Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Keldon Mor Keldon@********.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:19:56 -0500
If this has been discussed (which it probably has) then we can make it quick
:)

Besides the obvious of decking and driving a car, what exactly else can one
do with a datajack without any other cyberware? Does it have to be a
cyberdeck or can it be a desktop or pocket secretary? can you jack into a
vcr to set the programing so you don't miss ER? :) Can you jack into someone
else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?

How about Smartgun links, sure, you got your -2 modifier and can eject clips
via cybercommands...How versitile is this system? Can you say, have a
quarterstaff built that colapses and expands via a smartgun link (think
Babylon 5). Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
programed person (as i would think all lonestar, etc would have this) and
would this be hardwired or can it be changed via a smartgun command? It just
seems that the subdermal induction pads issue commands bothways and it could
open a whole line of man/machine interactions...how about having a door knob
at home with the proper hardware would set off a alarm or what ever if you
didn't, say, issue a eject clip command or eject-eject-safety-eject? sure,
it could be easily bypassed but you have to know about it first...

Just hate seeing technology go to waste...

Peace,
Keldon@********.net
http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/keldon
Message no. 2
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 15:34:39 +1000
Datajacks can be used to issue mental commands to any system that is
equipped to cope with it. People could use datajacks to, say, talk on the
phone (for those private conversations, without the expense of a
cyber-phone). Controlling pocket secretaries would be a trivial task.

One adaptor I can readily see for datajacks would be a home-environment
controller. Plug an RF transmitter into the datajack, and you've instantly
got a super-powerful remote control. Turn on the lights, check the status of
the fridge inventory, change TV channels, see who's at the door via the
security system... all fairly feasible. Interference from neighbours would
be avoided by a very low-power signal (with receivers in each room), and a
cellular design.

All of this is why the datajack is the most common piece of cyberware, and
the only socially acceptable enhancement (as opposed to functional
replacements).

Subdermal pads could also be used, but I understand that the bandwidth is a
lot lower... only trivial commands could be sent. OTH, implanting a
sub-dermal pad into someone, and then using it to open doors via a palm-lock
would be one heck of a security device... read the palm print AND query the
pad. Probably too expensive to be worth it, though... most people would
defeat a palm-lock by bypassing it, not tricking it.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 3
From: Keldon Mor Keldon@********.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 01:24:47 -0500
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.com>
To: <shadowrn@*********.org>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 1999 12:34 AM
Subject: RE: Datajacks and stuff...


> One adaptor I can readily see for datajacks would be a home-environment
> controller. Plug an RF transmitter into the datajack, and you've instantly
> got a super-powerful remote control. Turn on the lights, check the status
of
> the fridge inventory, change TV channels, see who's at the door via the
> security system... all fairly feasible. Interference from neighbours would
> be avoided by a very low-power signal (with receivers in each room), and a
> cellular design.

I like that Idea, would be nice and easy for my optical datajack in my eye.
Man, talking about being a couch potato :)

> Subdermal pads could also be used, but I understand that the bandwidth is
a
> lot lower... only trivial commands could be sent. OTH, implanting a
> sub-dermal pad into someone, and then using it to open doors via a
palm-lock
> would be one heck of a security device... read the palm print AND query
the
> pad. Probably too expensive to be worth it, though... most people would
> defeat a palm-lock by bypassing it, not tricking it.

This would fall under the category of "knowing is half the battle". Sure,
maglocks & keypads are defeated all the time, it's pretty obvious that the
security device is there but a induction doorknob would at least require a
die roll to notice it. I would say it impractical for corp use with everyone
needing a subdermal implant but think of the private home use, my home that
is.

Peace,
Keldon@********.net
http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/keldon
Message no. 4
From: Scott Wheelock iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 03:27:00 -0300
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Keldon Mor."
] Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
] programed person

See The Corporate Security Handbook, page something,
for an item that does exactly that. Or just ask someone
on the list who has it (that's not me, obviously) to enlighten
the rest of us. Anyone want to help us out by talking a bit
about that piece of equipment?

-Murder of One
Message no. 5
From: dghost@****.com dghost@****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 02:32:34 -0500
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 15:34:39 +1000 "Robert Watkins"
<robert.watkins@******.com> writes:
>Datajacks can be used to issue mental commands to any system that is
>equipped to cope with it. People could use datajacks to, say, talk on
the
>phone (for those private conversations, without the expense of a
>cyber-phone). Controlling pocket secretaries would be a trivial task.

I think the cyber-comm link should be a requirement for more than simple
controls. (ie, think a standard TV remote versus the touch-screen
universal remotes or something.) The datajack, even in SR3 is too
ambiguously defined.

>One adaptor I can readily see for datajacks would be a home-environment
>controller. Plug an RF transmitter into the datajack, and you've
instantly
>got a super-powerful remote control. Turn on the lights, check the
status of
>the fridge inventory, change TV channels, see who's at the door via the
>security system... all fairly feasible. Interference from neighbours
would
>be avoided by a very low-power signal (with receivers in each room), and
a
>cellular design.

Cool idea ... could be enhanced by some othe pieces of cyber too. (In
this case, I'm thinking about for a corporate security system ...
Security guards with maps of the complex plus overlaid video feeds for
the perpertrators, etc.)

<SNIP>
>Subdermal pads could also be used, but I understand that the bandwidth
is a
>lot lower... only trivial commands could be sent. OTH, implanting a
>sub-dermal pad into someone, and then using it to open doors via a
palm-lock
>would be one heck of a security device... read the palm print AND query
the
>pad. Probably too expensive to be worth it, though... most people would
>defeat a palm-lock by bypassing it, not tricking it.

Optically scaning datajacks are lower bandwith... Subdermal datajacks are
just double cost and +.1 Essence cost.

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 6
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:48:15 EDT
In a message dated 4/19/99 3:46:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dghost@****.com
writes:

> Optically scaning datajacks are lower bandwith... Subdermal datajacks are
> just double cost and +.1 Essence cost.

Not really, optical scanning datajacks can get some high DFR's too. At most
there's, what, a 20% loss in DFR ... and what kind of DFR does a TV remote
control NEED, anyway? <g>

Sean
GM Pax
Message no. 7
From: Josh strago@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:39:05 -0400
Keldon Mor wrote:

> If this has been discussed (which it probably has) then we can make it quick
> :)
>
> Besides the obvious of decking and driving a car, what exactly else can one
> do with a datajack without any other cyberware? Does it have to be a
> cyberdeck or can it be a desktop or pocket secretary? can you jack into a
> vcr to set the programing so you don't miss ER? :) Can you jack into someone
> else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?
>
> How about Smartgun links, sure, you got your -2 modifier and can eject clips
> via cybercommands...How versitile is this system? Can you say, have a
> quarterstaff built that colapses and expands via a smartgun link (think
> Babylon 5). Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
> programed person (as i would think all lonestar, etc would have this) and
> would this be hardwired or can it be changed via a smartgun command? It just
> seems that the subdermal induction pads issue commands bothways and it could
> open a whole line of man/machine interactions...how about having a door knob
> at home with the proper hardware would set off a alarm or what ever if you
> didn't, say, issue a eject clip command or eject-eject-safety-eject? sure,
> it could be easily bypassed but you have to know about it first...
>
> Just hate seeing technology go to waste...
>
> Peace,
> Keldon@********.net
> http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/keldon

Actually, I was thinking about the same thing earlier...
The gun firing for only one person reminds me of the Judge guns from the movie
Judge Dredd. The Judge guns could only be fired by someone who was a Judge
(known by a genetic scanner in the handgrip). Anyone whose genetic scan came up
false who held the gun for too long or tried to fire would get a nasty electric
shock. I wanted to give Lone Star and all of my NPCs who used mil-spec hardware
this feature. They could inter-change their weapons (so if one cop gets geeked
and his partner runs out of ammo, he could grab his dead partner's gun and use
it).

