Talk:Data (Star Trek)
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Data (Star Trek) article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
||This article is currently being developed or reviewed.
Some statements may be disputed, incorrect, unverified, biased or otherwise objectionable. Please discuss on the talk page before making substantial changes.
Data's Storage and Speed presently surpassed
It may add context to compare Data's 800 quadrillion bits of storage and 60 trillion operations per second to today's modern computer systems. These number still surpass personal computers by about 1000 times in speed, and 50,000 times in storage capacity. However, todays server farms exceed the storage by perhaps 10-100 times and the fastest super computer (around 10.5 petaflops sustained as of November, 2011) is around 175 times faster. (Data does have about 500 times the storage capacity of this one supercomputer that's 175 times faster, The "K computer", SPARC64 VIIIfx 2.0GHz, Tofu interconnect) Gatortpk (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
It is interesting to note that both the storage and speed progression of personal computers at the time (~1990) would have reached Data's figures around the year 2020-2025. At present, it appears the personal computers will have the speed of Data around 2025 and storage capacity around 2030-2035. (Though this is highly speculative as current technologies that have been around for around 4 to 5 decades may not useful in those future dates. I'm referring to HDD and silicon based transistors in integrated circuits – CPUs) Gatortpk (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Using Wikipedia as a citation source for Data's computational abilities
There is currently citation that points to another WP article to support the claim about Data's computational abilities. It is wrong to use WP as a source, and is clearly stated in WP:RS policy. Using a cite like this is against the current WP policy. And more, the cited link does not even mention anything about the claim. To properly cite the claim an WP:RS must be used, from an external site.
If you want to use the linked WP page as an informative link then you need to clearly state that it is mentioned that episode and not make it look like a reliable cite that confirms the claim.
Because of WP:3RR I won't risk undoing this wrong cite yet again, but I hope that you can understand that the reference is being used improperly and needs to be undone and replaced with a proper source for the claim.
- The fact in question is, as you acknowledge, taken straight from dialogue. As the IP editor(s) and I told you in the edit history, the episode itself serves as the reliable source. That's the whole point of WP:TVPLOT (and related MOS articles like WP:FILMPLOT; that's why the plot summary for, say, Star Wars does not need any citations). In such cases, when there is a citation and/or episode-article wikilink, they are to 1) state what episode serves as the source, and 2) as a convenient way for the curious to read about the episode. That's it. The article on the episode does not, and is not meant to, serve as the cite for anything. Ylee (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- I am the person who made this citation. Ylee has already explained it in what I believe to be clear terms, but just to make sure no doubt remains: Wikipedia is not being used as a source here. The citation is of the episode itself - which is, in fact, the primary source of the material in question. The included link to the Wikipedia article on that episode is merely convenience. Incidentally, you may note that other citations on this page (and lots of other pages) are of this same form: Citations of the primary source, with convenient links to the Wikipedia article on the page. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
What is the problem here? This is like citing The Sorrows of Young Werther page 102 where the article does not support the cite but the book does (if you have the right edition :-)) Agathoclea (talk) 06:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
88.81784197 PB = 88 817 841.97 GB
"Sentient" / "Self-Aware"
The New American Oxford Dictionary defines self-awareness as: "conscious knowledge of one's own character, feelings, motives, and desires." It defines sentient as: "able to perceive or feel things." Two recurring themes of the series were: 1) Data's knowledge of his existence and actions, and his reflection on these. 2) Data's quest for emotional experience. Data was therefore definitively self-aware, and he was striving for sentience (whether he ever achieved it, or always had it, is perhaps debatable). The writers (and therefore the in-universe characters) commonly confused the two terms, but that doesn't mean we should. Startswithj (talk) 23:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Should Mr. Data be listed as under every fictional scientific profession category?
Mr. Data clearly knows every aspects of how to operate the ship and deals with a wide variety of space and terrestrial phenomenon; I think he should he listed under every appropriate category, fictional chemist, physicist, painter, linguist, engineer, musician, geologist, meteorologist; I'm sure physically he's capable of martial arts but he never demonstrates that skill unlike multiple sciences. CensoredScribe (talk) 01:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- No. Categories should only be the most relevant to the article.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
"The episode "In Theory" traces Data's literary roots to Isaac Asimov's and Philip K. Dick's exploration of the nature of artificial intelligence and the nature of reality and humanity. The episode reflects the ideas created in such works as The Bicentennial Man and Asimov's Robot series (which introduced the Three Laws of Robotics)."