Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sci-Fi Microsoft Operating Systems Programming Software Television Windows Technology

According To Star Trek: Discovery, Starfleet Still Runs Microsoft Windows (theverge.com) 237

AmiMoJo shares a report from The Verge: The third episode of Star Trek: Discovery aired this week, and at one point in the episode, Sonequa Martin-Green's Michael Burnham is tasked with reconciling two suites of code. In the show, Burnham claims the code is confusing because it deals with quantum astrophysics, biochemistry, and gene expression. And while the episode later reveals that it's related to the USS Discovery's experimental new mycelial network transportation system, Twitter user Rob Graham noted the code itself is a little more pedestrian in nature. More specifically, it seems to be decompiled code for the infamous Stuxnet virus, developed by the United States to attack Iranian computers running Windows.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

According To Star Trek: Discovery, Starfleet Still Runs Microsoft Windows

Comments Filter:
  • by physburn ( 1095481 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:07AM (#55306879) Homepage Journal
    Who wants windows to managed their antimatter.
    • by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:54AM (#55307141)

      I don't want it to manage the turbolifts or even whatever they use for toilets. If the best the federation has is Windows, I'm joining up with the Romulans.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I don't want it to manage the turbolifts or even whatever they use for toilets. If the best the federation has is Windows, I'm joining up with the Romulans.

        Closed environment?

        Smug sense of superiority?

        Apple!

      • Romulans are still using OS/2.
      • by cb88 ( 1410145 )
        Why else would that TurboLift have been chomping that leg/boot like no tomorrow... I wouldn't even be supprised if it was a Borland TurboLift.
    • by Oswald McWeany ( 2428506 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @08:25AM (#55307279)

      Who wants windows to managed their antimatter.

      What's worse... if Windows manages their computer; Cortana (aka Clippy 2) is probably the voice control controlling the computers. That bitch cortana is who my grand kids will have to talk to if they want their "Tea, Earl Grey, Hot". This makes me sad.

      • The ship's computer seems to have gone through some fairly drastic changes over the years.

        Enterprise: No voice interface, apparently people got fed up with Alexa and Siri by the next century.

        Discovery: Young female voice borrowed from an early 21st century sat-nav.

        Original Series: Lost her voice again, people finally realized that touch interfaces and transparent screens are dumb and reverted to good old reliable 12V bulbs and switches.

        Next Generation: The computer is a bit older and wiser now, and everything reverted to flat screens and touch panels.

        Deep Space 9: CRTs are back in fashion, complete with curved display.

        Voyager: Why does the ship even need people any more?

    • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

      Who wants windows to managed their antimatter.

      The antimatter containment chamber has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down.

    • This makes a core dump a much more exciting event.
    • Hey it is 200 years in the future. We should have by then what the sales people promised us for Windows 95.

      • Hey it is 200 years in the future. We should have by then what the sales people promised us for Windows 95.

        C'mon this is supposed to be the bright future. Maybe they have the bugs worked out of Windows 10 by then. Now that I think about it, CBS and Microsoft missed a golden opportunity for marketing synergy. They could rebrand Windows 10 Enterprise, to Windows 10 Discovery

    • Maybe this explains all the problems with the holodeck on TNG

  • Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Insightful)

    by itamihn ( 1213328 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:11AM (#55306893) Homepage

    What is with the huge banner that Slashdot lately has? Worse yet, it's floating and moves with scrolling, making it impossible to read anything on a short window. Will Slashdot finally be the site that makes me use adblocking software?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by supremebob ( 574732 )

      Hell, even this post feels like an ad for the new Star Trek show.

      I thought that the majority of Slashdot users decided that they weren't going to watch this show when they made it exclusive to CBS's new streaming service?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Was kind of hoping for some interesting discussion about the show. It's very different... The captain from the first two episodes was a model Starfleet officer, trying to avoid conflict and do the right thing. Now we are getting echos of Section 31 and doing what it takes to win the war.

        The Federation itself perhaps has not reached that level yet. Life imprisonment doesn't sound very enlightened, especially when the crime was largely poor decision making. Of course, in reality she was actually correct and t

        • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:16AM (#55307059)

          >Star Trek usually considers the moral and philosophical implications of choices, but so far there has been very little of that in Discover

          That would be science fiction. CBS isn't in the sci-fi business. Hell, they're not even in the 'sci-fi veneer on something else' business. They're mainly in the 'procedurals with some action for the over 40 crowd' business.

