believing in this theory since middle second-season.
The nice thing about all this is that they can still stick in the occasional
'canon', and just factor it to statistical probability causality...
;D
Count 1
More HCLCL in Enterprise!!
Steve T
>
> True enough. One thing I enjoy about the Trek universe is it's
> consistency. Writers tend to incorporate previous works into current
> novels. Granted there are exceptions (Ex: The explanation of FIRST
> CONTACT in STRANGERS IN THE SKY). But these exceptions are quite
> rare.
The whole integrity of canon is remarkable when you think of it -- thanks largely to the
efforts of fans and writers who care. This was amusingly parodied in 'Galaxy Quest' where
aliens watching a Star Trek-like TV show are able to build an identical, working starship
that's fully consistent with every episode of the show.
But the consistency is usually one-way. Novelists work their stories into established
Trek history carefully and lovingly, and they 'flesh out' the history and relationships,
but TPTB don't necessarily (ever?) use the material in novels or comic books or other
printed sources to build on in the shows and movies. This was the basis for the whole
concept of canon in the first place -- that you could only trust the TV shows and movies
for 'true' information about the Trek universe. And it's understandable, since trying to
reconcile *all* the Star Trek works into a cohesive universe would be a formidable task.
In fact, I'd be interested if anybody is aware of a 'canon' fact that can be traced to a
first appearance in a novel or other non-canon source.
'Strangers From the Sky' was written in 1987 and although I haven't read it, I'm positive
that it fit in with the canon of the time perfectly -- the divergence was no fault of Ms.
Bonanno.
Cheers
Steve T
Scotty
Seems that we have a "DALLAS" event, Star Trek style, in the making.
:^)
Scotty
Steve T
"Snake" <vze3...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wR71b.25681$Cd2....@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
Well, as long as they don't show Bobby Ewing in the shower at the end of season 3...
Scotty
My fav Garak line is:
"Of course I'm paranoid. Everyone is out to get me."
-Garak
Scotty
Way back when, I noticed that there was a scene in Babs 5 (Babylon 5)
where it looked like Ivonava and Talai were going to get... ahem..
together..
Dare we fantasize about a Hoshi/T'Pol "dream sequence"? Wouldn't that
prove conclusively that ENTERPRISE is, indeed, the Mirror universe?
Scotty
Scotty
wrote:
>
>"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
>news:ej0akvkdu0n3aje0n...@4ax.com...
>>
>> True enough. One thing I enjoy about the Trek universe is it's
>> consistency. Writers tend to incorporate previous works into current
>> novels. Granted there are exceptions (Ex: The explanation of FIRST
>> CONTACT in STRANGERS IN THE SKY). But these exceptions are quite
>> rare.
>
>The whole integrity of canon is remarkable when you think of it -- thanks largely to the
>efforts of fans and writers who care. This was amusingly parodied in 'Galaxy Quest' where
>aliens watching a Star Trek-like TV show are able to build an identical, working starship
>that's fully consistent with every episode of the show.
>
>But the consistency is usually one-way. Novelists work their stories into established
>Trek history carefully and lovingly, and they 'flesh out' the history and relationships,
>but TPTB don't necessarily (ever?) use the material in novels or comic books or other
>printed sources to build on in the shows and movies. This was the basis for the whole
>concept of canon in the first place -- that you could only trust the TV shows and movies
>for 'true' information about the Trek universe. And it's understandable, since trying to
>reconcile *all* the Star Trek works into a cohesive universe would be a formidable task.
>
>In fact, I'd be interested if anybody is aware of a 'canon' fact that can be traced to a
>first appearance in a novel or other non-canon source.
Got ya on that one... :^)
Hikaru Sulu...
First appeared in the novel ENTROPY EFFECT.
Adopted in the ST Movies and in ST:Voyager
>'Strangers From the Sky' was written in 1987 and although I haven't read it, I'm positive
>that it fit in with the canon of the time perfectly -- the divergence was no fault of Ms.
>Bonanno.
Not laying blame on any authors and apologies if that was the
impression I left. As you say, it can't be 100% consistent in movies
and in novels.
I simply pointed to that one instance as an example of the exception
that proves the rule.
And you are correct, it is because of the fans. ST fans demand
consistency because they are used to it. Up until Roddenberry's death,
that consistency was lovingly nurtured and maintained. The "new"
crowd (Berman, Braga and Moore) has seem to forget that one
idiosyncracy of the fans. But I have major biases against the "new
breed" of TPTB, including Echeverria, so you can probably count me as
one of the most biased and non-objective when it comes to that.
But I digress... :^)
>
>Cheers
>Steve T
>
Scotty
wrote:
>
ESP!!!!! :^)
I get the feeling we have lived thru some of the same years, Steve..
:^)
However, they can show T'Pol in the shower at the end of EVERY season
and there would be few complaints... :^)
Scotty
Scotty
<n...@spam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <8kn9kv8jhp69m470j...@4ax.com>, Scotty
><sco...@enterprise.com> wrote:
>
>> This was also explored in SPECTRE.
>
>Which, need I remind you, is not canon.
OK I guess it's about time I asked this..
What exactly is "canon"?
Scotty
donut
news:kM71b.795318$ro6.15...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca:
> I am liking this the more I read. Talk about a reset button! The entire
> show is the parallel universe. It sure would be a lot easier for B&B from
> this season on. No need to adhere to canon, 'cause it is all unknown
> territory.
>
> Now I just hope they don't make the mistake of TRYING to stick to what is
> canon (from the others series) and burst this lovely bubble I have :)
Not really. Precedent has already been established, from the future visits
of Kirk, and Kira/Bashir to the parallel universe.
IMO, this would be just another cop out by B&B and would even further lower
my already low opinion of them.
Tamara
LOL! I can just see the serious expression on his face when he says that
too.
Graham Kennedy
Canon material is that which the writers are *supposed* to
take into account when writing new episodes. Only filmed
episodes and movies are considered canon. Other material
such as books, comics, games, etc. can be used in new episodes
if the writer wishes, but do not have to be.
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and author, Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
Scotty
A kindered spirit!!
Scotty
Steve T
>
>
> Got ya on that one... :^)
>
> Hikaru Sulu...
>
> First appeared in the novel ENTROPY EFFECT.
>
> Adopted in the ST Movies and in ST:Voyager
>
Cool!
As near as I can tell, 'Hikaru' first appeared in Star Trek VI which was released in 1991,
while the Entropy Effect was published in 1981.
So there's a good chance that Ms. McIntyre's novel was the source.
Of course, there may have been some character outlines used by writers in the early days,
with some information that never ended up 'on screen'. So it could be that the novelist
and screenwriter both used the same source material, not necessarily that the screenwriter
took it from the novel.
Nonetheless, one for the record books. :-)
Didn't 'Tiberius' also first appear in a novel?
I seem to recall the gravestone in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" had the wrong middle
initial for James Kirk.
Tamara
"donut" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93DE78D...@216.102.43.227...
Well, there has been precedent since TOS "Mirror, Mirror", but never has an
entire series been set in the "alternate" universe.
It does seem like a great idea, which means Beavus and Butthead will screw
it up.
Snake
> Cool!
>
> As near as I can tell, 'Hikaru' first appeared in Star Trek VI which was
released in 1991,
> while the Entropy Effect was published in 1981.
>
> So there's a good chance that Ms. McIntyre's novel was the source.
I'm not positive about Vonda McIntyre, but I remember reading in a 'Making
of..' somewhere that 'Hikaru' was indeed chosen because the fan base created
and imbraced it. A (modestly) well known Star Trek trivia piece.
RikaCMO
ROFL, where's that from?
--
-- Rika
Check out my art gallery!
http//:rikacmo.deviantart.com
.:^ Two of Spades in the Evil Cabal Deck ^:.
=====
"I always knew you'd be responsible
for the destruction of the Universe." - Bass, 'Bob and George'
=====
Scotty
wrote:
>
I know it was discussed in depth in FINAL FRONTIER...
Up until age 10, Jimmy Kirk thought that the T stood for "Tank". :^)
James TANK Kirk hehehehehehehehehe
On another note, Tiberius figures VERY prominently in SPECTRE :^)
Have I piqued your interest yet??
Scotty
EvilBill[AGQx]
Only what appears or is stated on screen, in the most strict
definition. For example: that Vulcans have green blood; or that the
Borg originate from the Delta Quadrant. Anything mentioned in Trek
novels that's not seen or mentioned on screen, isn't canon. Which is a
good thing really, because there's enough inconsistensies in filmed
Trek!
