Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Converting SR1/SR2/SR3 Matrix hosts
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Omer Joel
The many old Shadowrun adventures and sourcebooks include, among other thing, outdated (both in terms of in-game history and in terms of game rules) Matrix hosts and systems. So, how do we "Reload" the Matrix? biggrin.gif

RTGs should be considered as the routers and mainframes of very large, regional WANs. LTGs could be treated as LANs and/or WANs but are far less relevant than in SR1/SR2/SR3 unless extreme layring is applied for security reasons. The same goes with PLTGs, though these are far more likely to be layered than RTGs and LTGs.

In SR1/SR2, Each Host consisted of a map of Nodes, which had to be accessed in a linear fashion. They should be converted to SR4 networks of wireless nodes as following:
- SANs should be ignored unless the system is mostly isolated and wired (which is rare)
- SPUs should be ignored unless they are specifically labeled as "chokepoints" or similarly, and then the nodes connected to them (I/OPs and SMs) can only be accessed through them; you'd have to establish a wireless link with the chokepoint ("SPU") before connecting to the layered nodes.
- CPUs should remain "CPUs", that is the facility's/building's mainframe/miniframe/server/security hub/data security hub, but usually one cannot shut down the entire network from them. You could also use them as the local LAN.
- I/OP's and SMs are the devices controlled through them i.e. cameras, doors, etc.
- Datastores are file servers and/or personal terminals (terms).

Unless extreme security layring is in place, assume all or most of the nodes to be accessible via wireless link.

Now, on to Ratings:
Response: 75% of the SR1/SR2 node's Security Rating number, rounded up.
Signal: Assign as you see fit, but typically 3 to 6.
Firewall: If an Access or Barrier ICE is present, the base Firewall rating would be 75% of it's rating, rounded up, plus +1 if the ICE is a Barrier if no such ICE is present, use 75% of the Security Rating number, rounded up; add to that a Security Color Modifier:
CODE

Color Modifier
Blue     -1
Green     0
Orang    +1
Red      +2

System: 75% of the SR1/SR2 node's Security Rating number, rounded up.
Matrix Condition Monitir: As usual (8+[System/2]).
Omer Joel
Now on to SR1/SR2-style ICs (or maybe SR3 too?). First and foremost, their Pilot rating equals 75% of their old "Rating", rounded up; for simplicity sake, assume that their programs are of that rating too, as is their Firewall (as usual).

Access and Barier are discussed in my previous post.

Scrambler: Simply assume that all the files and/or devices in the node are encrypted with a Rating equal to 75% of that of the old IC, rounded up, and add a data bomb of the same rating to each.

Trace and Report: Has the Analyze and Track programs.
Trace and Dump: Has the Analyze, Track, Exploit and Stealth programs, and tries to crash the Hackers system.
Trace and Burn: Has the Analyse, Track, Attack and Armor programs.
Tar Baby: Has the Analyze and Exploit programs, and tries to force the Hacker's system to unload programs.
Tar Pit: Has the Analyze and Exploit programs, and tries to force the Hacker's system to delete programs.
Killer: Has the Analyze and Attack programs.
Blaster: Has the Analyze, Attack and Exploit programs.
Non-Lethal Black ICE: Has the Analyze and Blackout programs.
Lethal Black ICE: Has the Analyze and Black Hammer programs.


Rifleman
love.gif

An actual SIMPLE conversion scheme that works effectively 99% effectively for past products all the way to first edition. Danke! biggrin.gif

[Edit: I can't spell.]
NightmareX
Only one point I disagree with - there would still be RTGs. They'd be somewhat reduced in importance, but they'd still be there.
PlatonicPimp
I agree. I think that there are still regional grids. They are what bounce your signal from point A to point B when you make a call outside your personal signal range. (i.e. the cellular network.)

That's important to remeber because it means that anytime you go to a node outside your personal signal range, the traffic is travelling through the RTG, and therefore anyone on the RTG can try to intercept the signal.
Omer Joel
Corrected.
Omer Joel
QUOTE (Rifleman)
love.gif

An actual SIMPLE conversion scheme that works effectively 99% effectively for past products all the way to first edition. Danke! biggrin.gif

[Edit: I can't spell.]

Actually, it works for SR1/SR2 only for now; SR3 is a bit more different in concept, and far more abstract, so I'll probably treat the SR3 "Host" as a Network (LAN); there WILL be more calculations to be done in the SR3 version. Ironically, there much more in common between the SR1/SR2 Matrix system and the SR4 one than between the SR3 and the SR4 Matrix systems. SR4 is somewhat like the SR1/SR2 system with linearity thrown out of the window, so that you can (in most cases) access whatever node you want rather than "dungeon-crawl" your way to it from the SAN.
Rifleman
QUOTE (Omer Joel)
Actually, it works for SR1/SR2 only for now;

I'm sorry, but why would I want to translate anything else? biggrin.gif

(Okay, Okay, I am kidding, that was a bad joke. But I am a first gen SR man myself, so SR3 is of secondary concern.)