          They really ought to have sold off the Star Trek TV rights, it's not in their wheelhouse.

          • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @08:10AM (#55307203)

            They really ought to have sold off the Star Trek TV rights, it's not in their wheelhouse.

            Your criticism of CBS may be correct, I don't really have a basis to evaluate it. But I would argue we do not live in a time when the masses will tolerate an idealistic utopian future, the philosophical dilemmas inherent in bringing it about and real people trying to be better than we expect.

            We live in a time when pragmatists and self-centered behavior is idolized, when war and violence are seen as ideal tools for solving difficult social problems, and when letting people die because they're not us is ok as long as we don't say it out loud. People acting on idealism are viewed as ridiculous and naive and with utmost contempt. That's not compatible with any of the Star Trek series I've liked.

            I guess I don't think we're living in a time when Star Trek could be successful, even if it were holding itself to its ideals. They really should just sell the IP and the new owners should sit on it for a little while, while we wallow in our self-imposed cess pit for a decade or two. After a few decades we're going to realize that pragmatism may not be that great after all.

            • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Interesting)

              by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @08:22AM (#55307261)

              >I guess I don't think we're living in a time when Star Trek could be successful

              I think perhaps you have that backwards. Sure, we're still producing 'gritty/dark', but I think we're on the tail end of that as audiences often want to escape reality and get a taste of something different - which can simply entertain or be inspirational - and the world's been a bit too gritty and dark recently.

              I'd say now is actually a great time to start popping out the idealistic stuff, but maybe not quite as simplistic as it used to be. Not every idealist has to be deeply and secretly flawed... but they do have to deal with a realistic world where not everything goes their way just because they're 'fighting the good fight'. (And I'd throw the current MCU Captain America and DC Wonder Woman up as decent examples of this)

              A lot of entertainment presents an idealized individual who encounters no serious barriers because everyone more or less falls under the spell of their righteousness in 60 minutes less commercial breaks, and that's just stupid on too many levels to take.

              • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

                I hope you are right. I am not sure though. As much as I would like to see "some little children helping their mommies" on TV again I don't see it heading there.

                So far the effort seems to be how to go glittery and darker; or how to make the formerly wholesome like "Archie and Veronica" into some dark murder conspiracy. Heck they are supposedly bringing a 'dark' version of "Sabrina the Teenage Witch" to TV.

                Now maybe this is Hollywood lagging behind in terms of responding to audience desires. Hopefully th

                • >As much as I would like to see "some little children helping their mommies" on TV

                  This fall on NBC - 'Equalizer, Jr."

            • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

              We live in a time when pragmatists and self-centered behavior is idolized, when war and violence are seen as ideal tools for solving difficult social problems, and when letting people die because they're not us is ok as long as we don't say it out loud.

              So... what you're saying is it would be more accurate to have a Sci-Fi show called Extinction Event. That wouldn't be any fun though because we all know generally what the ending would be...

              By the way, idealism won't fix that problem. You must focus not on utopia and ideals but rather on what will avoid the extinction event. The two are not one in the same. Believing they both are is a claim that has no evidence to support it that I'm aware of. But... whatever delusion gets you through the day I suppos

              • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Informative)

                by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @09:15AM (#55307495) Journal

                I think your memory of Star Trek is a little shaky. The usual formula was:

                1) Kirk arrives at some planet and encounters some culture supposedly more primitive than the Federation.

                2) Some moral delima is presented, with little real ambiguity in terms of justice, and kinda obvious parallels to our real culture. For example hatred between people who are black on the left and white on right, vs black on the right and white on the left.

                3) Kirk gives some lecture about how humanity moved passed all this.

                4) A contrived action scene where some red shirted folks die. Nobody will be held responsible ultimately.

                5) Kirk somehow either explains how the cultures current path will lead to their total destruction or in some cases threatens to bring it about himself.

                6) everyone sings kumbaya

                • You missed the part where Kirk is held captive, and where Kirk (or on at least two occasions, Spock) seduces a woman,

                  Also, they didn't sing Kumbaya, McCoy or Kirk made some vaguely racist comment at Spock's expense, Spock would raise an eyebrow, Kirk and the bridge crew would chuckle, and then the end credits would role.

                  Simpler times, man, simpler times.

            • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Insightful)

              by theweatherelectric ( 2007596 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @09:16AM (#55307501)

              I guess I don't think we're living in a time when Star Trek could be successful

              Maybe the The Orville [imdb.com] will be successful. Even with the comedy aspect to it The Orville [youtube.com] is more Star Trek than Star Trek is these days.

            • I guess I don't think we're living in a time when Star Trek could be successful

              Especially when it is closeted away on some branch stream service.

              I will watch them someday when/if the series is licensed to Netflix. Until that day, I guess I won't be seeing the new Star Trek... This despite the fact that I am a fan and continue to watch old episodes of TOS, STTNG, DS9 and Voyager several times a week.

            • > I guess I don't think we're living in a time when Star Trek could be successful,

              Are you talking Financially? Hollywood accounting aside, they made [screenrant.com] money [wikipedia.org] off the Reboot.

              * Star Trek (2019) = $257 million (US) + $385 million (world) - $150 million (budget) = $492 million
              * Into Darkness (2013) = $228 million (US), $467 million (world) - $190 million (budget) = $505 million
              * Beyond (2016) = $158 million (US), $343 million (world) - $185 million (budget) = $316 million

              That said, even though Beyond made money

              • Are you talking Financially?

                As I am not a shareholder, I could not care less about that. If your point is that pragmatically financially successful things will keep getting made until they aren't financially successful enough to warrant more investment bucks, you'll get no debate from me, that's fact.

                This is all how we run a franchise into the ground. Very similar to how wall street runs corporations into the ground. Unimaginative, but very practical. The next most unimaginative but practical thing is to

                • Yup, I 100% agree with your analysis about constantly running IP into the ground.

                  It is sad how "Greed becomes a cancer that destroys everything it touches." :-/

                  --
                  Only Cowards Censor

        • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Kiuas ( 1084567 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:30AM (#55307087)

          It's very different... The captain from the first two episodes was a model Starfleet officer, trying to avoid conflict and do the right thing. Now we are getting echos of Section 31 and doing what it takes to win the war.

          You're right that it's different, but there's also an issue with the main character that bugs me which is that she's got a way too broad range of skills based on the first episodes. Like just as an example in the 2 first episodes she twice beat a Klingon warrior in single combat while having no previous experience of fighting them, and being smaller. I get that the show wants to emphasize that she's a supergenius and raised by the Vulcans in science and martial arts, but still, I was expecting her character to be a modern take on Spock, not a deadly warrior-princess archetype that goes around instantly kicking everyone's ass. Really the ending of the 2nd episode was a really big blunder in my view from the point of view of writing. I mean, she first tells the captain that they should seek to capture the Klingon leader not kill him so as to not make him a martyr. Okay, makes sense. How do the plan to do it? By beaming to the klingon ship with no backup, just the 2 of them with phasers, 2 women against a shipload of gigantic space Mongol-superwarriors, and then when the captain is killed, instead of doing the logical thing which is retreating hell out of there, she violates her own advice and shoots the Klingon captain dead, essentially causing their mission to be a total failure while also making the death of her captain counter-productive. From a story point of view how're we supposed to feel that she's ever in any danger when she's already demonstrated in the first few episodes that no matter what she's up against and with how little previous experience, she'll get through just fine.

          I mean, I get that they're playing round with the notion that she's not a Vulcan so her emotions do take over from time to time, that's ool, and that can function as a neat narrative device, however it's really rather annoying to watch a character that's supposed to be like the smartest person in the whole of Starfeet give out advice on what to do, and then violate her own advice 5 minutes later. Likewise in the beginning she goes to have a look at an unknown artifact that they have no scans on and no idea how hostile it is and instead of doing a flyby like she was instructed, she instantly goes 'wow, this is pretty, I'm going to land on it', runs into a Klingon and kills him in 5 seconds. Is this the Vulcan approach? Is this what Spock would have done? Is this the kind of discipline the Vulcan academy teaches to their students?

          That being said, I think the show can still go into a good direction, we'll need to wait and see. So far it's a tad too much like the Abrams films, which is to say that it looks neat and has a lot of action that probably appeals to a larger audience, but it doesn't feel very Trekky to me yet.

          • > the main character that bugs me which is that she's got a way too broad range of skills

            That is standard for Trek. They give lip service to specialization, but when you get down to it the lead character always knows what the technical people are doing and can micromanage them if they're not actually just doing it themselves.

