Oh, just any technobabble ever is enough to make something hard scifi and reasonable to you? I don't think you've ever used reason, then. Which is sort of the issue here.
You can't reason why the contradictions aren't contradictions, you just stomp your foot "no no no I'm right and I don't have to reason in it any way"
I remember a study saying roughly 50 000 eur or 70 000 dollars annually and after that the increase of happiness with money is negligible. But that was like 15 years ago at least so I'm thinking it's more like 80k eur and 120k USD or smth at the moment at least.
I don't think you understand what our senses are capable of.
You're literally just handwaving all the issues. Which is completely fine, as long as you stop pretending there's some actually reasonable science behind this fantasy-machine.
The only limitations it has is the writer's imagination and the budget of the show. That's all. It's soft scifi.
None of your explanations have even remotely explained anything. But you're refusing to accept they are actually handwavy soft scifi, which they very much are.
Saying "volumetric displays and forcefields" doesn't make it rational that a group of people in a limited size room could think they're all in very different places in massive village for instance. That I could play tennis with you in the same village while there's a whole dancing competition going on in the same village but 3km away, with competitors and real people in thw audience.
If you don't realise that 16 people in a small room the size of a couple of buses couldn't do that unless they're being essentially completely neurologically manipulated and just still instead of actually being on a tennis court, then I can accept it. It's completely just fooling your brain and not actually doing any of the things. That's acceptable. Pretending that saying "volumetric displays and forcefields" is a good explanation for any of that is beyond ridiculous.
It's a soft scifi fantasy machine. Maybe you're just allergic to even thinking you might be watching fantasy instead of scifi and that just irks you doesn't it.
But honestly, Outlander is harder scifi than this. And it's not especially technological. (It still is marked as scifi though or was at least)
I provided you with an actual photograph with a quote that's clearly showing that holographic food isn't real, as otherwise Quark wouldn't need to offer the person real food.
You're just saying "trust me bro, it's definitely real food"
Sure, TNG has like water leaving the holodeck as wet people can walk out. But Voyager contradicts those notions.
Like I've said, the holo-tech is just beyond inconsistent and should not be anyones idea of "hard" scifi. The explanations contradict each other from one episode to the next and especially from one show to the next. It's soft scifi and I'm completely fine with that. Are you?
pretty much halfway towards what holodeck does already.
Yeah, a bad copy that's not affecting all of your senses as has lots of limitations?
VR is fun but it's nowhere near fooling the senses properly. Proprioception, acceleration.
You refuse to answer questions which I say can't be answered while still not agreeing with me that it's goddamn ludicrous to even suggest the holotech has anything to do with hard scifi.
It's a pure fantasy machine only limited by the writer's imagination, nothing else.
Yeah it's called a suite because it's not a deck of any sort on a ship.
I'm still going to ask where you're getting "all the food is real" from?
Nor do I think them necessarily not being federation holotech, which I also don't know where you're getting that, but since DS9 was under Cardassian rule and whatnot it's not entirely unbelievable.
No, but on a remote uninhabited island you can pretend the bullshit doesn't exist.
It's incredibly hard to delude yourself when something is in front of yourself face. Although this is apparently a flaw in me, as most people seem perfectly capable of it.
Yeah this. It's reasonable if the companies are and the system is.
But for instance Ryde scooters in my city had most of their brakes set pretty friggin tight, so that pretty much any application of the rear bake lead to skidding.
I know kids do it on purpose, and I did enjoy skidding a corner or two, but tried doing it minimally. Couldn't help myself though, especially because 50% at least were just useful accidents.
But my point is that if the rear brake wasn't as tight, I wouldn't have skidded at all.
It very much depends, actually. You can totally take a photograph of a single person walking on the street. Especially if their face isn't clearly visible, like taking a photo from behind.
It would be determined on a case by case basis. Ofc even unrecognised is wrong if you actually follow a person instead of just taking a shot of a random person for art.
No amount of any technology would be able to make people think they're in a vast desert with others several kilometers away when theyre actually standing within arms reach.
But the technobabble handwaving works for me.
There's just absolutely zero point in pretending the holodecks are "hard scifi"
In short; the holodeck doesn't "magic" its own power into existence.
Yes, I'm aware. But even when they were running on strictly least power, they kept the holodecks up for entertainment. So yeah, some things about it won't ever make sense.
I just watched voyager a while ago I should be able to remember it better damn.
But anyway, even just having a large tenniscourt. Larger than the holodeck is. Let's say 16 tennis fields each with human players, and then the whole stages filled with people. How is none of that coming against the limitations of a small room? See what i mean. If everyone stands in one corner. Then how do you emit a town that should be just a display on the walls, but everyone can start traveling in opposite directions if they so choose.
Well depends on what I'd have obviously, and what the island is like.
But assume basic glamping equipment and a perfect island and I'd be better than now.
Of course crashing on an atoll somewhere without any equipment would be pretty bleak. Deadly even.