Still, from your work so far, I consider it only a matter of time before you crack that particular egg.
ashenwo1f
this is AWESOME thanks, always good to be able to play a generational campaign if desired this helps allot.
Shadowrun has a neat story arc going on with what, like 20 years game time Being able to play through "historical" events is boss.
If i'm not ready for matrix 2.0 and don't want to ditch my old characters i don't have to. etc. etc.
If i want to play through maria mercurial or bug city i can. I think the new rules and setting are pretty great but they totaly didn't think about the entire setting.

Maybe in a source book.

crash2029
Thanks for the wiz conversions chummer. I'm prepping to run a few SR2 adventures for my group, the conversions are much apprieciated. So gracias, domo and thanx.

BTW the adventures are Eye Witness and Dark Angel. We don't really give a damn about universe continuity, mostly 'cause I'm the only one who knows it. smile.gif

Anyhoo, thanks man.
FriendoftheDork
Thanks, this will make it so much easier to run 1st ed modules for my 4td ed group!
Aaron
QUOTE (PlatonicPimp @ Oct 21 2005, 10:10 AM)
I agree. I think that there are still regional grids. They are what bounce your signal from point A to point B when you make a call outside your personal signal range. (i.e. the cellular network.)

Er ... no, I don't think so. Well, not as such, anyway. When every device is wireless, and every wireless device is also a router, you don't need an infrastructure. Once you have a certain density of devices, you have a mesh network. There might be devices installed to help facilitate long-distance communication (for example, a device on a tower with a Signal Rating of 9 or a Satellite Link or some such), but these are just devices, not networks.

Any discussion of an RTG or WAN or MAN would be analogous at best, and refer to "the devices in this area," rather than any sort of specific infrastructure.
Nim
I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers. From a technical perspective, yes, every device could act as a router for every other device. And if this were a designed network - a bunch of devices in a corporate office, say - that's probably what they'd do. There, you're dealing with a collection of known, friendly devices.

Outside of a controlled environment, though, you can't ASSUME there will be 3rd-party devices in range that are willing to forward your signal. After all, why should they? They don't care whether your call goes through. And of course, if you want a reliable connection, you want to know and trust the node that's forwarding on your data. A pure mesh of peer nodes will be vulnerable to vandalism - all it takes is for someone to claim to be the least-cost route to some distant spot and then throw the data on the floor.

You might end up with some sort of managed peer network, though. Something like current-day celphone service, where part of the deal was that everyone on the service agreed to pass traffic for anyone ELSE on the service. There could be a sort of settlement process, where you get credits for routing other peoples' traffic, with the credits reducing your fee for the month.
Aaron
QUOTE (Nim)
I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers.

Don't think of it as "the generosity of strangers" so much as "conformity to standards." Modern routers on the Internet do this all the time. Got a Windows machine? Type in tracert bbc.co.uk and see whether all of the routers in the path belong to the same network, or whether some are "strangers" who are being "generous."

QUOTE (Nim)
Outside of a controlled environment, though, you can't ASSUME there will be 3rd-party devices in range that are willing to forward your signal.

Again, there's a matter of standards. When all wireless devices are set up to act as routers, and almost all electronic devices are wireless, it works fine. That's what the WMI was all about (page 34 in your hymnal). It's not about wireless networking, it's about ubiquitous wireless networking.

QUOTE (Nim)
And of course, if you want a reliable connection, you want to know and trust the node that's forwarding on your data.  A pure mesh of peer nodes will be vulnerable to vandalism - all it takes is for someone to claim to be the least-cost route to some distant spot and then throw the data on the floor.

This is actually less of a problem than you may think. Properly done, the sender would recognize the least-cost route and send a portion of a datagram via that route, and then find the next least-cost. Even better, shuffle your metrics each time you send a portion of a datagram. Even betterer, don't send consecutive chunks, and send (say) every twelfth bit along twelve different routes. I suspect the original designers had this in mind when they wrote the rule that you can only "eavesdrop on the wireless connections of anyone whose Signal range reaches you." (Boyle et al. 225)

QUOTE (Nim)
You might end up with some sort of managed peer network, though. Something like current-day celphone service, where part of the deal was that everyone on the service agreed to pass traffic for anyone ELSE on the service. There could be a sort of settlement process, where you get credits for routing other peoples' traffic, with the credits reducing your fee for the month.

There's another option, one that is less complicated in implementation and makes more sense from a nuyen standpoint. NeoNET says "make your wireless devices like this" and everyone complies or doesn't get to use the Matrix. No traffic tracking, no account balance changes, NeoNET gets all the cash and all the control.

Note that I'm talking about the Matrix in general, not private networks or the sort of internal infrastructure one would see in a government facility or on corporate campus. Those networks are most likely private, and even more likely wired (well, more accurately "cabled," since fiber optics don't really use wires, but you know what I mean).
Nim
QUOTE (Aaron @ Apr 6 2007, 01:46 PM)
QUOTE (Nim)
I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers.

