[ SECRET POST #3360 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3360 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Niche]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Rush Hour 1, 2, 3]


__________________________________________________



04.
["The Bride Was A Boy" manga]


__________________________________________________



05.
[J.K. Rowling]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Pretty Little Liars]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Twin Peaks]


__________________________________________________



08.
[The Walking Dead/The Flash]


__________________________________________________



09.
(GIRLS)


__________________________________________________



10.
[The Grinder]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Pokemon]


__________________________________________________



12.
[Lord of the Rings]


__________________________________________________



13.
[Babylon 5, Tolkien, Star Wars, Harry Potter]


__________________________________________________



14.
[Star Wars: The Force Awakens]


__________________________________________________



15.
[Pete Seeger]









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 032 secrets from Secret Submission Post #480.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Considering we're dangling our toes over the Singularity right now, this complaint is gibberish.

Seriously, Star Wars is NOT ON THE SAME TECHNOLOGICAL TRACK AS US. They have blasters and fuckin' stardrives and lightsabers, none of which we have. And like ALL science fiction prior to about the 90s, they aren't as focused on information technology as we are. Indeed, no society, real or imagined, in all of human history has been as focused on information technology as we are.

Let's step outside of infotech for one second and see how your analogy holds up. In 1977 we had automatic dishwashers. In 2016 we have automatic dishwashers that are more energy-efficient. In 1977 we had supersonic passenger aircraft. In 2016 we... okay, we don't have those any more. In fact, we're largely using close variants on the same airplane designs we had in '77. In 1977 we had bulletproof vests. In 2016 we have slightly slimmer and more efficient bulletproof vests.

By your logic, the fact that computers are a thousand times more powerful than they were a generation ago means that cars should logically also be a thousand times more powerful. They are not. By your logic, the fact that telephones are infinitely more versatile than they were a generation ago means that microwave ovens should also be infinitely more versatile. They are not.

JESUS you think about technology in a facile way. If you were any dumber you'd qualify to give a TED talk.

[(Anonymous)]

The singularity is a myth to keep white middle class geeks in thrall to new technologies, but you're otherwise correct.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not white and I love the singularity. Check your... something.

Just shut up and leave race out of shit it doesn't belong in.

+1000000000000

[(Anonymous)]

FUCKING THANK YOU

[ketita]

Basically this. A lot of the physical technologies haven't changed much. Even the rockets we're using to send people into space aren't significantly different than they were 30 years ago - but now they've got much better sensors and navigational systems.

And a lot of the stuff that HAS changed visibly has not necessarily changed for the better, as many things are no longer built to last.
Especially if you consider that many parts of the galaxy look pretty dang poor, and we know that the Empire blasted apart at least one major cultural center (Alderaan) and would have had an interest in preventing people from developing lots of fancy new weapons, I can believe that the galaxy hasn't really recovered much and that fats-tracking floating droids is not on their priority list.

[(Anonymous)]

OP

So basically you're saying: why should JJ Abrams use his imagination to think up anything original or interesting, because after all, SW technology has already advanced to its ultimate by George Lucas.

I mean, except for making a light saber that kills its owner if you turn it the wrong way.

I mean, why come up with new kinds of weapons for the X-Wings or a new model of the landspeeder that isn't just Luke's turned on its side. What about new mods for the Millennium Falcon. Hey! Maybe we enter light speed differently now! Maybe we warp faster! Maybe there are teleportation devices that move cargo only! Who the eff knows! Maybe he could have put the tiniest bit of effort into creating something new instead of stealing both the plot AND every bit of the tech from George Lucas' works.

But whatever. Make your excuses based on the way OUR universe works.

[(Anonymous)]

Because no one except you gives a shit about that stuff, and JJ Abrams knows it.

[(Anonymous)]

Make your excuses based on the way OUR universe works.

Isn't that what you're doing, though? You're applying our universe's logic to the SW universe and having a big old whine about how they don't match up.

Cool ASD, bro, but you should probably hyperfocus on something new for a while.

[(Anonymous)]

OP

I guess you're right, although if they never had any progress they would still be living in caves?

Anyway, it's science fiction. I was expecting more than nothing at all.

[(Anonymous)]

Star Wars has always been more fantasy in space than science fiction, and fantasy has never been about realistic technological development. More often, everyone is just conveniently medieval forever.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

You're the one who wanted to bring in our universe, not me. I was just pointing out the fact that that makes you look embarrassingly stupid.

It sounds like the point you were trying, and failing, to make is that the new movie should feature some new techno-wonders to enjoy, and you're annoyed that Abrams & Co. didn't bring in more new design stuff we hadn't seen in the previous movies.

And you're right! The movie about the poor orphan on a desert planet who gets embroiled with the Space Nazi baddies, discovers they're a Jedi, gets Anakin Skywalker's old lightsaber, and then teams up with Han, Chewie, and Leia to go off in the Millennium Falcon and blow up the baddies giant round laser superweapon, didn't have a lot of stuff we hadn't previously seen.

