Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Television United Kingdom Technology

Computers and Doctor Who 93

Esther Schindler writes "We all know that the arts reflect the technology of their times. So let's look at The Doctor ('the definite article,' as Tom Baker said in December 1974) and his use of computers. Actually, for a show so closely associated with the Slashdot-techie lifestyle, Doctor Who didn't have much to do with computers early on. This article by Peter Salus traces the formative years: 'In January 1970, Jon Pertwee (Doctor #3) acquired a Cambridge scientist (Caroline John as Liz Shaw) as his companion, which might lead the unsuspecting viewer to think that a firmer computer science basis might ensue. But only in April did Liz exhibit her technical knowledge (by recognizing a Geiger counter reading).' And then we get to K-9....."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Computers and Doctor Who

Comments Filter:
  • Obligatory: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 25, 2013 @12:06PM (#45235717)

    Dammit, he's a Doctor, not an Engineer!

  • by TheRealHocusLocus ( 2319802 ) on Friday October 25, 2013 @03:06PM (#45238447)

    Everything he does is by the seat of his pants. To do seat of the pants things you need to grasp handles that are connected to levers which control valves and apertures that gloop glop into gloping chambers. Every button is a Frankenstein switch that tosses a relay accross the room, and for every relay there is an Override Lever.

    You need steam driven technology to propel your contrivances, with beefy pistons, moving fluids and rotating coils. You need planetary gears and axles and rocket assisted rotation (NOTE: replace rockets after each use). You need self destruct device timers with real gears so you can save yourself with a piece of chewing gum.

    If you have a computer companion on board you cannot stoop so low as to conduit everything, make yourself into a helpless git by relying on digital to analog circuits to (hopefully) permit you to ask the computer to fly what is actually YOUR own goddamned ship.

    Your computer must consist of a hybrid electro-mechanical system that is mobile and pot-bellied, that loco-motes where it is needed and drives multiple robotic arms (with Mickey Mouse gloves) to grasp aforesaid mechanical controls just as you would. In case of a virus or malfunction you can then just kick the stupid thing out of the way and take control of your own destiny, rather than whimper and die like some horrid little clam trapped inside a malfunctioning shell.

    Every control system on your ship must be able to operate with a kick, or be disabled by kicking harder.

    There must be lots of blinking lights, but they must be operated by relays and stepper contacts.

    And if your computer plays chess, it is because there is an actual dwarf hidden in the console.

    Dr. Who did not spend his time debugging arcane API incompatibilities after version control branches incorrectly and legacy memory-mapped data type formats change after a compiler and library upgrade, forcing some off-by-one read of noble structs to ignoble garbage that makes pointers overflow and underflow, careening wantonly through memory structures like spiders on LSD. All of this causing nothing to happen in the real world, it just sits there inoperative.

    Dr. Who has no need for do-lotsa-think-first Object Oriented threaded systems either, he is impulsive, violently productive and has visited three Universes in the time it takes you to decide on whether to capitalize or encapsulate or do whatever the hell you do, or not.

    And he does it all with levers and dials.

    And girls. He does it with girls.

    Case closed.

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford

Working...