Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Peter Mikulsky PeterMikulsky@********.de
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 22:31:32 +0200
Hi folks!

I was flipping through my Matrix book in order to create a NPC with a C2
deck. From SR3 p.207 "All utilities must be kept in storage memory...." what
makes sense but in Matrix on p.56 i read ".... must contain the following
elements: MPCP, persona programs, ASIST circuitry, I/O Speed and active
memory." Why is storage memory not mentioned? When storage memory IS needed
then there are C2 decks really obsolete because you have to use headware
memory (essecne cost: Mp : 300) for stoarge the utilities. That makes no
sense, or did I miss something?

Thanx for assistance.

Peter
Message no. 2
From: Tzeentch tzeentch666@*********.net
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:08:37 -0700
From: "Peter Mikulsky" <PeterMikulsky@********.de>
> I was flipping through my Matrix book in order to create a NPC with a C2
> deck. From SR3 p.207 "All utilities must be kept in storage memory...."
what
> makes sense but in Matrix on p.56 i read ".... must contain the following
> elements: MPCP, persona programs, ASIST circuitry, I/O Speed and active
> memory." Why is storage memory not mentioned? When storage memory IS
needed
> then there are C2 decks really obsolete because you have to use headware
> memory (essecne cost: Mp : 300) for stoarge the utilities. That makes no
> sense, or did I miss something?

You missed "Note that headware memory (p. 298, SR3) can be used for both
active and storage memory. Other linked memory sources may also be used for
storage memory (but not active memory"

Kenneth
"Targeting people who are less internet savvy than current AOL subscribers
may sound like a great strategy, but we have yet to see if those people
actually exist."
-BBSpot
Message no. 3
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 20:07:33 -0400
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:08:37 -0700 "Tzeentch" <tzeentch666@*********.net>
writes:
> Kenneth
> "Targeting people who are less internet savvy than current AOL
> subscribers
> may sound like a great strategy, but we have yet to see if those
> people
> actually exist."
> -BBSpot

Look on Web TV :-)


Vocenoctum
<http://members.xoom.com/vocenoctum>;

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sun Mar 18 16:05:06 2001
I have a tiny Matrix doubt, from the last session I GM'ed.

The team's decker was poking around a farily tight Draco
Foundation host in search of information. At one point, she had both
Killer and Trace IC after her at the same time.

Then the killer strikes and dumps her before the Trace has a
chance to make its first "attack". What happens? Can the trace IC track
her, or not? At the time I ruled that it wouldn't be able to, I just
wanted to know if this is right or not.

--
Bira <ra002585@**.unicamp.br>
All your base belong to us!
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott W)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sun Mar 18 17:05:02 2001
> Then the killer strikes and dumps her before the Trace has a chance
to make its first "attack". What happens? Can the trace IC track her,
or not? At the time I ruled that it wouldn't be able to, I just
wanted to know if this is right or not.

Seems okay. If the Trace IC had gotten a chance to attack and then
gotten any successes, it would have switched to its location cycle.
When the decker got dumped it probably would have had enough time to
find her. But since it was still in its hunting cycle, I don't think
the fact that her datatrail was still there should matter. After all,
her persona was gone.

-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Sven De Herdt)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sun Mar 18 17:50:01 2001
> Then the killer strikes and dumps her before the Trace has a
> chance to make its first "attack". What happens? Can the
> trace IC track
> her, or not? At the time I ruled that it wouldn't be able to, I just
> wanted to know if this is right or not.

No, it couldn't especially since the decker's icon already went off-line and
at that point the Trace wouldn't really have any datatrail to hook onto
anymore.

The only exception is when the icon gets dumped by Black IC, at which point
the connection remains intact.

-sven ;)
--
Message no. 7
From: honken101@********.net (Fredrik Holmqvist)
Subject: Matrix Question!
Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 23:29:10 +0200
I am way too used to the first and 2nd edition way to draw a system map. Do
i even put a "slave" module in there or are they controlled from a host, so
there is no need to mark it on the system map?

/Honken
Message no. 8
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Matrix Question!
Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 19:51:00 -0400
At 05:29 PM 5/9/2004, Fredrik Holmqvist wrote:
>I am way too used to the first and 2nd edition way to draw a system map.
>Do i even put a "slave" module in there or are they controlled from a
>host, so there is no need to mark it on the system map?