Don't think of it as "the generosity of strangers" so much as "conformity to standards." Modern routers on the Internet do this all the time. Got a Windows machine? Type in tracert bbc.co.uk and see whether all of the routers in the path belong to the same network, or whether some are "strangers" who are being "generous."

I'll reply to the rest when I get a chance to actually give full attention to the technical details, but I can reply to this one now. Oh - and the really general examples and such are just to keep this all readable, not to insult your intelligence, Aaron. You clearly know your stuff; we're disagreeing more about how the tech will be used than how it works smile.gif

The routers in your traceroute are owned by people who are being PAID to route that traffic. There's a commercial agreement between me and my ISP. My ISP has service-and-reciprocity agreements with a bunch of peer providers, and (if it's a smallish ISP) with one or more big backbone providers. Everybody involved is getting their nickel, or being compensated via barter by having their own traffic carried in turn. It's cooperative, but it's a formalized cooperation with contracts and money changing hands.

Phone companies route calls between each other all the time, or you wouldn't be able to call a friend with a different cellular service. But they also compare who sent how much, and bill each other for the difference.

I /do/ think that cooperative, no-cost networks would exist, at least locally. But I think they'd be perceived as less reliable, so I don't think they'd displace paid services from most of the market.
Aaron
QUOTE (Nim @ Apr 6 2007, 02:34 PM)
The routers in your traceroute are owned by people who are being PAID to route that traffic.

[...]

Phone companies route calls between each other all the time, or you wouldn't be able to call a friend with a different cellular service. But they also compare who sent how much, and bill each other for the difference.

All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.

EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.
Nim
QUOTE (Aaron)
All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.

EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.

After giving it some thought, I /do/ think I was a bit too locked into The Way Things Are Now. But when my real issue is not being convinced that a purely ad-hoc network with NO other backbone makes sense / is plausible, you can see why 'it would work fine in a purely ad-hoc network' doesn't really help me come to terms with it smile.gif

I (believe I) understand how the SR4 wireless world is meant to work; I think I'm just still convincing myself that it's believable.

You're not going to be able to route long-distance traffic by hopping from commlink to commlink; they don't have the range to cross, say, an ocean or large wilderness. For that, you need some sort of backbone - high-Signal transmitters, sattelite uplinks, whathaveyou. Those things ARE 'infrastructure', and they're not free. Someone built them, and someone's maintaining them, and they're getting paid for it. Even if ad hoc suffices for all the traffic within a metro area (which I wasn't convinced of before, but which I'm willing to grant on the basis of reasonable SOTA advances over the course of 60 years), I think you're still going to be looking at some sort of subscription service for long-haul links.

Or am I missing something?
Aaron
QUOTE (Nim)
You're not going to be able to route long-distance traffic by hopping from commlink to commlink; they don't have the range to cross, say, an ocean or large wilderness.

Yes and no. There's long range and there's long range. I imagine I could get a signal from Chicago to New York fairly reliably with all of the traffic and highways that are going between. But in Really The Middle Of Nowhere, you're kinda screwed without a Satellite Link (which has a Signal of 8, even though one would need a Signal of 9 to get to LEO, and 13 to get to geosynchronous orbit, but maybe the Signal is just for ground-based devices and the uplink is directional and separate).

As far as providing an uplink or similar facilities is concerned, I reckon that such a thing could easily be paid for with good old-fashioned marketing revenues. Let's say we put an uplink station or some other long-distance relay in the middle of Champaign, Illinois, and let's say the population there is still around 150,000. Let's also say that one Matrix ID and a month of contact information (what IDs that ID connected to) is worth 0.2• to marketing researchers and targeted advertisers and the like. That tower/uplink/whatever is going to produce 30,000• a month. No subscription fees, nothing up-front, just "here, use this," and away we go.

Is that plausible?
Ravor
Well I guess my question would be why would the Megas set up a system that they basically couldn't even pretend to control? Although I won't pretend to be a network wiz or anything and may just be showing off my ingonace in this matter, but if I'm understanding the way you're setting up the system then Commlink A is bouncing off clothes, RFID Tags, other commlinks, ect in order to access the 'Trix, and all you need to play is a commlink with enough power to reach out and touch someone...

In a world where big brother is watching and all powerful corperations seek to rule the virtual landscape it doesn't really make sense to me anyways to set things up that way. Well plus I don't agree that your shirt is going to have a signal greater then 1, or that people would allow their commlinks to be used as automatic routers without getting something in return. (Plus I don't buy the argument that you can always count on hitting ad-hoc routers in order to go where you want to go.)

Besides, the book itself mentions Public Access Wi-Fi Routers having a range of 10 km just like cell phone towers, with that short of range they can't have been meant for long distance traffic so given the fact that bandwidth is appearently not a huge concern I'd imagine that for cities and towns at least, you get access to the Matrix through your ISP which in turn 'buys' access to a city's Wi-Fi Routers. (After all given what we know about the Megas, why would they settle on a system where they only got to sell data, when they could charge an access fee and then sell the data as cream.)
Aaron
QUOTE (Ravor)
Well I guess my question would be why would the Megas set up a system that they basically couldn't even pretend to control?

