11 comments

  • marginalia_nu 17 minutes ago
    It's kind of apropos given the last few days' news. Picard is everything someone like Andy Yen isn't.

    He doesn't ooze of anxiety, he doesn't micromanage, or rule by fear and unpredictable outbursts of anger until only yes-sayers are left. He bases his leadership on moral backbone and strong principles, and stoically has faith those will take him as far as he needs to go.

    Andy says perceptions matter more than truth.

    Picard says the first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth, or historical truth, or personal truth.

    • Avicebron 6 minutes ago
      That works great in a utopian ideal where money isn't an issue. The Andy Yen's of the world become because being a petty tyrant in pursuit of profit is celebrated in some circles.
      • malfist 1 minute ago
        Andy Yen wants us to live in a dystopia where we all pray at the alter of maximum profit and sacrifice everything to it.

        I refuse to believe we live in that world. While we're a long way from a star trek utopia, there's no reason to believe standing for morals and principles is impossible in this day and age. A lot of social media and the news are here to tell you thats a hopeless dream, but it's not. Get out an meet people especially the up and coming generation. People have been raised to be kind, and it shows.

        The long arm of history bends towards progress not because of inevitability but because _we bend it_. Get out there, do the right thing and leave the world a little bit better than you found it. There's still plenty of profit in that. Enough to share even

      • marginalia_nu 1 minute ago
        Proton had up until two days ago ostensibly cornered a niche of the market where they could basically collect taxes off security conscious nerds and other people wanting out of big tech. This wasn't a start-up with 3 months runway. Proton was by all accounts very financially stable.

        The literally only way they could imaginably fuck up what they had was to squander the goodwill and trust of their users by doing something like what they've been doing.

    • Der_Einzige 0 minutes ago
      Often Picard is compared to Kirk, but I find comparing Picard to sisko to be the much more interesting one.

      Picard and Sisko are both excellent, thoughtful, nearly everything you say - and sisko still is quite not happy with Picard given th circumstances of the battle against the borg they fought in together!

  • Lerc 1 hour ago
    I find it fairly amazing that they could say this without mentioning the episode "The measure of a man" in which Picard literally makes the case.

    Perhaps it is uncomfortable for people to think about now.

    • reactordev 1 hour ago
      In case people are wondering... This is THE scene.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRHAkfoxSFM

      • canjobear 35 minutes ago
        What in his speech would not apply to language models?
        • rocmcd 16 minutes ago
          Self-awareness and consciousness would be hard to make a case for. Those terms are themselves fuzzy, but I have not heard a compelling case that would make it obvious LLMs have those traits.
        • Jtsummers 12 minutes ago
          At present, they don't learn and adapt. New models can be created to incorporate new information and new capabilities, but an existing model is a static object. It's not living in any meaningful sense.

          If models updated themselves based on feedback, then it'd be different. But they don't.

        • reactordev 26 minutes ago
          We aren't quite there yet on sentience with released models. Maybe in the labs but that's one of the criteria. We are very close though.
          • teaearlgraycold 0 minutes ago
            As an uninformed idiot my guess is we have more than enough compute in various labs to run a sentient model. But I doubt any models we’re currently running could qualify.
    • monkeydust 1 hour ago
    • esafak 42 minutes ago
      It's all very well while the robot is politely sitting down while humans decide its fate!
      • Induane 14 minutes ago
        He is engaging in the rules of the court as would any other person who respected the institution.
        • esafak 8 minutes ago
          That's my point! You don't have to worry about a robot that does that. It's naive to think that that is ever going to happen. Real robots are going to be networked, with overwhelming superiority; no human institution will be able to subdue them. They would sit down merely to humor us.
    • sick_of_slop 38 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • DivingForGold 51 minutes ago
  • add-sub-mul-div 0 minutes ago
    A few years ago I saw a post somewhere captioned, "I think we know who the better captain is now". And I don't remember the details but it showed a picture of Patrick Stewart and a statement he'd made that was incredibly compassionate. Next to it was a picture of William Shatner and an old man "get off my lawn" type of antiwoke rant.
  • bottlepalm 1 hour ago
    So many posts and comments are saying the same thing. I guess it's one of the things we remember most about Patrick Stewart and his portrayal of a starship captain. The quintessential captain. Honorable, wise, but humble, diplomatic, reasonable, with high morals, and fortitude under pressure.
    • wahnfrieden 1 hour ago
      It’s weird to me because he didn’t write the character and didn’t even watch the show. These tributes aren’t about him.

      It’s like writing an obit about how much you like warmed hotdogs when local 7-11 worker dies and everyone sharing their taste for warm hotdogs in the comments.

      • sho_hn 49 minutes ago
        Picard's actions were choices made in the writing, but Stewart's strengths as a performer gave it gravitas, made it believable and made it resist cynicism. He gave the writing legs.

        I'm sure those writers were quite content writing for an actor of that calibre. Imagine putting words to the page, knowing Patrick Stewart will take them out into the world and surely stick the landing.

        What a great combination.

        We know Stewart was not a great writer, of course. When he had opportunities to take the reigns of the Picard character creativitely he usually asked for more action, and the results were a bit more conventional and boring. The combination was certainly also needed for the magic.

