Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Victor Rodriguez, Jr" <sedahdro@*****.COM>
Subject: Cybertechnology book
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 03:39:00 EST
I just got the new Cybertechnology Sourcbook (AHHHHHH!!!!!!-7.6 essence.
What was said to be impossible is now possible. This ain't Kansas anymore,
Toto. In it I notice a new datajack they called it an Opitcal Scanning
Datajack and apparantly there are no wires to connect just a device they
call an Optical Scanning Datajack Emitter, which gets attached to a data out
port. Then it sends a laser signal to your eye where the datajack is at.
So, can you use this as a wireless decking system if you have a C^2 Deck, ie
connect the emitter to the terminal jack at the terminal your using to get
onto the matrix? By the way you can now put C^2 Decks in a cyberarm, by
just adding 20% to the cost of the Deck and it costs no essece!

2)Another question it says that a Character that undergoes cybermancy has an
astral pressence as if he were astrally perceiving, but he can't see or
sense astral space. It also mentions that he is a groundble source. What
happens if he's walking down the street and just happens to come across a
ward would it stop him (afterall he is present in the astral)and have to
subdue the ward, or could he walk straight through without any hastle?

3)I was just looking through my SRII book and I notice some discrepancies
with the cyberdecks their are two different prices for Response Upgrades the
one in the Matrix section is much cheaper than the one in the price section
in the back of the book. Which one are we supposed to use?
Inquiring minds want to know,
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 2
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 10:37:09 GMT
> From: "Victor Rodriguez, Jr"

> I just got the new Cybertechnology Sourcbook (AHHHHHH!!!!!!-7.6 essence.

> So, can you use this as a wireless decking system if you have a C^2 Deck, ie
> connect the emitter to the terminal jack at the terminal your using to get
> onto the matrix?
don't see why not, this is an optical link and you are allowed to
deck over satalite uplinks, microwave links etc.

> By the way you can now put C^2 Decks in a cyberarm, by
> just adding 20% to the cost of the Deck and it costs no essece!
>
whatever the cost it at last makes them worth the bother, even with
beta fifo memory you could never get enough for even a moderate
backup deck without using all your essence before.

> 2)Another question it says that a Character that undergoes
> cybermancy has an
> astral pressence as if he were astrally perceiving, but he can't see or
> sense astral space. It also mentions that he is a groundble source.
which is what makes cybermancy so stupid, especially as it comments
one of the things this might attract is a wraith, just contemplate
one of those things controlling the cyber zombie! can we say,
policeman 'get me 2 FRT's!!!', Fast response team 'call out the
national guard!', national guard 'hey we didn't volunteer for this get
the regulars!'.

> What
> happens if he's walking down the street and just happens to come across a
> ward would it stop him (afterall he is present in the astral)and have to
> subdue the ward, or could he walk straight through without any hastle?
>
OOPS FASA!!
mind you there is the matter of dual critters.
All things considered you probably have got to let cyber zombies wall
through wards, though they will probably alert whoever monitors the
ward in the process.
Due to complications this is best left for now, thanks the web,
discussion on the list etc i know there is help on this subject in
the NAGA [wards were on the list of topics in it] (whatever
you call it) but until it gets published we don't have the details
available to use. [so leave refs to that before they start and folkks
scream 'but i don't have that' / 'beware copyright', hopefully we
only have a few months to wait to find out]

> 3)I was just looking through my SRII book and I notice some
> discrepancies with the cyberdecks their are two different prices for
> Response Upgrades the one in the Matrix section is much cheaper than
> the one in the price section
> in the back of the book. Which one are we supposed to use?
FASA contradicting themselves in the same book, now i'm _sure_ i
_never_ saw them manage that before. :)


> Inquiring minds want to know,
> ---Sedah Drol
>
Mark
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 22:42:55 +0200
>3)I was just looking through my SRII book and I notice some discrepancies
>with the cyberdecks their are two different prices for Response Upgrades the
>one in the Matrix section is much cheaper than the one in the price section
>in the back of the book. Which one are we supposed to use?

