Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 20:47:34 EST
To the extra readers for this post, please consider this well...


In a message dated 2/17/1999 9:46:05 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dbuehrer@******.carl.org writes:

> My fault, I didn't explain my point well.

OH, well, GEE.... ;-PPPPP (believe it or not David, when I first started
writing this, I wasn't feeling nearly as "deep" as I was by the end of it
<insert sincere smile>)

> When a person is astrally projecting they are perceiving the astral
> plane with their astral form. IMO the brain does not play a role.
> True, the meat body may twitch when the astral form is injured or
> stressed but I feel that this is an autonomic response. I don't feel
> that the process of information while astrally projecting involves the
> brain.

Oh really? Boy, do you need to reread Shadowtech again....

> I also feel that when a person is astrally perceiving that the brain
> isn't involved at all. The perception of the astral and the processing
> of this perception are handled by the perceiver's astral form and again
> the brain is not involved.

See above, and below...

> I believe that that is why you can't record astral perception with
> simsense. The act of astral perception and the processing of that
> perception take place soley on the astral plane.
>
> IMHO astral preception is 100% astral/spiritual.

see below...

> / > I don't think it's a cut and dried rulling. I think it's an attempt
to
> / > maintain consistency with SR magic theory.
> /
> / Oh, so do I ultimately, but IMO, it's simply a cop-out at this time.
>
> Well, :) it may in fact be a cop out and I may be working to hard at
> try to convince myself that the designers had the same idea I have.

Okay, I'm not trying to be a real dickhead with this one, but quite frankly,
the argument you presented, and in some manner or direction, what *most* have
been presented has run into a calamity of sorts, at least IMnsHO (I *like*
that Arkham...)

My reasoning is that certain Bioware/Cyberware does in fact effect the
intelligence, which does in turn reflect upon the solidity/strength of the
Astral "Personae" (my choice of words here, sorry).

Additionally, IF the concept of Astral Perception or Projection were a
"spiritual" or "astral" thing, then the concept of "MEMORY"
would immediately
come to the front of the action. Think about this, I'm very serious. What
you (David in this particular case), is that the concept of memory involves
the (physical) mind, and Shadowrun has even backed this current theory up
(Mnemonic Enhancer and the IMS implant).

There is some reflection therefore upon the mind of the magician, the
physical, recollective, mind of the individual that is using the Astral
Perception abilities. It is being translated into something that the mind of
the magician is capable of comprehending.

Okay, time for *another* thread throwback here. Anyone else remember those
discussions a while ago about "alternative methods of astral perception?",
meaning "smell" and "sound" and "touch", for those magicians
that were born
"blind." Think about all of this very closely, very slowly.

I realize very much the current viewpoint of FASA concerning recording the
astral actions of the individual. More than some would like to believe in
fact (pictures coming soon, I promise). But, that viewpoint is subject to
change and or enlightenment (depending upon the choice of words), and believe
when I say you folks are helping me build one hell of a case in my favor.

Simsense is using ASIST technology, from both the playing and recording ends
of the business (literally in Shadowbeat's definitions).

Now where am I attempting to go with this?

How many magicians in SR, as per the stories and rules and anything given to
us the player, are BORN with comprehension and knowledge of their talent? In
all honesty, unless you play a game with similarities to ours here, NOT A
SINGLE ONE of them!!! Remember, in several places (novella or sourcebook),
there are indications that individuals "awaken" into their abilities, becoming
aware of them at some point in their developmental stage(s) of their
lifetimes.

Every single magician in SR, as they state to this point, are born like anyone
else, with the normally, fatefully, alloted array of senses as everyone else.
Sight, Sound, Tactile, Olfactory, Auditory (physical senses here). There
"parasenses" of arousal, enthusiasm, pain, fear, etc...., are all
recieving/sending their information via those 5 senses. Were any of us a
magician in SR, we'd be initially developing all of our senses, and to a great
extent, our "sensational biases", using the basic 5 senses as everyone else
does.

Thus, it is called "Astral Perception", because it deals with translatory
information that is "perceived" by the individual, whatever or wherever their
individual POV is found.

