 Five Years is Not Enough. |
  |
 Mar 23 2005, 08:35 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 369 Joined: 1-September 03 From: New York State Member No.: 5,563  |
Lets say that some one some where is working on tech to replace what we currently call the internet. Sure it will be simular but the basic tech will be completely different. Next lets say that a year before they can bring it to market Al Quidea some how manages to destroy the infrastructure of the internet. They crash it hard. Something that will disrupt service for a year or more in some locations.
What do you think the priority is going to be? I'll bet interested parties are going to be concerned with time. How fast can we restore service? So, to do this quickly: do they replace the damaged equipment with the already existing tech that is in abundance or do they dick around waiting for that some, one some where to manufacture enough of their untried tech and software? Thanos |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 08:43 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 18-March 02 From: Plymouth UK. Member No.: 2,408 |
Unless of course the tech was already in development.
Or even better waiting in the wings to replace existing tech anyway. :notworthy: :smokin: |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 08:56 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
King of the Hobos Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,117 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 127 |
Depends on how badly fried it is. If it's so badly damaged that you're going to have to rebuild damn near the whole thing and something like the wireless network initiative had come out just before the incident, then the major hurdle against introducing it - the massive cost of it compared to an already working system - is neatly taken out of the equation.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 08:52 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 91 Joined: 23-January 05 From: Washington, DC Member No.: 7,007 |
Entirely depends on how much nuyen the patent holders of the new tech slipped into the pockets of the old politicians! ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 08:53 PM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
conclusion-leaping: the first official Dumpshock Olympic event. nothing that's been written so far says that the basic technology will change. as a matter of fact, given that the WMI has been in development since Target: Matrix, it's probably safe to assume that the basic technology doesn't change--that the WMI is, in fact, intended from the get-go to be completely compatible with existing technology. all you have to do is set up a bunch of wireless routers, and then replace the hardline connection on the machines with a wireless uplink. that's no harder than replacing your NIC with a wireless NIC. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 09:07 PM
Post
#6
|
|||
|
The King In Yellow Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,922 Joined: 26-February 05 From: JWD Member No.: 7,121 |
I doupt anyone can keep up with the garbage I wrote yesterday. Don't drink and post. >_< |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 09:16 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Slacker Extraordinaire Group: Retired Admins Posts: 337 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ashburn, VA Member No.: 997 |
I agree... server operating systems, programming languages, and more would likely be 100% the same aside from some new drivers for the new hardware and maybe a couple of new protocols for newer methods of connectivity. Those things wouldn't take long to put together. (I assume) The only additional hardware would be the NIC or whatever that connects individual devices to the network and the wireless hubs, switches, and routers that link those signals into the larger network. Of course some things would probably have to change. If digital overlay completely replaces matrix topography (or even if it doesn't I suppose) a new breed of client OS or browser would be necessary. And, given that projects to replace the internet have been being worked on for years in the real world, it's not so difficult to imagine that someone was doing the same in Shadowrun. Depending on how badly the 'crash' is, the cost of rebuilding the old network (possibly having the same vulnerabilities again) might have been about the same as implementing a new one (without the potential vulnerability and with a whole bunch of additional functionality). If that were the case, why not go with the new? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 09:54 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
surfing under the influence? expect the Information Superhighway Patrol to stop by your residence shortly.
i'm not even sure the basic structure of the Matrix itself--the connections between the computers--will need to change much, if at all. they could still be using landlines for the massive data transfer that occurs between, say, RTGs (though as i understand it, that structure is going to take a serious hit from terrorist shenanigans), and just replacing the end-user connections with wireless. even without the terrorist attacks, WMI could have possibly outstripped hardline access within 5 years, and certainly could have done it in 10 (barring acts of god or Lofwyr). |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 09:51 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
The King In Yellow Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,922 Joined: 26-February 05 From: JWD Member No.: 7,121 |
They'll never catch me! *speeds away* |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:05 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 369 Joined: 1-September 03 From: New York State Member No.: 5,563 |
Quote mfb
On further reflection you may be right but about the change in tech to a degree. From what I've read it may not be completely but significantly changed. The Virtual Overlay. Don't sound like adding wireless routers to me. Sound a little bit more involved. And even if it isn't how long will it take to trickle down the the average joe? 5 Years? Maybe but I doubt it. Yes I'm aware of the WMI but is it ready to go to market in '65? Is there enough of it to get the matrix 2.0 up and running for every one in 5 years? Also consider the equipment that isn't damaged. Oh Yeah. BIIIGGG factor. There are tv stations still using video machines running 2 inch tape they bought in the late 1960's due to how much they cost. Here comes some new tech. I don't need a deck. Cool! I'm just gonna though my 100k :nuyen: deck in the trash with all the accessories. Don't think 5 years is enough. Thanos |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
On average 5 years is not probably enough, but maybe this is not an average stiuation. Cell phones took a very long time to trickle down but PDAs did not. Now they are in the first gen of combos and leaping forward.
