4 ms·

> They seem to actually use some sort of formal query language that fits English a bit closer, but is still distinct from when the characters speak to each othe

> They seem to actually use some sort of formal query language that fits English a bit closer, but is still distinct from when the characters speak to each other. "Computer, begin auto-destruct sequence, authorization Picard 4-7 Alpha Tango." - Wake word. Command. Authorization stanza. (I bet the computer would prompt for authorization if missing.) "Computer, Commander Beverly Crusher. Confirm auto-destruct sequence, authorization Crusher 2-2 Beta Charlie." - Wake word (possibly superfluous). Identification stanza (probably superfluous for the usual crew, but I can see from an HCI perspective that you might want to make people provide it specifically for such a consequential protocol, and it may also be of merit if some random admiral usually halfway across the galaxy pops in to confirm). Command confirmation, authorization stanza. "This is Captain Jean-Luc Picard. Destruct sequence Alpha-One. Fifteen minutes, silent countdown. Enable." - Computer is very awake at this point, no wake word. Identification stanza. Sequence parameter. Time parameter. Verbosity parameter. Commit.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
To be fair, that's just how Picard speaks (e.g. "engage"). I haven't noticed anyone else saying "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot". In any case I think this kind of speech is formulaic for the benefit of the audience, most of all, who are made aware through the formality that the speaker is addressing a machine. Additionally, we're watching navy men and women in space, so we expect them to speak to each other and to their computers in a formulaic manner ("Deck 5! Report!" etc, I can't think of good examples, brain's too tired). Or perhaps the idea is that Trek AI is not really as advanced as to be able to understand natural language and that makes Data such a unique specimen. Then again, there's the example of the Doctor in Voyager. I'm confused, I admit.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  The Doctor in Voyager is, IIRC, an early prototype, and Voyager is bother later than The Next Generation and set on a newer ship. And the Doctor, IIRC, benefited from upgrades during the show, having been more limited I scope initially. In any case, Trek isn't super internally consistent, anyhow.
- 0xffff2 6y ago
  Maybe I'm misremembering, but I distinctly remember that basically everyone ever shown interacting with a replicator follows the generic->specific parameter hierarchy.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
    You and dragonwriter are probably right. I'm going by memory, here :)

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

To be fair, that's just how Picard speaks (e.g. "engage"). I haven't noticed anyone else saying "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot". In any case I think this kind of speech is formulaic for the benefit of the audience, most of all, who are made aware through the formality that the speaker is addressing a machine. Additionally, we're watching navy men and women in space, so we expect them to speak to each other and to their computers in a formulaic manner ("Deck 5! Report!" etc, I can't think of good examples, brain's too tired). Or perhaps the idea is that Trek AI is not really as advanced as to be able to understand natural language and that makes Data such a unique specimen. Then again, there's the example of the Doctor in Voyager. I'm confused, I admit.

dragonwriter 6y ago
The Doctor in Voyager is, IIRC, an early prototype, and Voyager is bother later than The Next Generation and set on a newer ship. And the Doctor, IIRC, benefited from upgrades during the show, having been more limited I scope initially. In any case, Trek isn't super internally consistent, anyhow.
0xffff2 6y ago
Maybe I'm misremembering, but I distinctly remember that basically everyone ever shown interacting with a replicator follows the generic->specific parameter hierarchy.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
  You and dragonwriter are probably right. I'm going by memory, here :)