That makes some sense, but it seems like a backward explanation for the bad worldbuilding.
Like, the lack of computer-aimed turrets. You might not want a completely AI powered ship, but this is more the difference between “cruise control” and manually controlling the vehicle. Not using computer-assist is basically risking your life. As we see in the movies, humans are pretty shit at using the turrets. Computer-assisted aim would mean the ship is much more likely to survive. And, if someone did manage to hack your turret, you could turn off the computer-assist like you’d turn off a malfunctioning cruise-control.
Also, if computer systems are hacked trivially by droids, why do they have hackable ports all over the star destroyer? Wouldn’t they only put them next to human-guarded posts?
In addition, airgapped systems are a simple way to deal with this sort of thing. Like, your refrigerator or dishwasher probably has microprocessors, but they’re not on the network, nor do they have a port you can plug into. Maybe there is one buried under a panel somewhere, but you don’t have to worry about them being hacked.
And yes, droids are treated like slaves in some ways, but in other ways they’re trusted to be bounty hunters, military troops, etc. If you trust / allow a droid to pilot a ship, why wouldn’t you trust a turret to be equipped with computer-assisted aiming?
All that’s fair! IMHO it does get a little closer to the nitpicky level of scrutiny that Star Trek doesn’t really hold up to either, you know?
I do think droids are the airgapped system, it’s why the droid army in the prequels had physical droids sit in the seats and operate ships instead of having a main computer run everything.
Ok, but droids have those manipulator arms that go out that let them hack other systems. So, it doesn’t help much if your air-gapped system interacts with other networks.
But yeah, nothing really holds up to scrutiny if you dig too deep. Having said that, I think Star Trek (at least the modern version) does a bit better at it than Star Wars. Star Wars suffers from it being a 1977 movie where George Lucas just went with the “rule of cool” instead of worldbuilding. Star Trek (at least the modern version) seemed to think at least a bit beyond what they showed on screen.
Yeah for sure! At least we have both (well, kinda, Star Wars after The Last Jedi just doesn’t do it for me anymore haha). I think the pre-Disney EU had more effort into fleshing out the world, now it’s even more “rule of cool” than when Lucas was running the show
I’m not too interested in most of the new Star Wars stuff, but it’s still good special effects so I watch it while doing other things. But, I did really like Andor. It was a real departure from the typical Star Wars fare which is low on plot but loaded in special effects. For most of the new Star Wars stuff, you can tune it out and only pay attention when there’s a battle or something. But, Andor actually had a real plot with some actual twists… and good special effects.
That makes some sense, but it seems like a backward explanation for the bad worldbuilding.
Like, the lack of computer-aimed turrets. You might not want a completely AI powered ship, but this is more the difference between “cruise control” and manually controlling the vehicle. Not using computer-assist is basically risking your life. As we see in the movies, humans are pretty shit at using the turrets. Computer-assisted aim would mean the ship is much more likely to survive. And, if someone did manage to hack your turret, you could turn off the computer-assist like you’d turn off a malfunctioning cruise-control.
Also, if computer systems are hacked trivially by droids, why do they have hackable ports all over the star destroyer? Wouldn’t they only put them next to human-guarded posts?
In addition, airgapped systems are a simple way to deal with this sort of thing. Like, your refrigerator or dishwasher probably has microprocessors, but they’re not on the network, nor do they have a port you can plug into. Maybe there is one buried under a panel somewhere, but you don’t have to worry about them being hacked.
And yes, droids are treated like slaves in some ways, but in other ways they’re trusted to be bounty hunters, military troops, etc. If you trust / allow a droid to pilot a ship, why wouldn’t you trust a turret to be equipped with computer-assisted aiming?
All that’s fair! IMHO it does get a little closer to the nitpicky level of scrutiny that Star Trek doesn’t really hold up to either, you know?
I do think droids are the airgapped system, it’s why the droid army in the prequels had physical droids sit in the seats and operate ships instead of having a main computer run everything.
Ok, but droids have those manipulator arms that go out that let them hack other systems. So, it doesn’t help much if your air-gapped system interacts with other networks.
But yeah, nothing really holds up to scrutiny if you dig too deep. Having said that, I think Star Trek (at least the modern version) does a bit better at it than Star Wars. Star Wars suffers from it being a 1977 movie where George Lucas just went with the “rule of cool” instead of worldbuilding. Star Trek (at least the modern version) seemed to think at least a bit beyond what they showed on screen.
Yeah for sure! At least we have both (well, kinda, Star Wars after The Last Jedi just doesn’t do it for me anymore haha). I think the pre-Disney EU had more effort into fleshing out the world, now it’s even more “rule of cool” than when Lucas was running the show
I’m not too interested in most of the new Star Wars stuff, but it’s still good special effects so I watch it while doing other things. But, I did really like Andor. It was a real departure from the typical Star Wars fare which is low on plot but loaded in special effects. For most of the new Star Wars stuff, you can tune it out and only pay attention when there’s a battle or something. But, Andor actually had a real plot with some actual twists… and good special effects.