| From: | Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Gearheads: The Nature of the Matrix and Simsense Players [VERY LONG and DETAILED!!] |
| Date: | Tue, 30 Nov 1999 21:17:25 -0800 |
> First off, I'd like to thank Tzeentch (Great Chaos Daemon of
> Change that he is) for his well-thought-out post on the nature of the
> Matrix and the realities of telecommunications. Now I'm going to tear his
> argument apart, but only in the nicest possible way.
Heheh. You find GW players in the wierdest spots... I cover your points then
go into a big long discussion on simsense and stuff, if you could care less
about the Matrix skip to the bottom and read that at least. You might want
to grab the Holy Tome of Shadowrun, Shadowbeat and compare what I say to
that.
> One thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is that "The
> Matrix" (and by that I mean the part that everyone sees and interacts
> with) is in and of itself a "virtual machine." But how, you ask, is such
> a thing possible? What kind of host could possibly run it all?
Ok, I'm assuming you're looking at the Matrix as one giant network, with
hosts and other machines essentially just being subnets?
> Every computer, router, hub, switch, and passbox maintained by the
> telecommunications industries collectively, that's what. Everything you
> "see" or "touch" or "hear" or interact with in the
Matrix is a
> representation of far more complex processes going on outside the virtual
> machine. You may not be able to spy actual data packets and see what they
> say, but it is entirely possible that the underlying network allows the
> virtual machine to show you a "stream" of data moving in or out of a given
> host.
Hmm, ok so you're saying the Matrix is a distributed architecture in that
almost everything connected to it becomes a part of the processing power? IE
when I boot my cyberdeck and log onto the Matrix I have a little "matrix
daemon" running in the background?
If not then how does this differ from the current internet? You could say we
all "touch" the internet in some way with our personal computers.
I don't buy the representation of system loads for reasons explained below.
> But you ask, "why ever would they do this?" Simple: the
> width/brightness/density of the stream may represent the overall data
> load passing to or from that host.
That's reasonable (and really no different from system monitoring software
now).
>This is a diagnostic/public service
> thing. It allows folks to easily see at a glance when a system is
> overloaded. It's like listening on the radio for the traffic report on
> your way home from work. If you know that something's jammed beforehand,
> you'll pick and alternate route.
Why go through the trouble at all of having the systems broadcast this at
all? Your own personal system can monitor this and display it just as well.
And the hosts don't have to waste power doing it for you.
>There are times that I as a user would
> have killed for the ability to know beforehand that the network traffic to
> a given site was so high that I'd have to wait eons for my
> requests/purchases to process. Further, there are times that I as a
> system administrator would have killed to have an easy visual
> representation of the load of my entire network ('cause let's face it,
> "top" and "load" can only go so far).
Heh, yes - but why bother? Just as easy to call up a simple network diagram
in your "field of view" showing chokepoints. It would be a LOT more accurate
then relying on trying to figure out what the Matrix metaphor was trying to
show.
> Can a decker get access to this data? Absolutely. How? Well,
> that's a little harder. I'll include the example that Tzeentch gave and
> work from there...
I'd follow this a bit better if you said the system sent out System
Diagnostic messages of some sort and the deckers equipment just rendered
that as "traffic" or whatnot. If he wanted more detailed info then what the
UMS gave him then he would pull up a report and see the raw info the
messages were sending - not the filtered stuff.
> > Look at this way (incredibly simplified)...Company A has a remote
> > observation platform that they receive telemetry from. It's not
important
> > enough o warrant a direct link so it's uses COTs cellular technology to
> > transfer the info over the Matrix.
>
> Excellent. A good example to start with.
>
> > All of it's data is routed to the companies local office where it goes
> > into their private network. This data is not "broadcasted" onto the
> > Matrix...
>
> Here's where we disagree. Look at the unification of voice,
> video, and data communication now. My cable company wants to give me
> internet access and a cellular phone. Tell me that we're not looking at a
> unification of technologies here. My ideal world has me having to only
> pay for *one* line into my house that takes care of all the crap that
> comes in or goes out. Easier to install, maintain, and troubleshoot.
> It's headed that way now, and there's no reason to think it won't continue
> in the future.
I think we diverged here on what I meant by "broadcasts". Remember earlier I
noted that there could be "public" broadcasts made by Matrix users and hosts
that everyone could receive (ie other peoples icons, the hostsite icons and
"location" etc. You could be sending on the Matrix (ie the network) but
since it's not "broadcast" you would have a LOT harder time finding it since
you would not see it with your Matrix metaphor translation program.
Essentially broadcast data is stuff everyone gets just by being "on" the
Matrix.
I'm not argueing you will not see a "mediawire" style port in the future.
Where you won't have a phone or cable line - just a jack that any
information system could use. Plug your stereo in and it talks to the house
network. Get on the net? That talks to the home server and routes you out to
the net (whether it uses a normal phone or whatever they do to get online in
SR). Stealing a jackpoint? You just steal that "houses" (or businesses)
already existing connection. Which could really blow if they have limited
access or bandwidth...
> Again, think of the Matrix as a virtual machine run as a user
> interface for the complicated vagueries of the telecommunications
> industry. The data from Company A's platform uses COTS cellular
> technology to communicate with the local broadcast tower, a tower which is
> also carrying voice, video, and data to every other cell phone, pager,
> pocket secretary, and cell modem in its area of coverage.