Easy. It's not about control. With control comes responsibility, and responsibility isn't profitable. Of course, you can't profit without some control, so you control the parts you have to, and with as little overhead as possible. For example, control the patents and the standards for the Wireless Matrix, and you get to collect from every manufacturer that wants to create a wireless device (with a discount to your own subsidiaries, of course).

QUOTE (Ravor)
Although I won't pretend to be a network wiz or anything and may just be showing off my ingonace in this matter, but if I'm understanding the way you're setting up the system then Commlink A is bouncing off clothes, RFID Tags, other commlinks, ect in order to access the 'Trix, and all you need to play is a commlink with enough power to reach out and touch someone...

I didn't set it up that way, Rob Boyle and company did. Go back and read the section entitled "Welcome to the Machine" on page 38 and 39 of your hymnal. Then look out the window and imagine you're in 2070. See that streetlight? Wireless. Those cars? Wireless. The traffic control box? Wireless. Those people walking across the street? Well, they're not wireless, but they've probably got PANs that are. The sewer drain? Probably wireless, if the city is tracking its infrastructure. The building across the street? Full of wirelessness. Heck, if you're in a large enough city, the street itself is wireless (GridGuide).

Of course, if you're in the country when you look out the window, the example is pretty screwy. But you know what? I live in a city that isn't exactly a metropolis, but my Palm Pilot just found eight wireless networks, and I'm on the edge of town, sixty-three years before the time we're discussing.

QUOTE (Ravor)
In a world where big brother is watching and all powerful corperations seek to rule the virtual landscape it doesn't really make sense to me anyways to set things up that way.

It does to me. If I wanted to go all Big Brother on a population, I'd want as few controls on the network as possible. Step 1 in the US administration's wiretapping program was to remove the oversight and controlling rules on the integrity and privacy of the communications infrastructure.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Well plus I don't agree that your shirt is going to have a signal greater then 1,

Yeah, that does sound silly. Of course, a Signal of 0 is three meters. I bet you're within three meters of a networked electronic device right now.

QUOTE (Ravor)
or that people would allow their commlinks to be used as automatic routers without getting something in return.

Erm ... what if the reward for routing traffic was the ability to use other people's commlinks as routers? This is really electronic communication as an extension of the social contract: you're not kicking people, and as such can expect not to be kicked in return.

QUOTE (Ravor)
(Plus I don't buy the argument that you can always count on hitting ad-hoc routers in order to go where you want to go.)

See the above, starting with "Then look out the window ..."

QUOTE (Ravor)
Besides, the book itself mentions Public Access Wi-Fi Routers having a range of 10 km just like cell phone towers, with that short of range they can't have been meant for long distance traffic

Ever played ultimate? I leave the relevance of the question as an exercise to the reader. =)

QUOTE (Ravor)
(After all given what we know about the Megas, why would they settle on a system where they only got to sell data, when they could charge an access fee and then sell the data as cream.)

I'd buy that if it was Megas (in the plural). But the WMI pretty much belonged to NeoNET, so the game theory works a little differently.
Ravor
Ok, I've reread the Welcome to the Machine and I've come away convinced that we must have two completely different books. About the closest I can find reguarding ad-hoc networks is the ability to link up with your friend's PAN in order to comunicate with them, in fact the way I read the bit about going to the mall you have to first subscribe to their network if you even want your commlink to even aknowledge the mall's existance.

When I move on to page 206 under the section entitled Matrix Topology it does talk about the wireless MESH network that is made up of PANs and other wireless devices, *BUT* it also explictaly talks about "hardwired base stations to the local Matrix infrastucture" which is in turn wired into local telecommunication grids. And it is the linking of those grids which forms the backbone of the Matrix.

And then the way that I read the PAN Modes section on page 211 Active Mode is the only one which other nodes can even access your PAN at all without your premission. In Passive Mode although your PAN does show up as an active network, only pre-authorized nodes can actually access you, and I for one have a very hard time believing that if the Matrix was supposed to be an ad-hoc network of various PANs that Hidden Mode would even be an option without somehow altering your commlink.

And in my opinion more evidence can be found on page 212 in the Linking and Subscribing section, where it talks about just because you have a wireless device(s), like the streetlamps, cars, and PANs you mentioned doesn't mean that they will actually talk to one another unless you tell them to. And given the fairly hard limit to the number of Nodes your commlink can even talk to at once, if my link were automaticaly using one or more as a wireless router then why isn't it mentioned? Because I'd bet that while on a Shadowrun and in Hidden Mode that extra subscribtion slot(s) might come in handy and I'd most definently wouldn't want corp security to use my commlink as an automatic router unless I was tapping into their conversations on purpose.

