28

I started watching Picard last night and even though it's set after Voyager, Data and his AI are treated as unique. I've never actually watched ST:TNG, but was a huge fan of Voyager. Several episodes were dedicated to The Doctor's humanity and growth -- it certainly seemed like the EMH AI was at least on par with Data's.

So why is Data treated like a unique being? He is not the only example of an AI who grew and developed. It would be crazy to believe The Doctor wouldn't become a well known case study upon Voyager's return, especially to characters in ST:Picard who's academic focus is on AI development.

The obvious out of universe answer is that Picard the character has a much stronger connection to Data, and mixing the EMH into the plot would muddy the waters. That said, is there an in universe explanation for why no one who studies AI seems even remotely aware of the EMH (or specifically Voyager's EMH?)

  • 6
    Hmm, it's almost like the writers of Picard were not actually very well acquainted with Star Trek... – Harabeck Jul 9 at 21:50
  • 5
    @Harabeck I really think that criticism is unfounded. All the recent Star Treks are full of references to all the previous shows. When something’s been produced for over 50 years, there will always be continuity holes to pick. TNG contradicted both the Original Series and itself several times. Lieutenant Dax doesn’t sit particularly well with the portrayal of the Trill in that one TNG episode, but Deep Space Nine is still worth a watch. There’s plenty to criticise in every Star Trek series, but “ignoring previous Star Trek” is way, way down the list. – Paul D. Waite Jul 9 at 23:30
  • 3
    @Harabeck: Data was depicted as unique and impossible to reproduce in TNG, and the medical hologram dates back to Voyager. Therefore it doesn't really make sense to blame this on the writers of Picard. – Ben Crowell Jul 10 at 0:14
  • 2
    @Harabeck: so you're annoyed because Seven changed. Fair enough. I would point out that in Voyager, it wasn't like Seven was a regular human adult. She was recovering from being a Borg drone, having been assimilated during childhood. Most of what I remember of her during Voyager was her fairly slowly discovering her humanity, much like Data in TNG. I'm not sure that would make sense decades later. I can understand if you really like that Seven, and really don't like future Seven, but I don't think every aspect of every character has to have background, or a specific role in the narrative. – Paul D. Waite Jul 11 at 15:25
  • 2
    As far as the drunk emotional vigilante bit goes, you did notice Icheb being brutally murdered for his Borg implants, right. And Seven, understandably, taking that pretty hard? If that's not background for the vigilantism and the drinking, I really don't know what is. – Paul D. Waite Jul 11 at 15:26
25

So, even ignoring the Emergency Medical Hologram*, accidental artificial intelligence (in the sense of artificial consciousness) is apparently a semi-regular occurrence in the Next Generation time frame. (It probably would have happened more during the Original Series if it weren't for Kirk running around shouting the Liar's Paradox at anything that looked a bit like an android.)

Intentional artificial intelligence, however, is apparently more difficult. Data, and his kin, were the only known example of sentient androids being intentionally and successfully designed and created, and no-one else could figure out how to do it.

As per Star Trek: Picard, the Daystrom Institute eventually successfully created synths. This work may have been informed by studies of Voyager's EHM and similar emergent AIs, although the synths didn't quite seem to have the same degree of sentience as Data or the Doctor. Perhaps the emergent AIs were studied, but it wasn't possible to understand or reproduce what led to their emergence**.

STAR TREK: PICARD SPOILERS AHEAD:

Bruce Maddox later created Dahj and Soji, from a single positronic neuron of Data's; this is presumably unrelated to emergent AIs like the EMH. They did seem to have the level of sentience one would expect from Soong-type androids. However, they were kept secret, as all development of artificial intelligence was outlawed following the apparent Synth attack on Mars.

* A difficult, but necessary task at the best of times.

** Or those pesky Federation ethics limited the amount of study that could be done. I hold out hope that the Doctor wasn't terminated under the AI laws, and serves as a kind of benevolent tenor King on a planet of sentient holograms somewhere. If you know anyone on the Picard season 2 staff, I have a great spec script for them.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    Marked as the correct answer for mentioning that data was the only intentional AI -- all the others were accidental. – Sidney Jul 9 at 14:46
  • 1
    Agnes Jurati clearly states in Picard S1E1 that, "B-4 wasn't much like Data. No other synth has been." clearly implying that the synths shown on Mars in the show weren't truly sentient. – GeoffAtkins Jul 9 at 15:31
  • 2
    It may not be intention--the EMH and Moriarty are not self-contained entities, but need substantial (external) computing power and specialized holographic emitters to exist. Both characters have to deal with that limitation when they want to exit an environment with holodeck capability. The exocomps were self-contained, but their intellectual capabilities are highly specialized, and they compare to Data maybe like a lizard compares to a human. – Cristobol Polychronopolis Jul 9 at 20:46
  • 2
    @GeoffAtkins Data seems able to remain as sentient as usual even when the rest of him is unavailable. youtube.com/watch?v=JT52AzJ1wec – Nathaniel Jul 10 at 10:09
  • 2
    I have heard (though only rumours) that Robert Picardo is involved in Picard S2, though no details on how he's involved or to what degree. – Richard Ward Jul 10 at 13:59
11

Portability

Most of the AIs seen in Star Trek are housed in starship Main Computers.