Yup, but you would not "see" it. You only see what updates and information
you receive. You could have a dreckhot Sensor program that allows you to
recognize a lot of traffic and analyze it WAY past what the average user see
though. ie you could look for and then have displayed a specific relay
stations traffic through your systems metaphor - ie you could have it look
like a point that glows depending on traffic that you can measure, etc.
> Were a decker
> to be observing the LTG that that tower belongs to, and were that LTG set
> up to show overall traffic loads, the decker would "see" an icon for that
> tower, and "see" a "stream" of data going to/from it.
This I dispute. It would be a blatant waste of even Shadowruns near-magical
bandwidth to show information of this type, much less advantageous for
whoever ran that tower to have the information available to begin with (you
have to have the hardware to send the info out, or a piece of software
running to do it..and for what end? You're sure not making money on it.).
You would not see overall system loads unless you set up YOUR system to
perform some sort of diagnostic function and display that in a way that you
liked. Just like the current internet makes such matters "invisible" you
would never notice them in the future either. You can just trust your Matrix
interface is automatically checking dataflow and picking the least congested
path when you "move". Its a waste of time and resources to have that
information broadcast to the Matrix as a whole.
>This doesn't do him
> a damn bit of good at this point, but he knows it's there and that it's
> active.
How do you propose one "sees" backbone architecture such as this?
Routers..ok I can see you displaying those since they are factored into the
host 'icon'. But a celltower or microwave link tower pretty much just relays
traffic. The Matrix just..IS..you would not see and would not want to see
the HALO relays floating over the city, celltowers, microwave links and all
the other "hard"components of the net. It's all prettyfied and everything
hidden.
> From the tower, the data packet will get rebroadcast and sent on
> its way, perhaps to another tower, perhaps to a receiving station that
> will send it along a land-line and further on its way, perhaps to a
> ground station that will beam it to a satellite where the signal will get
> bounced half-way across the world before entering Company A's home office.
Exactly, but that's all invisible and outside the "visibility" scope of the
LTG anyways. Your own client side software would have to determine how to
handle that.
> If that's not "broadcast on the Matrix" I don't know what is. Forget
> about different ports, because once everything's digital there's little
> point to it, and any decker worth his salt is going to be listening to
> every active port a router has anyway.
I suppose, in an network model where everyone is just a host on one
ubernetwork...maybe. But even shared lines can be secured. Just because you
can "see" all the computers on a cablemodem line as being on the same local
area network does not mean they can't secure their systems or perform
actions you can't see, even in promiscuous mode you only see what's on YOUR
network (IIRC) . You don't suddenly start seeing every piece of data flying
by "above" your current network. You can see traffic not addressed to you
though and sniff it...as long as someone on your network was a recipient
(your card just does not discard it). Someone help me out here though.
> > Would Joe Decker "see" this traffic going into the Company A building?
>
> That depends entirely on what the LTG is set up to show the casual
> observer. I'd say that the LTG would show a representation of overall
> load, but not specific data packets in particular.
I would not go so far as the LTG would broadcast anything other then updates
on items in it's "space". Why waste the bandwidth? Your own software can
figure that out (future version of "ping" and "traceroute".
> > In fact unless you had inside knowledge there would be no way for you
> > to easily see what was going on with this platform.
>
> Exactly, and you'll get no disagreement from me on this. You need
> to know of the existence of the observation platform before you have a
> hope in hell of intercepting its data. But then again, if you didn't know
> it existed, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
> > The data packets are routed to Company A so your service provider would
> > throw them out once it hit THEIR servers.
>
> Now. In 2060?
> Even if the system worked the same way (which is a long shot,
> IMHO), no one is arguing that you'll see the packets themselves, merely a
> virtual representation of them.
I could see YOUR client side system monitoring local system load and
displaying it. But I don't buy the idea that the host itself is handling
that information.
> > You would not even see the packets so you could not sniff them.
>
> Wrong again. You know there's traffic going to and from Company A
> from this remote platform. Set yourself up on a router between points A
> and B and listen in.
Exacty, it requires you get "between" the data somehow so you could be a man
in the middle. There ARE ways to potentially detect people doing this
however. The average joe decker coming from an illegal jackpoint tap from
Bobs Bar and Grill would have no hope of interecepting the traffic - even
though it's being sent through the "matrix".
> If you know what you're looking for, you just may
> find it. Yes, it involves hacking into a router maintained by the
> telecommunications company, but guess what - you've just made a "Tap
> Commcall" operation, using the security of the LTG or RTG's security
> rating, just like described in VR2.0.
I'd make the decker hack the system, not just perform some cheesy test. The
routers and databases are not public access. I'd make a decker hack the
total telecom system to even attempt a Tap Commcall in fact. He could leave
a backdoor or fake account. but it won't be automatic. And it could be
killed at any time.
> You're not hacking the platform or
> Company A's system, but you're listening in none the less. Granted, you
> need to know something about where the data is coming from and where it's
> going to in order to do this successfully, but that also is part of the
> process, and is reflected in rolling your Computer skill (i.e. spending
> time checking out various routers, running tracerouts on various packets,
> comparing sources and destinations, and narrowing down your search).
Agreed. you have to know it exists and have some background knowledge to
even attempt this though. Otherwise it would be like finding a nanite in a
haystack.