Josh
Message no. 8
From: runnerpaul@*****.com runnerpaul@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 13:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12:19 AM 4/19/1999 -0500, Keldon Mor wrote:
>Besides the obvious of decking and driving a car, what exactly else
can one
>do with a datajack without any other cyberware?

Ah. Now, part of that depends on the datajack in question (of course,
this is all subject to change when Man & Machine comes out). The
standard datajack, from the core rulebook, has a built in "Level 0"
I/O SPU. This acts as an input/output controller for data transfer,
such as loading data into memory, accessing Knowsofts, and so forth
(other bits of cyber can act as an input/output controller, look it up
in Shadowtech if you're interested).

Why is this important? Because of the fact that if you're never going
to be using the datajack to transfer data, and only using it to
experience Simsense and to control devices, then the Datajack-1 from
Shadowtech provides the functionality you would need, at a cheaper
essence cost.

When Renraku Arcology: Shutdown came out, there was a piece of
equipment introduced called an ASIST Converter. ASIST Converters come
both as external modules for 50¥, or as a microtronic version small
enough to to be added to the circuits of a datajack for no extra
essence cost and 1000¥.

The ASIST Converter handles both the conversion of a raw digital
simsense signal into something understandable to the metahuman brain
(and presumably also the RAS override functions that shut off the
body's motor functions and real world sensory inputs), but also the
conversion of signals from the brain into something understandable to
a computer.

Cyberdecks, vehicles with datajack ports or rigger-adaptation, purely
cybernetic RC decks, simsense players, and even those BTL chips
designed to be directly plugged into a datajack all have ASIST
Converters hardwired in. Anything else would presumably need ASIST
Converter circuitry added to it, before it could become datajack
compatible. I figure most any suitable piece of electronic gear is
available in a datajack compatible form, for just 50¥ over list price
(possibly 1000¥ for extremely small electronics).

>Does it have to be a
>cyberdeck or can it be a desktop or pocket secretary? can you jack
into a
>vcr to set the programing so you don't miss ER? :)

As long as an electronic device is equipped with the proper hardware,
it could presumably be run by datajack. The test that I use is: given
the fact that by SR time, even simple electronics would have a
significant amount of processing power, would the device in question
be capable of having its functions activated automatically by a
scripting language run on its onboard computer? If the answer is "Yes"
(and it would be for most electronic gear in SR, IMO) then the device
can be run by datajack.

DGhost suggested requiring the cybercomm link for issuing complex
commands via datajack, but I disagree. In Rigger2, someone equipped
with just a datajack can still issue sentence length commands to a
cyberneticly controlled RC Deck. I don't think pocket secretaries or
VCRs would be much different.

>Can you jack into someone
>else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?

With normal datajacks, I'd say no. If both parties had ASIST
Converters, either as external modules or built into their datajack
hardware, then I'd allow it.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2

iQCVAwUBNxtkY6PbvUVI86rNAQEbPAP/Vaxy8Ll2lVd6bspVMZpKD5vspadQ38jw
Bu7vB2vd5paGSx2slz2zAJwQdNjaQiKqPrc1k6DJJuDdTLiHmaOHih/55kAW7+oF
hpOZa9V0ospA27iEGZ5kPGPB8u2gv0EsmB+E8lTIumM1Dk35s+6TnA9HWsuFOL2D
MAhpPTb8n9U=HqCI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344

---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com
Message no. 9
From: Glenn Royer groyer@********.EDU
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:12:58 -0700
>
>>Can you jack into someone
>>else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?
>
>With normal datajacks, I'd say no. If both parties had ASIST
>Converters, either as external modules or built into their datajack
>hardware, then I'd allow it.
>
>--
> -- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)


i would say yes, because i think the idea is cool. :) of course that doesnt
do it for anyone, but, ... eh.. well anyway, i have another point, i
remember a couple of people doing that in an early SR novel. i dont
remember which one.. hmm.. that probably doesnt carry much weight either...
eh...

i have another question... do external smartgun adapters require a datajack
(or smartgoggles) to use? i usually require my people to use one, again
because it's cool, but i dont remember it being canon.
-Glenn
Message no. 10
From: Kelson kelson13@***********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:24:52 -0800
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:12:58 Glenn Royer wrote:

>i have another question... do external smartgun adapters require a datajack
>(or smartgoggles) to use? i usually require my people to use one, again
>because it's cool, but i dont remember it being canon.

The external Smartlink systems use goggles that plug into the gun. No datajack is
required. You couldn't just use a datajack because all the datajack does is transfer data
(at least the basic version does -- the higher end models have some memory, etc.). How
would the jack interpret the visual input of your surroundings? It's not pure data (ones
and zeros). You need vision to interpret what you see. A datajack can't do that. Even
if it could, where would the information go? It couldn't go to your eyes directly (the
datajack isn't wired into your eyes). Thus, it would have to be interpreted by the brain
and then transferred to your eyes. However, this should probably only work when ASIST is
involved and the source is artificial (simsense, BTLs, the Matrix, etc.) - not from the
real world.

Just my 2 cents (again).

>-Glenn

Justin :)


-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums
Message no. 11
From: Mockingbird mockingbird@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 13:49:18 -0500
Oringinally said by Keldon@********.net:
>
>> Subdermal pads could also be used, but I understand that the
>>bandwidth is a
>> lot lower... only trivial commands could be sent. OTH, implanting a
>> sub-dermal pad into someone, and then using it to open doors via a
>palm-lock would be one heck of a security device... read the palm
>>print AND query the pad. Probably too expensive to be worth it,
>>though... most people would defeat a palm-lock by bypassing it, not
>>tricking it.
>
>This would fall under the category of "knowing is half the battle".
Sure,
>>maglocks & keypads are defeated all the time, it's pretty obvious
>that the security device is there but a induction doorknob would at
>least require a die roll to notice it. I would say it impractical for
corp >use with everyone needing a subdermal implant but think of the
private >home use, my home that is.


Ok,
How about this, instead of a subdermal, each door has a receiver,
each ID badge a small transmitter (range 2-3 meters). The badge
constantly transmits a user id. When the door picks it up, it
crossreferences it, if the user has permission to go through the door,
it unlocks. Now the guards don't have to deal with locks, but the
runners do. (Sure the runners can grab an id card. If yours tend to
do that, put palm scanners in the doorknobs that verify the person
holding the door is the one the badge is for. With a digital signal,
it wouldn't be difficult to receive and decifer the 5-6 badges that
might be close enough to the door).

Mockingbird
Message no. 12
From: runnerpaul@*****.com runnerpaul@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:51:40 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 10:24 AM 4/19/1999 -0800, Kelson wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:12:58 Glenn Royer wrote:
>>i have another question... do external smartgun adapters require a
datajack
>>(or smartgoggles) to use? i usually require my people to use one,
again
>>because it's cool, but i dont remember it being canon.
>The external Smartlink systems use goggles that plug into the gun. No
datajack is required.

Actually, the external Smartgun Adapter can interface with either
smartgoggles or a smartlink.
BBB3, p.281:
"The external system mounts on the weapon (top- or underbarrel
positions) and can be transfered from weapon to weapon, with one hour
of maintenance and alignment. Without a receptor (smart goggles or
smartlink) the hardware is dead weight."

Back in first edition, datajacks _were_ listed as valid receptors of
smartgun data, but however, while there were rules for what modifier
to give when using smartgoggles, and when using smartlink cyberware,
there weren't any modifiers listed for using a datajack.

Depending on how the basics of ASIST works in your game, it is quite
feasible for a smartlink to interface with a datajack, but since this
hasn't been canon since first edition, I wouldn't worry about it.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2

iQCVAwUBNxuWT6PbvUVI86rNAQGgGAP/VePHn/F0ZoSoFXJSM0dyZtwZEtO+cOg2
UXyKyoauH4vx6qc0L9fzTRt8fHP4fMnKOf9FGe6i08yqT/Dgwsjxl8UM0QQVqbPm
6KozHg9A6xQEfL983WdI0nw8jKQLwm/TF0dhedsxaSkXzlcYCQdL4ubpI7GWPDss
FuOz0FVv/LoLmb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344

---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com
Message no. 13
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 18:03:13 EDT
In a message dated 4/18/1999 8:04:56 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
Keldon@********.net writes:

>
> Besides the obvious of decking and driving a car, what exactly else can one
> do with a datajack without any other cyberware? Does it have to be a
> cyberdeck or can it be a desktop or pocket secretary?