Sure, I will agree with anyone that the current, LIVE, events of a magician
that is Astral PROJECTING is not going to be recordable. But the events that
a magician perceives using "astral perception" are going to be reverse
sensated by the individual. They will perceive "the aura of their subject",
and in so doing their mind, having been trained, developed, and biased, is
going to attempt to translate that into the one thing it understands the most.
Visual Sight. Which then in turns fires the visual cortecis of the
(meta)human mind. Hence, the ability to record. Simsense is NOT going to
record the actual "light sensory" that is incoming, that is what the "Video
Link" or "Eye Camera" are there for. No, it is recording the interaction
of
sensations with the (meta)human mind.

All of the other potential senses are going to occur in a parallel nature to
this. Parasympathesis (Kinesthetics) would therefore occur, especially in all
manners. Think of the "scenes" in certain books.

Someone mentioned the story of the mage being watched by the rigger in the
book written by Dowd. In that one, the body of the magician (who is
projecting IIRC), suddenly spasms. In another story, a person who is fighting
an astral target (I forget if they are combating them using perception or
projection) suddenly has a wound scored by the opponent in the astral, and
their physical arm suddenly shows a reflection of the wound.

Hell, let's face other facts. Damage and Drain due to excessive magical
exertion (by spell casting, spirit conjuring, or other) reflects directly upon
the body. Here's a way of *really* looking at things if you will allow me...

Let's say I'm able to cast a spell, so I do so. I extend my concentration in
such a manner as to trigger the event of the spell casting itself. As I do
so, my body surges with a thrill that I cannot quite understand. My fingers
tingle as the edges of their boundary touch the manipulated energies (tactile
parasympathesis), and my blood begins to surge through the pathways of my body
as my adrenaline builds, as well as the understanding that this spell is a big
one (hey, I'm a dramaticist, if you're going to have a fantasy, you might as
well have a really good one ;-) and hence I'm likely to get hurt by it.

As I release the spell, it's intricate workings leap out. I might feel as a
father does, when his child leaves the home and the protective concourses that
I have offered it within my body, but I have worked hard in it's efforts, and
therefore I am certain of it's success it will have during the course of it's
lifetime (short though it may in fact be).

But then, the backwash from the channeling itself occurs. That tingling on
the edges of my fingers suddenly erupts into a burning, coursing down the
nerve endings, telling me, reminding me, of the heavy, terrible, price that
magic can often take upon those that attempt to nurture it's development. As
the nerve endings travel through me, as fast or faster than the power itself
(only my innermost fears could know that truth), the pain truly explodes into
me. The spell was a massive one (hey, I wanted a sunny vacation this
summer... ;), and it reminds me of the depth it required.

As the power finishes surging from my being, it ignites those nerves, massive
contusions and abrasions appear, indeed in some places, seeming like the burns
of a massive fire (which is why it's so hard to heal the wounds done from
magical workings?) that I have allowed myself to somehow be exposed to. As
the blood boils from the venting fire in my soul, vessels rupture, indeed
rending gashes upon my body. Tears pouring from my eyes in desperation and
utter anguish at the pain itself for so terribly an action.

It could be like chewing your fingernails out of nervousness, casting the
tidbits of yourself aside like so much dross and drivel ... It could be like a
mother ripping her unborn from herself almost in the worst of cases.

In ALL cases, (meta)human experiences liken the events that happen to them in
some manner or method. What really happened in the above example?

I decided to toss a Wind spell to blow away the clouds, several cuts running
the length of my arms opened up, instantly seared close by the fire I had let
loose within my desirous self. This, would be the price I would have paid for
my overzealousness.

Simsense is a recording of (meta)human experience, nothing else, nothing less.
I guess I don't ultimately care how anyone out there views the possibilities,
but to me, I'm not trying to overwhelm the value or ability of the ASIST
technology. Neh, I am trying not to cheapen the value of the person who is
witness to the events themselves....

-K
Message no. 2
From: Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:43:33 -0500 (EST)
To: shadowrn@*********.org, FASAMike@***.com, kadams@***.net,
shaman@*******.com, runefo@***.uio.no, zmjett@*********.COM,
guilleme@******.cc.purdue.edu, Hollar@******.cc.purdue.edu,
TalonMail@***.com

Wow. That's a lot of addresses I had to snip. ;)

Anyways, I make a couple of clearly stated assumptions. I also move
some stuff around, so my apologies if I've misinterpreted your words.

