 Hackers, Or what makes a rigger a rigger... |
  |
 Apr 13 2005, 02:05 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,047 Joined: 12-November 03 From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation. Member No.: 5,818  |
A rigger is someone with a VCR, right? I mean, that's it. A decker is someone with a deck.
It's the name and the concept that matters. In many ways, a rigger is defined by what they do, not how they do it. And this is what I am frightened of losing. |
 |
 
|
|
Apr 13 2005, 02:19 PM
Post
#2
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 401 Joined: 7-June 02 From: Living with the straw sheep. Member No.: 2,850 |
I'm a bit confused by your question. You start by positing rigger = character with VCR (which is to say, anyone who possesses a certain item, essentially), and then you say
So, then a rigger would be someone who drives/flies/pilots vehicles using a cybernetic interface, and a decker would be someone who hacks about on the matrix (using a cybernetic interface, and probably a cyberdeck), neh? In that case, what exactly are you losing? Are you worried that SR4 might have rigger=cyber-driver-character rather than rigger=VCR? :wobble: |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 13 2005, 03:18 PM
Post
#3
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 81 Joined: 12-April 02 From: the shadows.... Member No.: 2,548 |
I posted this in a different thread, but it seems appropriate here too, in relation to the difference between riggers and deckers and the change to making them all "hackers"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 13 2005, 08:10 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
Jon Szeto had some pretty specific ideas in mind for the in-game science justifications for how the VCR works when he wrote the Rigger rules that have been with us in some form or another since Rigger 2. For whatever reason (space considerations, most likely) his descriptions behind the science of the 'Rig never got published into the sourcebooks, so he put them out in a TSS article called "The Man-Machine Interface".
In that article he explained how the purpose of the 'rig was to not just serve as an advanced form of Direct Neural Interface Control, converting muscle impulses the brain thinks it's sending to the body into control signals that drive the vehicle. The secondary function was to 'hijack' the portion of the brain that normally regulates the body's autonomic functions, turning it into a Process Control Biocomputer that regulates every last controllable variable of the vehicle's power train, controlling such things as fuel/air mixture, valve timings, gear ratios, suspension tuning and so on, with a biological level of regulation and precision The fact that the 'rig could tap the processing power of the brain to be able to squeeze every last drop of performance possible out of the vehicle was supposed to be the justification as why rigging was so much better than just a flat DNI control. However, what I suspect has happened, is that by 2070, they've reached the point where the computers are finally powerful enough that you don't need to hijack someone's hindbrain for processing power, that the computers themselves can now process to a level that they can emulate all the effects a 'rig & living brain combo could produce. At that point, you really just need a full-immersion direct neural interface, which opens the door for the whole Rigger/Decker fusion thing. Wouldn't that mean that in short, anyone who has whatever passes for a datajack in 2070, could do things previously only the Rigger was capable of? Perhaps, but supposedly, from what hints the playtesters have been able to toss out from behind their NDAs, your Vehicle-Specialist Hackers and your Drone-specialist Hackers are still the best at it. This suggests to me that there's a separate skillset involved, or some specialized hardware. One possibility in the specialized hardware department is that since they're supposedly dropping cyberdecks and control 'rigs, they'll incorporate some sort of initiative/reaction enhancement into the datajack itself (or what passes for a datajack in 2070). |
|
|
|
|
Apr 13 2005, 08:18 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Only problem with that concept of hindbrain hijacking is that someoen jacked into a car for extended perods, say, more than 40 seconds or so, would probably die. No more breathing as the part of the brain that controlled that is not regulating oxygen levels in your fuel air mixture. your heart would stop beating properly as that portion is now adjusting the timing sequuence in the spark-plugs
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 13 2005, 08:25 PM
Post
#6
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Exactly what I was thinking. Even if you avoided tinkering with the critical stuff, wouldn't being jacked in for extended periods royally screw with your body temperature control, *cough* waste management organs, etc.? I mean you'd think we'd actually be, you know, using the brains we have? Generally speaking biological organisms get rid of stuff they don't use. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 13 2005, 08:28 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
Unless rig itself takes over the task of regulating the rigger's body. Just enough to emulate a body in a coma state. The question is, then, if you can design something that can serve as a surrogate hindbrain while you hijack the real thing, why would you need the real thing in the first place? Simply because it's a lot easier to control a body in an advanced rest-state like a pseudo-coma than it is to control a complex piece of machinery that is actively being pushed to the limits of its performance envelope. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 14 2005, 03:38 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 486 Joined: 4-August 04 From: Fomorian Wastes Member No.: 6,538 |
I still have in my head...