The ship's computer AI is (obviously) housed in the Main Computer.
The Holodeck characters that gained spontaneous emergent intelligence (Moriarity, Fairhaven etc) are all constructed by the ship's Main Computer.
Though Moriarity is eventually transferred to a portable device to keep the simulation running indefinitely. The possibility that the simulation is running a lot slower to allow for lesser hardware is unstated, but explains why the holodeck is usually run via the main computer rather than its own onboard equipment.

The EMH is unusual in that he has his own separate computer hardware, but it's still very much non-portable, integrated into the ship.
The Mobile Emitter is the product of hundreds of years of refinement and doesn't count for our purposes.

Data however is a human-level intelligence AI housed in a human-sized brain (as evidenced by how he can continue to think and talk when his head is severed in at least one or two episodes).
Practically unique in the series for that alone!

Design-Type

Apart from the hardware, the EMH and similar AIs are explicitly modelled on existing people, both physically and personality-wise.
The Soong Androids are not. They're an effort to produce AI that grows into its personality from a low baseline (if anything), rather than being a highly sophisticated simulation of a person that has enough intellect to grow from there.

Different approaches, with different limitations and requirements.

| improve this answer | |
  • What I like very much about this answer is the aspect of origin. The EMH's program has been condensed from the expertise of the brightest human / biological medical experts of the Federation, supposedly including a lot of their personality in this process. – Ralf Kleberhoff Jul 10 at 11:31
  • The trouble with the second part is that Data contained the stored diaries of ~300 colonists. Granted, it wasn't as large as the EMH's collection of human-produced records; but it also was not restricted to one particular domain of endeavor (that is, medical engineering). – jpaugh Jul 10 at 19:55
  • I'd like to remind you that the sum total written word of humanity at the moment in plain-text format is a matter of terabytes of space. The diaries of a few hundred colonists is trivially small data and I'd be shocked if Data (made with 24th century hardware) couldn't store and retrieve that amount of information with ease. Even factoring in high resolution photos and video footage. – Ruadhan2300 Jul 13 at 11:02
9

An additional thought stemming from lucasbachmann's answer is that while they are of comparable sentience the EMH requires (at least prior to the mobile emitter attained via time travel, and the federation probably has rules about trying to research items attained from the future) an entire ship's computer, while data is mobile in his own right.

| improve this answer | |
  • While a fair point, the EMH didn't use up all of the ship's computer power. I don't recall any canon mention of how much it did use, but the rest of the ships functions needed some of it.. – GeoffAtkins Jul 9 at 15:19
  • 1
    @GeoffAtkins - And when he was in his 'mobile emitter', the EMH (in his entirety) was dramatically smaller than Data's brain. – Valorum Jul 9 at 23:30
  • 1
    @Valorum - But the mobile emitter was from the future. Even if we ignore the fact that it was a handwave to allow his character more freedom to develop, that's an unfair advantage. However, the mobile emitter did nothing for his cognitive abilities or development, so one has to assume it has similar processing power to what the Doctor was able to utilise from Voyager's computer. – GeoffAtkins Jul 10 at 7:00
  • 1
    @GeoffAtkins: I recall episodes where the Doctor had to choose which sub-programs to leave behind when, say, going on an away mission. So, he seemed to be larger than what a shuttlecraft or the Delta Flyer computer could handle. – Ellesedil Jul 11 at 14:36
7

Data is an engineering marvel in terms of his body and his brain being beyond state of the art nanotechnology that federation science can't duplicate.

The EMH or Moriarty the original sentient hologram are just brute force consequences of computer power and programming with a mundane holographic interface.

So basically the self awareness that should have made Data special was diminished by in universe technology even in TNG. I'd say the legal and philosophical implications of this were completely ignored. And the answer to your question is that folks who work on AI are really working on nanotechnology that produces AI.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Do you have a canon reference for how nanotechnology was involved in Data's creation or operation? – T.J.L. Jul 9 at 14:01
  • Exploring the legal and philosophical implications of Data's sentience is the entire plot of S2E9 of TNG, The Measure of a Man. Admittedly, after that it is largely dropped again. – Ty Hayes Jul 9 at 14:16
  • 3
    @Ty Hayes "Measure of a Man" does not deal with the fact that holograms can be self aware and that this process appears to be trivial. The ONLY thing special about Data in a world with Moriarty and the EMH is that the machinery that produces his self-awareness can fit in a human sized head. There is every reason to believe that in the TNG universe if there was a computer the size of a building hooked up to an android body by wifi or with a hologram interface it could have the same self awareness as Data. – lucasbachmann Jul 9 at 15:36
  • @lucasbachmann That's completely fair. I didn't initially get that that was the point you were making in your answer. Thanks for clearing it up – Ty Hayes Jul 9 at 16:02
  • 1
    I initially DV'd this because it appeared to be arguing elegance is a requirement for sentience, but I thought better. But the question isn't about sentience, it's about why Data is unique, and the answer points out Starfleet's contradictory treatment of their own holograms vs Data. This is explored in The Doctor's own arc. – Schwern Jul 9 at 21:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.