John Scalzi, having previously displayed some very odd notions about what "good design" is all about (and having been factually wrong in the process), turns his eye from Star Wars to Star Trek. Unfortunately, the results are about the same: he gets some things wrong (the Probe in STIV is not attempting to "destroy everything"), he makes some odd assertions (his bit about phasers is just weird), and instead of talking about "design" he ends up talking about scientific plausibility. I mean, sure, "Red Matter" is one of the worst Maguffins I myself have ever seen in a movie, but what on Earth does that have to do with design?
Now, weird design choices in Star Trek aren't that hard to find. Since there's no real reason for it to be there, putting the bridge on top of the ship where it's totally exposed is an odd choice. In the most recent movie, the design of the Romulan mining ship makes no sense, what with catwalks over yawning chasms and everyone splashing through ankle-deep water and all. But there's more to critiquing design than saying that Red Matter is full of crap.
Oh well. This is clearly another attempt by John to get the geeks fired up, so mission accomplished!