Yes it can, and I seem to recall in an earlier book this option being
mentioned somewhere.

can you jack into a
> vcr to set the programing so you don't miss ER? :)

If the VCR is built for that kind of stuff, sure.

Can you jack into someone
> else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?

Technically, NO! However, with the new mods for specific protocols and the
like in the RA:S book, you wouldn't actually jack into each other's minds'
directly, but you might be able to exchange information in a "matrix-like
language."

In our games, with the right gear/software, there is more to this
possibility...

> How about Smartgun links, sure, you got your -2 modifier and can eject
clips
> via cybercommands...How versitile is this system? Can you say, have a
> quarterstaff built that colapses and expands via a smartgun link (think
> Babylon 5).

In theory, yes.

Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
> programed person (as i would think all lonestar, etc would have this) and
> would this be hardwired or can it be changed via a smartgun command?

We call this "inversing the smartlink protocols" in the games here. It takes
an electronic (5) roll (base time 1 hour) *AND* a cybertechnologies (5) roll.
The success tests are added together with regards to reducing the time.
Once complete, the "-2" modifier is gone, BUT the gun will ONLY fire at the
person that meets the smartlink systems recognition parameters. Hence, no
overshots or generic accidents. Rule of One's is exempt of course.

It just
> seems that the subdermal induction pads issue commands bothways and it
could
> open a whole line of man/machine interactions...how about having a door
knob
> at home with the proper hardware would set off a alarm or what ever if you
> didn't, say, issue a eject clip command or eject-eject-safety-eject? sure,
> it could be easily bypassed but you have to know about it first...

Basically, you could do any of the things you are wanting to do, if you
decide you want to do them. The book(s) do not give much in the way of
guidelines or suggestions for a lot of the ideas however, and so you have to
kind of "wing it".

-K
Message no. 14
From: Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:27:32 -0500
> From: runnerpaul@*****.com
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: Datajacks and stuff
> Date: Monday, April 19, 1999 3:51 PM

> Actually, the external Smartgun Adapter can interface with either
> smartgoggles or a smartlink.

Correct. :) But not datajacks.

> Depending on how the basics of ASIST works in your game, it is quite
> feasible for a smartlink to interface with a datajack, but since this
> hasn't been canon since first edition, I wouldn't worry about it.

I still don't see how this would be possible. The Smartlink in no way
interprets data from the outside world. It simply puts a crosshair in your
line of vision (directed by your eyes, not the outside world). The only
time the datajack interprets external information is when jacked into the
Matrix, using simsense or BTLs and the like. Neither the datajack nor the
smartlink allow you to see the physical world. So you still would need
some form of visual input to interface with the Smartlink. Either get
Smartlink cyberware or get the goggles (or glasses, or helmet). If you
don't want all this, go for the laser sight. ;) There's probably an
expensive way of getting away with an external system (helmet, glasses,
goggles) without having to use a cord. You could probably use IR or radio
signals or some such for short range transmission of the signal from the
gun to the receiver. Inobvious and doesn't require surgery. :) Not
optimal, but close.

Justin
Message no. 15
From: Glenn Royer groyer@********.EDU
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 21:50:01 -0700
>The external Smartlink systems use goggles that plug into the gun. No
datajack is required. You couldn't just use a datajack because all the
datajack does is transfer data (at least the basic version does -- the
higher end models have some memory, etc.). How would the jack interpret the
visual input of your surroundings? It's not pure data (ones and zeros).
You need vision to interpret what you see. A datajack can't do that. Even
if it could, where would the information go? It couldn't go to your eyes
directly (the datajack isn't wired into your eyes). Thus, it would have to
be interpreted by the brain and then transferred to your eyes. However,
this should probably only work when ASIST is involved and the source is
artificial (simsense, BTLs, the Matrix, etc.) - not from the real world.


okay, just for future reference, when i say 'smartlink' i mean cyberware and
'smartlink adaptor' means the hardware on or in the gun.

okay, i thought it was given that the user had to have the smartlink
cyberware.. my point is, where is ther user's interface when he's using an
external smartlink adaptor on his gun? judging from the pic in the BBB, and
the fact that it's an over- or under-barrel mount, i dont think it's the
user's hand... so the only way i see it working is through a datajack...
and, admit it, the drawing of the ork firing a rocket launcher in the BBB2
is pretty cool :)


... i dont see the datajack interpreting anything. if it could interpret
the data, it would be doing the job of the smartlink. i just see it routing
the data from the cord to the smartlink headware.

>
>>-Glenn
Message no. 16
From: Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:20:58 -0500
> From: Glenn Royer <groyer@********.EDU>
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: Datajacks and stuff...
> Date: Monday, April 19, 1999 11:50 PM

> okay, i thought it was given that the user had to have the smartlink
> cyberware.. my point is, where is ther user's interface when he's using
an
> external smartlink adaptor on his gun? judging from the pic in the BBB,
and
> the fact that it's an over- or under-barrel mount, i dont think it's the
> user's hand... so the only way i see it working is through a datajack...
> and, admit it, the drawing of the ork firing a rocket launcher in the
BBB2
> is pretty cool :)

The over or under barrel mount is for adding a Smartlink to a gun after
market (this is where the electronics for the smartlink are contained,
etc.). Guns that are integrally smartlinked (i.e. they come from the
factory that way) don't require this mount (it's all internal) -- IIRC.
The data is transmitted between an induction pad in the palm of the wearer
to a chip in the handle of the gun. As a house rule, I say that all
Smartlink level I units use a cord from a jack in the hand or wrist
(generally) to a plug in the gun. But that's just because it adds more
variety. No real different game effects (except for a lower level of
concealibility of the smartlink). Smartlink level II is the by the book
version (using an induction pad in the palm of the hand per the standard
rules). I also allow for cheaper variants of the smartlink II which have
the induction pad be a visible metallic pad, whereas the standard version
is subdermal and not visible. Again, house rules here. The general
concept and mechanics are the same. Just a bit of flavor for a relatively
common piece of ware. :)

> ... i dont see the datajack interpreting anything. if it could
interpret
> the data, it would be doing the job of the smartlink. i just see it
routing
> the data from the cord to the smartlink headware.

Precisely. I misunderstood the meaning of your previous post. My house
rule regarding smartlink I systems would probably use a standard low grade
datajack for the port in the arm and another in the gun. Optionally, the
cord could be hardwired to either the arm or gun, thus only leaving one end
loose. Whatever. :)


> >>-Glenn

Justin
Message no. 17
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 20:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
> Ok,
> How about this, instead of a subdermal, each door has a receiver,
each ID badge a small transmitter (range 2-3 meters). The badge
constantly transmits a user id. When the door picks it up, it
crossreferences it, if the user has permission to go through the door,
it unlocks. Now the guards don't have to deal with locks, but the
runners do. (Sure the runners can grab an id card. If yours tend to do
that, put palm scanners in the doorknobs that verify the person holding
the door is the one the badge is for. With a digital signal, it
wouldn't be difficult to receive and decifer the 5-6 badges that might
be close enough to the door).
>
> Mockingbird

If you want to see an example of this in action, read "Tailchaser", by
Paul Hume, from "Into the Shadows".

*Doc' shakes his head..."Mockingbird, Mockingbird - acknowledge your
sources, huh?" :)*
==Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow)

.sig Sauer
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 18
From: runnerpaul@*****.com runnerpaul@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:33:37 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 07:27 PM 4/19/1999 -0500, Kelson wrote:
>> Actually, the external Smartgun Adapter can interface with either
>> smartgoggles or a smartlink.
>
>Correct. :) But not datajacks.

