Ferengi Rules of Acquisition
memory-alpha.fandom.com
memory-alpha.fandom.com
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PvFYBkesqGU
Worf knows the rules of acquisition!
> I'd assume he does a fair bit of reading
Also the Enterprise Ferengi were pirates/raiders, very different from later depictions, which would make it more difficult to connect them later.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/ep-2-10-the-house-of-q...
https://cdn.simplecast.com/audio/e9ec167c-750d-44cc-bdcc-3b5...
For all the whiz-bang flaws of Kurtzman-era Trek, they pretty much nailed that show's accessibility from the jump. Even better than Prodigy, which I liked but was more like a distant cousin.
So, I’m worried that Paramount execs will either cut the show after three seasons (the Netflix Maneuver), or demand steep cuts in production expenses (see late-stage “Enterprise”).
Edit: I’d say only “The Mandalorian” is more expensive to make, and as we know, Disney+ is losing huge amounts of money.
Pike seemed to be cast as a Kirk clone, and seeing the many of the rest of the crew as recast versions of characters from the original series just made it seem like the writers/studios have no new ideas. At least TNG (and the original series) tried something new.
I don't think I'll be watching any more of this show.
My personal recommendation is to stick with it because the pay off with worth the persistence. But I cannot blame you for giving up when you did.
I could say the same for TNG and Voyager as well (especially season 1 of TNG). The 90s era Star Trek series take a few seasons to find their footing and build some depth.
Isreal-Palestine conflict is not the first one to come to my mind.
I don't understand why people expect, let alone want, the Bajorans to be an exclusive representation of a single peoples or problem...
It's much more poignant as an abstract which can be used to review real issues through a figurative representation of the entire class of issues/peoples.
In Star Trek the Ferengi are a foil, a caricature of capitalist excess. This fanfic attempts to paint a different kind of caricature. I'm not anarcho-capitalist so I don't want to speak for them but this seems to describe the utopia of free exchange they wish for.
Economic wars are a thing in our own world, let alone that one.
These cause widescale deaths and famine.
It's doubtful that the ferengi never experienced widespread death and disabling injuries as a result of "Economic Warfare" between factions...
I mean, how does everyone think the Nagus became a thing? Monopolies don't form during a period absent rules without a whole lot of people dying...
The First Nagus wrote the Rules to ensure maintenance of his new status quo after having eliminated his enemies through economic activity and more importantly Assassination....
The marquis? French resistance Against? The Germans.
Romulans? Romans.
Remans? Guess who?
Vulcans? Greek.
Klingons? Russians/Japanese depending on the Star Trek series.
Federation? Evolved America.
Ferengi? Present day capitalism.
Borg? Eventual conclusion of overreliance on technology.
All of the archetypes and races from Star Trek are taken from germs in our own history.
Africans?
> Ferengi
Jewish people.
But to be fair yes, everything in real life is a negotiation at the end of the day. Relationships included.
It's not as straight forward as "ferengi" = "Jewish".
I've also seen people describe the Bajorans as an analogue for the Jewish diaspora.
You can fit many real-life events, even more if you try hard enough.
I really seem to be way more indulged with Star Wars, were supporting insurgents against oppresive regimes was what the Good (TM) do.
I like those grey area better
Also, Bajorans = Israelis
Keep in mind there was no major Exodus, the vast majority of bajorans remained on Bajor and never left. The fee who did were either escaping the cardis or were taken for slavery offworld.
They're actually more aptly described as amalgam of Pre WWII Jews (more specifically Zionist terrorists like the Irgun aka Likud), the Irish during and after the Troubles, and the Current Palestinians....
If we're going to focus on the source people's at all maybe it behooves us to focus on the ones actually facing the horrors depicted, rather than those who used long past atrocities as excuse for their own misdeeds.
Interestingly one of those groups is still being very actively oppressed and abused, yet everyone always ignores that and often denies their part in the references which inspired the creation of the Bajorans.
Just, you have to recognize that the source material had its flaws. Like, this:
A contract is a contract is a contract… but only between Ferengi.
That's just kind of... bleh? Especially when, yes, you consider the ethnic stereotypes "culture of sneering traders who will cheat you" evokes. But even without those stereotypes, it's just kind of childish.
In contrast with another one: "Peace is good for business"
So this line is a warning about outsiders.