As for the rest of your post, well, given the way that I read your "hymnal" it's not relavent, there is still in use a hardwired Matrix infrastucture and wires are still the backbone of the 'Trix, not an ad-hoc network based off a "social contract" in a world that is supposed to be a dystopia.
Aaron
QUOTE (Ravor)
Ok, I've reread the Welcome to the Machine and I've come away convinced that we must have two completely different books. About the closest I can find reguarding ad-hoc networks is the ability to link up with your friend's PAN in order to comunicate with them, in fact the way I read the bit about going to the mall you have to first subscribe to their network if you even want your commlink to even aknowledge the mall's existance.

The disagreement does not arise from reading different books, but perhaps from different understandings about how routers work. A router can forward traffic without the source or destination accessing the router. Just because a device isn't acknowledging discovery signals doesn't mean that it can't forward traffic; in fact, I'd speculate that the reason a commlink in hidden mode can be discovered at all is the fact that it's still routing traffic (sure, this may mean that you can turn off the routing functions of your commlink, becoming much like a leech on a BitTorrent, but we'll have to wait for further information from FanPro to be certain).

Besides, when was the last time you connected directly with Level3.net? The only time a cabled backbone is going to be pertinent to the game is when a team specifically makes a run on a backbone facility, or possibly if the adventure is set in some place that has only one Matrix link to the rest of the world.

QUOTE (Ravor)
As for the rest of your post, well, given the way that I read your "hymnal" it's not relavent, there is still in use a hardwired Matrix infrastucture and wires are still the backbone of the 'Trix, not an ad-hoc network based off a "social contract" in a world that is supposed to be a dystopia.

With whom are you arguing? Go back and re-read my posts.

Sure, some of the Matrix is hard-wired. They wouldn't have rules for intercepting traffic if there wasn't. But a backbone isn't made of cables, it's made of routers. And the long-distance, intercontinental stuff is most likely satellite links, anyway; it's far easier and cheaper to use a satellite than to add and maintain physical infrastructure on the ground, especially in politically fractured areas, especially when there are already people living up there to do maintenance and repair.

While you're at it, perhaps you could explain how a social-contract-based network that is constantly exploited by hackers from the underworld, government, and megacorporations is not in keeping with a dystopian theme?
Ravor
QUOTE (Aaron)
Er ... no, I don't think so. Well, not as such, anyway. When every device is wireless, and every wireless device is also a router, you don't need an infrastructure. Once you have a certain density of devices, you have a mesh network. There might be devices installed to help facilitate long-distance communication (for example, a device on a tower with a Signal Rating of 9 or a Satellite Link or some such), but these are just devices, not networks.


QUOTE (Aaron)
Again, there's a matter of standards. When all wireless devices are set up to act as routers, and almost all electronic devices are wireless, it works fine. That's what the WMI was all about (page 34 in your hymnal). It's not about wireless networking, it's about ubiquitous wireless networking.


QUOTE (Aaron)
All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.


QUOTE (Aaron)
EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.


QUOTE (Aaron)
Yes and no. There's long range and there's long range. I imagine I could get a signal from Chicago to New York fairly reliably with all of the traffic and highways that are going between.


Provided that the tags work out like I envision, the parts which I'm arguing with you on should be in bold face. As I understand your stance, you are arguing that infrastructure isn't needed because everyone acts as an ad-hoc router for everyone else. What I'm saying is that given that the Core Book mentions that wired local infrastructure is tied together to what I understand to be grids of city-wide infrastructure which are in turn connected together to from the gobal Matrix as we know it that the Matrix simply can't be comprised totally or even majority from a freely advalable ad-hoc MESH network because someone does have to pay for all the infrastructure that is explictly mentioned in the Core.

As for the idea that every wireless device is also a router, well it sure seems funny that they didn't mention how a device's true Subscription limit is System*2+2 because the way I read the rules (As I mentioned earlier, I'm not even close to a network expert in Real Life, and besides, since when has Shadowrun computers ever worked like they should in 'Real Life'?) any device acting as a Real Time Router needs to eat two subscription slots as the device has to connect to two different nodes to do its job. That means that according to RAW both the Meta Link and the CMT Clip simply can not act as Real Time Routers while connected to any other Node and if the Matrix was built on the idea that everyone would be part of the ad-hoc routing system its odd that there even are commlinks out there that violate that very premise in their design if you use RAW.

*Edit*

As for the bit about why the social-contract based network you've described not being dystopian in nature, well in my opinion the answer is the fact that for the most part it largely works where-as in my view of a dark and gritty dystopia the network as a whole would be overstrained to the point of falling apart as more and more people started leeching off the system. Of course, I've been told that I tend to run cyberpunk and dystopias at the extremes as well, so I'll conceed that point to a matter of personal taste.
Aaron
QUOTE (Ravor)
Provided that the tags work out like I envision, the parts which I'm arguing with you on should be in bold face. As I understand your stance, you are arguing that infrastructure isn't needed because everyone acts as an ad-hoc router for everyone else.

What you seem to be missing is the part where my whole argument is based on the discussions of WANs and MANs. The mention was pretty brief and was way back there, so I can see where it could be missed. Although, now that I look at it again, you actually quoted part of the message that mentioned that, but left that part out; why was that?