The one in Virtual Realities, IMHO. The SRII price (in the tables) is like,
what, 250000Y per level? Since in VR it depends on the MPCP like just about
everything else, I'd say use that price.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
hold on to nothing as fast as you can
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 4
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 22:42:58 +0200
>don't see why not, this is an optical link and you are allowed to
>deck over satalite uplinks, microwave links etc.

I still think it's a bit odd you can't deck without a _physicial_ connection
to your deck, though (or so says SRII if I remember correctly) -- why can't
you plug a radio receiver into your datajack, and put a transmitter into the
cyberdeck?

[Negative Essence = astral presence]
>which is what makes cybermancy so stupid, especially as it comments
>one of the things this might attract is a wraith, just contemplate
>one of those things controlling the cyber zombie!

Well, yes, that is one of the more extreme game balance things I think :)

[NAGM/NAGA]
>hopefully we only have a few months to wait to find out]

Don't count on it... FASA's timing isn't exactly perfect :) My long-standing
example is still Running Short (promised as "on the horizon" in a 1993
flyer, and now said to be due out in mid-1996 I think...)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
hold on to nothing as fast as you can
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 5
From: Steffen Lassahn <SL@*****.DE>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 08:42:58 GMT+0100
> I still think it's a bit odd you can't deck without a _physicial_ connection
> to your deck, though (or so says SRII if I remember correctly) -- why can't
> you plug a radio receiver into your datajack, and put a transmitter into the
> cyberdeck?
>
IMHO the reason is that you need a two way link. So just a receiver
and a transmitter isn't anough. Another reason might be the bandwidth
of the connection. On an optical cable you can transmit an nearly
unrestricted amount of data at one time.

Mad Eagle




+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Steffen Lassahn sl@*****.de |
| Tel: +49-40-2507298 lassahn@*******.uni-hamburg.de |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 10:16:48 +0200
>> I still think it's a bit odd you can't deck without a _physicial_ connection
>> to your deck, though (or so says SRII if I remember correctly) -- why can't
>> you plug a radio receiver into your datajack, and put a transmitter into the
>> cyberdeck?
>>
>IMHO the reason is that you need a two way link. So just a receiver
>and a transmitter isn't anough. Another reason might be the bandwidth
>of the connection. On an optical cable you can transmit an nearly
>unrestricted amount of data at one time.

That's not a problem. Two-way radios exist, hell buy a cellular phone and
you have a radio link over which you can talk and listen at the same time...
Bandwidth is also not a problem if you consider that you _can_ deck over a
normal phone line -- cellular lines would be just as "wide" I think, if they
weren't you'd experience a huge lag if you phone someone using a cellular...

Oh, and there is no need to send the same mail both to me privately and to
the list. I'll only reply to the list one anyway :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
hold on to nothing as fast as you can
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 7
From: Steffen Lassahn <SL@*****.DE>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 10:23:31 GMT+0100
> >> I still think it's a bit odd you can't deck without a _physicial_ connection
> >> to your deck, though (or so says SRII if I remember correctly) -- why can't
> >> you plug a radio receiver into your datajack, and put a transmitter into the
> >> cyberdeck?
> >>
> >IMHO the reason is that you need a two way link. So just a receiver
> >and a transmitter isn't anough. Another reason might be the bandwidth
> >of the connection. On an optical cable you can transmit an nearly
> >unrestricted amount of data at one time.
>
> Bandwidth is also not a problem if you consider that you _can_ deck over a
> normal phone line -- cellular lines would be just as "wide" I think, if
they
> weren't you'd experience a huge lag if you phone someone using a cellular...
>
I don't think that a cellular phone is capable of transmitting high
resolution pictures, sensoric input and huge amounts of data at the
same time. It is very easy to transmit the human voice, but look at
todays videolinks on normal telephon lines. I don't think decking
makes a lot of sense when you get one picture every 10 seconds or so.