            > in the 2 first episodes she twice beat a Klingon warrior in single combat while having no previous experience of fighting them, and being smaller.

            Modern television. Nobody wan

            • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:5, Informative)

              by cryptolemur ( 1247988 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @08:49AM (#55307389)
              I'd like to point out that it was petite captain Georgiou who was fighting the klingon, and in the end lost mainly due to the mass/power difference. Burnham shot the klingon from behind to her captain, so differences in mass, power, gender or race did not really have any effect in that regard.

              One way to look at the same story is that this allegedly superb Star Fleet officer accidentally killed the klingon she was trying to make contact with, and then in haste shot the klingon she really needed to capture alive. So, instead of being all-powerful, unbeatable hero she actually messed everything up and turned a solvable confrontation into a war.
              • ...and she was court-martialed for it. Her poor choices led to consequences. I don't see a problem with that. In fact, it's a nice break from previous treks where officers disobey direct orders of a commanding officer, and they don't even get a day in the brig. I guess the ends justify the means a little too much.
            • > the main character that bugs me which is that she's got a way too broad range of skills

              That is standard for Trek. They give lip service to specialization, but when you get down to it the lead character always knows what the technical people are doing and can micromanage them if they're not actually just doing it themselves

              Except for Riker who always got annoyed when the doctors or engineers would go into lengthy technical discussions.

          • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

            Like just as an example in the 2 first episodes she twice beat a Klingon warrior in single combat while having no previous experience of fighting them, and being smaller. I get that the show wants to emphasize that she's a supergenius and raised by the Vulcans in science and martial arts, but still, I was expecting her character to be a modern take on Spock, not a deadly warrior-princess archetype that goes around instantly kicking everyone's ass.

            It seems like Ronda Rousey would have been the best choice for the role then.

          • by houghi ( 78078 )

            Perhaps she went to the Vulcan version of an Online University.

        • Midnight's Edge did a fantastic analysis [youtube.com], and Red Letter Media [youtube.com] (of Mr. Plinkett Phantom Menace review fame) detailing the LONG list of problems with STD:ADHD. (STOP with the fucking lens flare and visual diarrhea already!)

          Like many /.'ers, I grew up with TOS / TNG. The problem with Star Trash: Disaster is that isn't Trek by Alex Kurtzman's own admission:

          Alex Kurtzman (executive producer): First and foremost, the defining factor of Roddenberry's vision is the optimistic view of the future and the idea that h

          • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:4, Insightful)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo AT world3 DOT net> on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @10:13AM (#55307849) Homepage Journal

            I've been enjoying The Orville too. I just find it funny that so many people who seem to hate Discovery for the "touchy feely crap" and "forced diversity" seem to love that show.

            Last week the away team was three women, a man and a genderless robot. Two of the women had a long conversation about their feelings. There was also a domestic conflict subplot. The week before that it was an all-male society that considered the female gender to be a handicap in need of medical intervention, loads more feels there. Before that it was more domestic conflict when an ex-married couple are forced together in an apartment/zoo, and a female member of the crew has a crisis of confidence that she needs to talk out at length.

            In comparison Discovery is very business-like and direct.

            I think Discovery could keep with the ideals of Trek. Remember the war in DS9, it was fascinating to see how that kind of enlightened society dealt with a major conflict. Hopefully they will bring the moral issues that made that great into Discovery as time goes on.

            • I've been enjoying The Orville too. I just find it funny that so many people who seem to hate Discovery for the "touchy feely crap" and "forced diversity" seem to love that show.

              It's probable that Alex Jones doesn't know about The Orville yet, so they haven't been told that they're supposed to hate it yet.

      • I thought that the majority of Slashdot users decided that they weren't going to watch this show when they made it exclusive to CBS's new streaming service?

        We probably aren't. 100% of my knowledge of this show comes from Slashdot. I'm not stupid enough to pay money for a service that still shoves ads down my throat, particularly for just one show. I'm not interested enough to yoink it. So I live vicariously through marketing astroturf fluff.

      • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

        I thought that the majority of Slashdot users decided that they weren't going to watch this show when they made it exclusive to CBS's new streaming service?

        Yes, in fact this gives me another reason not to watch it. I don't think I ever will now. For the record, I loved STNG and DS9. It's a shame.