QUOTE (Ravor)
As for the idea that every wireless device is also a router [ ... ] any device acting as a Real Time Router needs to eat two subscription slots as the device has to connect to two different nodes to do its job.


The short answer is no. The long answer is encapsulated in a spoiler so as not to bore the uninterested.

[ Spoiler ]
Ravor
Well even based off the wiki links I still disagree albeit a little more informedly facelick.gif , because the way I see things, the local Matrix infrastructure which we know does exist per RAW would basically equate a combination of dedicated wireless routers and the station(s) where they convert into wires and are connected to the regional/global infrastructure that we also know does exist per RAW.

So basically when Joe Street-Sam logs into the Matrix and browses a Hong-Kong node for a listing of local whorehouses, a simplifed version of his datatrail might look something like this...

(Joe's) Commlink ==> (Joe's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Joe's) District MAN ==> (ISP) District MAN ==> ISP Node ==> (ISP) District MAN ==> WAN ==> (Hong Kong) District MAN ==> (Hong Kong) Node

However, provided that the commcode Joe's buddy Frank Mage gave him for the Node in question is correct then Joe probably isn't even aware of the route his datatrail took as he enters the stylized palor and starts bringing up 3D pictures of the girls and notes their prices.

Whereas when Frank fires off a quick call advising which girls to pick up the trail might look like this.

(Frank's) Commlink ==> (Frank's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Frank's) District MAN ==> (Frank's ISP) District MAN ==> (Frank's) ISP Node ==> (Frank's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's) ISP Node ==> (Joe's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's) District MAN ==> (Joe's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Joe's) Commlink

However once again Frank isn't even aware of the datatrail as his Commlink/ISP handles it all for him.

Now under your stance of an ad-hoc network how would it work, and what exactly do you consider the Matrix infrastructure mentioned in RAW to be then?

*Edit*

QUOTE (Aaron)
What you seem to be missing is the part where my whole argument is based on the discussions of WANs and MANs. The mention was pretty brief and was way back there, so I can see where it could be missed. Although, now that I look at it again, you actually quoted part of the message that mentioned that, but left that part out; why was that?


In truth I missed grabbing that chuck in my cut/paste, but I think we still disagree on their status anyways so I'm not sure what including it would have changed.
Aaron
If your datatrail model is accurate, why are the rules for intercepting traffic so restrictive?

Your datatrail for Joe and his buddy Frank makes sense from a modern standpoint. In The Future, though, the apartment terminal, the district MAN (which isn't a node, but a network, incidentally), the ISP node, et alia just aren't necessary. In 2070, each chunk of data sent back and forth would travel through a bunch of different routes, hopping from device to device, then through say half a dozen uplinks, over to Hong Kong, where it would travel through a bunch of different routes, hopping from device to device.

Incidentally, I'm not sure whether I'm conveying this well enough. When Spring Break is over, I'll try to remember to glance through my lesson plans and see if I can find anything that might be adaptable.

The beautiful thing about every device being a router is that you don't need an infrastructure, or rather the population of devices is its own infrastructure. Sure, you still need something to propagate signal through sparsely populated or unpopulated areas, but that's the next bit:

QUOTE (Ravor)
Now under your stance of an ad-hoc network how would it work, and what exactly do you consider the Matrix infrastructure mentioned in RAW to be then?

Mostly satellite uplinks; there's already a lot of that going on today. Why spend a bundle on salary, insurance, etc. for some people to go lay cable when you can just drop 500• on an uplink (probably less, since you're probably the manufacturer) and put it on the roof of one of your subsidiaries.

Sure, there's some legacy stuff left over from before the Crash 2.0, and there's no reason not to use it, but the main profit impetus for the WMI roll-out by Neuronet and Erika would be to go wireless. If you were a mega with a monopoly on wireless networking technology, wouldn't you want as much market penetration as possible? I can see legacy systems being used by municipalities and corporations as a cost-cutting measure, but the pressure from NeoNET would be to "upgrade."

Also, I don't think the concept of "ISP" as we know it is supported in the rules. Never, at any point, does the RAW state that you have to pay a certain amount for basic Matrix access for your commlink, nor does it state that you lose access if you have a Street lifestyle. Plus, if there were a subscription fee, how would technomancers get access?

What you're looking at in 2070 is a logical progression of AT&T's call anybody thing, where you get free airtime if you call any other AT&T customer (come to think of it, AT&T is a fairly good example of a baby evil AAA megacorp). NeoNET has the monopoly on wireless networking, and so can afford to let people use it for free. They've already got their pound of flesh with royalties and massive volume.
Ravor
You see, here is where I think we are getting stymied, I've read the bit about the WMI in the core book, ect, but appearently we have gotten two very different ideas on how extintsive the changes were. You read RAW coming from the view-point that it really was a nearly complete changeover where-as I read RAW from the view-point that for the most part only the surface levels were changed and that the completely new and shiny feel is only true when viewed from the prespective of an average user.

