IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Agents and Copy Protection
Ravor
post Jul 14 2007, 07:07 AM
Post #1


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



According to RAW an Agent has the following skills at ( Rating );

Computer
Cybercombat
Data Search
Hacking

So since breaking copy protection requires an extended ( Software + Logic ) test in theory an Agent could still try to default at ( Rating -1 ), which quite frankly aren't good odds at all. So I was wondering whether people allowed various "Skill Autosofts" to be used by Agents, and if so, do people consider an Agent to be capable of trying to break copy protection on other programs, or even itself? (Personally I'd rule that you couldn't break copy protection on an active program, but I'm not sure if that has any basis in reality.)

Also as an aside, even if you allow the usage of "Skill Autosofts" are they common enough to be bought and sold or are they something which a Decker would ahve to code himself?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ddays
post Jul 14 2007, 08:49 AM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 114
Joined: 2-July 07
Member No.: 12,127



I would have to rule against agents getting software skillsoft simply on the grounds that it potentially allows them to replicate endlessly.

Sounds like a nightmare AI scenario to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Jul 14 2007, 09:19 AM
Post #3


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



Ddays, Ravor, I like to follow the school of thought that replications are impossible due to the new architecture of the very core of the new hardware; IE, self-replication is impossible.

So, you can crack and copy software all you want (provided you can make the test to crack it), but active things - Agents, or anything else that can run other programs - can't be copied. Any copies are simply dismissed, evaporated into electronic nothingness.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
knasser
post Jul 14 2007, 10:44 AM
Post #4


Shadow Cartographer
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,737
Joined: 2-June 06
From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West)
Member No.: 8,636



Edit: Deleted: Going to post a more thought out answer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Buster
post Jul 14 2007, 01:41 PM
Post #5


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,246
Joined: 8-June 07
Member No.: 11,869



You could say that IC is a hardware/firmware "network appliance" that can't be copied (or rather it can be copied as easily as you can "copy" a motorcycle). However, since agents run on the host systems and are free roaming, they can be copied just like any other program.

But you could always go the Star Trek route and say that an agent's neural matrices are actually made of magical pixie dust instead of code and become unstable and disintegrate if copied.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Jul 15 2007, 07:08 AM
Post #6


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



ShadowDragon8685 if it were the case then Emergence and it's fears of another Mega-Virus simply doesn't make any sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post Jul 15 2007, 04:24 PM
Post #7


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



fears and reality are two different things ;)

what people fear have often little or no root in reality.

more people fear being in a plane crash then in a car crash, but more people die each year in car crashes then they do in plane crashes...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Jul 15 2007, 08:54 PM
Post #8


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



Hobgoblin has it.

Fear is not always founded. And after two crashes due to self-replicators, I'm pretty sure they've engineered all their new computer drek to have constantly running protection protocols against self-replicators.

Neither Technomancers nor A.I. can change the fundamental rules of the system, nor can they break them. And (extremely) agressive protection against self-replication is (IMO) the bedrock upon which the Matrix 2.0 is built.


But that dosen't stop people from panicing about it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Jul 15 2007, 09:33 PM
Post #9


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



Yeah, but part of what I'm asking is that am I missing where this is actually spelled out somewhere via Canon, or is this your theory on why copy protection works the way that it does?

Because my non RAW theory is that the Matrix 2.0 is largely the result of hype and that at it's core it is nothing more than the Marix 1.0 with some wireless access points bolted on. However I fully expect to be "proven wrong" when Unwired comes up so I'm just hoping against hope that they are able to provide a Canon explaination that works better then what they've given us so far.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post Jul 15 2007, 09:37 PM
Post #10


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



raw dont go either way. i think its lack of specifics are by design...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wakshaani
post Jul 15 2007, 09:53 PM
Post #11


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,598
Joined: 24-May 03
Member No.: 4,629



QUOTE (Ravor)
Yeah, but part of what I'm asking is that am I missing where this is actually spelled out somewhere via Canon, or is this your theory on why copy protection works the way that it does?

Because my non RAW theory is that the Matrix 2.0 is largely the result of hype and that at it's core it is nothing more than the Marix 1.0 with some wireless access points bolted on. However I fully expect to be "proven wrong" when Unwired comes up so I'm just hoping against hope that they are able to provide a Canon explaination that works better then what they've given us so far.

This is what *I'd* prefer, I know. It just makes more sense to be using the pre-existing infrastructure rather than setting up peer-to-peer radio towers or the like. Use the old cabling, tack on some wireless transmitters, and get it up and running again in a few weeks.

What may happen instead is that the old Matrix just *died* and can't come back, so new infrastructure *had* to be laid down.

I dunno.

Techfoo is beyond me, so, I don't know which makes more sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post Jul 15 2007, 10:21 PM
Post #12


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



there was emp strikes done towards key junctions iirc.

still, most of the cables would be fiber optics. so if they could get the junctions back in shape fast, the cables would still be there, ready for use.

still, there is the psychological side, where you can go: "look, no wires. and when using AR with that there is no risk of being trapped online".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Jul 15 2007, 10:46 PM
Post #13


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



Sure, but you also have to take into account that the "wireless Matrix" was already in the works before Crash 2.0 so it would have to be compatable with the existing Matrix in order to make any sense. (At least to me.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st July 2024 - 12:22 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.