Unless you're playing First Edition rules, back when datajacks were
much more fun. :)

>> Depending on how the basics of ASIST works in your game, it is
quite
>> feasible for a smartlink to interface with a datajack,

>I still don't see how this would be possible.

Ok, I'll lay it out step by step.

Datajacks can accept an ASIST feed, more commonly known as simsense.
Normally, this involves large amounts of data for every one of the
senses, but nothing says that an ASIST signal has to include
information on every sensory track. The tracks could all be blank,
except for an image of a crosshair on the visual track.

Normal simsense usually shuts off the input from the user's natural
senses, because experiencing both the real world and simsense at the
same time is usually quite disorienting. However, if the simsense feed
coming in from the datajack consists of just visuals of a crosshair
and ammo counter display, then it would not be too disorienting to
leave the user's natural sensory inputs up and running; the crosshair
would merely overlay itself over the images coming in from the user's
eyes. And yes, it is possible to input simsense through a datajack
without cutting out the natural sensory inputs, according to
Shadowbeat.

Normal simsense also usually shuts off the brain's motor control,
immobilizing the user. However, this too isn't absolutely required of
simsense; the user can be allowed to maintain partial or even full
motor control. This is established both by Shadowbeat, and also by VR
2.0, where a decker running a "cool" deck can operate it through
manual controls such as keyboards. Since it's somewhat hard to type
when you have no motor control, it's reasonable to conclude that
someone experiencing simsense can still move, as long as the simsense
allows it.

Alright, given that it's possible to use simsense to overlay a
crosshair atop the image that the user is seeing with his own eyes,
how does the smartgun's hardware get information about the user's
line-of-sight to know where in the field of view to put the crosshair
in the first place?

Given the fact that one of the major functions of the datajack is to
process ASIST input/output, and given the fact that some ASIST is both
real-time and interactive (the Matrix, or sim-games for example), it
would make sense that in addition to being able to accept mental
commands such as "run decrypt program" via direct neural interface,
datajacks would be able to detect motor commands in the brain.

Say a decker is in a host that has been sculpted to look like a
meeting room. This host is intended to simulate reality as closely as
possible, to allow for virtual reality tele-confrencing. However, this
sort of illusion breaks down severely if the decker has to issue
mental commands such as "rotate viewing angle 30 degrees left" just to
turn his head for a look around.

Real-time interactive ASIST such as the matrix would almost have to
depend on being able to detect motor commands issued by the brain to
control the persona icon's movements in the virtual world, otherwise,
concepts such as sculpted systems and humanoid icons don't make a
whole lot of sense. Since the datajack is the interface over which
ASIST gets input and output from the brain, it makes sense that the
datajack hardware is what is picking up the brain's motor commands and
body position signals, and relaying them to the ASIST Converter of the
cyberdeck, which translates them into information that the deck can
use to control the icon's movements.

It follows then, that if a datajack can pick up information about
where the user is looking so that a cyberdeck knows what field of view
to generate, then the datajack could pick up the same information and
relay it to smartgun hardware. Once the smartgun hardware knows where
the user is looking, then it can calculate where in the user's field
of view the crosshair should go.





-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2

iQCVAwUBNxwCXaPbvUVI86rNAQGqrQP/Xyzh3cmvj6ewhlKcME8LSTxaEDaJQdIQ
RLYweNPxybmMNTjRhTokfWkkcGi6dBqZRtESmOL/W3CqsxNLjuq+Fl1sBXDvXILF
Hi2seLqiGR1zLbcrXhiEvAhe+rHikgC5pCv8r1zy75H8yJzBkTSTzWVAaDHOpOZ8
Stqb83n4nJs=u6CR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344

---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com
Message no. 19
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:02:31 +1000
Runnerpaul writes:
> Say a decker is in a host that has been sculpted to look like a
> meeting room. This host is intended to simulate reality as closely as
> possible, to allow for virtual reality tele-confrencing. However, this
> sort of illusion breaks down severely if the decker has to issue
> mental commands such as "rotate viewing angle 30 degrees left" just to
> turn his head for a look around.

I'd just like to point out that the turning of the head would BE the mental
command for "rotate viewing angle 30 degrees left". :)

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 20
From: Sean McGrath nafien@*******.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:01:57 +1000
> You couldn't just use a datajack because all the
> datajack does is transfer data (at least the basic version does -- the
> higher end models have some memory, etc.). How would the jack interpret
the
> visual input of your surroundings? It's not pure data (ones and zeros).
> You need vision to interpret what you see. A datajack can't do that.
Even
> if it could, where would the information go? It couldn't go to your eyes
> directly (the datajack isn't wired into your eyes). Thus, it would have
to
> be interpreted by the brain and then transferred to your eyes.

Too easy to fudge that ... how does this spur of the moment thought grab
you:

SMARTGUN ADAPTER --> DATAJACK --> IMAGE LINK
0.2 Essence 0.2 Essence

The only problem being there is nothing to interpret the data coming from
the weapon, which is what a Smartlink does. So how about a piece of
Headware Memory loaded software to do that ... mebbe 100Mp?

SMARTGUN ADAPTER --> DATAJACK --> HEADWARE MEMORY --> IMAGE LINK
0.2 Essence 0.3 Essence 0.2 Essence

So the total Essence cost is the same as a Smartgun Link but your Cyberware
has many more purposes.

Even so I'd only give someone using this setup a -1 Target # modifer

My 2¥

Scam

________
SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2+ SR3++ h b++>+++ B UB IE+ RN
sa +++ ma+++ sh++ m+ gm M++
Message no. 21
From: Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:14:11 -0500
> From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.com>
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: RE: Datajacks and Stuff
> Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 12:02 AM

> Runnerpaul writes:

> > Say a decker is in a host that has been sculpted to look like a
> > meeting room. This host is intended to simulate reality as closely as
> > possible, to allow for virtual reality tele-confrencing. However, this
> > sort of illusion breaks down severely if the decker has to issue
> > mental commands such as "rotate viewing angle 30 degrees left" just to
> > turn his head for a look around.

> I'd just like to point out that the turning of the head would BE the
mental
> command for "rotate viewing angle 30 degrees left". :)

Actually, IIRC, ASIST allows a user to do something in the Matrix simply by
acting it out with his/her persona icon within the Matrix. If you are
jacked in, you generally don't do much with your meatbod during your romp
through whatever hosts you are invading today. It's all "do it and the
ASIST writes the code for you" and such. So, if you want to copy that
file, you simply pick it up and put it in your briefcase (for
example)....the Matrix copies the file to your deck. It's all controlled
by your persona's actions. Not your meatbod's. Not by issuing a command,
per se. But by doing it. So, to look around in the Matrix, all you would
do is look around (from your persona's perspective). Tah dah. :)

Justin
Message no. 22
From: Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:17:32 -0500
> From: Sean McGrath <nafien@*******.com>
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: Datajacks and stuff...
> Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 12:01 AM

> SMARTGUN ADAPTER --> DATAJACK --> HEADWARE MEMORY --> IMAGE LINK
> 0.2 Essence 0.3 Essence 0.2 Essence

> So the total Essence cost is the same as a Smartgun Link but your
Cyberware
> has many more purposes.

Actually, a Smartlink only costs .5 Essence. So this setup is more
expensive. But it does have more uses. I still think you would need
something to process the images you're taking in....memory wouldn't cut it.
You'd need some sort of processor. Not worth it, IMO. Just go with the
Smartlink. That's why it's there. ;)

> My 2¥

Mine too. :)

> Scam

Justin
Message no. 23
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:24:44 +1000
Kelson writes:
> per se. But by doing it. So, to look around in the Matrix, all you would
> do is look around (from your persona's perspective). Tah dah. :)

Um... that's what I said. The person turns their head. They don't think
"Turn my head now", they just go to turn their head, or lift their arm, or
pick up the papers. The ASIST software translates the neural signals into
software commands (and also puts a block into your neural pathways so that
your meatbod doesn't do those actions).