Ereskanti@***.com writes:
> In a message dated 2/17/1999 9:46:05 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> dbuehrer@******.carl.org writes:
> > I also feel that when a person is astrally perceiving that the brain
> > isn't involved at all. The perception of the astral and the processing
> > of this perception are handled by the perceiver's astral form and again
> > the brain is not involved.
>
> See above, and below...
>
> > I believe that that is why you can't record astral perception with
> > simsense. The act of astral perception and the processing of that
> > perception take place soley on the astral plane.

My interpretation of what can and can't be done: Indirect
illusion spells, and other physical spells record on simsense.
Mana-based illusions, and other mana-based spells do not record,
though their effects will record (the wound from a manabolt will
register for example (it's real hard to miss), but the manabolt may
not be visible.)
As far as actual rulings go, the only things I have seen are
that things on the astral plane don't record. All other "Magic does
not record on simsense" statements have been pretty vague.

> Okay, time for *another* thread throwback here. Anyone else remember those
> discussions a while ago about "alternative methods of astral perception?",
> meaning "smell" and "sound" and "touch", for those
magicians that were born
> "blind." Think about all of this very closely, very slowly.

I missed this thread the first time. It's always been my
impression that a blind magician, regardless of whether he was always
blind, or his eyes were sewn shut 5 seconds ago, gains the ability of
sight, as seen through the astral plane. For a blind magician, this
is the same as normal sight, but the only one available to him. It
does not, IMHO, manifest as a different sense.

> Simsense is using ASIST technology, from both the playing and recording ends
> of the business (literally in Shadowbeat's definitions).

Now, here's my big point of debate. You see ASIST technology
as recording further along than I have always seen it.

[from later on]
> Simsense is a recording of (meta)human experience, nothing else,
> nothing less.

Is it? I've always seen simsense as a recording of the input
your body receives, recorded as it enters your brain. You don't
*feel* the happiness in the person who has been recorded. You feel
the endorphin rush that the simstar felt, because one has been
triggered in your body.

> Thus, it is called "Astral Perception", because it deals with translatory
> information that is "perceived" by the individual, whatever or wherever
their
> individual POV is found.

[astral perception description follows]
> They will perceive "the aura of their subject",
> and in so doing their mind, having been trained, developed, and biased, is
> going to attempt to translate that into the one thing it understands the most.
> Visual Sight. Which then in turns fires the visual cortecis of the
> (meta)human mind. Hence, the ability to record. Simsense is NOT going to
> record the actual "light sensory" that is incoming, that is what the
"Video
> Link" or "Eye Camera" are there for. No, it is recording the
interaction of
> sensations with the (meta)human mind.

I disagree here. I see a raw simsense recording as the
sensations a body feels, as it enters the brain. IMHO, if a simsense
signal can place a signal in after it has been translated by the
visual cortex, the same recording technology could be used to scan
surface thoughts, dig through memory, or produce a
visual-cortex-on-a-chip.
I also like the idea of a more unified technology, so that a
Video Link/Eye Camera combo are the same sort of technology used in
simsense, or perhaps derived in the oppposite order. I don't see the
two technologies as being unlinked.
SR also lists the brain (and spine, to a lesser extent) as
being the big things still mysterious to science in the SR world. I
find it more plausible that simsense can reecord the input as it
enters the brain, rather than recording a brain map, and feeding the
same mapping onto the viewer of the simsense.

> Let's say I'm able to cast a spell, so I do so. I extend my concentration in
> such a manner as to trigger the event of the spell casting itself. As I do
> so, my body surges with a thrill that I cannot quite understand.
[rest of example of spellcasting and drain snipped]

So, what you're saying (I hope), is that the emotional state
of the caster and the damage the body receives will show up on
simsense. The first, to me, is a completely psychological thing, and
has nothing to do with the actual casting of the spell, except for the
act of casting as a catalyst. The second, well, that's going to show
up on simsense, it's bodily damage. However, without being attuned to
the astral, that's all it is, damage. You didn't see it coming, you
don't know how it got there, and you don't know how to instinctively
try to dodge it.
Besides, if all that shows up on simsense is the psychological
effect of "yay, my spell worked", followed by a migraine, *I* think
that's a good example of magic not recording very well. Another
magician watching the experience might recognize the effects and why
they're happening, but the recording itself is going to give none of
the how or why that a spell has been cast. You could get the same
effect with a hologram (or another actor crumpling, in the case of a
manabolt) and a blow to the head.