Under Third Edition, there's no need to draw system maps at all. The only
issue is wether the device in question is controlled from the particular
host the character is on.

--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 9
From: anders@**********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: Matrix Question!
Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 22:57:20 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy J. Lanza" <tjlanza@************.com>
To: "Shadowrun Discussion" <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Matrix Question!

> Under Third Edition, there's no need to draw system maps at all. The only
> issue is wether the device in question is controlled from the particular
> host the character is on.
>
> --
> Timothy J. Lanza
> "When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
>
You might want a simple outline or system tree to KISS.
--Anders
Message no. 10
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Matrix Question!
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 10:56:43 +0200
According to Fredrik Holmqvist, on Sunday 09 May 2004 23:29 the word on the
street was...

> I am way too used to the first and 2nd edition way to draw a system map.
> Do i even put a "slave" module in there or are they controlled from a
> host, so there is no need to mark it on the system map?

Do you mean draw a system map in the SR3 matrix rules? You don't need
anything like that; all you need to do is set up a security sheaf, for
which several people have written handy little programs to help you
generate them quickly and easily :) Then just decide which hosts you can
get to from this one, and you're done.

OK, drawing a little map of their arrangement can help if there are lots of
hosts; you don't need to put any of the old nodes in this kind of map,
because whereas SR1 and SRII had you draw out the host's components, the
VR2.0/SR3 way is to consider only the complete hosts. If the host has a
slave node, you just make a note that it controls <whatever>, for example.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
... in real life, which was styled after the film.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 11
From: Paul.Grosse@***********.com (Paul Grosse)
Subject: Matrix Question!
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 13:48:32 -0500
> > Under Third Edition, there's no need to draw system maps at
> all. The
> > only issue is wether the device in question is controlled from the
> > particular host the character is on.
> >
> > --
> > Timothy J. Lanza
> > "When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
> >
> You might want a simple outline or system tree to KISS.
> --Anders
>

And they also look really cool and impressive on your wall, if they are
done well of course ;)

Paul "Yes that Paul" Grosse
PCGen OGL Chimp & LST Lemur-in-training
ICQ: 14397299
AO: Nylan
Various forums: Nylan (or Nylanfs)

"The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human race to
keep all it's eggs in." - Robert Heinlein
Message no. 12
From: scotthiller2002@*****.com (Scott Hiller)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 07:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
If the Decker Character doesn't know the LTG number
for a place, do they HAVE to log on to the RTG (or the
LTG?) first? And then log on to the specific LTG
number for the place?

For example: Say Craith wants to access the slave node
for an abandoned liquer store in the corner of W.
Armitage and N. Lincoln Ave. in the Chicago CZ. He is
also in the CZ. He does not know the LTG number for
the liquor store. Now, would he need to go all the way
to the "top," so to speak, and log onto the UCAS RTG
for the Midwest (NA/UCAS-MW), then access the CZ LTG
(X312), and then do a search on the CZ LTG for the
abandoned liquor store's specific LTG? Or can he
either just log onto the LTG? Or simply log onto
NooseNet? If I'm interpreting this correctly, then I
don't believe Craith COULD log onto the UCAS RTG from
within the CZ. But I could be wrong ... ?

Thanks for your help.

-Scott Hiller

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 13
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 19:43:46 +0200
According to Scott Hiller, on Friday 08 October 2004 16:24 the word on the
street was...

> If the Decker Character doesn't know the LTG number
> for a place, do they HAVE to log on to the RTG (or the
> LTG?) first? And then log on to the specific LTG
> number for the place?

Unless you can get into it directly, to get to an LTG, you need to go to
the RTG of which it is part. If you don't have the number of the LTG, you
can look it up on the RTG.

Of course, if you can jack straight into the LTG (for example by plugging
your deck into a socket inside the building whose LTG you want to access)
you don't have to bother with the RTG at all.