Rigger=Mechanic/Driver Decker=Coder/Hacker I have yet to see a programmer fix a car or a mechanic hack into network. As to cars of the future being just a computer on wheels when was the last time you had to mig-weld a printer. |
|
|
|
| Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_* |
Apr 14 2005, 06:56 PM
Post
#9
|
||
|
Guests |
I also read the fiction piece he just had published on the Shadowrun RPG site, and if that is how he thinks rigging works--to mentally project different aspects of a personal mental self-image as representative of the vehicle's body and attributes, then rigging in SR is completely effed up because at the very least it is an incredibly inefficient and impractical system, and at worst it makes one wonder, "How do you train your brain to recognize that damage to the rear rotor of the helo you're rigging is the same feeling as one gets when you hurt your lower left leg so that when JC's flying out of Seattle, the left leg of her decker eqv. icon rigger persona hurts and she knows why?" It's unnecessary, inefficient, and when projected onto the experience of rigging a building with CCSS, impossible to accept as a viable DNI system. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 14 2005, 06:58 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
You, sir, have never had to fix an old pin-matrix printer, have you? ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 14 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 27-May 03 From: Detroit Member No.: 4,642 |
You'd be suprised how much overlap there is in working on computers and machines, in mental attitude at least. I am a network monkey and my dad works on cars and manufacturing machinery (millwright.) The troubleshooting techniques and process are very similiar. Still, not the same actual skills.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 14 2005, 10:16 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
I worked a summer job as a Customer Service Rep back in, umm, the 80's. I was told that they intentionally hired ex farm kids because they tended to have much higher mechanical aptitude, and they found this was a huge aid in fixing computers. As I put it "If you can fix a combine, you can fix anything." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 10:06 AM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 401 Joined: 7-June 02 From: Living with the straw sheep. Member No.: 2,850 |
I also read that fiction piece...and it's interesting. What's interesting about it is that the control system is essentially about "imagined body position" and movement and so on... What it makes problematic is, well, the entire paradigm of how the VCR works, not to mention the distinction between the different vehicle skills. What I mean: If you control the vehicle by essentially training yourself to imagine making certain imaginary movements, then there is no reason for the control instructions for any one machine to be any different from those for any other. While any one given machine or vehicle might use a subset of the available commands, it makes more sense to use the rigger adaptation to the vehicle to adapt a universal control system/instruction set to function with that particular vehicle... That in turn, though, implies that the Pilot-Fixed Wing skill is completely different from the 'Rig flying vehicle' skill, even though they encompass much the same kind of skills and abilities (and secondary knowledge, I'd imagine). It also implies that you could default from the 'Pilot: X' skill to rig a vehicle of that kind, but possibly not the other way around (taking your hands off the control column to 'flap your wings' is not the best way to recover from a flat spin...) The other problem with the paradigm presented in that story is that it seems to allow control to be effected primarily using interactive simsense, which is where the disconnect between Rigger/Decker and their game-mechanical abilities and initiative boosts start to cause me a few problems... I'm not going to go near the CCSS rigging thing with a 10' pole... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 03:29 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 189 Joined: 21-April 04 From: Usually in the Nexus Member No.: 6,266 |
Even if the technology changed where Cyberdecks were no longer required (which it obviously has), there is no reason that the cyberculture that we all love would stop calling us "Deckers." Even if they change it in the new books, it doesn't mean that the campaigns played will need to play that fact any heed. If all of this was real, then the fading of the actual Cyberdecks would not necessarily mean the dissapearance of the name Decker, especially to the name Hacker.