Mark
Message no. 3
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 22:29:18 EST
In a message dated 2/17/1999 9:44:27 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
SHODAN+@***.EDU writes:

> Anyways, I make a couple of clearly stated assumptions. I also move
> some stuff around, so my apologies if I've misinterpreted your words.

And in so moving, you have changed the bias or relationship of the wording.
That is part of my discussion/argument.

> My interpretation of what can and can't be done: Indirect
> illusion spells, and other physical spells record on simsense.
> Mana-based illusions, and other mana-based spells do not record,
> though their effects will record (the wound from a manabolt will
> register for example (it's real hard to miss), but the manabolt may
> not be visible.)

Please note, one piece of cyberware. Sense Link

> As far as actual rulings go, the only things I have seen are
> that things on the astral plane don't record. All other "Magic does
> not record on simsense" statements have been pretty vague.

True, but don't get "Simsense Recordings" and "Trideo Recordings"
mixed up.

> I missed this thread the first time. It's always been my
> impression that a blind magician, regardless of whether he was always
> blind, or his eyes were sewn shut 5 seconds ago, gains the ability of
> sight, as seen through the astral plane. For a blind magician, this
> is the same as normal sight, but the only one available to him. It
> does not, IMHO, manifest as a different sense.

BUT, how does "normal sight" translate to the mind of a person who has never
had "sight" in the first place?

> > Simsense is using ASIST technology, from both the playing and recording
> ends
> > of the business (literally in Shadowbeat's definitions).
>
> Now, here's my big point of debate. You see ASIST technology
> as recording further along than I have always seen it.

Actually, not really. I however have been *very* careful to not get "ASIST"
and "Trideo" mixed up.

> > Simsense is a recording of (meta)human experience, nothing else,
> > nothing less.
>
> Is it? I've always seen simsense as a recording of the input
> your body receives, recorded as it enters your brain. You don't
> *feel* the happiness in the person who has been recorded. You feel
> the endorphin rush that the simstar felt, because one has been
> triggered in your body.

And thus, your mind (re)creates the experience of it all. What's the phrase?
"...from a certain point of view?"

> > They will perceive "the aura of their subject",
> > and in so doing their mind, having been trained, developed, and biased,
is
> > going to attempt to translate that into the one thing it understands the
> most.
> > Visual Sight. Which then in turns fires the visual cortecis of the
> > (meta)human mind. Hence, the ability to record. Simsense is NOT going
to
> > record the actual "light sensory" that is incoming, that is what the
"
> Video
> > Link" or "Eye Camera" are there for. No, it is recording the
interaction
> of
> > sensations with the (meta)human mind.
>
> I disagree here. I see a raw simsense recording as the
> sensations a body feels, as it enters the brain. IMHO, if a simsense
> signal can place a signal in after it has been translated by the
> visual cortex, the same recording technology could be used to scan
> surface thoughts, dig through memory, or produce a
> visual-cortex-on-a-chip.

Actually, it can, especially in lue of the concepts of skillsofts (any
category) as well as Cyberdeck technology and "BTL/Psychotropic"
considerations.

> I also like the idea of a more unified technology, so that a
> Video Link/Eye Camera combo are the same sort of technology used in
> simsense, or perhaps derived in the oppposite order. I don't see the
> two technologies as being unlinked.

This is what I was referring to as getting "Trideo" and "ASIST" mixed
up.

> SR also lists the brain (and spine, to a lesser extent) as
> being the big things still mysterious to science in the SR world. I
> find it more plausible that simsense can reecord the input as it
> enters the brain, rather than recording a brain map, and feeding the
> same mapping onto the viewer of the simsense.

I'm honestly afraid you have lost me in this paragraph? What exactly is the
difference? "record the input as it enters the brain" vs. "recording a
brain
map" and then continuing with "feeding the same mapping?" Tell me, what's
a
"MAP" at this point in your discussion? It would help me understand what you
are saying.

> So, what you're saying (I hope), is that the emotional state
> of the caster and the damage the body receives will show up on
> simsense. The first, to me, is a completely psychological thing, and
> has nothing to do with the actual casting of the spell, except for the
> act of casting as a catalyst. The second, well, that's going to show
> up on simsense, it's bodily damage. However, without being attuned to
> the astral, that's all it is, damage. You didn't see it coming, you
> don't know how it got there, and you don't know how to instinctively
> try to dodge it.