With such people how could contract be contract?
The punishment? death.
Which episode were you thinking of?
I'm assuming TNG's "Justice"? In ToS "Wolf in the Fold", Scott did not commit the crime but was subject to the local authorities; In DS9 "Hard Time" O'Brien did not commit the crime but was subject to and punished by the local authorities; In ToS "A Taste of Armageddon" the entire crew violate local law by not reporting to the disintegration chambers; In ToS "City on the Edge of Forever" Kirk and Spock steal clothing, and Spock steals tools (that one concerned the human race); In "Patterns of Force" Kirk and Spock are arrested and interrogated after stealing clothing and attempting to infiltrate a government building; In VOY "The Chute" Paris and Kim are imprisoned after a false conviction; In VOY "Ex Post Facto" Paris is imprisoned after a false conviction.
(Also, Nog attacked an army captain while under detention in New Mexico in DS9 "Little Green Men", and escaped without punishment by the local authorities.)
If you are talking about "Justice", I don't think your characterization is quite accurate. In fact, I think you've flipped things? Quoting Memory Alpha at https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Justice_(episode):
> Liato feels that Picard is suggesting some kind of a superiority. He suggests that the Enterprise just use their superior powers to rescue the boy, stating that they would just record him as a convicted criminal out of their reach, an advanced person who luckily escaped the barbarism of their "backward little world". But Picard tells them that he wants to honor and respect the Edo's rules and law, referencing the Prime Directive.
and
> Rivan is amazed at "the city" in the sky, and is surprised that with all this power, they do not just take Wesley. ...
> Finally, Picard asks how the Edo God aliens would react if they were to violate the Prime Directive and Data answers that they would consider the Enterprise crew to be "deceitful and untrustworthy" and subsequently reminds Picard that the Edo God aliens warned them to not to interfere with their children below.
Picard, before the sundown deadline when Wesley's execution was supposed to take place, instead appeals to the Edo god / high-tech "parent" and receives leniency. Its/their authority is above that of the Mediators, and recognized as such by the Edo.
If you go to different country and break laws, ýou should be fully expected to accept any punishment. Especially when you are specially selected for such missions. And this should extend to anyone you take with you. Just leave the kids and families home if you can not lose risking them when they do evil things.
> did not accept absolutely reasonable and just punishment for the heinous crime
The Edo "Gods" are recognized by the Edo as being above the power of the Edo. The Edo Gods granted clemency, which was within their power and thus within the Edo legal system.
You used the word "heinous". Does the story show the Edo consider it a heinous crime? I suspect that's your personal characterization.
At the very least, the Edo youth with Crusher attempted to argue that the crime was done without understanding, which suggests they might consider other crimes (perhaps one carried out with forethought and malice) as more heinous.
(If the violation of any law which requires corporal punishment is "heinous" by definition, then the entire crew of the Enterprise in "A Taste of Armageddon" commit a heinous crime by not reporting to the disintegration chambers after the simulated attack on their ship.)
> Likely they used something threat of genocide to attain their goals.
That makes me think you are talking about another episode?
There is no threat of genocide in "Justice", or anything like that. At best the threat was to run away - something even the local authorities pointed out as an option.
Further, the Edo Gods' abilities were far superior to that of the Enterprise, eg, almost invisible to sensors, able to shut down the Enterprise transporter remotely, and able to detect the new colony in the nearby star system. There was no conceivable threat of genocide or use of force against the population.
> ýou should be fully expected to accept any punishment
That's ... just wrong. I mean, in the human system we don't "accept any punishment". We can appeal a punishment to a higher court, or to someone who is empowered to grant a pardon for some or all of that punishment. (Carter pardoned draft dodgers who hadn't even been punished.)
Picard figured out that the local legal system did recognize a higher court, as it were, and figured out a successful strategy to appeal to that authority, in a way everyone agreed was justice.
Thankfully, punishment was stayed by the supreme local authority. We don't know what would have happened had that not occurred.
> Especially when you are specially selected for such missions.
I agree. Thing is, they did prepare. Early on Yar reported "the inhabitants' laws and customs are pretty straightforward and nothing out of the ordinary" (quoting Memory Alpha). It was only later, after arrival and further research into the legal system, that they learned they themselves were subject to capital punishment for any violation of the law. Quoting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfqa596xxbc :
Yar: Careful Commander. They've got some strange laws here.