Some old coot around 2105 might tell some young codeslinger the story of how Decker's got their names from back when they used to have to use strange keyboards (or a tricked-out fiddle like I use) to work their magic in the Matrix. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 05:43 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Not so obvious at all, given that playtester rumblings say otherwise. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 06:22 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 189 Joined: 21-April 04 From: Usually in the Nexus Member No.: 6,266 |
I say "Obviously" because of Fanpro's Website Q&A. I hope the playtesters help to change this.
Q. Are deckers called hackers in SR4? A. Yes. We’re eliminating the clunky old cyberdeck in SR4, and with no ‘deck, it doesn’t make much sense to call them deckers. So we’re back to calling them hackers, since that’s what they do. (And, yes, we are aware that some hackers out there don’t like having the term associated with illegal activities — and SR hackers will primarily be criminals, like other runners. Realistically, however, “hacking” is the term used for exploring, learning, and exploiting, whether it’s legal or not, so it fits.) |
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 06:25 AM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Where have any of the playtesters mentioned actual 'cyberdecks'? They've mentioned the existance of the word decker in the material they have access to, but the official blurb did specifically state that 'cyberdecks' are no more, and I have seen nothing that contradicts this. Computers or some other type of nterface almost definitely exist, but that is not necessarily a 'cyberdeck'.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 02:16 PM
Post
#18
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Hmm, maybe I misread it. It sounded like, given the context, there were still "decks" but they just weren't the clunkiness skateboard-without-wheels-or-maybe-a-mixing-board from that iconic picture of the girl in the dumpster. I'd have a tough time finding the quote though. P.S. Even the drone RC gear were called "decks", and those are likely a closer model for wi-fi decking. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 16 2005, 10:48 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 149 Joined: 21-March 05 From: UCAS (if its tuesday) Member No.: 7,200 |
but it's not like Jan 1 2070 all old gear will vanish and in it's place will be the shiny new whatever-ness that SR4 SOTA is. I figure that people will continue to use VCR's and decks for quite a while due to the cost, training etc.
And involuntary muscle functions such as breathing and heartbeat are controlled in the brain stem, not in any of the conscious parts of the brain. so using conscious thought for rigging/ decking would not be that hard as I understand. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 10:54 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Tilting at Windmills Group: Members Posts: 1,636 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Amarillo, TX, CAS Member No.: 388 |
I've mentioned more than once that the words "decker," "rigger," and "cyberdeck" continue to appear throughout the manuscript drafts I've seen. The key words in the blurbs and the FAQ, to me, are "clunky" and "old," not "cyberdeck." Haven't seen the draft of the gear list yet, though; that's still very much under construction.
I also don't totally agree with the change in terminology from "decker" and "rigger" to "hacker," especially in light of the continued use of the terms to denote different types of hackers, but it's not the religious issue with me that it is for many people here. I can live with it quite easily. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 16 2005, 11:30 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 189 Joined: 21-April 04 From: Usually in the Nexus Member No.: 6,266 |
....Amen?
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 17 2005, 02:15 AM
Post
#22
|
|||||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
My mistake. Although I knew you mentioned Deckers and Riggers, I don't recall you actually mentioning cyberdecks. For me though, the key phrase in the blurb seems to be ...
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 17 2005, 02:19 AM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Depending on exactly what the next Matrix is like, that whiz-hot Fairlight might have just become a great table leveler. :eek: Old VCRs definately could still be hanging there though, for old vehicles. Dirt cheap too, giving jobs to those hazbeen runners that now will drive tranport trucks for food. ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 17 2005, 04:04 AM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Tilting at Windmills Group: Members Posts: 1,636 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Amarillo, TX, CAS Member No.: 388 |
It's cool. The signal-to-noise ratio in here isn't always what it could be. :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 17 2005, 06:44 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i don't think i can envision a way to get rid of cyberdecks completely--there's got to be some piece of gear that seperates the men from the turtles. but i don't necessarily think that the gear deckers use to hack systems will come in something that looks like a cyberdeck. with pure DNI and the miniaturization that's possible, i don't see why your deck should be larger than a palm pilot, even in SR3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 05:38 AM |
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.