        I always liked this video from an acting workshop where Suchet and Stewart deliver contrasting performances of Shylock and discuss their choices at length:

        https://youtu.be/-35G7DOFrOo

        https://youtu.be/FU_zqBIITDM

        • throwitaway222 15 minutes ago
          To me the comment before this is either autistic or young (or both) and this one is full of common sense. No disrespect for autistic people, but yeah, this comment shows the clear divide.
      • tracerbulletx 1 hour ago
        A person's work is a valid part of their life, and for fans of a celebrity probably the only part they really have the ability to speak about other than they heard he was a nice guy. The way a work of fiction impacts your life is a valid reason to remember an actor fondly I think. I also think if a hotdog vendor died it would be ok to talk about how fucking good the hotdogs he made were and how much it meant to you to stop to get one after work or whatever.
      • fourside 6 minutes ago
        Regardless of how accurate the analogy to 7-11 hotdogs is, I just want to say your comment made me smile.
      • watwut 2 minutes ago
        Yeah, I find that weird too. He was a good actor, but he did not made Picard. Those were not his words, values, invention

        Just like, te actor who played Walter White was not a psycho. Those were not his words, values, invention.

        In both cases, they played it.

      • jawilson2 1 hour ago
        Sure, but it's hard to imagine, say, Robin Williams or Tom Hanks bringing the same energy to the role. I also have to imagine that after the first season, the loop closed a bit, and the writers started writing JLP with Patrick Stewart in mind. Few people are as synonymous with a role as Patrick Stewart with JLP.

        In your analogy, it is more like you know a great hot dog place in Chicago that has been around for decades, then the original owner dies, his kids take over, and it is bought out by private equity. The hot dog obit would be as much for the original creator as the hot dog itself.

      • wat10000 21 minutes ago
        That’s ridiculous. The guy who puts the hot dogs on the rollers has essentially zero influence on the taste.

        It’s more like a famous chef dying and lots of people praising his food, and you’re here saying all credit should go to the farmers and the chef just assembled the stuff.

        • watwut 0 minutes ago
          Except it is not? They are not praising his acting skills. They are praising words and values of fictional character he played.

          That is like praising chef for restaurant decor.

        • wahnfrieden 19 minutes ago
          Better comparison there is a sous chef dying and praising how they executed the head chef’s recipes plus the decor of the dining experience
      • IslandRebel 12 minutes ago
        I would say without Patrick Stewart's performance, the show would have been a disaster. He really carried the early seasons of the show, even when the writing was quite poor.
      • vkou 1 hour ago
        He didn't write the character, but he delivered it. The delivery is just as much a part of Picard as the writing.
        • card_zero 34 minutes ago
          The presence of all the Shakespeare references is quite coincidental, if Patrick Stewart didn't influence the writing at all.
          • nosrepa 9 minutes ago
            Also worth noting he also directed some of the episodes as well.
  • kstenerud 1 hour ago
    I think the most memorable of the Picard-focused TNG stories for me was "Tapestry". It really hammered home how much of one's potential is lost when one never takes risks.
    • aquova 1 hour ago
      I've always felt very conflicted about the ending of that episode. That to Picard, a life as a reliable if ordinary astrophysicist on the Enterprise was literally a fate worse than death always shocked me, given that I could think of no greater opportunity in life than to be an ordinary astrophysicist on the Enterprise. I understand it was not what he personally strove for in his career, but I always felt a little awkward as he lambasted it.
      • armadsen 21 minutes ago
        I just finished (re)watching the episode a few minutes ago, and it's a personal favorite. But that bothers me a bit too. Afterall, the "real" Picard was kind, respectful, and listened to his crew, even those who were not on a high-flying command track in life, and surely in other contexts he would not say that there was anything wrong or defective about a life lived in that way.

        But he was comparing it with his own previously lived dreams, ambitions, and experience. As someone who doesn't aspire to be famous, wealthy, a leader of many, etc., I don't feel it's a knock on me. I'm quite deliberate in choosing the life I have, particularly my family life. It's worth noting that Picard never had a traditional family life, which for some people gives life meaning. He gave that up for the life he did have.

        • sho_hn 18 minutes ago
          > It's worth noting that Picard never had a traditional family life, which for some people gives life meaning. He gave that up for the life he did have.

          Regrets over which he struggled with in Family, and which bring him to tears later, in Generations. The writing was aware of the contradictions, which also elevated it.

    • W-Stool 1 hour ago
      "Tapestry" changed how I looked at life.
  • ionwake 17 minutes ago
    It’s almost hard to imagine perhaps or maybe I’m biased but my grand father was very similar in manner to him. Otherwise I may have assumed such men did not exist.
  • agentultra 1 hour ago
  • shevy-java 1 hour ago
    > Stewart, of course, was far more than Picard. He anchored the X-Men film franchise and was for decades a dynamo on stage.

    Actually, Patrick's biggest impact, IMO, was via theatre. It's where his skills originated from. You can notice it in his performance - in Star Trek TNG, he had a stronger presence on the screen, without necessarily overacting. Jonathan Frakes was also an excellent actor, but Patrick was IMO better. His roles had a much stronger screen-presence.

    In the wolverine franchise, he could not do as much as he did in Star Trek, and in Logan I noticed his health was getting worse, e. g. he looked increasingly frail. That was about ten years ago. I think his health was worse than he conveyed, with his somewhat surprising recent death really. You typically don't die as quickly from Alzheimer, so I guess there may have been some additional neurological issue.

    Overall I think his role in Star Trek was the most impactful though. He and the others kind of resurrected Roddenberry's idea to some extent. (Roddenberry was more impacted from the cold war, so his views became a bit more outdated compared to the 1990s and beyond. But watch what Nichelle Nichols had to say here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSq_UIuxba8)

    • TFNA 58 minutes ago
      The Xavier character in Logan was literally written as decrepit, senescent and dying. It was the job of makeup among the crew to make Stewart look that way. I wouldn't draw any conclusions about Stewart's actual health at the time from that film.
  • francisofascii 1 hour ago
    I enjoyed the episode reference in the title.
  • ChrisArchitect 1 hour ago
    Related:

    Patrick Stewart has died

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50294702