True and Not True all at the same time. Sadly, IMO, "Emotions" are reflected
in pscyhoreactive chemical interaction that occurs within your (and mine and
*their*) body. Sure, we'd like to liken them to a higher function, but to
Science, that simply isn't going to be happening anytime in the near(distant?)
future. By manipulating broad PR Chemical ("...tropinism" terminology abounds
here) interaction and/or even the neural "firing" of various synaptic
activities, it becomes possible to "simulate" the various
"stimulations" of
another target.

> Besides, if all that shows up on simsense is the psychological
> effect of "yay, my spell worked", followed by a migraine, *I* think
> that's a good example of magic not recording very well. Another
> magician watching the experience might recognize the effects and why
> they're happening, but the recording itself is going to give none of
> the how or why that a spell has been cast. You could get the same
> effect with a hologram (or another actor crumpling, in the case of a
> manabolt) and a blow to the head.

No, actually that's a recording that works well, but is simply not understood
by the person who is experiencing the recording. What a way to experience
your first exposure to "drain", especially devastating levels of it.
Experienced magician is using the "recorder" at the time of the spellcasting,
and suffers the drain for the actions. Simsense Editorial Staff takes the
recording, replays it through a modulations console (not completely unlike an
equalizer for one's stereo, except that the input/output is different) and
makes certain to include certain "safety overrides" in the final recording,
just to make certain someone doesn't have a coronary at the time.

There is a movie, it's been mentioned before. "Brainstorm" is an AWESOME
concept paralleling much of this. Sure, it's a fictional thing. BUT, so is
Shadowrun.

-K
Message no. 4
From: David Buehrer dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 14:55:46 -0700 (MST)
Ereskanti@***.com wrote:
/
/ Okay, I'm not trying to be a real dickhead with this one, but quite frankly,
/ the argument you presented, and in some manner or direction, what *most* have
/ been presented has run into a calamity of sorts, at least IMnsHO (I *like*
/ that Arkham...)

Fair enough :)

/ My reasoning is that certain Bioware/Cyberware does in fact effect the
/ intelligence, which does in turn reflect upon the solidity/strength of the
/ Astral "Personae" (my choice of words here, sorry).
/
/ Additionally, IF the concept of Astral Perception or Projection were a
/ "spiritual" or "astral" thing, then the concept of
"MEMORY" would immediately
/ come to the front of the action. Think about this, I'm very serious. What
/ you (David in this particular case), is that the concept of memory involves
/ the (physical) mind, and Shadowrun has even backed this current theory up
/ (Mnemonic Enhancer and the IMS implant).
/
/ There is some reflection therefore upon the mind of the magician, the
/ physical, recollective, mind of the individual that is using the Astral
/ Perception abilities. It is being translated into something that the mind of
/ the magician is capable of comprehending.

...that's one mighty persuasive arguement. In fact, it completely
demolishes my arguement. Well done.

However, I might have another one :) If nothing else you can educate
me as to the error of my ways ;)

What if the problem occurs at the point at which a Simsense recorder
records.

IMO simsense records perceptions at one of two points. Either at the
point between the sense organ and the brain, or at the point after which
the brain has processed the information.

If simsense records perception as perceived by the sense organ then there
is a valid explanation as to why simsense won't record astral perception.
With the sense of, say, sight, the simsense recorder records the neural
impulses of the optic nerve. When it plays it back the viewers optical
lobes are stimulated with those signals, allowing them to see what the
actor sees, not what the actor perceives.

If this is the case then simsense recorders can't record astral perception
because their is no identifiable neural impulses between the astral "eye"
and the brain to record.

An arguement for this is that if a simsense recorder records directly
from the brain, the "perception" as it were, then I could see conflict
developing as viewers experience the actor's perceptions. Looking
through someone's eyes is one thing, looking through their mind is
another.

And while I will agree that simsense records directly from the brain
when it comes to emotions, I don't see that as a conflict. Emotions
are different from perceptions. If the view feels anger he is free to
associated with it as he pleases. If he perceives the world as the
actor, he would (IMHO) feel very disoriented.