> > The connection would not necessarily be a standard commlink connection
> > (it uses it's own port to talk to the computer there)
>
> Say what? Whether it's a "standard" commlink connection or not,
> it's still travelling over commercial telecommunications hardware. If
> it's moving across a COTS cellular connection, it's a "phone call" of some
> sort. It doesn't matter what port it's bound for on Company A's end, as
> it still gets routed through the LTG's hardware.
The other program has to know how to talk to other programs (even the future
will use the standard network model no?). You have to have standards like
"ports" for programs to easily communicate between themselves. Why would
this change? They may not call them ports but there has to be some
communications channel between programs and systems that is documented and
standardized.
> > and would EASILY be secured via even simple encryption.
>
> Now you're talking. So sure, the decker figures out which routers
> are handling the traffic, and sets himself up to listen. He snags some
> packets that he's 99% sure come from this observation post. He looks at
> them. They're garbage. So he runs a high-rating decryption algorithm on
> them. Suddenly, he sees the video feed from the observation platform.
Well, assuming future encyption totally sucks ;) But it would be a drag for
the decker if everyone started using PGP version 66.3 and the GM saying
"Hmm, with current technology it will take your cyberdeck 10 _billion_ years
to crack that single packet. Did I mentione each packet used a different
randomized encryption method?" <decker player screams>
> > The only way you would be able to find out about the platforms data
would be
> > to either hack the Company A building and get the data as it comes in
(by
> > checking out the slave nodes)...
>
> ...Which we've decided is too hard...
>
> > ... or hack into the routers "upstream" of where you are so you could
> > possibly sniff its traffic (assuming you knew its net id code).
>
> Bingo! That's exactly what "Tap Commcall" does. And finding its
> "net id code" is part of the challenge.
Like hacking the telecom operators ... and since they RUN the Matrix...
> No one ever said it was easy.
> Now, I can already hear the other tech-heads saying, "Yeah, but
> what about sophisticated load-averaging routines that spread traffic among
> a bunch of different routers such that no two packets necessarily get
> there the same way?" My response it this: those kinds of switching
> routines are based on algorithms, and algorithms can be cracked. So yes,
> a decker may be simultaneously monitoring three or four or twelve
> different routers for different packets to try to assemble the video feed
> from this platform, but it's all taken care of in a single operation.
Ok, that sounds perfectly reasonable. To be REALLY evil have the corps send
all the data EXCEPT certain really important sequencing packets via some
other medium like satellite or even radio (packet radio) (hey its only a
little data so costs are low). THAT would really mess with the deckers heads
since no matter what the data would be corrupted. The loss in speed could be
acceptable for the increase in security.
> Why? Because I don't want to roll dice all damn day. And the level of
> complexity of a networks switching algorithm is directly proportional to
> its overall Security Rating/Profile, which is exactly what is used to
> make the decker's life difficult for this kind of operation. Wow. It's
> almost as if someone already thought this through...
Hmm, ok that's a good justification on both counts.
> > It's harder to justify the actual network that would have to be in place
> > for this, especially considering the incredibly volatile history of
> > Shadowrun, but it's just a game.
>
> Keep in mind that things have been pretty stable since the mid
> 2030's or so, and 30 years of technological advance goes a *long* way
> (especially considering that the "Internet" as we know it didn't exist in
> its current form 30 years ago).
Well that has some logical problems. Some of the negative factors are the
incredible balkanization of the world powers, lack of centralized control of
goverment and telecommunications, and a hostile political climate. Plus what
corp would fund a new network system (probably heavily damaged in the SAIM
guerrilla war and breakup of the US (to be NA specific here, rest of the
world has similar problems)? The telco giants are fighting for share or are
content with being monopolies for their own LTG/RTG so there is little
incentive to innovate, just evolve (look at the floundering attempts of the
current telco companies to shoehorn more bandwidth over (in some cases)
50-60 year old copper wire!
If you can come up with a way to explain this more power to ya! I don't
think we can say it was enlightened self-interest though :)~ But its a VERY
VERY minor quibble. And since I hate the default SR background it's a
non-issue for me.
> > And to maintain even a modicum of technical credibility
> > you would have to agree that routing algorithms in SR would be VERY
advanced
> > to keep network latency down and minimize bandwidth usage.
>
> See my above point.
>
> > You have to pay for the commlink services and it seems reasonable to say
> > objects will "broadcast" what they are upon connection to the Matrix
(ie
an
> > advanced form of Jini lets say). They will also have to have an
"address"
> > for the network so traffic can be routed to them (this wil no doubt be
> > dynamic much like a badass version of DHCP).
>
> I agree completely, and hacking this kind of subscription service
> is what setting up an illegal jackpoint is all about.
That could be an adenture all by itself. Especially if you kill off illegal
accounts for every sucessful Trace :)
> > I'm rambling but it all boils down to VERIFICATION. In the base SR books
as
> > presented there is no verification of anything. Shadowbeat (the Holy
Book of
> > Shadowrun IMHO) covers this a bit but not much. At least in CP you pay
for
> > your net service, life in SR is pretty good if no deckers pay for their
> > service (and I can't see the Corps allowing that).
>
> 2600, anyone? There are lots of ways to get services for free,
> exploiting loopholes, harware problems, or bugs.
