From:	losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: VR 2.0
Date:	Thu, 28 May 1998 22:10:06 -0400

At 05:07 PM 5/28/98 -0400, you wrote:

<<snip>>

>Both of these systems seem at odds with one of the aspects of deckers
>which I have always thought to be important: the idea that deckers write
>their own programs on a regular basis, indeed, use their own programs
>almost exclusively.

Well, that is your perception of things (and it's not invalid, just not the
only possible take on decking). Ever read Neuromancer, or Count Zero, by
Gibson? Cowboys in Gibson's world frequently make use of progs provided by
their employer or bought from fixers. One character in the novels makes a
living selling both hardware and software for the purposes of cracking
systems.

>Given good programming techniques, it seems reasonable to me that one
>should be able to 'upgrade' existing programs that you own.

Not necessarily, again. Some things, in order to get significantly better
(a rating point's worth, here) have to change their approach or even the
basis of their function. Maybe beyond a certain point, "more" of a given
approach doesn't work, you have to start over if you want to get higher
than a 5 out of your Attack-5 program design. Sometimes what you've
already designed is more a liability than a help in the next stage of
improvement.

Or to put it another way, "Usually you just lose when you sell something
back."

losthalo