Okay, you are free to commence demolition :)

-David B.
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
ShadowRN GridSec
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 5
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 21:12:38 EST
In a message dated 2/18/1999 4:56:40 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
dbuehrer@******.carl.org writes:

>
> Okay, you are free to commence demolition :)
>
David, in a manner far easier and far more easily explained, you *HAVE* come
up with the only argument/opposition for the context as to WHY the Simsense
will NOT record astral perception that I have seen.

Very Good..!!!

I'm going to do some looking, if it is recorded at the point between sensory
organ and brain, then you are most likely correct, it will not work.

If however it connects at the mons connections, which is where the sensory
information reroutes IIRC (I may honestly have this one confused with another
organ that does this), or if it connects in the "brain" itself, then
everything is back at ground zero for the debate.

Like I said, I'll ask around.

-K (who thinks he already knows where those people will likely answer this one
towards)
Message no. 6
From: David Buehrer dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 07:24:13 -0700 (MST)
Ereskanti@***.com wrote:
/
/ David, in a manner far easier and far more easily explained, you *HAVE* come
/ up with the only argument/opposition for the context as to WHY the Simsense
/ will NOT record astral perception that I have seen.
/
/ Very Good..!!!

Every now and then my brain actually works :)

/ I'm going to do some looking, if it is recorded at the point between sensory
/ organ and brain, then you are most likely correct, it will not work.
/
/ If however it connects at the mons connections, which is where the sensory
/ information reroutes IIRC (I may honestly have this one confused with another
/ organ that does this), or if it connects in the "brain" itself, then
/ everything is back at ground zero for the debate.
/
/ Like I said, I'll ask around.

Based on the simple statement in the rules that astral perception can't
be recorded I'm inclinded to believe that simsense recorders directly
record the sensory information before it's processed by the brain.
However, I wouldn't be suprised if there's a comment in the rules that
says otherwise :)

But you gotta admit, it goes a long way towards providing a clearer
understanding of how astral perception works.

-David B.
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
ShadowRN GridSec
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 7
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:09:01 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, David Buehrer wrote:

> / I'm going to do some looking, if it is recorded at the point between sensory
> / organ and brain, then you are most likely correct, it will not work.
>
> Based on the simple statement in the rules that astral perception can't
> be recorded I'm inclinded to believe that simsense recorders directly
> record the sensory information before it's processed by the brain.

Aaaaaaarrrrrrgggghhh!!! This is what I've been saying the whole
time, with the exception that I term "process" slightly differently. Just
because your visual cortex makes an image, doesn't mean you know what it's
an image of. Capturing the signal at the optic nerve or visual cortex
just gives you a "picture," nothing more.

> But you gotta admit, it goes a long way towards providing a clearer
> understanding of how astral perception works.

Yes, it does, which I've been trying (in vain it seems) to get
across.

Marc
Message no. 8
From: Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject: THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception)
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 16:32:23 -0500 (EST)
Marc Renouf <renouf@********.com> writes:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, David Buehrer wrote:
>
> > / I'm going to do some looking, if it is recorded at the point between senso\
> ry
> > / organ and brain, then you are most likely correct, it will not work.
> >
> > Based on the simple statement in the rules that astral perception can't
> > be recorded I'm inclinded to believe that simsense recorders directly
> > record the sensory information before it's processed by the brain.
>
> Aaaaaaarrrrrrgggghhh!!! This is what I've been saying the whole
> time, with the exception that I term "process" slightly differently.

No it isn't, that's what I've been saying! :) Seriously,
David has stated this much better than I did during a late-night
session at work, and I've been staying out of the argument until I
could retrieve my copy of Shadowbeat and read it again. :)

As a short version: I see the brain in the SR world as being
a blackbox with known inputs and outputs. Most of the brain surgery
in SR involves a much lesser knowledge of what's going on in there.
Cerebral Booster: Let's shove some extra brain matter in
there and see what happens. Ooh, it's marketable!
Mnemonic Enhancer: Same thing, but with a different kind of
brain matter.

Anyways, I'm going to respond to the message I've been putting
off...

From: Ereskanti@***.com
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 22:29:18 EST
To: shadowrn@*********.org, guilleme@******.cc.purdue.edu,
Hollar@******.cc.purdue.edu, FASAMike@***.com

>SHODAN+@***.EDU writes:
>> Anyways, I make a couple of clearly stated assumptions. I also move
>> some stuff around, so my apologies if I've misinterpreted your words.
>
>And in so moving, you have changed the bias or relationship of the wording.
>That is part of my discussion/argument.