--
--
* "You babble you cant get broadband IN FUCKING ENGLAND!! BULLSHIT"
- a.j., alt.games.quake3, November 12th 2002; demonstrating his
cluelessness on the effectiveness of British Telecom
Jack of Hearts in the Eeeevil Cabal Deck of Cards
E-mail: evilbill @ lineone . net (remove spaces to e-mail)
AIM: EvilBill1782
MSN: dev...@agqx-imperium.fsnet.co.uk (do not e-mail me here!)
Web: http://www.angelfire.com/alt/evilbill/index.html
Scotty
One of the DS9 episodes where the Obsidan Order was sending out an
assassin after Garak. I can't recall the details much. It's hard to
catch a DS9 episode on the toob anymore :^(
Steve T
>
> On another note, Tiberius figures VERY prominently in SPECTRE :^)
>
> Have I piqued your interest yet??
>
Ok, ok, consider me piqued. :-)
Scotty
wrote:
>
Is your email addy valid?
Scotty
Steve T
It's not only valid, it's extremely active. I'm so popular that loads of strangers want
to send me 'That movie' and 'A Wicked screensaver'. ;-)
Scotty
wrote:
>
To get the full effect, you should start at the beginning...
SPECTRE is the fourth in a series of novels that chronicles Kirk's
life after Star Trek VI and Star Trek VII..
The series is:
The Ashes of Eden (1995)
The Return (1996)
Avenger (1997)
Spectre
Dark Victory (released??)
Actually, if I recall correctly, the first one, ASHES OF EDEN takes
place *between* Star Trek VI and Star Trek VII.
Very worthwhile reading. Very "un Kirk" like..
Scotty
Scotty
wrote:
>
>"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
>news:a2dakvci0rml8sfdt...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:51:34 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
>> >news:9gbakvsqj6hcbjrr5...@4ax.com...
>> >>
>> >> On another note, Tiberius figures VERY prominently in SPECTRE :^)
>> >>
>> >> Have I piqued your interest yet??
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >Ok, ok, consider me piqued. :-)
>> >
>>
>> Is your email addy valid?
>>
>
>It's not only valid, it's extremely active. I'm so popular that loads of strangers want
>to send me 'That movie' and 'A Wicked screensaver'. ;-)
>
>
>
<perk> Screen Saver? :)
You have mail...
Scotty
Steve T
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:13:20 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> >news:a2dakvci0rml8sfdt...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 21:51:34 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:9gbakvsqj6hcbjrr5...@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> Is your email addy valid?
> >>
> >
> >It's not only valid, it's extremely active. I'm so popular that loads of strangers
want
> >to send me 'That movie' and 'A Wicked screensaver'. ;-)
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> <perk> Screen Saver? :)
>
Trust me, you don't want this screensaver. If you didn't recognise the reference, I
presume you've been lucky this week. There's this virus, see...
Cheers
Steve T
ToolPackinMama
> Trust me, you don't want this screensaver. If you didn't recognise the reference, I
> presume you've been lucky this week. There's this virus, see...
And the rest of the details are in the attached file.
Steve T
Elvis Gump
la...@lauragoodwin.org wrote on 8/21/03 4:52 PM:
Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones. Never had any
virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
--
Computers let you make more mistakes faster than any other invention in
human history, with the possible exception of handguns and tequila.
-- Mitch Radcliffe
EvilBill[AGQx]
> in article 3F453F0C...@lauragoodwin.org, ToolPackinMama at
> la...@lauragoodwin.org wrote on 8/21/03 4:52 PM:
>
>> Steve T wrote:
>>
>>> Trust me, you don't want this screensaver. If you didn't
>>> recognise the reference, I
>>> presume you've been lucky this week. There's this virus, see...
>>
>> And the rest of the details are in the attached file.
>
> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones.
Except for that one of having to run Windows games through an emulator
and thus have them run half as fast as they are on an
equivalent-specced PC... <g>
> Never had
> any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
Elvis Gump
evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 5:50 PM:
> Elvis Gump wrote:
>> in article 3F453F0C...@lauragoodwin.org, ToolPackinMama at
>> la...@lauragoodwin.org wrote on 8/21/03 4:52 PM:
>>
>>> Steve T wrote:
>>>
>>>> Trust me, you don't want this screensaver. If you didn't
>>>> recognise the reference, I
>>>> presume you've been lucky this week. There's this virus, see...
>>>
>>> And the rest of the details are in the attached file.
>>
>> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones.
>
> Except for that one of having to run Windows games through an emulator
> and thus have them run half as fast as they are on an
> equivalent-specced PC... <g>
Why run Windows? That's the whole point, NOT RUNNING WINDOWS!
As for the speeds of Mac processors, mhz/ghz numbers are quite deceptive.
When I a friend of mine got one of the first 700mhz PCs a few years back my
333mhz iMac running the same Photoshop version and functions consistently
whipped his on speed every time.
>> Never had any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
>
> Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
> recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
Nothing can sneak onto a Mac period. The worst thing I've heard of in all my
time was people using Microsoft office which allowed briefly destructive
macros to run, but attachments in email simply can't run on the Mac
platform. I've never known a Mac user personally that's had any virus
infections of any kind.
--
hangover, n.: The wrath of grapes
Steve T
"Keeper of the Purple Twilight" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:210820031809364823%n...@spam.invalid...
>
> Now I'm not entirely opposed to the notion that Enterprise may be in
> the mirror universe. But I wouldn't reveal this till the final scene
> of the final episode (and give NO indications, in any episode up until
> then, specifically that this is going to happen): Assuming that the
> final episode will 'jump forward' a few years in the narrative, so we
> see the final founding of the interstellar organization we know is
> coming. Have a bunch of diplomats gathered around a table, celebrating
> the newly formed alliance. Right before fade to black, the camera pans
> up to the alliance's symbol: A large Earth globe with a knife
> bisecting it. The Terran Empire is born...
>
Wow, you did that so well, I actually got shivers!
Of course, a lot of viewers won't get the significance, unfortunately.
VernonT
"Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message
news:3f4519ed$0$46006$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net...
>
>
> I seem to recall the gravestone in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" had the
wrong middle
> initial for James Kirk.
It read, "James R. Kirk" IIRC
EvilBill[AGQx]
> in article bi3ic2$4lkd2$1...@ID-160726.news.uni-berlin.de,
> EvilBill[AGQx] at evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 5:50 PM:
>
>> Elvis Gump wrote:
>>>
>>> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones.
>>
>> Except for that one of having to run Windows games through an
>> emulator and thus have them run half as fast as they are on an
>> equivalent-specced PC... <g>
>
> Why run Windows? That's the whole point, NOT RUNNING WINDOWS!
Windows *games*, not Windows itself. IE, games that are PC-only. Very
few games companies make versions of their games for Macs.
> As for the speeds of Mac processors, mhz/ghz numbers are quite
> deceptive. When I a friend of mine got one of the first 700mhz PCs
> a few years back my 333mhz iMac running the same Photoshop version
> and functions consistently whipped his on speed every time.
>
I know the numbers are deceptive; simply running software through an
emulator makes it slower. It's always going to be faster running on
the machine for which it was designed, unless the emulated software is
more than five years old.
Take Age of Mythology for example (AFAIK there's no Mac version). You
could probably run it on a Mac through emulation, but you'd probably
need the beefiest Mac around to run it at a comparable speed to almost
any low to mid range PC.
>>> Never had any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
>>
>> Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
>> recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
>
> Nothing can sneak onto a Mac period.
Are you sure? Most viruses may be written to take advantage of
Windows, but a Net-connected PC - even one with a firewall - is always
vulnerable to hackers.
Elvis Gump
evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 6:56 PM:
> Elvis Gump wrote:
>> in article bi3ic2$4lkd2$1...@ID-160726.news.uni-berlin.de,
>> EvilBill[AGQx] at evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 5:50 PM:
>>
>>> Elvis Gump wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones.
>>>
>>> Except for that one of having to run Windows games through an
>>> emulator and thus have them run half as fast as they are on an
>>> equivalent-specced PC... <g>
>>
>> Why run Windows? That's the whole point, NOT RUNNING WINDOWS!
>
> Windows *games*, not Windows itself. IE, games that are PC-only. Very
> few games companies make versions of their games for Macs.
>
>> As for the speeds of Mac processors, mhz/ghz numbers are quite
>> deceptive. When I a friend of mine got one of the first 700mhz PCs
>> a few years back my 333mhz iMac running the same Photoshop version
>> and functions consistently whipped his on speed every time.
>>
>
> I know the numbers are deceptive; simply running software through an
> emulator makes it slower. It's always going to be faster running on
> the machine for which it was designed, unless the emulated software is
> more than five years old.