>
> For example: Say Craith wants to access the slave node
> for an abandoned liquer store in the corner of W.
> Armitage and N. Lincoln Ave. in the Chicago CZ. He is
> also in the CZ. He does not know the LTG number for
> the liquor store. Now, would he need to go all the way
> to the "top," so to speak, and log onto the UCAS RTG
> for the Midwest (NA/UCAS-MW), then access the CZ LTG
> (X312), and then do a search on the CZ LTG for the
> abandoned liquor store's specific LTG?

I'd say in this case his jackpoint would be part of the X312 LTG, and so
all he needs to do is search it for the LTG number of the liquor store,
without needing to go to the NA/UCAS-MW RTG.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Ik ben het beu
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 14
From: lists@*******.com (Wordman)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:21:23 -0400
On Oct 8, 2004, at 1:43 PM, Gurth wrote:

> I'd say in this case his jackpoint would be part of the X312 LTG, and
> so
> all he needs to do is search it for the LTG number of the liquor store,
> without needing to go to the NA/UCAS-MW RTG.

Or you could, you know, completely abandon the incredibly asinine
must-find-your-way-through-the-RTG/LTG-system-to-locate-a-host rules as
completely unrealistic, inane bullshit.

Have you seen, say, Apple's web site recently? Go check it out. Nice,
isn't it?

What? You mean you didn't have to personally navigate from your PC into
your ISP, then figure out where you are on the local grid, then figure
out what fiber lines get you to California, then track down the local
regional provider in Cupertino, then wander around until you found
Apple's site? You just typed http://www.apple.com and were brought
there instantly? Wow! What a concept.

I couldn't even tell you what state the machines that run the
divnull.com domain are, and I own the damn thing.
Message no. 15
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:30:57 -0400
At 11:21 PM 10/8/2004, Wordman wrote:

>On Oct 8, 2004, at 1:43 PM, Gurth wrote:
>
>>I'd say in this case his jackpoint would be part of the X312 LTG, and so
>>all he needs to do is search it for the LTG number of the liquor store,
>>without needing to go to the NA/UCAS-MW RTG.
>
>Or you could, you know, completely abandon the incredibly asinine
>must-find-your-way-through-the-RTG/LTG-system-to-locate-a-host rules as
>completely unrealistic, inane bullshit.
>
>Have you seen, say, Apple's web site recently? Go check it out. Nice,
>isn't it?
>
>What? You mean you didn't have to personally navigate from your PC into
>your ISP, then figure out where you are on the local grid, then figure out
>what fiber lines get you to California, then track down the local regional
>provider in Cupertino, then wander around until you found Apple's site?
>You just typed http://www.apple.com and were brought there instantly? Wow!
>What a concept.
>
>I couldn't even tell you what state the machines that run the divnull.com
>domain are, and I own the damn thing.

Yup, and you're making a legitimate connection and leaving a trail at each
and every one of those hops. Deckers don't do that. The entire point of
decking is to not leave a trail. Normal users don't perform Locate LTG
operations, they just activate a vendor-provided icon and go directly to
the service host in question. In fact, normal users don't perform any
system operations at all. Normal users don't have utilities. they don't
need them. Heck, they don't even really need active memory, just storage
for files they want to save for offline access.

Short version is... You're describing a normal user access methodology, not
a illegal computer criminal.

--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 16
From: lists@*******.com (Wordman)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:45:37 -0400
On Oct 8, 2004, at 11:30 PM, Timothy J. Lanza wrote:

> Yup, and you're making a legitimate connection and leaving a trail at
> each and every one of those hops. Deckers don't do that.