        • For the record, I loved STNG and DS9.

          Try The Orville [imdb.com].

          • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:4, Insightful)

            by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @09:48AM (#55307695)

            I have to agree that I am pleasantly surprised about the Orville. A lot of the Low Brow Humor had been toned down, and the stories seem to move well, and are interesting, and the characters are likable. Is it realistic dark and gritty... No, but I don't watch Star Trek for a dark future, but for a fun one. Well managed Camp that we had in TOS, STNG and even in DS9 made the show enjoyable.

            The Orville seems to be done with Heart and Love of what Star Trek use to be, While Discovery seems like a money grab, with the Artistic flair to make the Reviewers love it, however it just isn't that engaging as a normal viewer who after a long day at work, wants to watch something to make you feel calm and relaxed.
             

      • Re:Slashdot Ads (Score:4, Insightful)

        by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @12:06PM (#55308831)

        /Oblg. "STD is so bad it isn't even worth pirating!"

        Well, I wasn't going to watch either (Yet-Another-Stupid-Paywall) but a friend had CBS access and they _still_ chose to download the torrents so they could watch it across ALL their devices. (Go Figure!) I borrowed their USB stick so I could watch it on my 60" Plasma.

        I 99% agree with Midnight's Edge's analysis [youtube.com], and RedLetterMedia's review [youtube.com] about STD:ADHD.

        If CBS hadn't been trying to leech onto the Star Trek name I think more fans would be wiling to cut it some slack as just another "Sci-Fi" show. But going back and rewriting history is a slap in the face to many fans. This is one of the same reasons Enterprise failed -- show us something NEW _past_ Picard.

        It is interesting to note that according to Rotten Tomatoes fans only give it 60% [rottentomatoes.com] while the spiritual successor to Trek, The Orville has 90%. [rottentomatoes.com]

        --
        Censorship is NOT the Solution, it is precisely the Problem.

        • If CBS hadn't been trying to leech onto the Star Trek name I think more fans would be wiling to cut it some slack as just another "Sci-Fi" show.

          This is exactly why I haven't watched it. I read an article the other day about how dark, gritty, and cynical the show is. The article was acting like this was a great thing. That's fine. I loved Farscape which was pretty cynical in nature. Even BSG was great for a good half its run. But they stood on their own so I was cool with whatever tone they wanted to take

          SGU is a great example of cashing in yet betraying a franchise. It could have easily been it's own show and I probably would have loved it (

    • What is with the huge banner that Slashdot lately has? Worse yet, it's floating and moves with scrolling, making it impossible to read anything on a short window.

      Uhm, looks like any other site whatsoever if your browser lacks the basic configuration+extensions?

      Seriously, these days it's humanly impossible[1] to browse without blocking ads.

      [1]. As in, "impossible without losing your sanity[2]", not "strictly impossible", obviously.
      [2]. Ok, Slashdot readers and sanity, uh uh sure sure. But same applies to other websites.

      • I am fine with the ads in most websites. The worst offenders these days are Slashdot with their tall floating banners and Cnet with their autoplaying videos.

        • I am fine with the ads in most websites. The worst offenders these days are Slashdot with their tall floating banners and Cnet with their autoplaying videos.

          I don't go to CNET anymore because of that... and I've considered cutting out Slashdot. (don't get your hopes up too much though)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:20AM (#55306911)

    the Klingons will travel back in time to destroy mankind and starfleet by inventing Windows...

    captcha: compile. really, slashdot?

  • Hollywood OS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iTrawl ( 4142459 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:33AM (#55306939)

    The Federation runs Hollywood OS. It's so advanced that it can run legacy code of the 20th century in a bio-quantum context. If you look closely enough you'll see that it can run a languane known as PerlthonJS (to give an example), which, to the untrained eye, looks only like a random mixture of Perl, Python and JavaScript in one source file.

    • I presume it has an interpreter for that.

      Did you know that a core feature of the AS/400 is the ability to link together modules from different languages? Maybe they are powered by IBM.

    • by MrKaos ( 858439 )

      The Federation runs Hollywood OS. It's so advanced that it can run legacy code of the 20th century in a bio-quantum context.

      That maybe so however it is a little to obvious to just presume that Data is running Android, it's more likely that he is running a Beowulf cluster of Rasberry Pis. It's a potentially embarrassing plural but Data won't get offended.