I've noticed that this happens whenever I snip more than about
30% of the original post, so I just ask the original poster to make it
clear if and how something has changed.

>> My interpretation of what can and can't be done: Indirect
>> illusion spells, and other physical spells record on simsense.
>> Mana-based illusions, and other mana-based spells do not record,
>> though their effects will record (the wound from a manabolt will
>> register for example (it's real hard to miss), but the manabolt may
>> not be visible.)
>
> Please note, one piece of cyberware. Sense Link

I noted that piece of cyberware when forming my argument, and
it's pretty much the perfect example of what I'm talking about here.
Why do you bring it up?
The sense link, to the best of my knowledge, *is* a
lowish-grade simsense hookup. What it does, is it reads the sensory
input coming in from the body, and records it somewhere. If you're
astrally perceiving, the sense link will continue to record what your
eyes are seeing, and will probably get something as exciting as the
inside of the mage's eyelids.

> > As far as actual rulings go, the only things I have seen are
> > that things on the astral plane don't record. All other "Magic does
> > not record on simsense" statements have been pretty vague.
>
> True, but don't get "Simsense Recordings" and "Trideo Recordings"
mixed up.

I do, and I don't later on in the post. I deliberately try to portray
the two recording technologies as being related when being recorded
from cybereyes.

> > I missed this thread the first time. It's always been my
> > impression that a blind magician, regardless of whether he was always
> > blind, or his eyes were sewn shut 5 seconds ago, gains the ability of
> > sight, as seen through the astral plane. For a blind magician, this
> > is the same as normal sight, but the only one available to him. It
> > does not, IMHO, manifest as a different sense.
>
> BUT, how does "normal sight" translate to the mind of a person who has
never
> had "sight" in the first place?

It translates the same way "normal sight" would translate for
a newborn baby, with less ability to adapt, if the person is older.
If simsense technology could fix these problems, there would be no
such thing as a "blind" flaw.
It's much like my take on a magician who has never had "normal
vision" astrally perceiving. He develops the equivalent sense, and
uses it. If he then installed cybereyes, they wouldn't have the same
learning curve as someone who has never been able to see at all.

> > > Simsense is using ASIST technology, from both the playing and recording
> > ends
> > > of the business (literally in Shadowbeat's definitions).
> >
> > Now, here's my big point of debate. You see ASIST technology
> > as recording further along than I have always seen it.
>
> Actually, not really. I however have been *very* careful to not get
"ASIST"
> and "Trideo" mixed up.

Actually, you've been stating all along that your version of
ASIST is recording from the brain itself, not from the inputs that are
going into the brain. IMHO, this is how your POV comes across.

> > > Simsense is a recording of (meta)human experience, nothing else,
> > > nothing less.
> >
> > Is it? I've always seen simsense as a recording of the input
> > your body receives, recorded as it enters your brain. You don't
> > *feel* the happiness in the person who has been recorded. You feel
> > the endorphin rush that the simstar felt, because one has been
> > triggered in your body.
>
> And thus, your mind (re)creates the experience of it all. What's the phrase?
> "...from a certain point of view?"

So, how can your mind (re)create the experience of astral
perception, if all the ASIST is recording on the visual track is the
pattern of the inside of your eyelids, while the original brain is
seeing astral space?

>>> They will perceive "the aura of their subject",
>>> and in so doing their mind, having been trained, developed, and biased,
>is
>>> going to attempt to translate that into the one thing it understands the
>>most.
>>> Visual Sight. Which then in turns fires the visual cortecis of the
>>> (meta)human mind. Hence, the ability to record. Simsense is NOT going
>to
>>> record the actual "light sensory" that is incoming, that is what
the "
>> Video
>>> Link" or "Eye Camera" are there for. No, it is recording the
interaction
>>of
>>> sensations with the (meta)human mind.
>>
>> I disagree here. I see a raw simsense recording as the
>> sensations a body feels, as it enters the brain. IMHO, if a simsense
>> signal can place a signal in after it has been translated by the
>> visual cortex, the same recording technology could be used to scan
>> surface thoughts, dig through memory, or produce a
>> visual-cortex-on-a-chip.
>
>Actually, it can, especially in lue of the concepts of skillsofts (any
>category) as well as Cyberdeck technology and "BTL/Psychotropic"
>considerations.