Well fucking spotted there, Mr. Monk. Not like it was a nostalgia piece deliberately evoking the original as hard as it possibly could, no. Must just be laziness. I don't think the Disney corporation has any art designers or effects guys on payroll who could've come up with something new if they'd wanted to. But why are we here wasting time talking about Star Wars when your keen observational skills are needed in the fight against crime? Go! Go, for the good of the city!

[(Anonymous)]

OP

Gee, sarcasm much? What's your issue: that I felt there was nothing original in the tech in *addition* to there being nothing original in the plot? And maybe was a tiny bit disappointed as a result? Why is that a problem? It's no reflection on the people who enjoyed the film.

[a_potato]

One of the things that made the original trilogy interesting was the fact that everything looked worn. Nothing was shiny and new; it was dirty, decaying, used.

If it's used correctly, stagnation can be as compelling as advancement. We can argue about whether or not it was compelling in this case, but I don't think it's necessarily a failure of imagination to keep the tech mostly the same. It can be a valid world-building choice.

Also, to be fair, your secret kind of uses the way our universe works to argue that the Star Wars universe isn't advancing fast enough.

[(Anonymous)]

You can have old, broken, and worn technology that is new to us. No problem. I saw nothing original, did you?

[a_potato]

No, but I think it can be okay the tech mostly the same. The message is that something has kept the galaxy from advancing beyond the point established in the original trilogy (maybe it's the war, maybe it's entropy, maybe it's that there hasn't been any pressure for people to change/improve the tech that we see).

We are introduced to some new social and cultural facets of the world, however, in the form of Rey's and Finn's backstories. Why does it have to be the tech that's new?

[(Anonymous)]

OP

I'm wondering what could keep an entire galaxy of peoples/species from developing improved technology after the victory of The Return of the Jedi.

Anyway, sorry. I don't mean to be argumentative. For me, keeping things looking the same seemed dissonant after so many years and disappointing for the lack of imagination. But I realize opinions differ.

[analise]

Sure, it was a victory but killing the Emperor doesn't actually dismantle the Empire overnight. Doesn't mean that the New Republic just sets up shop in the Empire's place and starts engineers to working on new machines (and consider that for the previous couple of decades, likely the galaxy's smartest engineering and technical minds were working on building superweapons so....)

In fact, it's floating around somewhere in the new canon that several more battles were fought after Endor before the New Republic and the Empire came to a truce. That last battle was actually fought over Jakku and is why all those ships are crashed there. (it's actually kind of annoying to me that like...none of this was directly alluded to in the movie and we have to find out from EU stuff. I mean, I'm a fan that loves digging up worldbuilding shit like this but I do wonder where it leaves the more casual fan)

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Even in the "Old EU" there wasn't a great deal of advancement in the next twenty years after ROtJ. The remnants of the Empire did come up with some new variations of the TIE fighter. The super weapons were still mostly take offs of the Death Star (one looked like a light saber even.) Mostly because the companies that make the space ships, KUAT drive yards, INCOM technologies are super corporations with monopolies on ship building. And it was five to seven years after the battle of Endor before Coruscant was taken and the Empire was forced into hiding and that was the OLD EU. So the war was still on going 20 years later between Imperial Generals that styled themselves as warlords creating their own sectors and the remnants of those who WANTED Imperial rule.

I haven't even looked at the new EU. It is turning into a headache.

[(Anonymous)]

OP

I honestly, seriously cannot believe you are blaming JJ Abrams' lack of imagination on the Dark Side.

I'm over here completely boggled.

Okay.

[analise]

I...what?

[ketita]

JJ Abrams didn't even bother making up an original plot.

[diet_poison]

I don't think most people were looking for bunches of new technology in TFA. That wasn't the point.

Also, the Star Wars universe is so thoroughly defined by the kinds of technology it was introduced with that it could have really backfired, and might have been a big disappointment to fans.

Add onto that that TFA was intentionally made to parallel ANH...why put new stuff in there at all? It would disappoint fans, throw people off, and miss the point of Star Wars.

[(Anonymous)]

That wouldn't have been the movie most people wanted to see.

[(Anonymous)]

okay OP, explain what would be the benefit of a drastically different X-Wing when it comes to fighting? explain what benefit a different type of landspeeder would have to Rey? explain what parts of the Millennium Falcon needed alterations?

you realize that changes just don't happen for the fun of it, right? that changes are a result of necessity and if the X-wing model faired well in battle, why would they change to something else? if the hover landspeeder carries shit well and can be made CHEAPLY by a girl who is living as a slave and has no reason for upgraded or fancier equipment, why wouldn't it be the same? why would Han choose to alter the Falcon, which is for all intents and purposes, the equivalent of a beat-up "classic" car to him?

[(Anonymous)]

This. I have a 1993 Taurus. My parents have a 2004 Taurus. The two cars really don't look all that different at all despite being eleven years apart in age and technology.

I also have a desktop computer that I bought in 2001. It's not as fast or powerful technologically as computers today, but as far as appearance goes, it looks pretty much the same as most modern gaming computers.