Re the photo being apparently unconnected to the story. Actually, come to think of it, BoingBoing often illustrates its posts with Creative Commons images that may or may not actually be of the same thing being discussed, and that’s what was done here. In this case it does feel somewhat misleading, but I guess I can argue that we should have checked the photo attribution (which BB’s usually good about posting) before taking it over-literally.
On the digression (Rephrasing, since this may or may not meet the strict definition of “concern trolling”): The pornography discussion is offtopic. Take it elsewhere, please.
The only episode of Enterprise I can find where the good guys tortured someone is the 2nd episode of season 3. They’re attacked by pirates after entering The Expanse. It was part of their 9/11-style storyline. Archer puts a captured pirate in an airlock and drains the air out of it to get him to say where the people who attacked Earth are. While he’s doing that, the chief of security shows up. You’d expect if anyone would be in favour of getting information by any means necessary, it’d be him, but he seems very disapproving.
I think most commercials rely on creating some level of “pain”, for a lack of a better word.
You’re not good enough, use our product, it will change that. You’re not safe, use our product. You’re not enjoying life, use our product. As a matter of fact, I can’t think of one commercial where the premise starts with already content people.
The pdf linked by plugh001 shows custom consoles and furniture (the “Captain’s Chair”) that don’t come cheap. Those are considerably fancier than the sort of thing you see at JPL. A check of the websites of several companies that sell custom control consoles showed only products that resemble the JPL consoles, not far removed from regular corporate cubicle furniture. None featured expanses of curved sheetmetal as in the pdf.
At the conclusion of the ST:TOS episode The Savage Curtain Kirk explains to an alien that the difference between the “good guys” and the “bad guys” isn’t their methods but rather their motivations.
I remember being twelve or thirteen the first time I saw that episode and thinking, well, that’s ridiculously simplistic bullshit.
I’ve been involved in a project that required custom consoles. Not cheap, but not necessarily more expensive than other artisan furnishings. Again, think executive conference room; the last one of those I was in had a huge single-slab conference table which may not have been any cheaper.
The curved sheet metal (is it metal, or fiberglass?) appears to be simple curves. That’s actually fairly cheap, especially since it’s decorative rather than needing to meet functional constraints. And remember the age during which the NASA consoles were designed, and that the JPL setup inherits from that rather than trying to look futuristic. Different design aesthetic.
(The size of the room, and the concept behind the room, are arguably more questionable than the style thereof. I’m having trouble thinking of a good “war room” justification for this particular setup, even if trying to manage a serious network attack. It’s pretty, and I’d love to play a good multiplayer simulation/roleplaying game in it… OK, maybe that’s what they’re actually using it for; I can sorta see that but even so it feels like overkill. And the “captain’s chair” is pretty useless … though I suppose if you’re going to do the rest of the setup you might as well do that too.)
Sorry to derail the discussion, that wasn’t my intention. Honestly though, this has to be about the sixth post in the past couple of days about the NSA, so I don’t see why the same points have to be brought up every time (especially when the main story here seems to have been the Enterprise room rather than the NSA). In some senses, I don’t find this story all that unusual or creepy. It’s well known that personal relationships are very important in Congress, so if you want to sell a bill you will need to talk with members of congress on a personal level to try to get their support. In that sense, Alexander was just doing his job in a fairly standard way - explaining to members of Congress what the agency did in simple terms and trying to get their backing. He might have been using the Enterprise bridge style room as a gimmick, but I didn’t read anything about members being bought. You could get equally outraged by the fact that people play golf together with government officials or invite them to fancy restaurants (or even ask after their families) as a way to help the negotiation process. It’s probably not the best way to achieve transparent democracy, but it’s the way things work in many areas of government. What the NSA actually does is creepy, but the main newsworthy element in the story for me was the replica Enterprise bridge (which turned out to be more of a functional control center/office that was loosely based on the Enterprise).
I would be negatively impressed by a cheesy sales gimmick like this, but since I am neither a salesperson or a politician for sale I am not one to judge, I guess.
Just the feeling I got about him from the article:
“Alexander is 10 times the political general as David Petraeus,” says the former administration official, comparing the NSA director to a man who was once considered a White House contender. “He could charm the paint off a wall.”
…
“But I think he has a little bit of naiveté about this controversy. He thinks, ‘What’s the problem? I wouldn’t abuse this power. Aren’t we all honorable people?’ People get into these insular worlds out there at NSA. I think Keith fits right in.”
I could be filling in the gaps with details from people I have known.
