Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: PDL@****.dacom.co.kr
Subject: Senses and security devices
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 96 10:33:24 PST
What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was wondering if a
character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it should be possible to see the
infrared security beam. Do people agree with this? What are other ways that security
devices could be detected?

Patrick
Message no. 2
From: cobaltblue@********.net
Subject: RE: Senses and security devices
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 96 20:56:02 PST
On Thu, 1 Feb 96 10:33:24 PST PDL@****.dacom.co.kr wrote:
>What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was wondering if a
character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it should be possible to see the
infrared security beam. Do people agree with this? What are other ways that security
devices could be detected?
>
>Patrick
>
Patrick, there so many different ways to set up a security system that having
thermographic or infrared vision would probably have little effect. Usually in sec
systems I set up, I like to use chem sniffers as frontline for a medium to high security
area. Then, pressure sensitive pads attached to gas launchers in critical corridors, with
PS pads attached to trigger passive alert on one false step, then active on the next. The
pads are hooked to maglocks, so the hell of it is that the PC probably won't know when
they screwed up. If it's a really critical area....sentry guns. They activate on motion,
track multiple targets and are easily concealed in wall niches. Of course, the best
backup security is a good guard force.:-)
Message no. 3
From: A.J.Norman@******.ac.nz (Andrew Norman)
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 02:11:31 +0000
>What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was
>wondering if a character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it
>should be possible to see the infrared security beam. Do people agree
>with this? What are other ways that secu
>rity devices could be detected?

This would only work if the IR system is active, it wouldn't work with the
more common pasive motion systems in use today. If the system is active,
yes I agree that a character with IR vision would see a beam of light
travelling across the room, much in the same way as we see a laser beam at
night.

Just my 0.02 nuyen worth

Andrew
Message no. 4
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 11:44:10 +0100
PDL@****.dacom.co.kr said on 1 Feb 96...

> What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was
> wondering if a character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it
> should be possible to see the infrared security beam. Do people agree
> with this? What are other ways that security devices could be
> detected?

It depends on the security device. If you mean an infrared laser with an
"infared security beam" then you can only see it if you have thermographic
vision *and* there is something there for the beam to bounce off of-- like
dust in the air, or sticking your eye into its path :)
Things like passive IR detectors can't be noticed -- they just notice you
because of the difference in temperature between your body and the
background.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Sometimes it feels like )@&*()@&%#68%3*(48@&%
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 5
From: neon@******.backbone.olemiss.edu (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 09:46:45 -0600
>PDL@****.dacom.co.kr said on 1 Feb 96...
>
>> What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was
>> wondering if a character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it
>> should be possible to see the infrared security beam. Do people agree
>> with this? What are other ways that security devices could be
>> detected?

Actually, you can't see the infrared spectrum with thermographic vision. By
its very definition, thermographic is the ability to see heat differential.
You aren't seeing an light spectrum given off by an object, your seeing the
temperature of an object versus the temperature of the background. If your
in a room that's temp is 98.6 degrees F, then a person wouldn't be visible
on thermographic, because they're temp color would be the same as the
background. Infrared is a spectrum of light that is invisible to the human
eye. They're too seperate things. You could see the heat given off by the
sec. device, but not the beam itself.

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"You only need two things in this world. WD40 to make things go, and
duct tape to make them stop."
Message no. 6
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 13:14:48 +0000 (GMT)
On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, Mike Broadwater wrote:

> Actually, you can't see the infrared spectrum with thermographic vision. By
> its very definition, thermographic is the ability to see heat differential.
> You aren't seeing an light spectrum given off by an object, your seeing the
> temperature of an object versus the temperature of the background. If your
> in a room that's temp is 98.6 degrees F, then a person wouldn't be visible
> on thermographic, because they're temp color would be the same as the
> background. Infrared is a spectrum of light that is invisible to the human
> eye. They're too seperate things. You could see the heat given off by the
> sec. device, but not the beam itself.

In Ka.Ge they actually had some cyber eye options and one was to get a
pure infra red sight, rather than the infra red superimposed onto the
normal light spectrum sight which Trolls and Dwarves have (ie normal
"Thermographic" sight).