Mad Eagle

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Steffen Lassahn sl@*****.de |
| Tel: +49-40-2507298 lassahn@*******.uni-hamburg.de |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 8
From: Stefan Struck <struck@******.INFORMATIK.UNI-BONN.DE>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 11:09:17 +0200
Victor wrote:
>
> I just got the new Cybertechnology Sourcbook (AHHHHHH!!!!!!-7.6 essence.

Somewhere in the rec ... cyber newsgroup was stated that this is a typo or
miscalculation. If you sum up the cyberware the guy got in his guts you came
up with an essence of -2 - -3 or something like this (haven't done the
calculation myself, yet)
So, it's not that bad but bad enough.
bye,
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail: struck@****.informatik.uni-bonn.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This space
intentionally
left blank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 9
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 13:41:19 GMT
> From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
>
> Don't count on it... FASA's timing isn't exactly perfect :) My long-standing
> example is still Running Short (promised as "on the horizon" in a 1993
> flyer, and now said to be due out in mid-1996 I think...)
>
That flyer did rather badly didn't it, even HB took well over a year
(? 18 months) after they suggested.
This is particularly annoying as running short would be very useful,
especially as everyone has done the decent sprawl sites adventures.

now i wonder why the word 'hope' was in the origonal?? :)

> --
> Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
>
Mark
Message no. 10
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 13:43:05 GMT
> From: Stefan Struck <struck@******.INFORMATIK.UNI-BONN.DE>

> Victor wrote:
> >
> > I just got the new Cybertechnology Sourcbook (AHHHHHH!!!!!!-7.6 essence.
>
> Somewhere in the rec ... cyber newsgroup was stated that this is a typo or
> miscalculation.

Lou posted for FASA on rec.games.frp.cyber that the decimal point was
guilty, it should be -0.76 not -7.6, though i have not checked in
detail the is more believable.

> Stefan
>

Mark
Message no. 11
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 21:31:39 +0200
Dammit! I just lost all the replies I just wrote just before I uploaded them
:( :( Now I can start all over again :(
I guess you'll have to do without a lot of the stuff I just wrote... (I can
just _tell_ you're all happy now :)

>I don't think that a cellular phone is capable of transmitting high
>resolution pictures, sensoric input and huge amounts of data at the
>same time. It is very easy to transmit the human voice, but look at
>todays videolinks on normal telephon lines. I don't think decking
>makes a lot of sense when you get one picture every 10 seconds or so.

Phone lines now are very narrow-band, made to transmit just the mid-section
of the human voice. That's why computers have such a hard time sending all
their data through. I think in 2050 phone lines would have been widened
tremendously, and since wrist phones also come with screens cellular links
would be just as wide...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
hold on to nothing as fast as you can
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 12
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 00:32:10 +1000
Victor Rodriguez, Jr writes:

> 2)Another question it says that a Character that undergoes cybermancy has an
> astral pressence as if he were astrally perceiving, but he can't see or
> sense astral space. It also mentions that he is a groundble source. What
> happens if he's walking down the street and just happens to come across a
> ward would it stop him (afterall he is present in the astral)and have to
> subdue the ward, or could he walk straight through without any hastle?

If the character has an astral presence, then he will be blocked by a ward.
Wards block, and attack, _anything_ that has an astral presence which
attempts to pass through them. However, taking a squiz at the up and coming
rules from a future SR product, we see that what would happen is that the
ward would get a single attack on the astral presence, and then because it
was connected to a physical presense that was moving, the astral presence
would then pass through the ward. Assuming, of course, that the single
attack didn't kill the astral presence. From this point alone it seems to me
that only a moron or a munchkin would undergo cybermancy.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GE d- s++:-- a19 C++ US++>+++ P+ L E W(+) N o(@) K? w(+) O(@) M- V? PS+ PE(@)
Y+ PGP@>+ t+ 5 X+(++) R+(++) tv--- b++(+++) DI? D+@ G++(+) e h(*) !r y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 20:24:43 +0200
>Wards block, and attack, _anything_ that has an astral presence which
>attempts to pass through them. However, taking a squiz at the up and coming
>rules from a future SR product, we see that what would happen is that the
>ward would get a single attack on the astral presence, and then because it
>was connected to a physical presense that was moving, the astral presence
>would then pass through the ward. Assuming, of course, that the single
>attack didn't kill the astral presence.