So I'm not going to try to argue with you how a wireless ad-hoc MESH network might or might not work in Real Life, but according to RAW the 2070 Wireless Matrix does require local hardwired infrastructure even in a city, so based off the way I read your descriptions of how a true ad-hoc network would work the Matrix 2.0 simply can't be set up that way.

We also know that in the very least there are Matrix Server Providers, although RAW isn't totally clear whether all they do is provide you with your Commcode and an email drop-box or if they are actually necessary to browse the Matrix. Given the choosen name, I tend to lean towards the latter, with the exception of course Nodes which you are close enough to connect with directly. And according to RAW most people do pay for such services which I would assume is part of Lifestyle, but there are free albeit unreliable Matrix Service Providers out there as well for those with Squater or Street Lifestyles.

We also know that commcalls can and do pass through multiple wired Matrix Nodes and that in order to intercept them you just need to have access to any one of the Nodes in the path, and that these taps are detectable abeit difficultly. You only need to be close to the commlink if you are intercepting the wireless signal before it gets transfered into the Matrix itself, otherwise if you could securely send commcalls through an ad-hoc wireless network and only worry about people evesdropping on you within your link's signal rating why would you do anything else? So I say that the rules for intercepting Matrix Traffic aren't really that restrictive and support my way of viewing the Matrix 2.0.

And we also know you can direct your traffic through black 'anomymizer nodes' whoes sole purpose is to confuse traces, ect...

And speaking of Traces, if virtually the entire Matrix is no longer wired in lue of an ad-hoc wireless network why does RAW make such an effort to point out the effects of intercepting commcalls through wired Nodes, or tracing the Datatrail to a wired node? In fact, how exactly would a trace through an ad-hoc network work as the nodes involved would be constantly moving and changing in and out of each other's Signal Rating so the same pathway(s) most likely don't even exist anymore.

As for technomancers getting Matrix Access, well with the exception of the Nodes that happen to be close enough for them to hit directly via wireless, they would have to pay an Matrix Service Provider for a commcode. I don't remember if this was in the FAQ or if it appeared as a post, but I seem to recall one of the designers saying that Technomancers would do well to have a working commlink, if for nothing else then storage for IDs, commcodes, ect... (That is of course assuming that my aging memory isn't failing me, so be forewarned.)
Aaron
Ravor, could you give some page numbers for your assertions in your last post, please? Some consider it rude to make other people do your research for you.
Ravor
Sure, no problem...

<><><><><><><><><><>

...but according to RAW the 2070 Wireless Matrix does require local hardwired infrastructure even in a city...

QUOTE (Matrix Topology; page 206)
The Matrix is a complex organism, a vast collection of billions of nodes all linked together in various networks that are themselves linked together. At the bottom layer of the pyramid are individual users with their commlinks and personal area networks (p.210). These users and PANs wirelessly interact with other PANs and devices all around them in a wireless mesh network, Homes and offices are integrated through a terminal -- or term for short -- that tends to serve as its multimedia center (image scanner, full-size printer, video screen or holo display, larger speakers, and so on). This network connects through numerous gateways and hardwired base stations to the local Matrix infrastructure; together, they form a telecommunications grid. These grids are, in turn, interlinked, forming the backbone of the Matrix itself.


We also know that in the very least there are Matrix Server Providers, although RAW isn't totally clear whether all they do is provide you with your Commcode and an email drop-box or if they are actually necessary to browse the Matrix.

QUOTE (Commcodes; page 214)
Everyone using the Matrix has a personal commcode, or Matrix address -- the equivalent of a vell phone number or email address -- to which their calls and messages are directed. Your commcode is usually registered with a paid Matrix service provider, though numerous free (if unreliable) and anonymous shadow-sites offer the same service. Hackers and shadowrunners -- and other criminals -- typically pay extra for the anonymity and extra security of a black commcode.


We also know that commcalls can and do pass through multiple wired Matrix Nodes and that in order to intercept them you just need to have access to any one of the Nodes in the path, and that these taps are detectable abeit difficultly.

QUOTE (Intercept Traffic; page 224)
In order to intercept traffic between any two nodes or users, you must first have access to a node that the traffic passes through. For example, to intercept a comcall between a Mr. Johnson and his lackey, you either need to compromise one of their commlinks or gain access to the Matrix nodes that the comcall passes through (which could be a challenge unto itself). Note that this action only applies to traffic passes through a wired medium; for wireless traffic, see Intercepting Wireless Signal, p. 225. The gamemaster may also require you to succeed in a Computer + Browse Test to locate the traffic flow you seek to intercept.


You only need to be close to the commlink if you are intercepting the wireless signal before it gets transfered into the Matrix itself, otherwise if you could securely send commcalls through an ad-hoc wireless network and only worry about people evesdropping on you within your link's signal rating why would you do anything else?

QUOTE (Intercepting Wireless Signals; page 225)
Wireless traffic is broadcast through the air, so anyone within range of a signal can pick it up, whether they are connected to the transmitting party or not. Thus you can eavesdrop on the wireless connections of anyone whoes Signal range reaches you. This makes it possible for you to even intercept traffic within a specific network -- such as the PAN traffic between Mr. Johnson's commlink and the other devices on his network.