There are alternatives or similar versions of practically any software
package you need. I'm a graphic designer so at least in that field PCs
actually suck for comparable performance and software. As to games, I'm a
bit old for them I guess. I used to have a flight simulator a few years ago
that I ran over my Mac network for an ex-girlfriends son who was a teen at
the time. He and his friends had to be run off constantly because this
seemed to be pretty popular with his mostly PC friends.
> Take Age of Mythology for example (AFAIK there's no Mac version). You
> could probably run it on a Mac through emulation, but you'd probably
> need the beefiest Mac around to run it at a comparable speed to almost
> any low to mid range PC.
Well I can't argue with you on the games front, but I can tell you that on
the internet front I simply don't worry about infection. Perhaps if you want
a PC, keep it off the grid. That seems to be the only way to keep them safe.
>>>> Never had any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
>>>
>>> Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
>>> recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
>>
>> Nothing can sneak onto a Mac period.
>
> Are you sure? Most viruses may be written to take advantage of
> Windows, but a Net-connected PC - even one with a firewall - is always
> vulnerable to hackers.
Perhaps, especially with the newer Mac OS X that is Unix based rather than
the older Mac kernel which is what I still run (Mac OS9), but typically I
find that Mac seems to have fewer holes and I can't ever recall reading
about similar security alerts to Windows on Mac news sites I visit daily.
I suppose there's a lot of brand and functional loyalty to whatever you
learn to use first say like your car brand. I have used PCs quite a bit and
I find Windows still doesn't approach the usability of the first Macs I
started on, but maybe that's because I'm more used to the Mac way of doing
things.
I have a friend that's an SGI animation wizard but looked like a three year
old for the longest time trying to use my Mac. He's the guy I mentioned that
had the PC, a Sony Viao which he switched to a few years back and recently
gave up on the thing and switched to a combination of Mac and Linux. If Mac
ever goes away I think I'd want to use Linux before I ever try Windows.
--
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
-- Phillip K. Dick
Graham Kennedy
>
> In fact, I'd be interested if anybody is aware of a 'canon' fact that can be traced to a
> first appearance in a novel or other non-canon source.
I believe Sulu's first name being Hikaru was a common feature
in novels, but finally made it to the screen in ST VI.
Dough
>
> What exactly is "canon"?
>
>
Okay, my $.02... this all started with Gene first stating that ONLY
filmed/televised Trek was "real" or canon... he then shot himself in the
foot by saying the animated series (filmed AND televised) was NOT canon,
except for two of the episodes he really liked! <G>
In MY mind (alone, probably), since it's ALL fiction, I feel that anything
bearing the Star Trek as well as the Paramount seal should be considered
part of the continuity, regardless of where the agreements fall or falter...
after all, Pocket Books, Paramount, and Trek believe each written word is
valuable enough to copyright and defend, so if they've stamped it as "TREK",
then so should we.
Dough
The Merry Piper
wrote:
>Okay, my $.02... this all started with Gene first stating that ONLY
>filmed/televised Trek was "real" or canon... he then shot himself in the
>foot by saying the animated series (filmed AND televised) was NOT canon,
>except for two of the episodes he really liked! <G>
Two? I knew "Yesteryear" was one but what was the other?
-----------------------------------------
Piper
If you're going to dance
You'll have to pay ... me.
-----------------------------------------
ToolPackinMama
>
> in article 3F453F0C...@lauragoodwin.org, ToolPackinMama at
> la...@lauragoodwin.org wrote on 8/21/03 4:52 PM:
>
> > Steve T wrote:
> >
> >> Trust me, you don't want this screensaver. If you didn't recognise the
> >> reference, I
> >> presume you've been lucky this week. There's this virus, see...
> >
> > And the rest of the details are in the attached file.
>
> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones. Never had any
> virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
Will OSX run on my PC? Probably not, huh? Can I download it for a
trial run? Probably not, huh?
ToolPackinMama
>
> Elvis Gump wrote:
> > Never had
> > any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
>
> Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
> recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
>
I didn't even get that one. :)
Steve T
"Dough" <dhubl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:vkar9o8...@corp.supernews.com...
Except that then you get into such a morass of inconsistencies... I remember the Star Trek
comic books had a bunch of adventures between the cinema release of ST Search for Spock
and ST Voyage Home, which involved Kirk captaining the Excelsior. (since the orginal
NCC-1701 had been destroyed in ST III and nobody knew it would be replaced in ST IV)
Someone's already raised the example of 'Stranger From The Sky' - a first contact story at
odds with ST: First Contact.
And heck, Shatner's got his own agenda, with 'superman' Kirk running around alive and well
in the 24th century.
I'm not saying the 'non-canon' work is bad -- I think it's excellent, most often better
crafted than the movies, and sometimes take impressive and successful steps to bring
resolution to existing continuity problems -- but I'm happy to accept them as
'speculative' Trek stories and wouldn't insist their conclusions are reflected in future
live-action Trek productions.
Elvis Gump
la...@lauragoodwin.org wrote on 8/21/03 8:49 PM:
There have been rumors that Apple developed a version of OS X that would run
on PC architecture but only as a contingency in case things with IBM and
Motorola went south as they make the PowerPC processors that constitute the
core of the Mac architecture. I'm not aware that this is more than a rumor,
but it seems plausible.
One of the things you get with Mac is that they also make the hardware and
seem to do an enormously better job at quality control than any other PC
manufacturer. I only know of a few instances where crappy third party parts
have caused problems with Macs.
I have original 512k Macs that have had no special love and care that still
boot up and run though are basically worthless as anything other than a
curiosity. I've basically held on to them in the interest of perhaps one day
gutting them out to put some future micro computer inside their cases. I got
about 7 of these and a few IIXs from a local newspaper that was going to
throw them out a few years back. I have two of the Mac IIx's that run at
33mhz that also still run fine and use them occasionally in other rooms as
basic word processors. Find any PCs from that era that are still even
running.
I think one of the problems that Apple has is that the machines tend to keep
going and going and Mac users hang onto them. With PCs you have to keep
upgrading and upgrading.
--
"When I woke up this morning, my girlfriend asked if I had slept well. I
said, "No, I made a few mistakes."
-- Steven Wright
ToolPackinMama
> There have been rumors that Apple developed a version of OS X that would run
> on PC architecture
Yeah, it's called Linux. :)
DanielSBen
Dark Victory was released some time ago, and there are two more,
"Preserver" and "Captain's Peril". Not too far away is a novel called
"Captain's Blood".
Ashes of Eden, The Return, and Avenger form a trilogy, as do Spectre,
Dark Victory, and Preserver.
Short, short summaries (apologies - my memory is somewhat lacking,
especially on the Spectre/Dark Victory duo. They've run together a
little - and with the beginning of Preserver):
Ashes: Runs off to far-off planet with genetically engineered
Klingon-Romulan woman, battles (and kills) old nemesis (now Starfleet
admiral) and his secret-agent daughter, must run off back to earth.
Return: Borg and rebel Romulans revive Kirk with nanoprobes, want to
use him to assasinate Picard. He's found first, and "De-programmed".
Occurs between E-D blowing up and E-E being launched, so the
"enterprise" is a temporarily rechristened Defiant class ship - which
beams down Picard and Kirk to Borg homeworld to blow it up. Picard
escapes, but does Kirk...
Avenger: Big galactic plague caused by obnoxious Vulcans. Kirk
returns to far-off planet (with help of renegade Borg), meets up with
woman again (somehow finding an animal-only cure for the plague),
hooks up with science vessel, meets Picard, finds the obnoxious
Vulcans who caused plague (btw, they also knocked Sarek off with toxin
that fakes Bendii symptoms), Drs. McCoy and Crusher find plant cure as
well.
Spectre / Dark Victory (together): woman is captured (along with
Picard's crew and the Enterprise) by evil-Picard in the mirror
universe. Kirk, with Mirror-Janeway, Mirror-Spock, and his
Mirror-daughter, stage a rescue. Later on, Kirk and the woman marry
(btw, she's pregnant with his kid), but she's poisoned - and he has to
work with Mirror-Kirk (emperor Tiberius) to get the cure, in exchange
for a little help in Preserver.
Preserver: Kirk and Mirror-Kirk, exploring a First Federation depot
(that's what Mirror-Kirk wanted) find out that the Preservers were
influencing actions and planned to destroy the mirror universe.
Mirror-Kirk has his own agenda in this. The mechanism to bring about
this uberdestruction is found and is destroyed. Sadly, Kirk's wife
dies - although the kid was born first, and it's a hermaphrodite!