Well yes but security holes close VERY fast even now (Microsloth
notwithstanding), especially in the fast-forward 2060s. You can't use the
2600 hertz tone to sieze phone trunks anymore (that's the origin of the 2600
name..). And good luck trying to use last months security exploit on a
properly administered network. SOTA is a beotch now!
Of course sometimes a patch just opens another vulnerability.. And so it
goes. Ain't progress grand?
> Part of the fun is
> figuring out how to make it all work. Granted, some of those loopholes
> will get shut down, hardware will get fixed, and software will get
> patched. But there will be new ones to take their places. It's the
> nature of the beast. I know at least one person who has an AOL account
> that is not in their name and (as near as I can tell) gets billed
> "elsewhere". How many people do you know who get premium cable or
> satellite channels for free?
Not that many anymore :) Well more power to your account boosting friend on
AOL (I'm willing to bet he just hijacked someones account or is using a
stolen credit card). The difference between our good AOL "l33t d00d" and a
decker is that the decker is active. Things are looking for him and if he is
found bye-bye account. Ask your "l33t" friend to go run a portscanner on a
.mil or .gov site and see how long his account lasts.
> > <shrug> Who built this network anyways? The fiberoptic fairies? Maybe
the
> > immortal elves did it or something or they used magic. It seems pretty
> > amazing with the general lack of centralized control or reason to
upgrade
> > the network (not to mention the expense!!!) that the Matrix is so
drekhot to
> > begin with! transmitting everything from simsense to live trideo feeds??
To
> > millions of users all over the world at incredible speeds with no
> > congestion? Now THAT is magic chummers.
>
> No one ever said that there was no congestion, nor that there
> weren't local differences or problems. But that's the joy of "UMS
> Default." It's a standard that everyone supports, sort of like PPP or
> TCP/IP on a much larger scale. It's infinitely better for the consumer to
> have a product that allows for variance but conforms to some underlying
> standard. That's why cellular service here in the US sucks ass compared
> to other countries. We still don't have a standard, so everybody and
> their brother is doing something different, and your coverage or services
> may be limited outside your area. In Japan, for example, they've had
> web-surfing, text paging, e-mail, and even two-way video available to
> cellular customers for years now. In Detroit, text messaging is all the
> rage. No video. No e-mail. But the Japanese government stepped up to
> the plate and actually set up an industry standard. That hasn't happened
> here in the US yet, and our capabilities suffer because of it.
This I can agree 150% with.
> The differences between the various RTG's and LTG's is more likely
> one of convenience, service, access speed, and user "perks" than one of
> underlying incompatibility. Maybe the Seattle RTG shows "streams"
> of light representing data moving around as a user-friendly way of
> monitoring load. Maybe the Tir RTG doesn't, becuase they think it's a
> potential breach security.
Problem here. Why would the future net be even less efficient then the
current internet? Think about it, what's easier, just going to a site and it
does matter where in the world it is - or having to hop around LTGs and RTGs
to get where you are going?? How do you sort that little monster out? Since
in SR it sure seems you have to do that to get to sites outside your LTG...
Perhaps its a symptom of the balkanized powers?
Why would every RTG/LTG be different? Talk about a waste of resources! If
City A has it's own "theme" and so does City "B" thats a lot of wasted
processor cycles handling the special effects..and that means more bandwidth
for the hapless user. Especially if hes from another RTG!
In my view of the Matrix this could happen by there being a lot more global
broadcasted traffic to send "special effects" information. This might not be
appreciated by some users though (damn, Spokane has so much glitter from all
the flying dolphin contructs it slows the entire LTG down!!). Just assign a
bandwidth penalty to LTGs who show off too much. And no you can't just "not
see it" since it's being sent along with all the other information you DO
want.
> > And again, the matrix is not some astral plane that data travels through
and
> > your decker is not moving "anywhere" to see the data transmissions.
>
> What you do or don't see in the Matrix is purely up to how the
> LTG, RTG, or host's virtual environment is encoded. And *everything* is a
> metaphor, which is something that people seem to be forgetting. No, it's
> not an "astral plane for data," but actions and perceptions there are
> abstractions of what's going in in a massively complicated
> telecommunications network. If the LTG is set up to show beams of light
> to represent point-to-point traffic, you're going to see it. If it's not,
> you won't. Either way, you can't just run over and snag a data packet and
> look at it.
> Or maybe you can. Maybe running over and snagging a datapacket
> from the stream is a directly analogous metaphor to listening in on a
> router and decrypting the local traffic.
<shrug> I don't see how actually performing some metaphoric action is all
that more efficient for certain tasks then a keyboard. For many things it
will be a GODSEND but for something like file maintenance? A metaphor
implies simplifcation of data, I don't want to be doing account security in
a metaphor enviroment unless it's drekhot - probably be easier to use a
simple dialog box and dials to do that sort of thing.
> "Metaphor" is the operative word. What your decker's icons look
> like and what his or her actions are perceived by others as is virtually
> meaningless in the overall scheme of things, as it *should* be. What's
> important are your program ratings and the ratings of the hosts you're
> trying to spoof, hack, trace, snoop, eavesdrop, or crash.
Agreed. Like a big game of Asherons Call, where what others SEE you doing
has no relation to what you did to perform that action.. it could be their
software interpreting your actions in fact.