The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Life is a choice, Death....an obligation."-Me
Shadowrun WWW site at http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun
Message no. 7
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 22:37:58 EST
> >
> >> What do people think about being able to sense security devices? I was
> >> wondering if a character could see on the infrared spectrum then, it
> >> should be possible to see the infrared security beam. Do people agree
> >> with this? What are other ways that security devices could be
> >> detected?
>
> Actually, you can't see the infrared spectrum with thermographic vision. By
> its very definition, thermographic is the ability to see heat differential.
> You aren't seeing an light spectrum given off by an object, your seeing the
> temperature of an object versus the temperature of the background. If your
> in a room that's temp is 98.6 degrees F, then a person wouldn't be visible
> on thermographic, because they're temp color would be the same as the
> background. Infrared is a spectrum of light that is invisible to the human
> eye. They're too seperate things. You could see the heat given off by the
> sec. device, but not the beam itself.
Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most laser-targeting systems use
a beam of infrared light. If they do they can be seen by either
lowlight or infrared, I can't remember which, but it is in the books.
Check out cybertechnology or FoF.
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 8
From: Lomion <lomion@********.net>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 01:04:15 -0500
At 22:37 02/02/96 EST, you wrote:
>>
>> Actually, you can't see the infrared spectrum with thermographic vision. By
>> its very definition, thermographic is the ability to see heat differential.
>> You aren't seeing an light spectrum given off by an object, your seeing the
>> temperature of an object versus the temperature of the background. If your
>> in a room that's temp is 98.6 degrees F, then a person wouldn't be visible
>> on thermographic, because they're temp color would be the same as the
>> background. Infrared is a spectrum of light that is invisible to the human
>> eye. They're too seperate things. You could see the heat given off by the
>> sec. device, but not the beam itself.
>Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most laser-targeting systems use
>a beam of infrared light. If they do they can be seen by either
>lowlight or infrared, I can't remember which, but it is in the books.
>Check out cybertechnology or FoF.
> ---Sedah Drol
The way lasers and such work(at least in the real world) is that they are
invisible unless you have laser-sensing tech, or are able to "dust" the beam
with a reflective material. Light has to enter the eye to be seen, focused
light(a laser) will only be seen if it hits the eye directly.
Larry
---------------------------------
"Unheard by the outward ear
In the heart I whisper fear;
Changing shape from hour to hour
I employ my savage power"
'Faust", Goethe
---------------------------------
Message no. 9
From: cobaltblue@********.net
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 96 11:03:37 PST
>Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most laser-targeting systems use
>a beam of infrared light. If they do they can be seen by either
>lowlight or infrared, I can't remember which, but it is in the books.
>Check out cybertechnology or FoF.
> ---Sedah Drol

Yes, but that light is only visible when reflected by solid matter, gas or dust
particles.
Message no. 10
From: Benjamin <benjamin@*****.com>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 08:14:21 PST
>
> >Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most laser-targeting systems use
> >a beam of infrared light. If they do they can be seen by either
> >lowlight or infrared, I can't remember which, but it is in the books.
> >Check out cybertechnology or FoF.
> > ---Sedah Drol
>
> Yes, but that light is only visible when reflected by solid matter, gas or dust
particles.
>
>

Or when you have your eye intercept the beam. Can we say Goodbye, Flare
Compensation?
--

Shiftboy (aka Benjamin Kercheval)
benjamin@*****.com (NOT whatever happenes to be in the From: line today)

Probably the world's only Weretiger PhysAd

no website



"After spending hours trying to get the system up and running, Carl
discovers that everything had been plugged into a `Clapper' light
socket when he tries to kill a mosquito."
-5th Wave
Message no. 11
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 16:51:32 +0000 (GMT)
|
|>
|> >Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most laser-targeting systems use
|> >a beam of infrared light. If they do they can be seen by either
|> >lowlight or infrared, I can't remember which, but it is in the books.
|> >Check out cybertechnology or FoF.
|> > ---Sedah Drol
|>
|> Yes, but that light is only visible when reflected by solid matter, gas or dust
particles.
|>
|>
|
|Or when you have your eye intercept the beam. Can we say Goodbye, Flare
|Compensation?

That all depends on the power of the beam. Semiconductor lasers don't
produce enough energy to damage the retina, so the flare comp wouldn't be
damaged either.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crackin |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant bolder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal in:- |to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: t_little@**********.utas.edu.au (Timothy Little)
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 11:14:24 +1100
>> Yes, but that light is only visible when reflected by solid matter, gas
or dust particles.
>>
>>
>
>Or when you have your eye intercept the beam. Can we say Goodbye, Flare
>Compensation?

I can say "Goodbye, Flare Compensation", but I wouldn't imagine a low-power
security sensor beam to have any effect at all on eyes, natural or cyber.