Captain's Peril: Kirk leaves his baby kid with a babysitter to go
orbital skydiving, archeological digging, and mystery-solving on Bajor
with Picard, all while remembering the actions of an early mission -
where his crew was pitted in a contest against Klingons by an alien
who acted like a little girl and had astonishing tech to give the
winner (to stop evil aliens in her galaxy). Guess what, both sides
lose! And the evil aliens are about to creep into our galaxy, setting
the stage for the next book...
-DanielSBen
Justin O.
> In article <8kn9kv8jhp69m470j...@4ax.com>, Scotty
> <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote:
>
>> This was also explored in SPECTRE.
>
> Which, need I remind you, is not canon.
I agree 100%, but it IS an interesting source to use for speculation.
Science Fiction is all about "What If's?" and it's fun to say "What if the
Shatnerverse was canon?" and see how that would affect the legit, canon
versions of Trek, as Scotty did.
It's all in good fun.
--
-Justin O.
The Six of Spades in the Evil Cabal Deck of Cards
Justin O.
> In article <vkamk5o...@corp.supernews.com>, VernonT
> <hoop...@silverstar.com> wrote:
>
>> > I seem to recall the gravestone in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
>> > had the
>> wrong middle
>> > initial for James Kirk.
>>
>>
>> It read, "James R. Kirk" IIRC
>
> The hardcover novel Q-SQUARED has an explanation for that one...
Is that the one written by de Lancie himself (or at least his Ghostwriter)?
I think I may be getting that confused with something else.
Justin O.
> In article <Xns93DECE1BC5D77...@130.133.1.4>, Justin O.
> <Speci...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> >> It read, "James R. Kirk" IIRC
>> >
>> > The hardcover novel Q-SQUARED has an explanation for that one...
>>
>> Is that the one written by de Lancie himself (or at least his
>> Ghostwriter)?
>
> No, I think you mean "I, Q".
>
> Q-Squared was written by Peter David. The whole novel takes place
> among three different parallel universes or 'tracks'.
>
> Track B is the normal Trekverse.
>
> Track C is like the war universe in Yesterday's Enterprise, but it's
> one where the Ent-C failed in its mission and the war continued.
>
> Track A is a minor variant of the normal Trek universe with Jack
> Crusher as captain of the Enterprise (Picard is XO - he was broken in
> rank after the Stargazer court martial), Geordi as Beverly's head
> nurse (she and Jack were divorced - Wesley died in an accident at age
> 4), James R. Kirk, and a few other minor differences.
Oh, yeah, OK. I remember both books now.
It's been a long time since I've read Q Squared.
Tamara
IAWTP.... the great ideas are ones only "fans" (everyone else are "viewers")
would appreciate :-/
:
:
:
Tamara
"I could crush him like an ant. But it would be too easy. No, revenge is
a dish best served cold. I'll bide my time until... Oh, what the hell.
I'll just crush him like an ant."
-- Montgomery Burns, The Simpsons
Tamara
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 20:39:12 GMT, "RikaCMO"
> <REMOVE1...@rogers.comREMOVE> wrote:
>
> >Scotty <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> >> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 18:03:15 GMT, "Tamara" <themp...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:bi2vee$4cqms$1...@ID-130993.news.uni-berlin.de...> >> >> news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
> >> >> > I had an epiphany while re-watching REGENERATION last night.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I had also just finished reading (again) William Shatner's novel
> >> >> > SPECTRE. (As an aside, has anyone read the sequel?)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In any case, if you follow the theory of the convergent creation
of
> >> >> > the "Mirror" Universe (I'll be happy to go over this theory for
those
> >> >> > who haven't read the book), then it has to follow that the
Enterprise
> >> >> > universe that we are viewing is actually the *MIRROR* universe (as
> >> >> > portrayed in TOS Mirror, Mirror) and not the "real" universe at
all.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Forgive me if this theory has been put forth and discussed. But
it
> >> >> > was a real shocker for me..
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Any holes in this theory??
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes. The lack of hardcore leather clad lesbians in Enterprise.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Here, here!!
> >> >
> >> >A new "look" for Hoshi...?
> >> >
> >> >:
> >> >:
> >> >:
> >> >Tamara
> >> >
> >> >"Well, the truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination."
> >> > -- Garak, DS9
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> My fav Garak line is:
> >>
> >> "Of course I'm paranoid. Everyone is out to get me."
> >> -Garak
> >
> >
> >ROFL, where's that from?
>
>
> One of the DS9 episodes where the Obsidan Order was sending out an
> assassin after Garak. I can't recall the details much. It's hard to
> catch a DS9 episode on the toob anymore :^(
No way! That's the same ep my sig was from!! Someone bombed his tailor shop
(actually, the assassin was to poison him, but Garak blew up his own shop
just so Odo would get involved and start an investigation. Just like Garak
to do something like that.)
Scotty
<n...@spam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <Xns93DECE1BC5D77...@130.133.1.4>, Justin O.
><Speci...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> >> It read, "James R. Kirk" IIRC
>> >
>> > The hardcover novel Q-SQUARED has an explanation for that one...
>>
>> Is that the one written by de Lancie himself (or at least his Ghostwriter)?
>
>No, I think you mean "I, Q".
>
>Q-Squared was written by Peter David. The whole novel takes place
>among three different parallel universes or 'tracks'.
>
>Track B is the normal Trekverse.
>
>Track C is like the war universe in Yesterday's Enterprise, but it's
>one where the Ent-C failed in its mission and the war continued.
>
>Track A is a minor variant of the normal Trek universe with Jack
>Crusher as captain of the Enterprise (Picard is XO - he was broken in
>rank after the Stargazer court martial), Geordi as Beverly's head nurse
>(she and Jack were divorced - Wesley died in an accident at age 4),
>James R. Kirk, and a few other minor differences.
Yea, that book really messed me up...
I had to read the first few pages 4 times or so because I couldn't
understand why it was CAPTAIN Crusher and FIRST OFFICER Picard.. :^)
Scotty
cmo...@nospam.com
didn't really watch DS9 much)? I think this helps to support the theory.
Very interesting thought. Alas, I think you have a better imagination than
B&B and would make a better writer... I doubt B&B are that "clever."
"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
news:8kn9kv8jhp69m470j...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 14:56:55 +0000 (UTC), Graham Kennedy
> <gra...@ditl.org> wrote:
>
> >Scotty wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 15:20:57 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
> >>>
> >>>>I had an epiphany while re-watching REGENERATION last night.
> >>>>
> >>>>I had also just finished reading (again) William Shatner's novel
> >>>>SPECTRE. (As an aside, has anyone read the sequel?)
> >>>>
> >>>>In any case, if you follow the theory of the convergent creation of
> >>>>the "Mirror" Universe (I'll be happy to go over this theory for those
> >>>>who haven't read the book),
> >>>
> >>>Yep, I'd like to hear this, if you don't mind expanding on it. And how
Enterprise ties in
> >>>as being in the Mirror universe.
> >>>
> >>>Cheers
> >>>Steve T
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Not a problem.
> >>
> >> I'll use terms like "real" and "mirror" as they apply..
> >>
> >> This theory encompasses many Trek aspects. FIRST CONTACT, SPECTRE,
> >> TOS, DS9 and TNG.
> >>
> >> OK, in the original timeline, Cochrane built his warp ship, First
> >> Contact occurred, and there was no hitches. Up until this point,
> >> there was one universe. (Granted there were many, but for our
> >> purposes of exploring the "mirror" universe link, there is only one).
> >>
> >> Anyways at this point, a divergence occurred. As depicted in FIRST
> >> CONTACT, the Borg showed up and meddled in the happenings of First
> >> Contact. At this point, the universes diverged considerably. In the
> >> real universe Cochrane, after successfully completing the flight of
> >> the PHOENIX, moved to Alpha Centauri and named the lake next to his
> >> new home, Lake Sloane. Presumably after the navigator of the Phoenix.
> >>
> >> In the Mirror universe, the Borg were introduced centuries earlier.
> >> (Remember, the *first* contact with the Borg, in the real universe,
> >> did not occur until 2nd or 3rd Season TNG.) So, Earth had an inkling
> >> of what awaited itself out in the universe, and it's evolution was
> >> along decidedly more military lines. Cochrane moved to Alpha Centauri
> >> and named the lake next to his new home, *LAKE RIKER*.
> >>
> >> So, the theory is that, in the Mirror universe, it was the Borg's
> >> attempted intervention in the timeline that caused the divergence of
> >> the universes, but still kept them linked, since they were the "same"
> >> for so long. That is why we see a lot of travel between the same
> >> universes, as depicted in TOS and DS9, plus the ST Novels Dark Mirror
> >> and SPECTRE.