Yes they do, at least fifth world hackers do. They clean up logs after
the fact, not during. And most of the time, they don't bother. Instead,
they create a convoluted series of connections, so that, to the target,
the connection appears to come from some random host. By the time the
target's security team backtrack the connection (if they even bother),
they reach a completely innocent system. This system may try to help
the target's security team. Assuming the hacker left any logs intact on
the innocent system, they might be able to backtrack him to the next
innocent system in the chain. And so on. Generally, the chain is long
enough (and typically goes through several countries who's governments
do not cooperate) that tracking the hacker takes months, if it can be
done at all. By that time, a smart hacker will be elsewhere.
Message no. 17
From: failhelm@*****.com (failhelm)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
--- Wordman <lists@*******.com> wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 1:43 PM, Gurth wrote:
>
> > I'd say in this case his jackpoint would be part
> of the X312 LTG, and
> > so
> > all he needs to do is search it for the LTG number
> of the liquor store,
> > without needing to go to the NA/UCAS-MW RTG.
>
> Or you could, you know, completely abandon the
> incredibly asinine
>
must-find-your-way-through-the-RTG/LTG-system-to-locate-a-host
> rules as
> completely unrealistic, inane bullshit.
>
> Have you seen, say, Apple's web site recently? Go
> check it out. Nice,
> isn't it?
>
> What? You mean you didn't have to personally
> navigate from your PC into
> your ISP, then figure out where you are on the local
> grid, then figure
> out what fiber lines get you to California, then
> track down the local
> regional provider in Cupertino, then wander around
> until you found
> Apple's site? You just typed http://www.apple.com
> and were brought
> there instantly? Wow! What a concept.
>
> I couldn't even tell you what state the machines
> that run the
> divnull.com domain are, and I own the damn thing.

Except that given the change the world would likely
not do an IP system anyways. The MXP system seems to
emulate IPX/SPX more closely, I beleive. Not to
mention the entire infrastructure & topography of the
Matrix appears to be widely different from today. You
can't just type in an address and have your friendly
neiborhood server translate that text to match an
matrix compatible code like an IP address without
working out some other issues.

The issue of MXP addressing and whom and what handles
the translations between grides is imperitive. I have
yet to find any text that provides a sharing of
LTG/RTG codes as a public service so that searching
works accross grids, even deckers have to user an
illegal utiliy that likely mimics a gopher or
something. Instead the Matrix working off a shopping
mall concept where users come to you. In fact most of
my Matrix reading provides that the oposite would be
true. Only that RTGs might share information and
provide some sort of pass along service in the case of
email or instant messaging.

Extrateritoriality plays a big role in this too. Not
every country/Mega is going to allow some shmuck to
meander through their hosts and grid just to look @
prawn or by the latest Kevlar Cline underware.

If the Matrix was that simple there wouldn't be the
need to focus on Icongraphy outside of the host like
there is. One of the most outstanding features of the
Seattle grids are the looming icons of hosts.

I'm not a modern day haxor, nor am I a modern
internet/networking topography engineering guru.

This my understanding of why the matrix isn't a www
society post 2029.

P.S. there are some nice tracer utilites out there
that can run geographical traces on IPs, providing a
physical view as well as registration informaton (if
any).

- Failhelm
Message no. 18
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:31:48 +0200
According to Wordman, on Saturday 09 October 2004 05:21 the word on the
street was...

> Or you could, you know, completely abandon the incredibly asinine
> must-find-your-way-through-the-RTG/LTG-system-to-locate-a-host rules as
> completely unrealistic, inane bullshit.

True, but as Scott was askin about the rules as they are, I didn't feel it
was the place for explaining how the system is bogus :)

> Have you seen, say, Apple's web site recently? Go check it out. Nice,
> isn't it?
>
> What? You mean you didn't have to personally navigate from your PC into
> your ISP, then figure out where you are on the local grid, then figure
> out what fiber lines get you to California, then track down the local
> regional provider in Cupertino, then wander around until you found
> Apple's site? You just typed http://www.apple.com and were brought
> there instantly? Wow! What a concept.

I'm sure you remember Gopher? As I recall (I never did use it much) that's
pretty much how that system worked... I have memories of selecting North
America -> United States -> California -> and so on to get to SR stuff...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Ik ben het beu
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 19
From: wolfjack@********.org (Adam J. Lyle)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 07:50:53 -0400
> What? You mean you didn't have to personally navigate from
> your PC into
> your ISP, then figure out where you are on the local grid,
> then figure
> out what fiber lines get you to California, then track down the local
> regional provider in Cupertino, then wander around until you found
> Apple's site? You just typed http://www.apple.com and were brought
> there instantly? Wow! What a concept.
>

Actually, the background process is quite similar. If the domain name
servers that I use have never been asked "who" apple.com is then they
have to find that out. They start by asking the root name servers (the
RTG). The root servers direct my machine to the .com name servers (the
LTG). The .com name severs direct me to the apple.com name servers (the
host or PLTG. Finally the apple.com name severs tell me that apple.com
translates to 17.254.3.183. My computer then looks at that IP and
decides if it is local or not. Since the IP is local it knows to ask
the router that I connect to. The router I connect to does the same
task. On and on and on. Keep in mind that the basic Internet principle
is each device knows what network is local to it and only ONE device
that is not. So in the span of about 2 seconds my computer does have to
navigate to my ISP, the figure out where I am on the local grid....