That means it has to get at least 6 successes in its advantage in _one_
attack, and the dual-natured cyborg will get a resistance test against them
I think... I wouldn't think wards are too much of a worry for people who've
undergone cybermancy -- physical spells cast from astral space would be much
more of a worry IMHO. Picture your sammie with an Essence of -2.57 walking
into a corporate compound and getting hit by a high-Force Mana Bolt cast
from astral space, or coming under attack from astrally-present elementals
(or even watchers). Still, on the physical plane they're about as deadly as
you can get, which in my book offsets their weaknesses :) (And they can be
interesting to play, I created a char who's basically Robocop without
built-in guidelines, so now he doesn't know what he should do with his life :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
don't know what I want but I know how to get it
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 14
From: Sebastian Wiers <seb@***.RIPCO.COM>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 20:24:48 -0500
>
> > >> I still think it's a bit odd you can't deck without a _physicial_
connection
> > >> to your deck, though (or so says SRII if I remember correctly) -- why
can't
> > >> you plug a radio receiver into your datajack, and put a transmitter
into the
> > >> cyberdeck?
> > >>
> > >IMHO the reason is that you need a two way link. So just a receiver
> > >and a transmitter isn't anough. Another reason might be the bandwidth
> > >of the connection. On an optical cable you can transmit an nearly
> > >unrestricted amount of data at one time.
> >
> > Bandwidth is also not a problem if you consider that you _can_ deck over a
> > normal phone line -- cellular lines would be just as "wide" I think,
if they
> > weren't you'd experience a huge lag if you phone someone using a cellular...
> >
> I don't think that a cellular phone is capable of transmitting high
> resolution pictures, sensoric input and huge amounts of data at the
> same time. It is very easy to transmit the human voice, but look at
> todays videolinks on normal telephon lines. I don't think decking
> makes a lot of sense when you get one picture every 10 seconds or so.
>
> Mad Eagle
>
> +---------------------------------------------------------+
> | Steffen Lassahn sl@*****.de |
> | Tel: +49-40-2507298 lassahn@*******.uni-hamburg.de |
> +---------------------------------------------------------+
>

I wonder about that bandwidth stuff- comercial mdems have gotten what, 100
times faster in the past ten years? so in 60 they will be 10^12 times as fast
as now- on the order of 300,000 giga baud? This asuming yopu permit continued
exponential improvement, which all serious SF should, barring cataclysmic
settback (like the graet crash that took everything offline- scarry). Still,
the bandwidth available online in "VR" settings boggles the mind.

SEB
Message no. 15
From: "S.F. Eley" <gt6877c@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 02:20:26 -0400
Sebastian Weirs writes:

> I wonder about that bandwidth stuff- comercial mdems have gotten what, 100
> times faster in the past ten years? so in 60 they will be 10^12 times as fast
> as now- on the order of 300,000 giga baud? This asuming yopu permit continued
> exponential improvement, which all serious SF should, barring cataclysmic
> settback (like the graet crash that took everything offline- scarry). Still,
> the bandwidth available online in "VR" settings boggles the mind.

All serious SF should "permit continued exponential improvement?" Not
quite.

Let's see.. Before the 19th century, the fastest anyone had traveled was
the speed of a good horse. Today we have spacecraft that are clocked in
miles per second. So give us just one or two more centuries and.. Hey!
Multiples of the speed of light! It's just "continued exponential
improvement.." Inevitable, right? Wrong.

There are certain logical limits that are set by the technology one uses.
Affordable bandwidth will NOT continue to expand exponentially for much
longer.. At least, not using any technology we can presently foresee.
Yes, we continue to figure out how to use our electrons and photons more
efficiently, but there are certain physical limits you won't overcome.