If the beam was in the beam was in the visible spectrum, you might be
dazzled briefly (without flare comp.), but otherwise unaffected. I've
inadvertently looked into a number of laser beams (every time I go grocery
shopping, for instance).

Of course, looking into the beam will set off the security sensor, so even a
blinded eye could be the least of your worries 8-)


--
Tim Little
Message no. 13
From: cobaltblue@********.net
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 96 08:15:35 PST
On Sun, 4 Feb 1996 11:14:24 +1100 Timothy Little wrote:
>I can say "Goodbye, Flare Compensation", but I wouldn't imagine a low-power
>security sensor beam to have any effect at all on eyes, natural or cyber.
>
>If the beam was in the beam was in the visible spectrum, you might be
>dazzled briefly (without flare comp.), but otherwise unaffected. I've
>inadvertently looked into a number of laser beams (every time I go grocery
>shopping, for instance).
>
>Of course, looking into the beam will set off the security sensor, so even a
>blinded eye could be the least of your worries 8-)
>
>
>--
>Tim Little
>
You're right, but grocery store laser scanners are such a wide beam that they have
little effect; narrow the beam and you concentrate more light into a smaller area. That's
when you start worrying about blinding/flare comp.
Message no. 14
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 12:26:21 +0100
Timothy Little said on 4 Feb 96...

> >Or when you have your eye intercept the beam. Can we say Goodbye, Flare
> >Compensation?
>
> I can say "Goodbye, Flare Compensation", but I wouldn't imagine a low-power
> security sensor beam to have any effect at all on eyes, natural or cyber.

Which is why the two-stage security laser was invented, as per the NAGRL.
Low enough power not to damage anything that breaks it, until something
does go through it.

> Of course, looking into the beam will set off the security sensor, so even a
> blinded eye could be the least of your worries 8-)

Although it might make things a bit more difficult :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
This won't hurt a bit.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 15
From: seb@***.ripco.com (Sebastian Wiers)
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 12:00:03 -0600 (CST)
>
> I can say "Goodbye, Flare Compensation", but I wouldn't imagine a low-power
> security sensor beam to have any effect at all on eyes, natural or cyber.
>
> If the beam was in the beam was in the visible spectrum, you might be
> dazzled briefly (without flare comp.), but otherwise unaffected. I've
> inadvertently looked into a number of laser beams (every time I go grocery
> shopping, for instance).

No, what you have looked at is the scatter of the beam off of scretched plexi,
unless you actually bend down and put yer face on the scanner. Those things
are designed not to shoot beams into peoples eyes, because that WILL blind
you, at least temporarilly. I shot a 200 milliwat lazer into my ey throuh
saveral dark shields, and it was like puuting a flashbulb against my iris
(well, not that bad, but bad)
Of course, the beam aimingf directly at the iris is a pretty unlikely thing,
even with a scaming laze, which would probably not be as blinding anyhow due
to the very brief exposure.
>
> Of course, looking into the beam will set off the security sensor, so even a
> blinded eye could be the least of your worries 8-)
>
>
> --
> Tim Little
>
>


--
() _
/\ /) //
/ ) o _, // o // _
/__/__<_(_) o //__<_</_</_
/| />
|/ </
Message no. 16
From: t_little@**********.utas.edu.au (Timothy Little)
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 17:29:16 +1100
>The way lasers and such work(at least in the real world) is that they are
>invisible unless you have laser-sensing tech, or are able to "dust" the beam
>with a reflective material. Light has to enter the eye to be seen, focused
>light(a laser) will only be seen if it hits the eye directly.

Any normal room will have dust in the air, and reflections from this dust
make the beam visible against a dark background.

--
Tim Little
Message no. 17
From: Lomion <lomion@********.net>
Subject: Re: Senses and security devices
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 23:46:57 -0500
>Any normal room will have dust in the air, and reflections from this dust
>make the beam visible against a dark background.
>
>--
>Tim Little
>
I wasn't talking about literal dust, I mant a metrial that can reflect a
low-power laser. There similar devices used in security today- the old
"electric eye". Normal dust doesn't reflect them, a water-cystal suspension
or something similar is needed.
Larry
http://www2.cybernex.net/~lomion
-----------------------------------------------
"I had only to wish that here be a large crowd
of spectators then day of my execution and that
they greet me with cries of hate."
A. Camus, "The Stranger"
-----------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Senses and security devices, 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!