But this is now and we have a gui that allows our physical bodies to
interact with the system. If it was just my brain talking directly to
the net, I might have to do the same thing.


> I couldn't even tell you what state the machines that run the
> divnull.com domain are, and I own the damn thing.
>

I would have guessed Los Angeles since my traceroute stops at a device
with lax in it's name. Though a quick google search found a handy
little website that gives a more specific answer of La Mirada, CA. So,
I was only like 18 miles off. Not bad in global terms.


-Adam
Message no. 20
From: u.alberton@*****.com (Bira)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 16:13:59 -0300
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 07:50:53 -0400, Adam J. Lyle <wolfjack@********.org> wrote:

>
> But this is now and we have a gui that allows our physical bodies to
> interact with the system. If it was just my brain talking directly to
> the net, I might have to do the same thing.

I think a datajack or the like that didn't even include a way to talk
to the Matrix equivalent of DNS would be a total sales failure :). The
flavor text keeps telling its readers how the world's networks have
grown so intensely complex that neural interfaces became a necessity,
and that they made all easy and intuitive.

Having to "resolve" every adress by hand seems to run counter to the
whole concept. Even "clicking on a vendor-provider icon" to go
someplace, as has been suggested, seems sort of inconvenient. Why do
you have to wait for a vendor to provide you with anything? Can't you
just "type in" an easily-remembered address, or even better, think "I
want to visit the Mitsuhama site" and just go there?

Saying the Matrix is that way on purpose (like falheim did) also
doesn't quite cut it. The reason the Internet took off like it has is
that it's relatively easy to find stuff in it. It's something everyone
has come to depend on, and since the Matrix is there to replace the
old Internet, it has to do the same basic things.

The "territory" problems are also a big issue today, since you have a
bunch of corporations and government organizations in several
different countries running backbone networks (which would be the
equivalent of RTGs, I guess). This has been handled by a sucession of
deals between these entities, and the creation of routing protocols
designed to support variations in policy between two nets.

Sure, the actual protocols used by the Matrix can be very different
from what we have today, but I don't think the basic model would
change. Name the place, and you're there. No one actually needs to see
the networks lying between their decks and the end hosts.

The only reason they go into detail about icons representing grids and
communication lines was because this is what William Gibson did in
Neuromancer, and they wanted to emulate it. Note that he didn't know
anything at all about computers when he first wrote the book... :)

--
Bira
http://compexplicita.blogspot.com
Message no. 21
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Matrix Question
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:32:03 +0200
According to Bira, on Saturday 09 October 2004 21:13 the word on the street
was...

> Saying the Matrix is that way on purpose (like falheim did) also
> doesn't quite cut it. The reason the Internet took off like it has is
> that it's relatively easy to find stuff in it.

The reason it took off is the invention of the WWW, and (quite probably)
the discovery of that WWW by porn merchants. Back in the spring of 1994,
when I was still in college, very few people seem to have known about the
internet connection the place had; those who did used it for e-mail,
downloading stuff off FTP sites, and IRC -- all text-only things. Six
months later, everybody who wanted to be anybody a dial-in account with an
ISP, a 14K4 modem and Netscape 1.x in/on their PC at home, and browsed the
WWW.

> Sure, the actual protocols used by the Matrix can be very different
> from what we have today, but I don't think the basic model would
> change. Name the place, and you're there. No one actually needs to see
> the networks lying between their decks and the end hosts.

Agreed; if the Matrix is supposed to be intuitive, the rules should reflect
this. (That, BTW, is part of the reason for automatic system operations,
as far as I'm concerned: to some extent, they represent, given the current
rules set, the user wanting to do something without being bothered about
_how_ it happens.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Ik ben het beu
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Matrix Question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

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

Thwap!