this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
17 points (100.0% liked)

Daystrom Institute

3468 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Daystrom Institute!

Serious, in-depth discussion about Star Trek from both in-universe and real world perspectives.

Read more about how to comment at Daystrom.

Rules

1. Explain your reasoning

All threads and comments submitted to the Daystrom Institute must contain an explanation of the reasoning put forth.

2. No whinging, jokes, memes, and other shallow content.

This entire community has a “serious tag” on it. Shitposts are encouraged in Risa.

3. Be diplomatic.

Participate in a courteous, objective, and open-minded fashion. Be nice to other posters and the people who make Star Trek. Disagree respectfully and don’t gatekeep.

4. Assume good faith.

Assume good faith. Give other posters the benefit of the doubt, but report them if you genuinely believe they are trolling. Don’t whine about “politics.”

5. Tag spoilers.

Historically Daystrom has not had a spoiler policy, so you may encounter untagged spoilers here. Ultimately, avoiding online discussion until you are caught up is the only certain way to avoid spoilers.

6. Stay on-topic.

Threads must discuss Star Trek. Comments must discuss the topic raised in the original post.

Episode Guides

The /r/DaystromInstitute wiki held a number of popular Star Trek watch guides. We have rehosted them here:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

After rewatching DS9: “Defiant”, I had a thought; to prevent transporter clones from impersonating each other, could Starfleet require, as a part of duty, that transporter clones receive slight genomic resequencing that changes no major traits but allows DNA scanners to distinguish them?

I can think of a few issues. One, would it break genetic experimentation laws even though there would be negligible changes to each transporter clone? Two, is this too sever a violation of personal liberties for the Federation to be allowed? Three, is the technology there to do this effectively in a starship’s sickbay?

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ummthatguy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

It should be considered no different than scanning for errant microbes/viruses/changlings. Not to mention, there should already be a detectable difference in phase variance by merely being a body in another point in spacetime (updated info not reaching all known outposts/ships notwithstanding).

[–] williams_482@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Transporter clones appear to be vanishingly rare. We're aware of two (Thomas Riker and William Boimler), and the circumstances around Thomas Riker's existence were clearly unheard of to any of the people investigating. Clearly this is not a thing that transporters normally do, or are even capable of outside of extremely unusual circumstances.

It also seems pretty dystopian to require the insertion of artificial genetic markers to make a person more easily recognizable. Would we expect "normal" identical twins to be treated similarly? Or actual clones?

I think the larger lesson on this incident from Starfleet's perspective is that they need to beef up their internal security practices. Big shocker, that. Thomas Riker is neither the first nor last person to successfully impersonate a starfleet officer and cause major troubles in doing so, and most threat vectors can't be solved by preemptively identifying likely perpetrators (such as this likely very offended transporter clone) and modifying them specifically to make infiltration more difficult.

[–] data1701d@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago

I’d say you’re right.

Just as a clarification, though, bother Enterprise Riker and Thomas Riker would receive the DNA modification to mark them as legal forks of the old Riker (since both are the real Riker, a.k.a there are four transporter clones, not two).

The same thing would be done to both Boimlers.