So, to recap: turning your head IS the mental command for "rotate viewport
30 degrees left".

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 24
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:33:39 EDT
In a message dated 4/19/99 2:51:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mockingbird@*********.com writes:

> Ok,
> How about this, instead of a subdermal, each door has a receiver,
> each ID badge a small transmitter (range 2-3 meters). The badge
> constantly transmits a user id. When the door picks it up, it
> crossreferences it, if the user has permission to go through the door,
> it unlocks. Now the guards don't have to deal with locks, but the
> runners do. (Sure the runners can grab an id card. If yours tend to
> do that, put palm scanners in the doorknobs that verify the person
> holding the door is the one the badge is for. With a digital signal,
> it wouldn't be difficult to receive and decifer the 5-6 badges that
> might be close enough to the door).
>
> Mockingbird
>

Current technology, almost ready for commercial release (last I read,
somewhere or other) : "Factoids" do similar, with advertisements rather than
locks. :-)

Sean
GM Pax
Message no. 25
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:38:04 EDT
In a message dated 4/19/99 9:46:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
groyer@********.EDU writes:

> okay, i thought it was given that the user had to have the smartlink
> cyberware.. my point is, where is ther user's interface when he's using an
> external smartlink adaptor on his gun? judging from the pic in the BBB,
and
> the fact that it's an over- or under-barrel mount, i dont think it's the
> user's hand... so the only way i see it working is through a datajack...
> and, admit it, the drawing of the ork firing a rocket launcher in the BBB2
> is pretty cool :)
>

It's the hand. Just as with some laser sights, a pad is added to the grips
of the gun (part of why it takes an HOUR to put the smartlink module on
another gun). For the laser sights, it's an on/off pressure switch. For the
smartlink, it's an induction data transfer pad. Cords run to the grips, or
perhaps a directed IR beam is used. Or low-range RF. :-)

Sean
GM Pax
Message no. 26
From: Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:07:39 -0500
:> okay, i thought it was given that the user had to have the smartlink
:> cyberware.. my point is, where is ther user's interface when he's using
:an
:> external smartlink adaptor on his gun?

The induction could be conveyed through the frame of the gun, rather
like those computer networks that use the ground / conduit of your elctrical
sytem as an RF coveyor. Might not work for platic frame guns- you'd have to
add some foil tape to the grips, leading to the adpator. Ah, Duct tape- the
friend of the low budget cyberpunk everywhere.

judging from the pic in the BBB,
:and
:> the fact that it's an over- or under-barrel mount, i dont think it's the
:> user's hand... so the only way i see it working is through a datajack...
:> and, admit it, the drawing of the ork firing a rocket launcher in the
:BBB2
:> is pretty cool :)


You bet it is, and theres gob's of other nice "cable to gun" or just
generally surpurflous exterior cable / conduit / hose pictures. Rumour has
it that Man and Machine will give any extra +1 die for related tasks when
using cyberware with gratuitious exterior cables.

Mongoose




Yes, that WAS a joke....
Message no. 27
From: Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:58:24 -0500
:> Besides the obvious of decking and driving a car, what exactly else can
one
:> do with a datajack without any other cyberware? Does it have to be a
:> cyberdeck or can it be a desktop or pocket secretary?
:
:Yes it can, and I seem to recall in an earlier book this option being
:mentioned somewhere.

I'm suprised SR3 doesn't mention this. In our game, it was a houserule
that for reasonable cost (+50%, or something), any electronics itme could
have datajack control. This didn't allow any new functions except hands fre
opperation and datajack data transfer, but it was worth it for some things.
Maybe this is a derivation from (ta-da!) Shadowbeats bit about various
soundboards and stuff that can have manuel or datajack controls, I dunno.

:can you jack into a
:> vcr to set the programing so you don't miss ER? :)
:
:If the VCR is built for that kind of stuff, sure.

That's basically what we allowed. You could also jack into a
chemsniffer and route the output to your display link, to alert yourself to
gas attacks...


:Can you jack into someone
:> else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?

Erk- not really, unless you had soem way of outputting data they could
comprehend. An encephlon (on both ends), or cyberlink, would allow it, as
would something like subvocal mikes / subdermal speakers (or their extrerior
equvalent)- those would be real handy with optical scanning jacks.

:> How about Smartgun links, sure, you got your -2 modifier and can eject
:clips
:> via cybercommands...How versitile is this system? Can you say, have a
:> quarterstaff built that colapses and expands via a smartgun link (think
:> Babylon 5).
:
:In theory, yes.

I'd agree, and say it would just need some minor rules. Cannon
Companion, I hope?

:Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
:> programed person (as i would think all lonestar, etc would have this)
and
:> would this be hardwired or can it be changed via a smartgun command?


IMO, that would requires some form of encryption on both sides. I'd
hope cyberware is capable of adopting to unusual protocals easily, so I
think it would take more than a programing tweek.

Mongoose
Message no. 28
From: Keldon Mor Keldon@********.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 02:38:20 -0500
> :Can guns (or other weapons :) be set to only fire for the
> :> programed person (as i would think all lonestar, etc would have this)
> and
> :> would this be hardwired or can it be changed via a smartgun command?
>
>
> IMO, that would requires some form of encryption on both sides. I'd
> hope cyberware is capable of adopting to unusual protocals easily, so I
> think it would take more than a programing tweek.
>
> Mongoose
>

One would think that this would be standard by now. They already have
pistols that will not fire if you are not wearing a ring that emits the
proper code. It would also seem that all smartlink systems (and guns) sold
would have a encrypted serial number (or sin) embedded in it. Any gun left
behind would have a record of the person who fired it. (of course we shadow
people would have this disabled) but the world still revolves around people
with sin numbers and probably constitutes a large percentage of owners. On
that note, the gun would just need to record the serial/sin number and the
safety would not disengage unless you are the owner. (perfect for cops and
bodyguards with kids at home :)

Peace,
Keldon@********.net
http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/keldon
Message no. 29
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:53:11 +0200
According to Mockingbird, at 13:49 on 19 Apr 99, the word on
the street was...

> How about this, instead of a subdermal, each door has a receiver,
> each ID badge a small transmitter (range 2-3 meters). The badge
> constantly transmits a user id. When the door picks it up, it
> crossreferences it, if the user has permission to go through the door,
> it unlocks.

One problem with this system is that it's too easy to get through doors if
you don't have a badge, provided you walk close enough to someone who
does. The badge-holder walks past a door and it unlocks for a few seconds
(the time it takes to walk in front of the door), and in that time someone
else can simply open it.

A handier solution would be to put a scanner somewhere near the door, and
let the users wave the badge in front of it. Or perhaps build the scanner
into the door frame, and only unlock the door when a badge is already
inside the frame (better make it a deep frame :)

> Now the guards don't have to deal with locks, but the runners do. (Sure
> the runners can grab an id card. If yours tend to do that, put palm
> scanners in the doorknobs that verify the person holding the door is the
> one the badge is for.

That would depends on how long it takes a print scanner to read the hand
of someone grabbing a doorknob or -handle. IMHO, too long for what you're
proposing. And anyway, what's the point of installing both print scanners
_and_ a badge system on every door?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Throwing fire at the sun
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 30
From: Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 07:23:23 -0500
> From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.com>
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: RE: Datajacks and Stuff
> Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 12:24 AM

> Kelson writes:
> > per se. But by doing it. So, to look around in the Matrix, all you
would
> > do is look around (from your persona's perspective). Tah dah. :)

> Um... that's what I said. The person turns their head. They don't think
> "Turn my head now", they just go to turn their head, or lift their arm,
or
> pick up the papers. The ASIST software translates the neural signals into
> software commands (and also puts a block into your neural pathways so
that
> your meatbod doesn't do those actions).

Actually, what you are saying is that the person would have to turn his/her
head. I am saying that their *persona* turns its head. I'm not discussing
the meatbod here. The decker doesn't actually turn his physical head (his
consciousness is no more in his body than a Rigger who is in full-rig mode
- i.e. not in command chair mode, etc).