> However, the importance of the metaphor is that it makes things
> intuitive and user-friendly. It's much easier to have people pull a
> virtual book off a virtual shelf than to teach them how to retrieve
> backups from a bank of DLT's, trust me. Just as a mouse is more intuitive
> than a keyboard or arcane line commands, a simsense environment will be
> more intuitive than a flatscreen keyboard-and-mouse environment. Speaking
> is more intuitive than typing, and it's easier to have someone "speak"
> than write an e-mail message. "User" is a five letter word. It starts
> with a silent "L", so anything that makes it easier to use a computer
> environment is less hassle for the sysadmins. As our technology
> increases, we'll have more and more capabilities that will make the way we
> work now more and more obsolete.
True, but it can make simple tasks MUCH more complex. It's the difference
between UNIX and Windows. Generally you can do the same things but you have
to perform more "user friendly" steps in Windows then UNIX.
> > Can I see a really advanced VR? Sort of, it's not entirely logical.
After
> > all, can you just imagine what a productivity sink the Matrix would be?
I'd
> > get nothing done at work if I could jack in and get a body massage from
> > Jennifer Love Hewitt clones!!
>
> I have only this to say: I *could* surf the web for bizarre German porn
> and masturbate at my desk all day - but I don't. I have a job to do, and
> I do it well. It requires my attention, and my company wouldn't put up
> with that kind of major slacking. A virtual environment will be no
> different, and I'd imagine that "Big Brother" corps would take steps to
> keep that kind of behavior to a minimum. Companies are already taking
> steps to fight off what they call "cyberslacking" today.
The US goverment takes this VERY seriously, right down to some locations
preventing you from even moving icons around! But no matter what you do the
Dilberts and Wallys of the world WILL find a way to make all those gee-whiz
gadgets a bit less productive then you thought. They may not be surfing the
Matrix but they could be playing "Virtual Elf Bowling 2060" in full
simsense, and since they are jacked in it would be hard to visually see what
they were doing. And you have to draw the line somewhere with surveillance
tech - you can only have so many knowbots and filter programs prowling
around before it hurts the people that are working as much as the
cyberslackers.
> > Not to mention many task would take needless amounts of time if you had
> > to virtually perform actions to do them.
>
> Here's where you're getting caught up in taking the Matrix
> literally again. Actions you perform are *metaphors* for what you're
> really doing. Further, virtual actions are performed at the speed of
> thought. As soon as I think about opening my mailbox, *boom*, my virtual
> hand reaches over and does whatever the interface I'm using requires it to
> do. Very complicated actions can be simplified to very small virtual
> actions (a la molecular modelling today), and simple virtual actions need
> not be any more complicated than their real-world counterparts.
Certain actions would get a lot simpler, I'm not disputing the utility of
building molecules by hand and the like. I just don't buy the "Golly Gee,
it's in 3d and with simsense!! I'm SOOOOO much more productive now!"
attitude from the books. That's bogus.
Whether I reach out a hand and delete a file or select it and delete it from
a keyboard matters little and is not much more complex (especially since the
average level of computer literacy in the future will be LIGHTYEARS beyond
the Pointy-Haired Bosses of today (you'll always have throwbacks though).
You won't suddenly be faster or more "l33t" just because you crank your
ASIST into the danger zone.
> > Then we get into the whole Black ICE boondoggle and why a decker REALLY
> > gets a "reaction" bonus for having his simsense turned up yadda yadda.
>
> I agree totally. The vaguery here is the precise nature of
> Direct Neural Interface in the Shadowrun world. We know that thinking it
> makes it so, and that the brain's impulses are translated consistently,
> coherently, and consciously into virtual actions, but just how this is
> done requires us to suspend our disbelief and just go with it. But once
> that initial suspension of disbelief is made, the rest follows pretty
> naturally.
Well except for the background history (which I think is incredibly dumb) I
think Shadowrun is the best thought-out cyberpunk game to ever hit the
market. Too bad about the relative lack of "runner" commentary in the new
books. That really helped to figure out how things worked in the future.
Maybe if we had shadowcomments in the VR 2 book we would have less items to
talk about!
That's always a thought, a Plastic Warriors style Matrix book. We could beat
whatever cheesy Target: Matrix book they make into the ground :)
> Anyway, it's important to remember that what deckers (or
> legitimate users for that matter) "experience" in the Matrix is all
> illusory and representative of something that is mind-bogglingly complex.
I see it as being as complex as the user wants since all the "visualization"
is client side. Deckers just happen to run everything in Level 10 experience
mode where the average user would only see commonly visited hosts, some
information databases and a search engine or three. Not to mention deckers
have better diagnostic tools and utilities (Sensor).
> The computers that run the tellecommunications industry, the computers
> that run various corporations, etc, all have some interface, and they can
> make that interface anything they like. It's the whole point behind
> "sculpted" systems. Nothing is exactly what it seems in the Matrix, and
> exceedingly complicated actions are metaphorically translated into simple
> virtual tasks for ease of use.
Sculpted systems..ahh a favorite topic of mine.. So they look nice...but
they make everything
A) Non standard - you train someone in a Mitsuhama system and they will be
TOTALLY lost in a UMS system. Nothing works the same. And in a
culture/society that thinks of everything as symbols with no understanding
behind them (this is covered in many of the Shadowrun books) you could
easily be stuck in your little metaphor for system operations.
B) Take a LOT of resources to make; it's non-standard so you have to train
people to work with it, make your own development tools, and possibly even
new administration tools.