> >>
> >> Now, as this pertains to ENTERPRISE.
> >>
> >> In the episode REGENERATION, Starfleet found the remnants of the
> >> attempted Borg intervention, in the Arctic.
> >>
> >> Since the Borg intervention is what created the Mirror universe, if
> >> the remnants of Borg are found, then it MUST be the Mirror universe
> >> that we are witnessing in ENTERPRISE. Because there was no Borg
> >> Intervention in the "real" universe, therefore there could not be any
> >> Borg remnants.
> >
> >According the the multiple universes theory there are
> >an infinite number of universes, all slightly (or hugely,
> >depending) different from one another.
> >
> >Assuming that the Enterprise universe is indeed not part
> >of the "real" TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager one, what makes you
> >think that it must therefore be the precise one that Kirk
> >visited?
>
>
> This was also explored in SPECTRE.
>
> The theory goes that these two particular universes maintain a
> stronger link due to the manner in which the divergence occurred. I
> don't have the book in front of me, so I can't give you the exact
> explanation used..
>
> But, because of the stronger link, transfers to and from these 2
> particular universes is more likely.
>
> Think of it as a "wormhole" theory..
>
> Most wormholes allow instantaneous travel from place to place, but
> never the same places. Yet, we have a "stable" wormhole from DS9 to
> the same place in the Gamma quadrant.
>
> Multi-Universe travel is random, except for the travel between the
> "real" universe and *the* Mirror universe.
>
>
> Scotty
>
>
Symbiotic Order
news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
|
| Any holes in this theory??
When the Enterprise E went back into the future, they should have gone to
the alternate future, not the one they remembered.
--
- joe
http://www.mindspring.com/~joekiser/
Elvis Gump
Order at joek...@mindspring.com wrote on 8/23/03 4:15 PM:
> "Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
>
> |
> | Any holes in this theory??
>
> When the Enterprise E went back into the future, they should have gone to
> the alternate future, not the one they remembered.
They did! Didn't you see Nemesis? Did any of the movies after STFC look like
the universe that TNG traveled in before? I think not...
"Smooth as a baby's bottom, eh Mr. Data?"
"No."
--
Eat shit -- billions of flies can't be wrong.
Scotty
<joek...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
>news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
>
>|
>| Any holes in this theory??
>
>When the Enterprise E went back into the future, they should have gone to
>the alternate future, not the one they remembered.
Hmmmmmm
Good point!!
DAMN good point!!!
Voyager, it seems, is part of the "altered" universe as well, as
Babes7-9 had knowledge of the "Phoenix" incident..
Well, I guess that throws out the idea of using SPECTRE as a Canon
source... :)
Cuz if Voyager is part of the Mirror Universe, well... Everything
just goes to hell ....
Scotty
Steve T
"Elvis Gump" <elvi...@NOhotmailSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:BB6D5121.1734E%elvi...@NOhotmailSPAM.com...
> in article oPQ1b.4749$8i2....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net, Symbiotic
> Order at joek...@mindspring.com wrote on 8/23/03 4:15 PM:
>
> > "Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> > news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
> >
> > |
> > | Any holes in this theory??
> >
> > When the Enterprise E went back into the future, they should have gone to
> > the alternate future, not the one they remembered.
>
> They did! Didn't you see Nemesis? Did any of the movies after STFC look like
> the universe that TNG traveled in before? I think not...
But it's still a universe with a "Federation", not an "Empire" -- so if it's not the same
universe, it's still not the Mirror universe.
Elvis Gump
ne...@steve-t.info wrote on 8/23/03 6:41 PM:
But what if it's an EVIL Federation, then --
Ah, well, as Johnny Carson said when you have to diagram the joke I guess
it's not worth the effort.
--
"If all the world's a stage, I want to operate the trap door."
-- Paul Beatty
Steve T
"Elvis Gump" <elvi...@NOhotmailSPAM.com> wrote in message
> in article 3f47fd66$0$46007$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net,
>
> Ah, well, as Johnny Carson said when you have to diagram the joke I guess
> it's not worth the effort.
> --
Could be my fault - impaired humour gland. I never get Bobcat Goldthwaite either...
Bozo the Evil Klown
"Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message news:<3f450b7a$0$46004$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net>...
> "Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote in message
> news:ej0akvkdu0n3aje0n...@4ax.com...
> >
> > True enough. One thing I enjoy about the Trek universe is it's
> > consistency. Writers tend to incorporate previous works into current
> > novels. Granted there are exceptions (Ex: The explanation of FIRST
> > CONTACT in STRANGERS IN THE SKY). But these exceptions are quite
> > rare.
>
> The whole integrity of canon is remarkable when you think of it -- thanks largely to the
> efforts of fans and writers who care. This was amusingly parodied in 'Galaxy Quest' where
> aliens watching a Star Trek-like TV show are able to build an identical, working starship
> that's fully consistent with every episode of the show.
It's also been parodied in "Voyager" and "Enterprise," though how
*amusing* would vary with one's sense of humor.
> But the consistency is usually one-way. Novelists work their stories into established
> Trek history carefully and lovingly, and they 'flesh out' the history and relationships,
> but TPTB don't necessarily (ever?) use the material in novels or comic books or other
> printed sources to build on in the shows and movies.
Which is a bad thing, considering that some *very* talented writers
have written Trek novels and comic books. John M. Ford discussed
"genetic templates" being necessary for interspecies breeding in "The
Final Reflection," and in general built up a backstory for the
Klingons that was infinitely better than anything we got on-screen.
> This was the basis for the whole
> concept of canon in the first place -- that you could only trust the TV shows and movies
> for 'true' information about the Trek universe. And it's understandable, since trying to
> reconcile *all* the Star Trek works into a cohesive universe would be a formidable task.
It wouldn't even be possible for the on-screen work any more- not just
because of minor idiocies like no course changes being posible at warp
for that one Vger ep. For the last 15 years it's all been an exercise
in making it up willy-nilly, with no thought as to how it fits with
the ep just produced the week before.
It's easy enough to suspend disbelief in "Monk" or "Family Guy" set in
the recognizable present, with all those references we're familiar
with in our day-to-day lives. Trek presents an imaginary universe,
one we're *not* so familiar with, and it really helps sustain
disbelief when some things will work the same way from week to week.
*****
The Joker in the Eeeeeeevil Cabal Deck of Cards.
"Don't blame yourself, Robin; it is often difficult to think clearly
when strapped to a printing press." Millionaire Playboy Bruce Wayne
Scotty
wrote:
>
Surgical issue, eh ST??
Sense of humor surgically removed at birth? :^)
My wife had the same procedure..
Scotty
Scotty
WAY..
The fact that it also incorporated Ensign.... err.. whatsisname (the
Horta guy) and that Romulan renegade (Damn, I really need to re-read
some of my books) was an added bonus...
Scotty
On 23 Aug 2003 17:57:40 -0700, Evilk...@aol.com (Bozo the Evil
Steve T
"Bozo the Evil Klown" <Evilk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:34d81fa5.0308...@posting.google.com...
> http://www.holyducttape.com/antifrance/
>
> "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message
news:<3f450b7a$0$46004$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net>...
> >
> > aliens watching a Star Trek-like TV show are able to build an identical, working
starship
> > that's fully consistent with every episode of the show.
>
> It's also been parodied in "Voyager" and "Enterprise," though how
> *amusing* would vary with one's sense of humor.
>
You're using 'parodied' in this context as 'abused'? Or am I missing your point?
> > But the consistency is usually one-way. Novelists work their stories into established
> > Trek history carefully and lovingly, and they 'flesh out' the history and
relationships,
> > but TPTB don't necessarily (ever?) use the material in novels or comic books or other
> > printed sources to build on in the shows and movies.
>
> Which is a bad thing, considering that some *very* talented writers
> have written Trek novels and comic books. John M. Ford discussed
> "genetic templates" being necessary for interspecies breeding in "The
> Final Reflection," and in general built up a backstory for the
> Klingons that was infinitely better than anything we got on-screen.
I can't recall having read Ford specifically, but I've generally been impressed with the
Trek novels I have read, and I agree they could be used to enrich what we see on-screen.
I just think the current management look on canon as a curse, not a blessing, so they're
not going to willingly take on what they see as more restrictions on their creative
liberty. I'm not agreeing with this -- I'm simply guessing this is management's attitude.