You may have meant the same thing, but referring to the person turning his
head is not the same as referring to the persona turning its head.

> So, to recap: turning your head IS the mental command for "rotate
viewport
> 30 degrees left".

See above. :)

Justin
Aka "Clarification Man"
Message no. 31
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 12:09:15 EDT
In a message dated 4/20/99 8:20:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Kelson@****.net
writes:

> Actually, what you are saying is that the person would have to turn his/her
> head. I am saying that their *persona* turns its head. I'm not discussing
> the meatbod here. The decker doesn't actually turn his physical head (his
> consciousness is no more in his body than a Rigger who is in full-rig mode
> - i.e. not in command chair mode, etc).
>
> You may have meant the same thing, but referring to the person turning his
> head is not the same as referring to the persona turning its head.

When the persona turns it's head, the person IN hte matrix has sent the
neural signals to his neck muscles to turn their meatbod head ... those
signals merely get re-routed by the ASIST interface.

In essence, the decker (etc) _tries_ to turn their meatbod head ... and the
ASIST turns their PERSONA head instead. :-)

Sean
GM Pax
Message no. 32
From: Mockingbird mockingbird@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 13:11:06 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Gurth <gurth@******.nl>
To: shadowrn@*********.org <shadowrn@*********.org>
Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Datajacks and stuff...


According to Mockingbird, at 13:49 on 19 Apr 99, the word on
the street was...

That would depends on how long it takes a print scanner to read the
hand of someone grabbing a doorknob or -handle. IMHO, too long for
what you're proposing. And anyway, what's the point of installing both
print scanners _and_ a badge system on every door?

-----New Stuff-----
Hi,
Partially I was thinking out loud, but since you ask, set the
print scanners to a zone system. If an alarm goes off, only the print
scanners in that zone activate. Still allows the guards to get into
the (rough) area quickly, yet slows down the people leaving the area
until the guards get there. Or, possibly, only put scanners on high
level doors. (No need for the front door, but maybe on each of the
R&D labs).

Mockingbird
Message no. 33
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:29:13 -0500
>You bet it is, and theres gob's of other nice "cable to gun" or just
>generally surpurflous exterior cable / conduit / hose pictures. Rumour
>has it that Man and Machine will give any extra +1 die for related tasks
>when using cyberware with gratuitious exterior cables.

*snrk* I like it, I like it. I know it's not real, but it's an interesting
notion for certain kind of campaigns, I'm sure.

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 34
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 09:22:47 +1000
Kelson writes:
> Actually, what you are saying is that the person would have to
> turn his/her
> head. I am saying that their *persona* turns its head. I'm not
> discussing
> the meatbod here. The decker doesn't actually turn his physical head (his
> consciousness is no more in his body than a Rigger who is in full-rig mode
> - i.e. not in command chair mode, etc).
>
> You may have meant the same thing, but referring to the person turning his
> head is not the same as referring to the persona turning its head.
>
> > So, to recap: turning your head IS the mental command for "rotate
> viewport
> > 30 degrees left".
>
> See above. :)

And see my above, Kelson... I said that the person uses the same mental
command to turn their own head as they would to turn their persona. They
don't think "turn my head", they just do it. (Correction: I don't think
"turn my head" anymore than I'm thinking "raise fingers, bring them down on
suitable letters on the keyboard in front of me to form this email message
to Kelson". I do not know that you do not give those explicit commands to
cause your body to do things, but I doubt it)

The ASIST hardware and software kick in, intercept the neural signals,
decide that the person is trying to turn their head, turns the head of the
persona, and then wipes the signal out so that the meat body doesn't turn.
But from the perspective of the user, they've turned their head, the same
way they would have done in the real world.

So, to recap for the THIRD time: Turning your head IS the mental command for
"rotate viewport 30 degrees left".

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 35
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 20:22:40 -0400
Robert Watkins wrote:

> Kelson writes:
> > Actually, what you are saying is that the person would have to
> > turn his/her
> > head. I am saying that their *persona* turns its head. I'm not
> > discussing
> > the meatbod here. The decker doesn't actually turn his physical head (his
> > consciousness is no more in his body than a Rigger who is in full-rig mode
> > - i.e. not in command chair mode, etc).
> >
> > You may have meant the same thing, but referring to the person turning his
> > head is not the same as referring to the persona turning its head.
> >
> > > So, to recap: turning your head IS the mental command for "rotate
> > viewport
> > > 30 degrees left".
> >
> > See above. :)
>
> And see my above, Kelson... I said that the person uses the same mental
> command to turn their own head as they would to turn their persona. They
> don't think "turn my head", they just do it. (Correction: I don't think
> "turn my head" anymore than I'm thinking "raise fingers, bring them
down on
> suitable letters on the keyboard in front of me to form this email message
> to Kelson". I do not know that you do not give those explicit commands to
> cause your body to do things, but I doubt it)
>
> The ASIST hardware and software kick in, intercept the neural signals,
> decide that the person is trying to turn their head, turns the head of the
> persona, and then wipes the signal out so that the meat body doesn't turn.
> But from the perspective of the user, they've turned their head, the same
> way they would have done in the real world.
>
> So, to recap for the THIRD time: Turning your head IS the mental command for
> "rotate viewport 30 degrees left".
>
> --
> .sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com

I have to throw my 2 cents in about this. I agree with you,
robert.watkins@******.com.

--
SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+ M-
Message no. 36
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:36:14 -0700 (PDT)
> > How about this, instead of a subdermal, each door has a
receiver, each ID badge a small transmitter (range 2-3 meters). The
badge constantly transmits a user id. When the door picks it up, it
crossreferences it, if the user has permission to go through the door,
it unlocks.
>
> One problem with this system is that it's too easy to get through
doors if you don't have a badge, provided you walk close enough to
someone who does. The badge-holder walks past a door and it unlocks for
a few seconds (the time it takes to walk in front of the door), and in
that time someone else can simply open it.
> Gurth@******.nl

IMNSHO, Gurth, this would not be a problem - not with technology at
that point in time. Again, look at the story I mentioned previously -
"Tailchaser" by Paul Hume, in the "Into the Shadows" Collection. See,
there, in the United Oil facility as I recall, these IDs and scanners
were not merely used to open doors. They were used throughout the
facility. If the security system detects a warmbody, it goes searching
for an ID badge. If it doesn't have a valid badge, then the alarm goes
off. In other words, no hiding behind someone with a badge and sneaking
through doors as they open them - each and every person has to have a
badge or they're busted. All doors have locks, but the locks are only
activated if an unauthorised person comes near them - or if it's a
secure area, in which case palmprint or retinal scans would be required
for anyone to get in. Everywhere else, authorised people can come and
go as they please, with no impediments from locked doors. And
unauthorised personnel are, to put it mildly, screwed, no matter where
in the facility they are.

Now does that sound scary, or what? Especially if the security system
is set to lock down any location (say, a single room or corridor) where
unauthorised personnel are detected, then flood it with knockout gas.
Your runners would have to think quick, to say the least.

*Doc' thinks for a second, then pokes Hunter's eyes out. "Don't look!
Don't look!"*
==Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow)

.sig Sauer
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 37
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 11:25:50 +0200
According to Rand Ratinac, at 19:36 on 20 Apr 99, the word on
the street was...

> IMNSHO, Gurth, this would not be a problem - not with technology at
> that point in time. Again, look at the story I mentioned previously -
> "Tailchaser" by Paul Hume, in the "Into the Shadows" Collection.
See,
> there, in the United Oil facility as I recall, these IDs and scanners
> were not merely used to open doors. They were used throughout the
> facility. If the security system detects a warmbody, it goes searching
> for an ID badge. If it doesn't have a valid badge, then the alarm goes
> off.