Riker: I thought you reviewed their laws.
Yar: They listed nothing about punishment.
(IMO they should have requested an emergency beam-out of the entire team at that moment, which would have saved Crusher, but given this is a fictional story, the writers would have made the crime occur just before Yar learned the legal situation they were in.)
You characterized this away team's presence on the planet as following a contract. I think it's a valid viewpoint.
How valid is a contract where the penalty clauses aren't included in the contract and aren't made aware to one of the signatories?
(Still, that doesn't explain why Yar didn't notice that punishment was missing, when it should be part of any similar contract.)
> when they do evil things
The show only establishes the Edo consider what Crusher did was a crime. We do not know enough about the Edo sense of morality to establish what they consider "evil".
In human morality, we do not regard as "evil" every person who commits a crime.
Why then do you characterize what Crusher did as an "evil thing"? Or are you speaking abstractly about some hypothetical "evil thing"?
I get on one level that the Bajorans were much like the historical Jewish peoples, conquered and then freed.
But.... I always thought that the Ferenghi were the eponymous Jew stereotype. Short stature, crooked teeth, would cheat you at a drop of a hat, overly large ears, code of conduct to only deal with their race. It feels like they were created in the antisemitic light of "Happy Merchant" ( https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/happy-merchant ).
Obviously, those are antisemitic tropes for starting to dehumanize Jews. But damn, when I saw them in ST:TNG, that's exactly what I thought Rodenberry was trying to portray.
They're kind of like the Star Trek counterpart to Jar Jar Binks.
In TNG they might be one dimensional like Jar Jar, but I think the Ferengi get a lot of nuanced characters in DS9 that blow Jar Jar Binks out of the water in depth. Rom's evolution is particularly great.
Correct. But there is a whole lotta similarity between the Ferengi and real life antisemetic caricatures, as is easily seen by any internet search for "antisemitic caricatures".
Thus I maintain that claiming that the characteristics exhibited by the Ferengi are an exaggeration of Jewish traits is itself racist.
It's also why I chose to link to the ADL in this description, rather than other meme sites. It provides the much needed context that the initial linked picture was done in the 1990s, by "A. Whytt Mann".
Naturally, the Ferenghis were made as a personification of the worst that capitalism has to offer. However, the caricature itself of the Ferenghi turned into something quite terrible indeed.
And as some have said here and claimed of me, this isn't my antisemitism showing. In fact, scholars have mirrored my own thoughts:
> In his 2007 critique of The Next Generation for the National Review, the commentator Jonah Goldberg described the Ferengi as "runaway capitalists with bullwhips who looked like a mix between Nazi caricatures of Jews and the original Nosferatu."[28] The scholar of religion Ross S. Kraemer wrote that "Ferengi religion seems almost a parody, perhaps of traditional Judaism."[25] He wrote that the 285 Rules of Acquisition bore similarities with the 613 Commandments of Judaism and that the Ferengi social restrictions on women mirrored Orthodox Judaism's restrictions on women studying the Torah.[25] Historian Paul Sturtevant wrote in 2018 that not only are the Ferengi "extremely legalistic" and "defined by their greed", echoing common stereotypes of Jews, but the major Ferengi characters on Deep Space Nine were all played by Jewish actors.[29]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi
And the 285 rules of acquisition vs 613 commandments ties back to the main article, since I like to keep tying back in.
That just seems to be way too many "coincidences" for me to be comfortable with.
Ahmed Best, Jar Jar's voice and mo-cap actor person of color, finds the racial commentary about the character offensive and nearly committed suicide over the negativity and harassment.
Just because you have prejudices you apply to the work does not mean the creators did, which is where any factuality of racism or caricature could come to be.
Your prejudices and experiences aren't shared by everyone else, which means that they may create material that has zero negative features but for which You Perceive negative features due exclusively to Your Prejudices.