Not to mention the insane bandwidth such a system would take, how older
cyberdecks would be compatible, and what would happen if you just turned off
all the extra data for representing the sculpted system (there is NO WAY it
would "force" you to see things its way, sorry). I look at sculpted systems
like I look at sites with a lot of animated GIFs or Flash animations. Of
course you might be VERY tempted to see the sculpted system as it was
intended (taking the insane bandwidth hit)...otherwise you might not see
anything!!
Sculpted systems present data in their own way and it does not have to be in
a UMS format that your cyberdeck could translate. I could see some sculpted
systems doing both, having bare-bones UMS representation and also the
sculpted material "on-top". You would either need a special "plugin"
or
possibly (evil GM mode) a hardware "dongle" that would need to be attached
to your computer. See why they are so popular in 2060? You can block people
out just by using your own non-proprietary standards. The AOL of 2060 I
could see doing this so only "their" user can use AOL features.
The following shows my views on simsense, the matrix, and sculpted systems.
-------------WARNING, IN CHARACTER DISCUSSION FOLLOWS-----------
*****But waittasec! Your deck does all the translation for the signals!! And
it's all simsense!*****
"Wrong chummer, if the Matrix was set up in a constant realtime simsense
feed nothing would work beyond a slow crawl."
"Instead your deck simply has a "library" of pre-recorded simsense
"sensations" stored in it that are played in various orders and strengths to
simulate reality at least partially. Think of it like the themes you use on
your computer. You could download "theme packs" of these simsense libraries
just like you download wallpaper and sounds for your computer now. There are
standard UMS "triggers" for simsense play but anyone can make their own
triggers and have it play a sensation or some other action (auditory alarm
if storage falls below 5Mp for example)."
*****But what about sim-whorehouses and other fun things I keep hearing
about? Or watching simsense shows?*****
"Thought you would never ask chummer! Well sure you have these
pre-recorded sensations but it's never as good as the real thing of course.
Even the more..errrr.."exotic" <cough> simsense themes get tired after a
while. Remember these prerecorded sensations are usually below even baseline
resolution. Would not want cheap cyberdecks replacing simsense players would
you??"
"Ok, back to the subject. Well if you enter a sim whorehouse or say a
pay-to-experience event you have a few options. For the bandwidth or system
impaired you could get special "plug-ins" that are essentially extensions to
your decks standard capabilities to play their own downloaded simsense
samples. Unlike the built-in samples (which are factored into your deck and
do not take up "space") you have to download the plugin and possibly another
library of samples -just to use their freakin' service!! This is for the
weeflerunners and UCAS Online users only chummer. Strictly low end."
"Now if you're a SOTA drekhot cyberdeck owner with bandwidth to burn you
can get the real deal! Yup, you can open a direct channel and experience
anything up to what your decks ASIST can handle, using your cyberdeck just
like a glorified simplayer! Cheap decks may struggle with baseline
recordings but any decker worth his optical chips has tweaked his unit or
ripped a good ASIST out of a commercial simsense unit and uses that. You
have a good enough deck and bandwidth you could potentially download raw
"wet" simsense impressions!"
"The good stuff ain't free though chummer. You pay by the second in a lot
of places and the better the quality the more you pay! Even script-kiddies
may be able to afford some simsense fun if they stick with the low-bandwidth
prepackaged drek. Like fine wine the good stuff will cost you."
"As to whether it could be dangerous..well no more dangerous then the
edgier commercial simsense recordings...take THAT for what it's worth
chummer."
*****Hey, I thought that's how that "Black ICE" stuff worked?*****
"You up past your bedtime kid? Black ICE is something the trid shows use
to scare away decker wanna-bes. You can't force an open simsense link and
only the truly sickest user would have a set of samples that could actually
harm him. If anything the safety toggles would kick in. So your mythical
Black ICE could not hit your "Open File" sample and jack it to Level 10000
strength. Does not work that way."
"Yeah, yeah, I've seen the stories about drek like "Black-Hammer". Listen
kid it's all bogus. You have a lot more things to worry about then getting
your brain fried by a program. Like them tracing your sorry hoop and sending
the not-so-friendly Lone Star chappies over to say hello."
"And unlike in that cheap "Netrunner in 2020" trideo thriller there are
no
programs that can make your deck explode, your house start on fire, or wipe
your mind. That show makes me vomit on my deck whenever I see it... Those
little 'Rache Bartmosse' dolls should all be burned in the same hellfire
that Pokemon 2060: Return of Pikachu belongs in. But I digress..."
*NOTE: I personally don't use Black ICE that affects simsense feeds because
I think it's lame, YMMV. And yes I think the Cyberpunk 2020 netrunning
system is absolutely pathetic.
*****What about home simsense players?*****
"Most standalone simsense players are pretty 'dumb' as far as
computer-controlled electronics go. The ASIST hardware is expensive enough
without tacking on more components. If you want to surf the matrix get a
real computer..."