> > This was the basis for the whole
> > concept of canon in the first place -- that you could only trust the TV shows and
movies
> > for 'true' information about the Trek universe. And it's understandable, since trying
to
> > reconcile *all* the Star Trek works into a cohesive universe would be a formidable
task.
>
> It wouldn't even be possible for the on-screen work any more- not just
> because of minor idiocies like no course changes being posible at warp
> for that one Vger ep. For the last 15 years it's all been an exercise
> in making it up willy-nilly, with no thought as to how it fits with
> the ep just produced the week before.
So you mean since the death of Roddenberry?
What's the issue with the V'ger story? Excepting the fact that we haven't seen either the
machine civilization or Decker/Ilia/V'ger before or since, the story didn't seem to be
particularly canon-disruptive?
>
> It's easy enough to suspend disbelief in "Monk" or "Family Guy" set in
> the recognizable present, with all those references we're familiar
> with in our day-to-day lives. Trek presents an imaginary universe,
> one we're *not* so familiar with, and it really helps sustain
> disbelief when some things will work the same way from week to week.
Yep, no argument with that.
The Highlander (aka Gordon)
> >
> > It wouldn't even be possible for the on-screen work any more- not just
> > because of minor idiocies like no course changes being posible at warp
> > for that one Vger ep. For the last 15 years it's all been an exercise
> > in making it up willy-nilly, with no thought as to how it fits with
> > the ep just produced the week before.
>
> So you mean since the death of Roddenberry?
>
> What's the issue with the V'ger story? Excepting the fact that we haven't
seen either the
> machine civilization or Decker/Ilia/V'ger before or since, the story
didn't seem to be
> particularly canon-disruptive?
Um....Voyager = vger (shorthand), also a reference to V'ger in TMP. vger or
V'ger used in the context of Voyager is not always complimentary.
Steve T
"The Highlander (aka Gordon)" <Highlan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bi97bc$6ptoh$1...@ID-120397.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> Um....Voyager = vger (shorthand), also a reference to V'ger in TMP. vger or
> V'ger used in the context of Voyager is not always complimentary.
Ah, thanks, I'm now enlightened. :-)
The Highlander (aka Gordon)
or
> > V'ger used in the context of Voyager is not always complimentary.
>
> Ah, thanks, I'm now enlightened. :-)
No problem. The distressing thing about V'ger, either one, is that with the
release of the director's cut of TPM and the passage of time and wearing of
Enterprise, both the original V'ger and the new V'ger both look better than
ever....*sigh*
EvilBill[AGQx]
The upside of this is, so does DS9. ;)
--
--
* So speaks the Lord of Terror, and so it is written.
Jack of Hearts in the Eeeevil Cabal Deck of Cards
E-mail: evilbill @ lineone . net (remove spaces to e-mail)
AIM: EvilBill1782
MSN: dev...@agqx-imperium.fsnet.co.uk (do not e-mail me here!)
Web: http://www.angelfire.com/alt/evilbill/index.html
ToolPackinMama
> But it's still a universe with a "Federation", not an "Empire" -- so if it's not the same
> universe, it's still not the Mirror universe.
Good point.
The Highlander (aka Gordon)
> The Highlander (aka Gordon) wrote:
> > "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote
> >> "The Highlander (aka Gordon)" <Highlan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >>> Um....Voyager = vger (shorthand), also a reference to V'ger in
> >>> TMP. vger or V'ger used in the context of Voyager is not always
> >>> complimentary.
> >>
> >> Ah, thanks, I'm now enlightened. :-)
> >
> > No problem. The distressing thing about V'ger, either one, is that
> > with the release of the director's cut of TPM and the passage of
> > time and wearing of Enterprise, both the original V'ger and the new
> > V'ger both look better than ever....*sigh*
>
> The upside of this is, so does DS9. ;)
DS9 keeps getting better and better. Your trekkie pal, Gordon.
;-)
Brian B
> attempted intervention in the timeline that caused the divergence of
> the universes, but still kept them linked, since they were the "same"
> for so long. That is why we see a lot of travel between the same
> universes, as depicted in TOS and DS9, plus the ST Novels Dark Mirror
> and SPECTRE.
Um. It's been a while since I read the novels, but in _Preserver_,
didn't Cochrane toss a coin to decide whether to tell the Vulcans (and
by extension the rest of Earth) about the Borg? IIRC there was a
strong suggestion that *that* was the divergence point, not the Borg's
arrival itself. (In one universe he kept quiet; in the other he
spilled the beans.)
Brian B
Scotty
<evilb...@lineone.net> wrote:
>The Highlander (aka Gordon) wrote:
>> "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote
>>> "The Highlander (aka Gordon)" <Highlan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Um....Voyager = vger (shorthand), also a reference to V'ger in
>>>> TMP. vger or V'ger used in the context of Voyager is not always
>>>> complimentary.
>>>
>>> Ah, thanks, I'm now enlightened. :-)
>>
>> No problem. The distressing thing about V'ger, either one, is that
>> with the release of the director's cut of TPM and the passage of
>> time and wearing of Enterprise, both the original V'ger and the new
>> V'ger both look better than ever....*sigh*
>
>The upside of this is, so does DS9. ;)
>
>--
TPM???
Do you mean TMP???
Yer confusing me, ST....
Scotty
Scotty
Not having read PRESERVER yet, I cannot address the fact, other then
to say that, if true (and I have no reason to doubt you) you would be
correct and my whole ENTERPRISE IS MIRROR theory falls apart..
Scotty
Bozo the Evil Klown
"Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message news:<3f481e24$0$46008$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net>...
> "Bozo the Evil Klown" <Evilk...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:34d81fa5.0308...@posting.google.com...
> > http://www.holyducttape.com/antifrance/
> >
> > "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info> wrote in message
> news:<3f450b7a$0$46004$65c6...@mercury.nildram.net>...
> > >
> > > The whole integrity of canon ... amusingly parodied in 'Galaxy Quest' where
> > > aliens watching a Star Trek-like TV show are able to build an identical, working
> starship
> > > that's fully consistent with every episode of the show.
> >
> > It's also been parodied in "Voyager" and "Enterprise," though how
> > *amusing* would vary with one's sense of humor.
> >
>
> You're using 'parodied' in this context as 'abused'? Or am I missing your point?
Well, with my sense of humor, it's amusing. By now a large proportion
of remaining Trek fans are absurdists.
> > > But the consistency is usually one-way. Novelists work their stories into established
> > > Trek history carefully and lovingly, and they 'flesh out' the history and
> relationships,
> > > but TPTB don't necessarily (ever?) use the material in novels or comic books or other
> > > printed sources to build on in the shows and movies.
> >
> > Which is a bad thing, considering that some *very* talented writers
> > have written Trek novels and comic books. John M. Ford discussed
> > "genetic templates" being necessary for interspecies breeding in "The
> > Final Reflection," and in general built up a backstory for the
> > Klingons that was infinitely better than anything we got on-screen.
>
> I can't recall having read Ford specifically,
"Final Reflection" and "How Much For Just The Planet?" are classics,
well worth looking up on Amazon.
> but I've generally been impressed with the
> Trek novels I have read, and I agree they could be used to enrich what we see on-screen.
> I just think the current management look on canon as a curse, not a blessing, so they're
> not going to willingly take on what they see as more restrictions on their creative
> liberty. I'm not agreeing with this -- I'm simply guessing this is management's attitude.
Berman and Braga have shown an amazing contempt for both Trek and the
fans thereof. Braga had stated he doesn't even like sci fi, which
explains why Trek hasn't copped the Hugo for Best Dramatic
Presentation since TNG "The Inner Light." B & B don't respect what
they're making, they don't care if it's good, bad or indifferent, and
there's no incentive there to make the kind of episodes that don't
suck.
Truly *creative* liberties are one thing (The "X-Men" movies are a
good example of getting it right), but too often they just make shit
up and think that's good enough. A hallmark of *any* good fiction is
internal consistency.
> > > This was the basis for the whole
> > > concept of canon in the first place -- that you could only trust the TV shows and
> movies
> > > for 'true' information about the Trek universe. And it's understandable, since trying
> to
> > > reconcile *all* the Star Trek works into a cohesive universe would be a formidable
> task.
> >
> > It wouldn't even be possible for the on-screen work any more- not just
> > because of minor idiocies like no course changes being posible at warp
> > for that one Vger ep. For the last 15 years it's all been an exercise
> > in making it up willy-nilly, with no thought as to how it fits with
> > the ep just produced the week before.
>
> So you mean since the death of Roddenberry?
>
> What's the issue with the V'ger story? Excepting the fact that we haven't seen either the
> machine civilization or Decker/Ilia/V'ger before or since, the story didn't seem to be
> particularly canon-disruptive?