> The Original Series had come from hostility between the US and the USSR during the Cold War, Wright sought an equivalent relevant to the US of the era he was living in, the 1980s. There was meanwhile a palpable feeling that the nation's financial sector was essentially full of greedy barbarians, a notion Wright transplanted into the futuristic science-fiction setting of The Next Generation. (Star Trek: The Next Generation 365, p. 36) Rob Bowman offered, "The Ferengi sprung from the stereotype of agents and lawyers being cutthroat, greedy and wanting only money." (Cinefantastique, Vol. 21, No. 2, p. 35) Wright thus conceived the Ferengi as a species of profit-obsessed, ruthless aliens. He was especially fond of the contrast between them and the crew of the Enterprise-D, who had no desire or need for money. (Star Trek: The Next Generation 365, p. 36)
* https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ferengi#Origins
Things got tweaked over time of course.
For people born toward the end of last century, the stereotypes you mention barely register at all. I only know them for having studied Weimar at undergrad level, but tbh the only stereotype of Jewishness, for me and my peers, is of well-dressed New Yorker professionals and LA executives using funny words.
Without comments as yours, I honestly would never have thought of late-1800s caricatures of Jews when looking at a Ferengi. You are effectively re-popularizing something that is utterly dead in the mainstream.
It’s a viewpoint, but I’m very skeptical.
IMO it is perfectly reasonable to contextualize a fictional race by the creators and the time it was created. Intentional ignorance and choosing to ignore reality never sit well with me. I’m more in the “those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it” camp myself.
A Character Type is different than a Caricature, which is Specifically when one is representing a Specific Person or Peoples.
When there is no such intent and is not based explicitly in such prior art, such characters are just that purely imaginary characters with zero bearing on real world racism.
Enough with the bs.
There's the creator's intent which can't really be known. Then there's the observer's interpretation which is equally valid.
You're Presuming based on your Prejudices aka Pre-Judging.
"Eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind", and all that. Surely there is a better way.
I guess some stereotypes are really archetypes and people fit them as needed ... or as feared about one's self.
Right now people are saying Indians/Pakistanis/Punjabs/etc are greedy because they are the vast majority of used car salesmen where I am, and I'm certain that they'd feel similarly about the representation of ferengi.
Ferengi are compilations of some of the least pleasant parts human nature. All people are manifest therein, because We're All Horrible.
A contract is a contract, provided all parties are in and beholden to the same jurisdiction.
Theres plenty of examples of bad actors who violated contracts without recourse due to living where no action could be taken or the wronged party simply not having "standing" as a non-citizen....
Also if you really think that everything goes through replicators, what does that mean for energy expenditure? If done on planets where does all the energy go?
And don't everyone else have those two things too? So why did Cardassia need mining outpost?
The thing is, the mechanism of the Replicator is less important then what it represents: productivity with zero human labor input. We don't live in that world - we have trouble conceiving of that world. But that's essentially the whole promise of AI: robots which can build more robots, which can then build products for us.
At some point, your whole civilizations pipeline becomes "energy + robot labor". And once you get the first part of the Dyson swarm up and running, energy is infinite - at least in human terms.
So I’m ok with replicators being a lazy plot device. It’s not like there aren’t countless others, like transporters, the usage of large mother ships rather than lots of smaller vessels, universal translators, 3D geometry presented in 2D, every species being bipedal, etc.
The point behind Star Trek is that it presents the best of humanity rather than the worst — which is what most other popular sci-fi stories focus on.
It’s also worth noting that the Ferengi were space worthy centuries before humans and one of the reasons speculated for their stagnation was the placement of greed above all else.
:)
Our society is rapidly heading in that direction. The main difference is that at least the Ferengi are honest about the values that govern their society. I think we’re far more likely to end up like the Ferengi than we are the federation.
What? Like our values? The Ferengi are developed to be every bit as unique, individually, as we are. We see Ferengi scientists, murderers, reformers, inventors, and leaders.
I think it’s more your lack of imagination that’s the issue. The Ferengi are totally plausible as scientists, inventors, and explorers. Nothing they do is at all out of line with what Europeans did in the age of discovery, apart from slavery. The Ferengi never tolerated slavery.
Ferengi females were arguably slaves since they had so few rights.
I think that speaks highly of the Ferengi social system.
Personally, I happen to love the Ferengi and their Rules. They started off as villains on TNG but they’re just too comical for that. DS9 seriously developed their culture into a lovely satire on capitalism. At the same time, the show developed their individual characters to an impressive extent, transforming them from the “greedy merchant/criminal” hat to something much deeper.
I think the greatest lesson of Star Trek is that we need to look past our stereotypes and past the most visible manifestations of culture to see people as individuals. The Ferengi, being such a strong caricature, challenged us to do so even more than the Klingons.