"Most decent simsense players (unlike my crappy Fuchi Sim-O-Rama 300) have
a standard mediawire connection that can connect to the Matrix. Most are
about as versatile as a brick as far as getting anything done on the Matrix
(no email even!). Usually they can only consult a local directory (for the
REALLY bad ones they only look for databases maintained by their
manufacturer) and display a listings of available simsense entertainment
options as well as their costs (if any) and requirements. "
"These 'requirements' are usually pretty basic. The average user does not
want to hear technical reasons why they can't watch Neil the Ork Barbarian
in no-drek full-on simsense glory. The directory simply compares your
simsense deck type to an internal listing and displays a three color icon
showing "compatibility" for the listing. As you might have guessed this is
Red=Not compatible, Yellow=May experience problems, Green=Compatible."
"You COULD modify your players identifier to show it is another (usually
more advanced) type but this is highly discouraged (even by me!). At best
the feed may feel a little "off" and at worse you could experience something
that feels like your intestines are coming out of your eyeballs (ouch that
brings back memories..). So take it from me chummers, keep your intestines
where they are and play it safe."
"Most simsense players have a small cache that they use to buffer incoming
simsense data and other mundane functions you could care less about. Well
this little space in your player is also used to load those same cheap
"plug-ins" that some sites have your cyberdecks download. Hey, it's all the
same ASIST standardized crap so whether its on a simsense deck or a
cyberdeck it's all the same. Obviously their may be different plugin
versions for different decks. This used to be a big problem a few years back
when the new simsense standards were still shaking out, Fuchi produced
simrecordings needed plugins that only worked (by sheer coincidence!) on
Fuchi players. This has pretty much disappeared though. Greed is a wonderful
lure to work out standards."
"So, if needed, the player will download the plugin (you may not even
notice this at all) and then you start getting simsense fed direct into your
little maggot-infested brain. In most cases the plugins are there to "tweak"
the incoming feed into a better quality signal (compression makes for a
"dull" simsense feed). If choosing between a feed with a plugin and one
without, usually you want the plugin. It just feels a lot better, ya know?"
***** But what about simsense samples and the other stuff you talked about
above?*****
"Boy, you're not very smart are you? <display_sigh>."
"Most simsense players don't need to play around with things like simsense
samples - 99.9% of the time you turn the unit on, surf to the feed you want
and let the good feelings come rolling in. Even the cheapest of cheap decks
does not use prerecorded impressions anymore. You only find that drek on the
earliest decks and some of the knockoff units being shipped out the PacRim.
These little beasts usually use REALLY low quality ASIST rigs that look like
overclocked versions of what you'll find on a Fisher Price "My First
Cyberdeck". Combined with some cheap silicon memory then can emulate a real
simsense player...barely."
"These cheap units use a software filter to analyze an incoming simsense
stream and pick out the closest sensations it has in its library. It uses
all sorts of tricks like multiplexing sensations together to emulate the
"real" feed. Needless to say this is lacking to a GREAT extent. But they are
VERY cheap and if you can afford a meal at McHughes you can pick one of
these up from some backalley pawnshop."
"Of course these things can be..urm...less then user friendly. Expect to
feel vertigo, nausea, phantom pain and the joy of less-then-effective RAS
cutuots on these things too. And that's just to get started! You don't even
WANT to know what kind of mishmash of sensations you can get if you try to
watch a high-end simsense program or the software filter cannot handle your
favorite programs specific combination of feelings..."
*****And sculpted systems are essentially using their own custom simsense
libraries?*****
"Well, among other things. Usually nonstandard simsense is just one of the
differences. In some of the REALLY bizarre sculpted systems they use
realtime generated simsense feeds for system operation. Why they waste all
that bandwidth is beyond me! But it does pretty much limit system use to
local users due to system load and reaction penalties/lag from non-local
clients."
"Most sculpted systems are not quite so freakish though. In most cases
they want you to load their own little filter program and simsense library.
The filter program is needed for you to "see" their iconography. Most don't
send out standard UMS compliant system information so you may either have to
resort to using their filter, designing your own based on theirs or doing
things the old fashioned pre-UMS way."
"Not related to simsense per se is that some of the higher-end sculpted
systems (I'm not talking of Mom and Pops so-called "sculpted systems" limit
access through their utilization of nonstandard protocols. In many they have
a standard UMS compliant section with limited capability and another layer
on top of that with their own sculpted code. Without being able to interpret
their data you can't do JACK chummer. You have to do things THEIR way. The
UMS standards for pulling files, opening datastores, etc won't work in most
sculpted systems. If you're unfamiliar with the system you're out of luck.
And a lot of the operations you won't be able to emulate by watching other
visibile users either, not that easy. Don't expect any but the best Sensor
program suites to help either - those rely on UMS complient system calls and
exploits to work."
"An even nastier variation of sculpted systems are what I call "two-tier"
or "cloudy" systems. These are hosts that have both UMS and sculpted code
running (not necessarily on the same servers, but in the same Matrix
"environment"). The UMS part could be perfectly open, drek - your local
department store could be a cloudy system. Unless you knew what to look for
everything would appear normal. But for someone who could see the sculpted
code things would look a lot different. Sometimes it's the same as UMS with
sculpted code "on top" as a special effect. But in some of the wierder corp
security models you use an open "boring" host as a cover for the secure
portion. Sounds wierd? Read on!"
"These cloudy systems usually use encrypted packets that you won't be able
to do anything with anyways. The corps outfit their systems either with
software keys (for the cheapskates) or hardware keys or dongles (little
pieces of hardware that you attach to your deck) for the paranoid. These are
"black boxes" that do all the decryption/encryption for you. Needless to
sa,y they are NOT easy to get ahold of. Not to mention if they find one
missing they can invalidate that specific unit. On top of the _that_ the
keys expire after a set time unless they are "refilled" by a master key
server (usually the corps most secure server that is only online for moments
to send out key updates then drops offline). This way even if you DO know
the system is running special code there is nothing you can do about it!"