  • by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:42AM (#55306963) Journal

    Press START to STOP engines.

    FATAL EXCEPTION: Warp core dumped!

    • FATAL EXCEPTION: Warp core dumped!

      To be fair, depending on your shirt colour the scenario leading up to the warp core being dumped often is quite fatal.

    • It's been upgraded from Windows 95 and 98 after they had to reboot the spaceship every (earth) 49.7 days.
    • FATAL EXCEPTION: Warp core dumped!

      Isn't that the *non*-fatal kind of Star Trek exceptions? I thought you were usually in more trouble when something happened and you *didn't* dump the core.

  • by cmseagle ( 1195671 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @06:46AM (#55306975)
    They could've taken the typical Hollywood approach and shown a bunch of green, Matrix-like gibberish scrolling across the screen. I'm choosing to view this more as an easter egg than as a continuity issue.
    • by Zocalo ( 252965 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:58AM (#55307161) Homepage
      My take too - it's a cute touch, and they must have known what the code was when they used it or they would have just have grabbed something vaguely appropriate from the OSS code base - like the use of NMAP in The Matrix, and many similar examples since - or gone down the gibberish/pseudo code route. I think most directors are well aware by now that with high-def. video anything like that put up on the screen will be subjected to a freezeframe and analysis, so you either need to make it relevant or an easter egg if you want to avoid some mockery. Since we clearly don't have any actual code to deal with the analysis of quantum lifeforms yet, that just leaves the easter egg.
    • They could've taken the typical Hollywood approach and shown a bunch of green, Matrix-like gibberish scrolling across the screen.

      Ironically from your quote the only example of actual hacking in the matrix was using legitimate hacking tools performing a legitimate hack.

    • I'm choosing to view this more as an easter egg than as a continuity issue.

      A real easter egg would have been to show the DeCSS code.

    • They could've taken the typical Hollywood approach and shown a bunch of green, Matrix-like gibberish scrolling across the screen. I'm choosing to view this more as an easter egg than as a continuity issue.

      How in the world would you have seen it as a continuity issue regardless of how they presented the code?

  • ...but the Hackers did not care: https://news.ycombinator.com/i... [ycombinator.com]

    Seriously, is there still a real hacker newssite out there? Something that really is about hacking, not about pushing yCombinator investments?
  • by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:06AM (#55307027)

    According To Star Trek: Discovery, Starfleet Still Runs Microsoft Windows

    Better headline: "Whoever creates the tech props for Star Trek: Discovery has a wicked sense of humour" (assuming this really is decompiled Stuxnet code)

  • Kill it already. (Score:3, Informative)

    by B33rNinj4 ( 666756 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @07:55AM (#55307149) Homepage Journal
    It's an idiotic series with no basis in any Star Trek lore. Hell, even fanfic is better.
  • by Chas ( 5144 ) on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @08:17AM (#55307231) Homepage Journal

    The Borg are in orbit.
    SIR! Our global defense grid just BSOD'ed!
    Shit! Someone send the Borg a Linux ISO from a distro that uses systemd!

  • I like that they used Stuxnet, knowing that it would be identified within hours after broadcast.

    I hate however that generations after me we will have no proper IDE at all, just some editor that has a little code folding and no syntax-aware highlighting at all... What happened to, say, vi?

  • We all know that StarTrek runs in a parallel universe where OS/2 Warp was the winning OS of the 90's OS Wars. https://youtu.be/WCKr-2EJxE4?t... [youtu.be]

    I'm looking for a better video by they way.
  • Remember when you could use Code Warrior on your PowerBook to compile code for an alien supercomputer?
  • Next thing you know you'll be telling me that "Star Trek is telling us that we'll still be using Styrofoam cups in the future [wp.com]"!

  • At least they're not still running XP ...
    --
    I'm smarter than you're.
  • This show is complete tosh.
  • How many of us are working on machines with mind-bogglingly complex microarchitectures that provide the illusion of a modestly-upgraded 8086 CPU to the software running on them?

    If there's one constant in human nature, it's that people will perform feats of astonishing ingenuity and resourcefulness in order to avoid change.

  • Before I couldn't get over the fact that the consoles on the bridge would explode in their faces but now I realize this was just a metaphor for Windows exploding. ;)

An age is called Dark not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it. -- James Michener, "Space"

Working...