“The way I see it, hew-mons used to be a lot like Ferengi: greedy, acquisitive, interested only in profit. We're a constant reminder of a part of your past you'd like to forget. But you're overlooking something: Hew-mons used to be a lot worse than the Ferengi. Slavery. Concentration camps. Interstellar wars. We have nothing in our past that approaches that kind of barbarism. You see? We're nothing like you. We're better.”
Personally, I would have christened their world Ferengeti
Truer words were rarely spoken
It seems obvious that the replicator enables utopias, but the point that was made was very thought provoking.
Here is the original source I first read an analysis of this idea from (sorry for linking to reddit): https://i.redd.it/9pmyd8xz3j2b1.png
Original sources from the screen shot: https://twitter.com/StorySlug/status/1587086761150349312
Interestingly, the Season 3 finale of "The Orville" took direct aim at the idea that
Star Trek's utopian future is only possible because of the replicator, and the
typically-conservative Trek fans who make the argument.
A woman from an underdeveloped planet keeps begging for replicator technology on the grounds
that it would bring her planet into the same socialist utopia that the crew of the Orville
enjoys, and the first officer says "You've basically got that backwards."
She explains that it was their socialist utopia that brought about the cooperation necessary
to invent the replicator, and that had it been invented during Earth's 20th or 21st centuries
it wouldn't have worked, because the rich and powerful would have hoarded the technology.
As @BoomerNiner often says, we have enough resources on the planet right now, without a replicator,
to give everybody food and housing — if we wanted to. The invention of a replicator wouldn't change that.
Zefram Cochrane, famously, tried to invent the warp drive with a profit motive - he thought he was going
to get rich off the technology, and it was only the realization that we weren't alone in the galaxy
(and perhaps a few lectures from people from the future) that changed him.
But mankind wasn't ready for all the various technologies that sprang from this revolution, which is
why the Vulcans tried to keep a close eye on humanity's entrance into the galaxy.
A few years after First Contact, Earth's government launched a probe, called "Friendship-1"
that tried to give other planets the means to contact Earth.
Instead, the people the probe found reverse-engineered the antimatter technology and
accidentally destroyed their planet.
The same thing happened in The Orville - early explorers, acting like missionaries, tried to bring
their advanced technology to other worlds in the hope of helping people - but the technology
just created conflict and ruined entire planets.
People don't suddenly become moved to share because of abundance - Elon Musk had 44 billion dollars
and he didn't decide to share it with the world, he decided to buy Twitter with it.
He has always, and will continue to, hoard his wealth for himself no matter how much he has.
If Tesla invented a replicator they wouldn't give that away to everyone for free. They'd patent it,
and sell it to world governments with DRM software they could deactivate remotely if those
governments didn't pay a subscription fee.
If governments had replicators, they wouldn't suddenly start handing out free, delicious, nutritious
food to everyone - "that will collapse the economy," they'd say.
"Free food for the needy would be unfair to people who've been paying money for food all this time."
"How will people be motivated to work," the Republicans would say,
"if they don't have the threat of starvation hanging over them?
If everyone has enough food, how will we motivate people to join the Army?"
Even though the replicator was producing molecularly-identical food to the real thing,
conservatives would insist it wasn't "real" enough for them. "Real" beef, they'd say,
demands the slaughter of an animal. Replicated beef is basically *vegan.*
The beef industry would quickly draw battle lines with their donation money,
congressmen from places like Texas would move to outlaw replicated meat from
being served on the grounds that it hurts entire industries.
Conspiracy theorists would insist that replicated beef is full of additives
the government is trying to sneak into them to feminize men and make you sick,
even though *real* beef is full of antibiotics and hormones.
Campaign ads would show Republicans personally slaughtering cattle and gutting
deer to show their commitment to only eating meat that was really alive.
We're already seeing this type of thing when, like, Cracker Barrel tries to
introduce plant-based sausage that's entirely optional to order.
People FREAK OUT that you might take their meat away.
In short, inventing a replicator wouldn't save us - right now, it'd *ruin* us
even faster, as the amount of bounty the wealth plays keep-away with would
just grow even larger and more ludicrous.