Maybe matrix 2.0 is a combo of WMI/Cranial Cyberdecks and display link/smart gun tech. One tech is just waiting to be mated with anther to really take off. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
the VR overlay is just an application, though. everything the VR overlay can do is already possible with SR's existing technology, as long as you're willing to walk around with a mile-long fiberoptic cable attached to your skull (or your trodes) at all times. assuming that the WMI was produced with one or more lines of accessories in stores on the day of its opening--and since it's basically intended by its designers to be a cash cow, i can't imagine that it won't be--i don't see why five years is too short a time at all. without other factors, VR overlay-enabled stores/restaurants/subway stops/etcetera might not be ubiquitous, but they'll be common.
i'm not sure what they'll do with cyberdecks. the basic protocols will all be the same--you'll still be using ASIST--so i'm tempted to say that cyberdecks should work on WMI as well as they did on hardlines. however, they're going to completely rewrite the Matrix rules, so it's kinda hard to say exactly how--or if--the old will interact with the new. i think it should be possible to do something with the deck besides throwing it away. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:21 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
In the picture for the promo the dwarf/hacker is holding a small box.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:50 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 369 Joined: 1-September 03 From: New York State Member No.: 5,563 |
mfb and Pthgar. You do make very good points. However I remain unconvinced that 5 years is enough time for the new tech to become common. We've had cable and dsl for how long? There are still many places that use dial up and have no access to other modes of connectivity. Certainly most of the major corps in key areas will have this new tech but how many lower level R&D labs or just admin offices will have it?
Thanos |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:55 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
Well, I guess if you want to talk about tech penetration, I can see your point. How about Matrix 2.0 in the cities and military establishments and expensive rural estates with satlinks. Everywhere else, plain old matrix. Really, not even that because of lack of support and infrastructure degradation. Think of how Prodigy went when direct internet access through the ISP became common. Struggled for a while than gave up.
5 years is too short for full penetration of the market, but how about 50% or even 75%? |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:56 PM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Eh? PDAs started in 1992 and, IIRC, didn't take off until nearly 2000. That is not that short a trickle-down time, though it's still under a decade. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 10:58 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
Yeah, but mobile phones were around since the 70's.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 11:13 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I'm not contending that they took less time, but that they both took a fair amount of time. Also, the contention that PDAs have trickled down is a seriously debatable one.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 11:10 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
I guess I phrased my originall point wrong. Try this:
Once two tehnologies that are complimentary find each other, the trickle dow time can be greatly reduced. Nearly everyone has a cell phone. Nearly every cellphone has a rudemntary PDA in it, thus reducing the trickle down time for PDAs (not cellphones) from decades to less than a decade. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 11:56 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
there's also the marketing angle to consider. WMI has a lot of resources behind it, pushing it to make it a big thing. if they step in and offer their services at reduced cost to areas particurlarly hard-hit by the fall of the old Matrix, it'd be pretty easy for WMI to take over in only 5 years. basically, it's pocket jesus, and it's pocket jesus with a great marketing scheme and a huge opportunity dropped right in its lap. everybody's going to want their own.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 11:49 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
I think part of what's missing here is that most people had Matrix access from their cars in 2060, simply not with ASIST. They've already had augmented reality in the form of virtual dashboards as well. Consider that the Athabascan Council already uses wireless repeaters and nothing indicates more places haven't already begun, at least nominally, to switch over. On the other hand, I tend to think 5 years is not enough time realistically.
However, I think the rate at which cell towers appeared, whether we were all using them or not, compared to the rate at which cable previously did is an interesting parallel. This massive tech upgrade is probably the desperate ploy pulled by Novatech, such as was done by Sprint and Verison, and should only appear in places you'd expect to see it: major cities in the UCAS, Japan, Europe, and to a lesser extent the PCC. Not necessarily realistic, but a workable balance between too long and too short. Since I don't plan on making the time jump, but rather actually running my game through it, I'll probably start the change over in 2062. Won't be too bad because I have no PC deckers or riggers. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 11:57 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Problem is that this is Pocket Jesus, and we're talking the Pharisees and Romans bringing him to power.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Mar 24 2005, 12:08 AM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Slacker Extraordinaire Group: Retired Admins Posts: 337 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Ashburn, VA Member No.: 997 |
I think we need to define common. How common is a cyberdeck? Most people access the matrix via terminals. Whatver the device is called that powers the virtual overlay, it is just an advance over and beyond the cyberdeck. That niche group is willing to upgrade or replace their technology to stay on the bleeding edge. The terminals that everyone else uses will be expanded to include their pocket secrataries, cell phones, or other portable computing devices all of which are wireless. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 24 2005, 02:01 AM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 369 Joined: 1-September 03 From: New York State Member No.: 5,563 |
OK. You've convinced me. Thanos. BTW is that a dumpshock 1st? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 24 2005, 02:06 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
Wow. I think it's a first that any body has been convinced of any thing other than their starting position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th April 2024 - 09:42 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.