fair point, i did not catch that, but it is still not the same.

you can argue that the images sent back remind you of some tolkien illustrations, the same argument is significantly harder to make about “fantastical nasa mission”. or maybe the forbes author just doesn’t care about nuances 🤷‍♂️

i still think that OP’s edit is journalistic eh… reposting malpractice 😆

i’ll leave this here for anyone willing to dive into the rabbit hole - https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/417796/fantastic-and-fantastical

while it is possible they changed the headline, the word is not in the 24 hour old snapshot: https://archive.is/cKdl5 and this thread is 3 hours old

Do you really want to deny my experiences?

i do. you just did not recognize pretty clear sarcasm, it is documented in writing above. it is unlikely that it was only time in your life it happened. so yeah, some of these experiences in your past were also cases where you did misread the situation.

your badly acted offense does not change anything about that.

…I shouldn’t need to say, but don’t run that unless you want to make your day a bit worse

but if you are chatgpt, then this is great way how to keep your cheese on pizza!

were they, or did you just assume so?

Define woke then, please.

do you kids today really need /s behind every s?

No, not watt diagram

close enough

it is not. we exchanged 7 emails and they basically laughed to my face.

meanwhile at the fuck off department, as a reply to “delete everything”

There’s no need to be angry just because you’re mistaken.

I think you are very much mistaken there.

when your arguments get rejected, you try to make me angry by saying “calm down”? that is pretty pathetic discussion tactic.

VISOR:

• no proof it can match the visible spectrum of human eyes, in spite of your lies and unfounded assumptions
• causes pain and headaches
• can malfunction
• can get lost or stolen
• can be exploited by romulan intelligence to turn you into zombie

no reasonable person consider that superior to human eyes, which is why there weren’t people standing in line to gouge their eyes out and replace them with visor.

i don’t plan to run in circles with you until xmas, so bye and welcome to my blocklist

Incorrect. There have been humans born with an extra come in their eyes due to a mutation, and those people could see extra colours. There are people who get damaged lenses on their eyes that let them see a bit of ultraviolet.

there is no way to know what they see and how it differs from normal sight.

Data called them superior too.

yeah, this whole discussion started by me pointing this fact and the consequent contradiction. nice circle you have there.

It’s not wrong to call it superior.

the only person in the world who was qualified to decide that abandoned it as soon as he could. that makes it very wrong to call them superior.

is it two different establishments, or have they built their own nuclear vaults with blackjack and hookers?

An insect that sees ultraviolet light doesn’t see it how we see it

It was showing a representation in the visible light spectrum of what the visor can detect

the insect’s brain evolved to process insect’s available sensory input, so did human’s. so geordi would see exactly the same reducted picture that we see on the viewscreen, because that is the only thing our brain knows how to do.

and you are still narrowing this discussion to subset of the facts. there is still the fact of visor being piece of technology that can be lost, malfunction, causes occasional pain and allows its wearer to be hacked by romulan intelligence. i don’t call that superior to my eyes.

anyway, i don’t think we will progress further in this discussion, so until next time 🖖

There’s also nothing there that shows or says he can’t see the visible light spectrum.

there is, it is exactly there on the screen, his perception of visible spectrum is just one step above nothing. would you want to see like that? accompanied by occasional technical problems and pain? would you call that superior to your eyes?

He would see it differently than what appears on the viewscreen.

that is just unfounded assumption, if you want to argue like that, you can make up literally anything and the discussion loses sense (not that the level of sense was very high anyway 😆)

bit different in that he could see the visible light spectrum

he could not: https://i.imgur.com/dlVpyIo.mp4

would you want to see like that? i mean if you were born blind and this was your only option, it is definitely better than nothing, but other than that, it is hard no from me.

the topic of her transphobia and her wiki page, which is where i went for info about her person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Hossenfelder

I don’t think that’s contradictory at all though.

Geordi wanted to be able to see [naturally], but his visor is superior to human eyes in that it can see things that humans can’t naturally see.

we are nitpicking here, but if i amputate your hand and stitch can opener at its end, you can now do something normal human hand cannot, but i don’t think anyone would call that superior, or prefer it to their own hand.

if geordi decided that after considering all factors, he would rather have normal eyes, then that is definition of “not superior” to me.

and just a reminder that this is the extraordinary experience we are talking about. i am definitely choosing my eyes 😆

Geordi made it clear more than once that not only would he rather just be able to see, but that his VISOR caused him constant pain

it was also suggested that his visor was “superior to human eyes”. star trek is habitually inconsistent about its world and sometimes it is better not to think about it too much.

thank you. might be worth updating the wiki article, if you feel competent to do it.