Sorry, around here "Vger" is shorthand for the "Star Trek: Voyager"
series. Usually the movie with the V'ger probe is referred to as TMP,
or "The Motionless Picture."
Unforgiven
> I have original 512k Macs that have had no special love and care that
> still boot up and run though are basically worthless as anything
> other than a curiosity. I've basically held on to them in the
> interest of perhaps one day gutting them out to put some future micro
> computer inside their cases. I got about 7 of these and a few IIXs
> from a local newspaper that was going to throw them out a few years
> back. I have two of the Mac IIx's that run at 33mhz that also still
> run fine and use them occasionally in other rooms as basic word
> processors. Find any PCs from that era that are still even running.
That's easy! Go to a primary school! I know a school that still has several
286 12MHz PCs happily running Windows for Workgroups 3.11. One serves as a
print-server, and the others all run a specific game for learning to read
(iirc) that simply needs nothing better. One of them even has an old
double-speed CD-ROM drive (which, although old, is of course significantly
newer than the computer it's in)
The IIS uses 386 processors, although I believe those are 'new' (as in,
recently built especially for the IIS).
--
Unforgiven
"Earth. It exists only in a corner of my memory."
Lord Dornkirk
The Vision of Escaflowne
Elvis Gump
jaap...@hotmail.com wrote on 8/24/03 1:03 PM:
Go out in the real workday world and see where you see that though. Go out
in the printing and graphics industry and you'll see old Macs still running
because they still do the job, not because they don't have the money or
need to upgrade. They simply take a licking and keep on ticking.
- - - - - - - - - -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34978-2003Aug23.html
- - - - - - - - - -
Microsoft Windows: Insecure by Design
By Rob Pegoraro
Sunday, August 24, 2003; Page F07
Between the Blaster worm and the Sobig virus, it's been a long two weeks for
Windows users. But nobody with a Mac or a Linux PC has had to lose a moment
of sleep over these outbreaks -- just like in earlier "malware" epidemics.
This is not a coincidence.
The usual theory has been that Windows gets all the attacks because almost
everybody uses it. But millions of people do use Mac OS X and Linux, a
sufficiently big market for plenty of legitimate software developers -- so
why do the authors of viruses and worms rarely take aim at either system?
Even if that changed, Windows would still be an easier target. In its
default setup, Windows XP on the Internet amounts to a car parked in a bad
part of town, with the doors unlocked, the key in the ignition and a Post-It
note on the dashboard saying, "Please don't steal this."
Not opening strange e-mail attachments helps to keep Windows secure (not to
mention it's plain common sense), but it isn't enough.
The vulnerabilities built in: Security starts with closing doors that don't
need to be open. On a PC, these doors are called "ports" -- channels to the
Internet reserved for specific tasks, such as publishing a Web page.
These ports are what network worms like Blaster crawl in through, exploiting
bugs in an operating system to implant themselves. (Viruses can't move on
their own and need other mechanisms, such as e-mail or floppy disks, to
spread.) It's canonical among security experts that unneeded ports should be
closed.
Windows XP Home Edition, however, ships with five ports open, behind which
run "services" that serve no purpose except on a computer network.
"Messenger Service," for instance, is designed to listen for alerts sent out
by a network's owner, but on a home computer all it does is receive ads
broadcast by spammers. The "Remote Procedure Call" feature exploited by
Blaster is, to quote a Microsoft advisory, "not intended to be used in
hostile environments such as the Internet."
Jeff Jones, Microsoft's senior director for "trustworthy computing," said
the company was heeding user requests when XP was designed: "What customers
were demanding was network compatibility, application compatibility."
But they weren't asking for easily cracked PCs either. Now, Jones said,
Microsoft believes it's better to leave ports shut until users open the ones
they need. But any change to this dangerous default configuration will only
come in some future update.
In comparison, Mac OS X ships with zero ports open to the Internet.
The firewall that's down: A firewall provides further defense against worms,
rejecting dangerous Internet traffic.
Windows XP includes basic firewall software (it doesn't monitor outgoing
connections), but it's inactive unless you use its "wizard" software to set
up a broadband connection. Turning it on is a five-step task in Microsoft's
directions (www.microsoft.com/protect) that must be repeated for every
Internet connection on a PC.
Mac OS X's firewall isn't enabled by default either, but it's much simpler
to enable. Red Hat Linux is better yet: Its firewall is on from the start.
The patches that aren't downloaded: Windows is better than most operating
systems at easing the drudgery of staying on top of patches and bug fixes,
since it can automatically download them. A PC kept current with Microsoft's
security updates would have survived this week unscathed.
But hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Windows systems still got
Blasted, even though the patch to stop this worm was released weeks ago.
Part of this is users' fault. "Critical updates" are called that for a
reason, and it's foolish to ignore them. (The same goes for not installing
and updating anti-virus software.)
The chance of a patch wrecking Windows is dwarfed by the odds that an
unpatched PC will get hit. And for those saying they don't trust Microsoft
to fix their systems, I have one question: If you don't trust this company,
why did you give it your money?
Microsoft, however, must share blame, too. Windows XP's pop-up invitations
to use Windows Update must compete for attention with all of XP's other,
less important nags -- get a Passport account, take a tour of XP, hide
unused desktop icons, blah, blah, blah.
Microsoft's critical updates also are absent from retail copies of Windows
XP, forcing buyers into lengthy Windows Update sessions to get the fixes
since last year's Service Pack 1 upgrade. At least the version of XP
provided to PC manufacturers is refreshed once a quarter or so -- and
Microsoft says it's working to shorten this lag.
The lack of any limit to damage: Windows XP, by default, provides
unrestricted, "administrator" access to a computer. This sounds like a good
thing but is not, because any program, worms and viruses included, also has
unrestricted access.
Yet administrator mode is the only realistic choice: XP Home's "limited
account," the only other option, doesn't even let you adjust a PC's clock.
Mac OS X and Linux get this right: Users get broad rights, but critical
system tasks require entering a password. If, for instance, a virus wants to
install a "backdoor" for further intrusions, you'll have to authorize it.
This fail-safe isn't immune to user gullibility and still allows the total
loss or theft of your data, but it beats Windows' anything-goes approach.
Because Microsoft blew off security concerns for so long, millions of PCs
remain unpatched, ready for the next Windows-transmitted disease. Microsoft
needs to do more than order up another round of "Protect Your PC" ads.
Here's a modest proposal: Microsoft should use some of its $49 billion hoard
to mail an update CD to anybody who wants one. At $3 a pop (a liberal
estimate), it could ship a disc to every human being on Earth -- and still
have $30 billion in the bank.
Living with technology, or trying to? E-mail Rob Pegoraro at r...@twp.com.
- - - - - - - - - -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34978-2003Aug23.html
- - - - - - - - - -
--
"Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy."
-- Charlie McCarthy
The Highlander (aka Gordon)
Rotflmao! Yes, I meant TMP, as in The Motion Picture, I was attempting to
avoid abbreviation confusion with TPM, a poster here, and instead of
avoiding it I seem to have compounded it.
The Merry Piper
TMP = The Merry Piper ....
-----------------------------------------
Piper
If you're going to dance
You'll have to pay ... me.
-----------------------------------------
Snake
> http://www.holyducttape.com/antifrance/
> "Final Reflection" and "How Much For Just The Planet?" are classics,
> well worth looking up on Amazon.
Oh yes. "How Much for Just the Planet?" Hehehe. Drunk Klingons = fun!
Try also "Tears of the Singer"
> Berman and Braga have shown an amazing contempt for both Trek and the
> fans thereof. Braga had stated he doesn't even like sci fi, which
> explains why Trek hasn't copped the Hugo for Best Dramatic
> Presentation since TNG "The Inner Light." B & B don't respect what
> they're making, they don't care if it's good, bad or indifferent, and
> there's no incentive there to make the kind of episodes that don't
> suck.
>
> Truly *creative* liberties are one thing (The "X-Men" movies are a
> good example of getting it right), but too often they just make shit
> up and think that's good enough. A hallmark of *any* good fiction is
> internal consistency.
Regretfully something that B&B simply do not understand. A universe of make
believe is believable only when it seems like a true universe - that is,
consistent and understandable via flights of imagination. Remove consistent
understandability and you get gibberish.
EvilBill[AGQx]
> "EvilBill[AGQx]" wrote:
>>
>> Elvis Gump wrote:
>
>
>>> Never had
>>> any virus in 18+ years of computing with Mac.
>>
>> Well, I've only had one in 10 years of using PCs, and that was that
>> recent Blaster worm that just sneaks onto your system.