That would work, yes. What the original poster (I forgot who it was,
sorry) suggested, though, would be almost equivalent to simply leaving all
doors unlocked. Your/Paul Hume's idea would be much better to create a
secure facility.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Throwing fire at the sun
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 38
From: Iridios iridios@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 08:22:56 -0400
A
d
d
i
n
g

S Hunter, I specifically got the impression that you were not to
p read or remember Doc's message. If however it does not really
o matter, then go on with my apologies. :)
i
l
e
r

S
p
a
c
e

j
u
s
t

i
n

c
a
s
e

t
h
i
s

m
i
g
h
t

t
u
r
n

o
u
t

t
o

b
e

a

g
a
m
e

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

:)

Doc' wrote:

> IMNSHO, Gurth, this would not be a problem - not with technology at
> that point in time. Again, look at the story I mentioned previously -
> "Tailchaser" by Paul Hume, in the "Into the Shadows" Collection.
See,
> there, in the United Oil facility as I recall, these IDs and scanners
> were not merely used to open doors. They were used throughout the
> facility. If the security system detects a warmbody, it goes searching
> for an ID badge. If it doesn't have a valid badge, then the alarm goes
> off. In other words, no hiding behind someone with a badge and sneaking
> through doors as they open them - each and every person has to have a
> badge or they're busted. All doors have locks, but the locks are only
> activated if an unauthorised person comes near them - or if it's a
> secure area, in which case palmprint or retinal scans would be required
> for anyone to get in. Everywhere else, authorised people can come and
> go as they please, with no impediments from locked doors. And
> unauthorised personnel are, to put it mildly, screwed, no matter where
> in the facility they are.

Definately tight security, but not foolproof. The following idea is
not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers. If the system is designed
to look for warm bodies, it probably looks for a temperature range
that all the metahumans average. So as not to put too much "strain"
on the system, and to ignore anything that is too hot (such as a stew
pot at a company function) or too cold (maybe a dog [if it's temp is
out of the range, if not it needs an ID badge too ;)]). There are two
ways to spoof such a system, reduce the runners temp to outside of the
range (tough to maintain with high activity) or make the ambient temp
high enough to bring the difference down below the alarmed range.
Changing the temp shouldn't be too extremely difficult. A system as
complex as the one you described is most likely computer controlled a
decker could conceivably infiltrate (hired as cleaning staff or
something on the bottom rung of the corp ladder). Go in at the end of
the week, program the heating unit to slowly increase the temperature
to the necessary level over the weekend. Fewer people will be
working, reducing the chances of the change being noticed. Maybe by
the target day, people will be asking if it's a bit warm. Then when
"warm" bodies enter an area, the computer disregards them because they
are not warm enough.
As for palmprints and retinal scanners, those can be disengaged with
a sufficient electronics roll.


Iridios
"God does not roll dice"
-Albert Einstein
Message no. 39
From: Kate . liliths_childe@*******.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 06:56:06 PDT
>A
>d
>d
>i
>n
>g
>
>S
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>S
>p
>a
>c
>e
>
>j
>u
>s
>t
>
>i
>n
>
>c
>a
>s
>e
>
>t
>h
>i
>s
>
>m
>i
>g
>h
>t
>
>t
>u
>r
>n
>
>o
>u
>t
>
>t
>o
>
>b
>e
>
>a
>
>g
>a
>m
>e
>
>s
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>The following idea is
>not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers.

[snip]

>A system as complex as the one you described is
>most likely computer controlled a
>decker could conceivably infiltrate (hired as cleaning
>staff or something on the bottom rung of the corp ladder).

[snip]

Just a thought here...

If you've got a decker in the system, the *only*
reason to carry out an elaborate (remember the KISS
principle) plan would be if your decker couldn't
hack the alarm functions in the first place...

Get a new Decker...

But make sure you get a good price for selling your
old one out.

And make sure the old Decker is geeked because most
of the time, your worst enemies can have been your
old friends...

Kate, feeling ruthless today

_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Message no. 40
From: Kevin Langevin kevinl@******.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:14:01 -0400
Hi there! :) How are you? Haven't heard from you in ages... :)

-Kev

Kevin Langevin
Test Engineer
Citrix Systems, Inc.

Web www.citrix.com
e-mail kevinl@******.com
Tel 954-267-2990
Fax 954-267-3149



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kate . [mailto:liliths_childe@*******.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 9:56 AM
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: Datajacks and stuff...
>
>
> >A
> >d
> >d
> >i
> >n
> >g
> >
> >S
> >p
> >o
> >i
> >l
> >e
> >r
> >
> >S
> >p
> >a
> >c
> >e
> >
> >j
> >u
> >s
> >t
> >
> >i
> >n
> >
> >c
> >a
> >s
> >e
> >
> >t
> >h
> >i
> >s
> >
> >m
> >i
> >g
> >h
> >t
> >
> >t
> >u
> >r
> >n
> >
> >o
> >u
> >t
> >
> >t
> >o
> >
> >b
> >e
> >
> >a
> >
> >g
> >a
> >m
> >e
> >
> >s
> >p
> >o
> >i
> >l
> >e
> >r
> >
> >The following idea is
> >not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers.
>
> [snip]
>
> >A system as complex as the one you described is
> >most likely computer controlled a
> >decker could conceivably infiltrate (hired as cleaning
> >staff or something on the bottom rung of the corp ladder).
>
> [snip]
>
> Just a thought here...
>
> If you've got a decker in the system, the *only*
> reason to carry out an elaborate (remember the KISS
> principle) plan would be if your decker couldn't
> hack the alarm functions in the first place...
>
> Get a new Decker...
>
> But make sure you get a good price for selling your
> old one out.
>
> And make sure the old Decker is geeked because most
> of the time, your worst enemies can have been your
> old friends...
>
> Kate, feeling ruthless today
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
>
Message no. 41
From: Kama kama@*******.net
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Kevin Langevin wrote:

> Hi there! :) How are you? Haven't heard from you in ages... :)
>
> -Kev
>
> Kevin Langevin
> Test Engineer
> Citrix Systems, Inc.
>
> Web www.citrix.com
> e-mail kevinl@******.com
> Tel 954-267-2990
> Fax 954-267-3149
>

I'm fine . . . other than having to breathe smoke from the forest fires,
everything is cool here. The cats are . . .

Oh, wait . . . This wasn't intended for me was it? This was supposed to
be a private E-mail . .

Kama
Keeper of the Dice Bag from Hell (tm)
Message no. 42
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 11:16:22 EDT
In a message dated 4/20/1999 12:59:08 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
m0ng005e@*********.com writes:

> :Can you jack into someone
> :> else's jack to exchange thoughts/information?
>
> Erk- not really, unless you had soem way of outputting data they could
> comprehend. An encephlon (on both ends), or cyberlink, would allow it, as
> would something like subvocal mikes / subdermal speakers (or their
extrerior
> equvalent)- those would be real handy with optical scanning jacks.

Actually, after doing some looking and prying into the RA:S book, I believe
that with the ASIST Protocol thing built into the datajack, a
person-to-person peer-type port setup could be achieved. Now granted, you
wouldn't have all those nifty things that having a cyberdeck or cyberterminal
or whatever else hooked up could do. BUT, a language translation could be
setup. In this case, the language in question is "ASIST". Reading Minds I
still don't think could be done without some kind of cyber/computer something
and psychotropic related programming that would "influence" the person on the
"receiving end" to "talk about" the information so desired.

-K
Message no. 43
From: Iridios iridios@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:05:35 -0400
"Kate ." wrote:
>
> >A
> >d
> >d
> >i
> >n
> >g
> >
> >S
> >p
> >o
> >i
> >l
> >e
> >r
> >
> >S
> >p
> >a
> >c
> >e
> >
> >j
> >u
> >s
> >t
> >
> >i
> >n
> >
> >c
> >a
> >s
> >e
> >
> >t
> >h
> >i
> >s
> >
> >m
> >i
> >g
> >h
> >t
> >
> >t
> >u
> >r
> >n
> >
> >o
> >u
> >t
> >
> >t
> >o
> >
> >b
> >e
> >
> >a
> >
> >g
> >a
> >m
> >e
> >
> >s
> >p
> >o
> >i
> >l
> >e
> >r
> >
> >The following idea is
> >not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers.
>
> [snip]
>
> >A system as complex as the one you described is
> >most likely computer controlled a
> >decker could conceivably infiltrate (hired as cleaning
> >staff or something on the bottom rung of the corp ladder).
>
> [snip]
>
> Just a thought here...
>
> If you've got a decker in the system, the *only*
> reason to carry out an elaborate (remember the KISS
> principle) plan would be if your decker couldn't
> hack the alarm functions in the first place...
>
> Get a new Decker...