"This sort of setup may seem really lame, but they can prevent authorized
users from seeing the "front" site as easy as they keep you from seeing the
juicy site. If only the sysadmins know it can be a pretty good measure of
security. When was the last time you suspected the local V-Mall of being a
front for Fuchis Biowarfare Research Division?"
*****You said some sites require simsense links to operate, could they use
'Black ICE' effects on you?*****
"A good question actually. Unless you are a truly clueless chummer you
don't make your ASIST any "hotter" then you need to. Contrary to common
belief, experiencing the Matrix at better then real intensity does NOT make
you a faster or better decker. Only the truly clueless believe that. Are you
a better musician just because you blast your instruments louder?"
"Technically if you turned off the safety cutoffs for your ASIST (such as
if you were recently tuned to the new California Hot simshow and forgot to
turn the switch back to on) you could really get fragged by some sneaky sims
ense code. But it's no different then juicing your ASIST up and getting
knocked out by random static and interference (those safety blocks are for
YOUR protection). The switch is usually a manual one so a malevolent program
could not turn it off (remember cutting out your safety limits are not
allowed and in some jurisdictions is ILLEGAL so it's not standard to begin
with)."
"Now, if the site in question used some wierd realtime Full-X simsense
feed and you played along you could seriously take some damage. But if that
happens..well I have no compassion for you since you could have turned the
resolution down to that of a baseline sim - it's doubtful they would use the
extra simsense information for more then window dressing."
"REALLY REALLY worried about black ICE? <display_big sigh> Well then run
a filter program like those cheap import sensedecks use. Or buffer, then
downsample the simsense feed to smooth it out and block out nonstandard
information. Any variation of those subliminal killer programs should work
for you. Now stop watching Netrunner and get back to reality."
*****What about psychotropic ICE?*****
"Hmm. This is another boogyman on the Matrix. But one that could very well
exist. I've never seen anything like it but you never know."
"For one thing it could be used on any sculpted system or even a UMS
system that you were getting live simsense information from. Remember even
UMS can have realtime simsense, though usually you need to download a plugin
since its not really a part of the UMS spec and everyone handles it
differently.."
"In this case the psychotropic ICE (psychoICE from now on) could be very
subtle and use low level harmonics in the simsense signal to cause you no
end of problems. This is touchy though since no two simsense units are
identical and even minor changes to configuration and chipset can have
marked influence. As a general rule psychoICE is used in conjunction with
other, more mundane security features. Once the system detects you, they
then begin feeding harmful harmonics into the simsense feed, simply rolling
through the possible exploits one by one until one works (they hope). This
may or may not work and the ICE has no way of finding out."
"This sort of thing is VERY hard to detect and fight simply because the
modulations look like random noise and are thrown out by the ASIST as
garbage..until the ICE gets a hit on your ASIST and it causes some
funkyness. For those systems that require a plugin or "loader" to receive
the feed they can be a lot more offensive. Usually the loader will secretly
monitor your mental state through the DNI and if the psychoICE gets a hit
(causing a minor but detectable change in brain function) it will
concentrate on that exploit and really start laying it on thick. You could
turn off or kill the plugins but that might mean you were unable to properly
operate on that host."
"The low level stuff may give you a really bad headache or other minor
psysiological problem from the distorted sensory information; but the hard
stuff..well there is where reality ends and your nightmare begins chummer.
No amount of pretty scenery or drekhot interface is worth becoming a zombie
chummer. They don't even need to hurt you, just warp your perceptions enough
to let the trace programs track you down and the hunter killer drones to
home in on your meatbody."
*****In Netrunner I can prevent a trace by moving from RTG to RTG before
hacking a site.*****
"HAHAH. Only on the trideo...."
"In reality that will do JACK to help you evade trace programs. Remember
that you are not GOING anywhere when you move around the Matrix. Your
perceptions may change but you jackpoint does not. To put it another way
your "silver cable" representing your connection goes straight from you to
your jackpoint, you can't 'thread' it across the planet."
"Still not getting it? Ok. To use a 20th century allegory doing the
Mexican Jumping RTG trick would be like visiting a succession of webpages
all over the world and then expecting to outwit goverment attempts to ID you
when you then attacked their servers. If I visit RTG A and then travel to
it's LTGs 1 through 3 my datatrail will go from my current location (LTG #)
up through the RTG to my home RTG to my home LTG. Golly you think they have
to trace each step! Uhm nope chummer, just illustrating an example. It's a
lot easier to trace then that. That's why you use Masking programs, the
datatrail is easy to follow once they get a lock on you."
"This is why if I flit from RTG A to B then C then D, and then back to A
and drop to an LTG to attack a system my path still only leads from that
LTGs RTG right to my home RTG. It does NOT still travel through B,C, or D."
"Got it? Now burn your Netrunner tapes and books referring to such obvious
tripe."
"Well playtimes over. Same bat time same bat channel!"
******Huh?*****
"Never mind...kids today...."
Kenneth
PS: Make a 3rd Edition Shadowbeat!!!!! If FASA won't I will! :)