>>
>
> I didn't even get that one. :)
Be thankful. <g>
--
--
* Windows 9x is a black hole: it sucks.
EvilBill[AGQx]
> in article bi3m7h$4r97j$1...@ID-160726.news.uni-berlin.de,
> EvilBill[AGQx] at evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 6:56 PM:
>
>> Elvis Gump wrote:
>>> in article bi3ic2$4lkd2$1...@ID-160726.news.uni-berlin.de,
>>> EvilBill[AGQx] at evilb...@lineone.net wrote on 8/21/03 5:50 PM:
>>>
>>>> Elvis Gump wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Use a Macintosh and all your troubles will be small ones.
>>>>
>>>> Except for that one of having to run Windows games through an
>>>> emulator and thus have them run half as fast as they are on an
>>>> equivalent-specced PC... <g>
>>>
>>> Why run Windows? That's the whole point, NOT RUNNING WINDOWS!
>>
>> Windows *games*, not Windows itself. IE, games that are PC-only.
>> Very few games companies make versions of their games for Macs.
>>
>>> As for the speeds of Mac processors, mhz/ghz numbers are quite
>>> deceptive. When I a friend of mine got one of the first 700mhz PCs
>>> a few years back my 333mhz iMac running the same Photoshop version
>>> and functions consistently whipped his on speed every time.
>>>
>>
>> I know the numbers are deceptive; simply running software through
>> an emulator makes it slower. It's always going to be faster
>> running on the machine for which it was designed, unless the
>> emulated software is more than five years old.
>
> There are alternatives or similar versions of practically any
> software package you need. I'm a graphic designer so at least in
> that field PCs actually suck for comparable performance and
> software. As to games, I'm a bit old for them I guess. I used to
> have a flight simulator a few years ago that I ran over my Mac
> network for an ex-girlfriends son who was a teen at the time. He
> and his friends had to be run off constantly because this seemed to
> be pretty popular with his mostly PC friends.
>
No-one's too old for games. <g> I know a guy in his 60s who plays
Quake 3.
>>
>> Are you sure? Most viruses may be written to take advantage of
>> Windows, but a Net-connected PC - even one with a firewall - is
>> always vulnerable to hackers.
>
> Perhaps, especially with the newer Mac OS X that is Unix based
> rather than the older Mac kernel which is what I still run (Mac
> OS9), but typically I find that Mac seems to have fewer holes and I
> can't ever recall reading about similar security alerts to Windows
> on Mac news sites I visit daily.
>
Thing with MacOS is, it's designed to run on a specific set of
hardware, so there's a lot less complexity needed. Whereas a PC can be
anything from a 386 with 2 megs of 30-pin SIMMS and integrated VGA, to
a 3.5Ghz Athlon XP with a gig of DDR RAM and a 128Mb Radeon 9900
graphics card. <g> And that's before you get onto sound cards, modems,
printers, scanners, hard drives, etc etc.
> I suppose there's a lot of brand and functional loyalty to whatever
> you learn to use first say like your car brand. I have used PCs
> quite a bit and I find Windows still doesn't approach the usability
> of the first Macs I started on, but maybe that's because I'm more
> used to the Mac way of doing things.
>
I don't so much have 'loyalty' to Windows, rather that it does what I
want and I don't want to have to learn a whole new way of doing stuff.
Besides, there's no MSN Messenger for Mac AFAIK. <g>
> I have a friend that's an SGI animation wizard but looked like a
> three year old for the longest time trying to use my Mac. He's the
> guy I mentioned that had the PC, a Sony Viao which he switched to a
> few years back and recently gave up on the thing and switched to a
> combination of Mac and Linux. If Mac ever goes away I think I'd
> want to use Linux before I ever try Windows.
EvilBill[AGQx]
LOL, well, that works ;)
The Highlander (aka Gordon)
>"The Highlander \(aka Gordon\)" <Highlan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >"Scotty" <sco...@enterprise.com> wrote
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you mean TMP???
> >>
> >> Yer confusing me, ST....
> >
> >Rotflmao! Yes, I meant TMP, as in The Motion Picture, I was attempting to
> >avoid abbreviation confusion with TPM, a poster here, and instead of
> >avoiding it I seem to have compounded it.
>
> TMP = The Merry Piper ....
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Piper
> If you're going to dance
> You'll have to pay ... me.
> -----------------------------------------
Gladly.
GMAN
>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 15:20:57 +0100, "Steve T" <ne...@steve-t.info>
>wrote:
>
>>>>news:jdj9kvsnqd7pdbai0...@4ax.com...
>>> I had an epiphany while re-watching REGENERATION last night.
>>>
>>> I had also just finished reading (again) William Shatner's novel
>>> SPECTRE. (As an aside, has anyone read the sequel?)
>>>
>>> In any case, if you follow the theory of the convergent creation of
>>> the "Mirror" Universe (I'll be happy to go over this theory for those
>>> who haven't read the book),
>>
>>Yep, I'd like to hear this, if you don't mind expanding on it. And how
> Enterprise ties in
>>as being in the Mirror universe.
>>
>>Cheers
>>Steve T
>>
>>
>
>
>Not a problem.
>
>I'll use terms like "real" and "mirror" as they apply..
>
>This theory encompasses many Trek aspects. FIRST CONTACT, SPECTRE,
>TOS, DS9 and TNG.
>
>OK, in the original timeline, Cochrane built his warp ship, First
>Contact occurred, and there was no hitches. Up until this point,
>there was one universe. (Granted there were many, but for our
>purposes of exploring the "mirror" universe link, there is only one).
>
>Anyways at this point, a divergence occurred. As depicted in FIRST
>CONTACT, the Borg showed up and meddled in the happenings of First
>Contact. At this point, the universes diverged considerably. In the
>real universe Cochrane, after successfully completing the flight of
>the PHOENIX, moved to Alpha Centauri and named the lake next to his
>new home, Lake Sloane. Presumably after the navigator of the Phoenix.
>
>In the Mirror universe, the Borg were introduced centuries earlier.
>(Remember, the *first* contact with the Borg, in the real universe,
>did not occur until 2nd or 3rd Season TNG.) So, Earth had an inkling
>of what awaited itself out in the universe, and it's evolution was
>along decidedly more military lines. Cochrane moved to Alpha Centauri
>and named the lake next to his new home, *LAKE RIKER*.
I thought that was the spot between Troys legs?
>
>So, the theory is that, in the Mirror universe, it was the Borg's
>attempted intervention in the timeline that caused the divergence of
>the universes, but still kept them linked, since they were the "same"
>for so long. That is why we see a lot of travel between the same
>universes, as depicted in TOS and DS9, plus the ST Novels Dark Mirror
>and SPECTRE.
>
>Now, as this pertains to ENTERPRISE.
>
>In the episode REGENERATION, Starfleet found the remnants of the
>attempted Borg intervention, in the Arctic.
>
>Since the Borg intervention is what created the Mirror universe, if
>the remnants of Borg are found, then it MUST be the Mirror universe
>that we are witnessing in ENTERPRISE. Because there was no Borg
>Intervention in the "real" universe, therefore there could not be any
>Borg remnants.
>
>
>
> Scotty
GMAN
>Graham Kennedy <gra...@ditl.org> wrote in message
> news:<bi2mjm$2cj$1...@titan.btinternet.com>...
>> > attempted intervention in the timeline that caused the divergence of
>> > the universes, but still kept them linked, since they were the "same"
>> > for so long. That is why we see a lot of travel between the same
>> > universes, as depicted in TOS and DS9, plus the ST Novels Dark Mirror
>> > and SPECTRE.
>> >
>> > Now, as this pertains to ENTERPRISE.
>> >
>> > In the episode REGENERATION, Starfleet found the remnants of the
>> > attempted Borg intervention, in the Arctic.
>> >
>> > Since the Borg intervention is what created the Mirror universe, if
>> > the remnants of Borg are found, then it MUST be the Mirror universe
>> > that we are witnessing in ENTERPRISE. Because there was no Borg
>> > Intervention in the "real" universe, therefore there could not be any
>> > Borg remnants.
>>
>> an infinite number of universes, all slightly (or hugely,
>> depending) different from one another.
>>
>> Assuming that the Enterprise universe is indeed not part
>> of the "real" TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager one, what makes you
>> think that it must therefore be the precise one that Kirk
>> visited?
>
>no way to be absolutely sure yet, however, the ENT timeline seems to
>be the result of the FC intervention
Very easy to believe. Just like the way Janeway totally screwed the future up
by going back and messing with herself to get the voyager back home with that
kick ass armadillo shell sheild tech.