Capitalism would never allow a replicator to exist to its true potential,
too many people would go broke. Replicators didn't create the Star Trek future,
the Star Trek future comes first, then replicators.Going back to the meat analogy, I’ve already seen people argue against meat substitute because it “preemptively kills cows by not birthing them for meat to begin with”. It’s amazing the mental gymnastics people will take to justify the status quo.
You could argue that 3D printers are still kinda shitty, and only making incremental improvements, but that's the trajectory I would expect replicators to follow as well. They'll be sold for industrial purposes for companies to make spare parts first and then to rich/upper-class nerds to make exotic things and mini-figs or something until incremental improvements result in a commodity version.
It probably would get patented, and stagnate for 20-ish years, and then see an explosion of innovation when the patent runs out (unlike copyrights, patents regularly are allowed to expire).
Can't disagree with the conspiracy theorists part, though. That one seems bang-on like what will happen.
This is not a trivial problem to solve. Figuring out how to fabricate chips at a slightly smaller scale is the work of huge research divisions that build giant machines to do it. But. Once you have this, and can put it into an appliance-sized box that can make another copy of itself out of a trivial investment of resources, things get really weird and capitalism probably breaks a lot of people and/or itself.
Until then, though, it'll be business as usual. Patents and copyright will be there to protect the immense investment the corporations made into making stuff a few nanometers smaller, and politicians and pundits sucking on those corporate cashflow teats will be there to help.
That's fair. I was thinking of the ability to work with arbitrary matter as a fundamental change rather than incremental improvement, but I can see the point.
> This is not a trivial problem to solve.
Of course not, and if I implied such, I apologize.
> things get really weird and capitalism probably breaks a lot of people and/or itself.
Probably, property only really makes sense in a world with scarcity. Which is why intellectual property always seemed weird to me.
Pirating music from the internet used to be legal, or at least not strictly illegal.
Internet itself was uncapped and only limited by the physical hardware (eg the modem or the copper wire carrying the data).
I’m sure there are many other, better examples… but believe you me, there will be laws floated and probably passed that restrict household 3D printing as we know it.
That kind of is sharing his money with the world.
> "How will people be motivated to work," the Republicans would say,
Why should they work if they don't want to? You have a replicator.
> how will we motivate people to join the Army?"
If this is so, then give replicator technology to the enemy and you won't need an army any more.
I also say the same for the Borg, the first episode there were hive minds connected with tech, they had their own babies and no one leader. Then the TNG turned them into ants/bees with queens.
To bad they did not expand upon what seemed to be the original intent.
And the Borg weren't portrayed as a hivemind in their first appearance, either. They were simply a vastly superior species that doesn't consider the Enterprise or its crew anything more than resources, and so they just start carving the ship up with a laser. Guinan even says it may be possible for the Federation to advance to the point of dialogue with them. The focus on assimilation was added later.
And the existence of a queen does make sense (although of course insect queens aren't actually monarchs.) A purely unstructured and decentralized hivemind would be incapable of the necessary degree of planning and organization necessary to accomplish anything, much less maintain a quadrant-spanning technological civilization. A hierarchy is still necessary, and in fact the original concept for the Borg more closely resembled an insect colony (which they couldn't do because of budgetary constraints.)
Also from a purely Doylist point of view, a villain needs a face and a voice, otherwise it's just a force of nature. A hurricane can be dangerous and dramatic but not compelling as an antagonist.
And TNG didn't invent the Borg Queen anyway, that was the movies. If you're going to blame a series for ruining the Borg look at Voyager.
Then, in the span of an episode, the Voyager crew not only figures out a way to crush 8472, but somehow does it with technology that the Borg have much better mastery over. It's as if a cavemen taught a sharpshooter how to be a better marksman.
I always felt that they don't is exactly what made the Borg so scary; they can't be talked to or negotiated with. They just exist to assimilate. Nothing more or less. No compassion, no humanity. Before the Borg queen they really were a force of nature, but with laser phaser guns and shit.
The replicators in Stargate had the same effect. I felt there too they went too far by explaining the origins and having "human-like" replicators (I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, as I never cared all that much for Stargate and it's been ages since I watched it).
They’re like a virus, they’re a local optimum that is both logical and nearly inescapable.
The human-form replicators were an evolution of the technology during the show, not part of their origin. Happened while they were trapped in a time dilation field.
I agree with the parent. A force of nature is not a bad way to present the Borg.