Truth is, we don't know HOW much bandwidth will increase by 2055.. I
daresay it won't continue to be exponential improvement, but any estimate
that's made now will likely look silly in another decade. This is why
Shadowrun created a fictional data unit, the Megapulse, rather than
expressing data transfers in megabytes or gigabytes and getting laughed at
somewhere down the line.

'Least, that's my theory. >8->


Blessings,

_TNX._

--
Stephen F. Eley (-) gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu )-( Student Pagan Community
http://wc62.residence.gatech.edu|
My opinions are my opinions. | "Somewhere, just out of sight, the
Please don't blame anyone else. | unicorns are gathering."
Message no. 16
From: "Victor Rodriguez, Jr" <sedahdro@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 02:12:00 EST
>HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP
>
>Category: Illusion
>Type: Physical
>Range: Self
>Target Number: 4
>Duration: Sustained
>
>Very Realistic or Very Complex Illusion: Base Drain S
>Physical Spell: +1 Drain Target
>Sustained Spell: +1 Drain Target
>Illusion Spell modifier: -1 Drain Level
>Personal Spell: -3 Drain Levels
>Bonus Game Effect (Perception Test, 2 x successes): +2 Drain Levels
>Bonus Game Effect (Creation of, and shifting of image): +1 Drain Level
>
>For a final Drain code of [(F/2)+2]M
I like this spell interesting. I think I shall give it to my Moon Druid.
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 17
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 01:39:01 +1000
Gurth writes:

> That means it has to get at least 6 successes in its advantage in _one_
> attack, and the dual-natured cyborg will get a resistance test against them
> I think... I wouldn't think wards are too much of a worry for people who've
> undergone cybermancy

Except for the fact that the creator of the ward knows immediately if the
ward is attacked. This is a bad situation if stealth is required, since a
cybermancy'd sammy can't turn off his astral presence like a magician can
turn off his foci.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GE d- s++:-- a19 C++ US++>+++ P+ L E W(+) N o(@) K? w(+) O(@) M- V? PS+ PE(@)
Y+ PGP@>+ t+ 5 X+(++) R+(++) tv--- b++(+++) DI? D+@ G++(+) e h(*) !r y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 18
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 10:12:32 +0200
>Except for the fact that the creator of the ward knows immediately if the
>ward is attacked.

Well, yes, but when do you use a cyborg if you need stealth? :) I would
think most people undergoing cybermancy would aim at high-level destruction
instead of subtlety...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The Teddy Pugh Interview
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 19
From: Sebastian Wiers <seb@***.RIPCO.COM>
Subject: Re: Cybertechnology book
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 19:15:34 -0500
> Sebastian Weirs writes:
>
> > I wonder about that bandwidth stuff- comercial mdems have gotten what, 100
> > times faster in the past ten years? so in 60 they will be 10^12 times as fast
> > as now- on the order of 300,000 giga baud? This asuming yopu permit continued
> > exponential improvement, which all serious SF should, barring cataclysmic
> > settback (like the graet crash that took everything offline- scarry). Still,
> > the bandwidth available online in "VR" settings boggles the mind.
>
> All serious SF should "permit continued exponential improvement?" Not
> quite.

Point well taken. As a matter of fact, rocket speed has platoed lately.
thetre are exeptions to all rules. My response was rherorical and hyperbolic,
and meant to adress those who thought there was "not enough bandwidth" for
certain proposals. I intended to point out that such technology would be hard
for us to picture.>

> Truth is, we don't know HOW much bandwidth will increase by 2055.. I
> daresay it won't continue to be exponential improvement, but any estimate
> that's made now will likely look silly in another decade. This is why
> Shadowrun created a fictional data unit, the Megapulse, rather than
> expressing data transfers in megabytes or gigabytes and getting laughed at
> somewhere down the line.
>
> 'Least, that's my theory. >8->
>
Well, DUH 8)'

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Cybertechnology book, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!