IMO, it would be easier to hack the enviromental system and get away
clean than it would be to hack the security systems.

Sometimes, the shortest path is not always a straight line.

Iridios
"God does not roll dice"
-Albert Einstein
Message no. 44
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 19:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
<BigSnip(TM)>
> Definately tight security, but not foolproof. The following idea is
not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers. If the system is designed to
look for warm bodies, it probably looks for a temperature range that
all the metahumans average.
<Snipples(TM)>

Errr...warmbodies was meant as a turn of phrase. I can see the system
utilising a motion sensor (again, tuned to relatively human-sized
creatures to stop bugs setting off alarms), a thermographic system as
you mentioned above, plus other forms of scanning. If you're going to
put in something this expensive, you're going to do it RIGHT - one form
of scanning would not be enough - two or three or even more would be
more likely.


> There are two ways to spoof such a system, reduce the runners temp to
outside of the range (tough to maintain with high activity) or make the
ambient temp high enough to bring the difference down below the alarmed
range. Changing the temp shouldn't be too extremely difficult.
<Snippola(TM)>
> Iridios

Thanks, Iridios.

Just one other thing I thought I should mention, also taken from a
movie. If you ARE dealing with a temperature-based system, the quickest
way to spoof that (if you have the equipment) is the method from "The
Saint". Val Kilmer had an enclosed bodysuit that could match its
exterior temperature to that of the surrounding air. In other words, he
became room temperature, which would, therefore, not set off any
alarms.

It'd get hot in there, though.

*"I hope that bodythuit bweatheth...I can't THTAND getting thweaty..."
==Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow)

.sig Sauer
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 45
From: Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 23:35:43 -0500
:Actually, after doing some looking and prying into the RA:S book, I believe
:that with the ASIST Protocol thing built into the datajack, a
:person-to-person peer-type port setup could be achieved. Now granted, you
:wouldn't have all those nifty things that having a cyberdeck or
cyberterminal
:or whatever else hooked up could do. BUT, a language translation could be
:setup. In this case, the language in question is "ASIST".

How useful a languge is that? AFAIK, experienceing a "wet record" from
somebody else is pretty confusing. Also, normal simsense does not include a
"cognitive" track, and requires propper equipment to pick up other tracks
(emotive, sensory, etc). So mental communication via normal simsense is a
unlikely thing. Also, I'd say the output of those R:AS assist converters is
pretty much just a crude version of a simsese recordings kinesthetic track-
that is all that is needed to control a persona, after all.
If you set up some sort of ASSIST filter that isolates the vocal codings
from the kinesthetic track, and coverts them into vocal coadings , or voacla
coadings into data / knowledge for the reciever, you basically have an
external cybercom link- which is a piece of gear in "Cyberpirates", it would
seem.

:Reading Minds I
:still don't think could be done without some kind of cyber/computer
something
:and psychotropic related programming that would "influence" the person on
the
:"receiving end" to "talk about" the information so desired.
:
:-K


That could probably be done with some of the psycho-manipulation gear
from Shadowbeat, one way or another, yes- if nothing else, by creating
simulated situations where they information would be recalled.

Mongoose
Message no. 46
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:11:02 EDT
In a message dated 4/22/99 12:12:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
m0ng005e@*********.com writes:

> How useful a languge is that? AFAIK, experienceing a "wet record" from
> somebody else is pretty confusing. Also, normal simsense does not include
a
> "cognitive" track, and requires propper equipment to pick up other tracks
> (emotive, sensory, etc). So mental communication via normal simsense is a
> unlikely thing. Also, I'd say the output of those R:AS assist converters
is
> pretty much just a crude version of a simsese recordings kinesthetic track-
> that is all that is needed to control a persona, after all.
> If you set up some sort of ASSIST filter that isolates the vocal
codings
> from the kinesthetic track, and coverts them into vocal coadings , or
voacla
> coadings into data / knowledge for the reciever, you basically have an
> external cybercom link- which is a piece of gear in "Cyberpirates", it
would
> seem.

Well, seeing as those Otaku can TALK to each other when in the Matrix ... I
would guess that means, the ASIST converter does, indeed, have vocal
record/playback capacity. All you have to do is take NORMAL ASIST recording
equipment, add in the overrides on the vocal cords, and then "try to talk"
... all the data on vocal-chord (etc) movements goes through the ASIST link
... but not to the OTHER guy's vocal chords, to a tiny virtual machine, that
mimics the _effects_ of said vocal organs.

The output of the virtual machine is then routed to the HEARING channel of
the ASIST input for the reciever.

OK, so maybe it'd take a small processor and a couple hundred MP. A Pocket
Secretary might just be able to handle it ...

Sean
GM Pax
Message no. 47
From: GMPax@***.com GMPax@***.com
Subject: Datajacks and stuff...
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:40:03 EDT
In a message dated 4/22/99 11:03:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
iridios@*********.com writes:

> "Kate ." wrote:
> >
> > >A
> > >d
> > >d
> > >i
> > >n
> > >g
> > >
> > >S
> > >p
> > >o
> > >i
> > >l
> > >e
> > >r
> > >
> > >S
> > >p
> > >a
> > >c
> > >e
> > >
> > >j
> > >u
> > >s
> > >t
> > >
> > >i
> > >n
> > >
> > >c
> > >a
> > >s
> > >e
> > >
> > >t
> > >h
> > >i
> > >s
> > >
> > >m
> > >i
> > >g
> > >h
> > >t
> > >
> > >t
> > >u
> > >r
> > >n
> > >
> > >o
> > >u
> > >t
> > >
> > >t
> > >o
> > >
> > >b
> > >e
> > >
> > >a
> > >
> > >g
> > >a
> > >m
> > >e
> > >
> > >s
> > >p
> > >o
> > >i
> > >l
> > >e
> > >r
> > >
> > >The following idea is
> > >not mine, I saw it on the movie Sneakers.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >A system as complex as the one you described is
> > >most likely computer controlled a
> > >decker could conceivably infiltrate (hired as cleaning
> > >staff or something on the bottom rung of the corp ladder).
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Just a thought here...
> >
> > If you've got a decker in the system, the *only*
> > reason to carry out an elaborate (remember the KISS
> > principle) plan would be if your decker couldn't
> > hack the alarm functions in the first place...
> >
> > Get a new Decker...
>
> IMO, it would be easier to hack the enviromental system and get away
> clean than it would be to hack the security systems.
>
> Sometimes, the shortest path is not always a straight line.
>
> Iridios
> "God does not roll dice"
> -Albert Einstein

IMO, it would be simple enough to have the security system monitor
environmental temperature independant of the enviromental control subsystem:
if the temperature crests a certain level, the enviroment systems reset to
default (IOW normal) levels for all settings, and the computer system
upgrades to the next alert level, as well as sending a "passive alert" to the
physical security assets on site: such an occurance would be a good sign
SOMETHING is wrong, after all.

If while in this heightened alert status, the same temperature shift occurs
AGAIN, full alert, all the bells, horns, sirens, whistles, and whatnot come
out of the woodwork and strive gallantly to deafen anyone and everyone within
earshot ... because it means a decker or frame is STILL manipulating the
enviromental control subsystem.

Alternately, BOTTLENECK the security _between_ enviromental SPU's and the
rest of the local matrix. :-)

Sean
GM Pax

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Datajacks and stuff..., 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.