Show me an example of this, that clearly involves mucking
around *directly* with the brain. My take on BTLs is that the art of
projecting subliminal messages has advanced quite a bit with the new
technology. The pleasure/pain/etc inputs are being stimulated so that
new associations occur, but not to the conscious mind.

>> I also like the idea of a more unified technology, so that a
>> Video Link/Eye Camera combo are the same sort of technology used in
>> simsense, or perhaps derived in the oppposite order. I don't see the
>> two technologies as being unlinked.
>
>This is what I was referring to as getting "Trideo" and "ASIST"
mixed up.

Very well, skip this paragraph, it's going off on a tangent
anyways. However, the original point of this paragraph is that *I*
feel that the Video Link/Eye Camera is taking ASIST input and
converting it into Trideo. I do not have the two mixed up, but
instead, I see them as related. I guess that could be defined as a
"deliberate mixup", and if you choose to do so, then I guess I have
the two mixed up.

>> SR also lists the brain (and spine, to a lesser extent) as
>> being the big things still mysterious to science in the SR world. I
>> find it more plausible that simsense can reecord the input as it
>> enters the brain, rather than recording a brain map, and feeding the
>> same mapping onto the viewer of the simsense.
>
>I'm honestly afraid you have lost me in this paragraph? What exactly is the
>difference? "record the input as it enters the brain" vs. "recording a
brain
>map" and then continuing with "feeding the same mapping?" Tell me,
what's a
>"MAP" at this point in your discussion? It would help me understand what
you
>are saying.

You've lost me, because my definition of "brain map" is one
step short of handwaving. Let me redefine "brain map" as "how you
think ASIST technology works", and "how I feel ASIST technology works"
as grabbing the inputs before they hit the brain and playing them back
in a similar manner.
What you describe involves a large amount of mucking around in
the brain, while what I see is more of mucking around with the inputs
to the brain.

>True and Not True all at the same time. Sadly, IMO, "Emotions" are
reflected
>in pscyhoreactive chemical interaction that occurs within your (and mine and
>*their*) body.

Yep. In addition, Simsense doesn't always record the emotive
track, only in the high-grade recordings.

> Sure, we'd like to liken them to a higher function, but to
>Science, that simply isn't going to be happening anytime in the near(distant?)
>future. By manipulating broad PR Chemical ("...tropinism" terminology
abounds
>here) interaction and/or even the neural "firing" of various synaptic
>activities, it becomes possible to "simulate" the various
"stimulations" of
>another target.

Yes, this seems to be how ASIST mimics emotions. I'm not
clear where you were going with this. Could you provide more
direction? Recording the emotional state of the caster when he casts
a spell doesn't amount to recording a spell.

>> Besides, if all that shows up on simsense is the psychological
>> effect of "yay, my spell worked", followed by a migraine, *I* think
>> that's a good example of magic not recording very well.
>
>No, actually that's a recording that works well, but is simply not understood
>by the person who is experiencing the recording.

I think we're in complete disagreement on whether something
records well. IMHO, when the shadowtalk says that magic doesn't
record worth a damn, the description I give above is a fine example of
a recording that isn't going to sell, and provides no insight as to
what's going on (i.e., doesn't record worth a damn).

*There's nothing in there that cannot be duplicated with a
hologram and a blow to the head.*

This is pretty key... Watching the playback, you have no idea
exactly what actions he went through to perform the casting of a
spell. With mundane actions, you know. The body is giving you input
in response. With spellcasting, you can do it even if you're
completely paralyzed, as long as your eyes work well enough to see the
target.

> What a way to experience
>your first exposure to "drain", especially devastating levels of it.
>Experienced magician is using the "recorder" at the time of the
spellcasting,
>and suffers the drain for the actions. Simsense Editorial Staff takes the
>recording, replays it through a modulations console (not completely unlike an
>equalizer for one's stereo, except that the input/output is different) and
>makes certain to include certain "safety overrides" in the final recording,
>just to make certain someone doesn't have a coronary at the time.

Alternatively, someone simrecords someone with a migraine. An
experienced magician with a trode set watches the playback, and offers
advice on how to make it more accurate. A sim technician fiddles with
the output, and the cycle repeats. You now have a simrecording of
"drain" indistiguishable from actual drain.

Mark

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about THANK YOU!! (Re: Simsense and Astral Perception), 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!