And we also know you can direct your traffic through black 'anomymizer nodes' whoes sole purpose is to confuse traces, ect...


QUOTE (Commcodes; pages 214-215)
You can also take advantage of encrypted re-routing services that route your link through numerous shadow-operated "anonymizer nodes." These nodes intentionally strip all identifying data from the link and even stagger traffic that enters and leaves the node in order to stymie traffic analysis attempts.


And speaking of Traces, if virtually the entire Matrix is no longer wired in lue of an ad-hoc wireless network why does RAW make such an effort to point out the effects of intercepting commcalls through wired Nodes, or tracing the Datatrail to a wired node? In fact, how exactly would a trace through an ad-hoc network work as the nodes involved would be constantly moving and changing in and out of each other's Signal Rating so the same pathway(s) most likely don't even exist anymore.


QUOTE (Track; page 219)
With a Track action, you can trace a user's datatrail from his icon back to his phyiscal location. This is different from a Data search action (which is like looking up someone's commcode in a directory); a trace follows the target's current connections node-by-node all the way back to the source. Note that you must have detected the target with a Matrix Perception Test (p. 217) in order to trace him.

...

Once you've scored hits equal to the threshold, you've identified the target's originating node and access ID (see Authorized Access, p. 215), If the node is wired to the Matrix, you'cve ascertained its physical location. If the node is a mobile wireless device, the device's rough current physical location has been triangulated (to within 50 meters). You can continue to monitor the device's location if it moves, as long as the device stays on and maintains a wireless connection.


<><><><><><><><><><>

So how exactly would a Trace action be able to work in an ad-hoc network where the 'routers' that the Matrix traffic was passing through were continuely on the move and may not even be within range of each other anymore? Also I note that Trace mentions that it tracks the traffic through nodes and not routers, so in my mind we get back to Subscription Slots again. (True, it might not work that way in Real Life as you've explained, but since when has Shadowrun computers ever worked like they should in Real Life?)
Aaron
Thanks.

QUOTE (Ravor)
...but according to RAW the 2070 Wireless Matrix does require local hardwired infrastructure even in a city...

QUOTE (Matrix Topology; page 206)
The Matrix is a complex organism, a vast collection of billions of nodes all linked together in various networks that are themselves linked together. At the bottom layer of the pyramid are individual users with their commlinks and personal area networks (p.210). These users and PANs wirelessly interact with other PANs and devices all around them in a wireless mesh network, Homes and offices are integrated through a terminal -- or term for short -- that tends to serve as its multimedia center (image scanner, full-size printer, video screen or holo display, larger speakers, and so on). This network connects through numerous gateways and hardwired base stations to the local Matrix infrastructure; together, they form a telecommunications grid. These grids are, in turn, interlinked, forming the backbone of the Matrix itself.

That says that there is an infrastructure for the city, not that it's wired. Plus, there's no specificity about whether data traffic that's destined to go across town uses the infrastructure. So if you want it to work that way in your game, keen.

QUOTE (Ravor)
We also know that in the very least there are Matrix Server Providers, although RAW isn't totally clear whether all they do is provide you with your Commcode and an email drop-box or if they are actually necessary to browse the Matrix.

It states that a service provider gives you a Matrix ID. It doesn't say (or even imply) that it provides access.

QUOTE (Ravor)
We also know that commcalls can and do pass through multiple wired Matrix Nodes and that in order to intercept them you just need to have access to any one of the Nodes in the path, and that these taps are detectable abeit difficultly.

QUOTE (Intercept Traffic; page 224)
In order to intercept traffic between any two nodes or users, you must first have access to a node that the traffic passes through. For example, to intercept a comcall between a Mr. Johnson and his lackey, you either need to compromise one of their commlinks or gain access to the Matrix nodes that the comcall passes through (which could be a challenge unto itself). Note that this action only applies to traffic passes through a wired medium; for wireless traffic, see Intercepting Wireless Signal, p. 225. The gamemaster may also require you to succeed in a Computer + Browse Test to locate the traffic flow you seek to intercept.


Er, this only applies to a wired medium, like it says. The whole idea of the wireless Matrix is that it's ... you know ... wireless.

QUOTE (Ravor)
You only need to be close to the commlink if you are intercepting the wireless signal before it gets transfered into the Matrix itself, otherwise if you could securely send commcalls through an ad-hoc wireless network and only worry about people evesdropping on you within your link's signal rating why would you do anything else?

Are you suggesting that my data traffic goes from my commlink through the municipal infrastructure to the commlink of my compadre on the other side of the room?

To answer your question, though: that's my point. If I write a letter to my girlfriend, then split up that letter into five letters that carry every fifth character in the letter, then give those letters to five of my friends to carry to her via five different routes, it doesn't matter which one you intercept; you won't be able to figure out my message. If you catch them all together, however, when they're with me or when they're with my girl, then you'll be able to piece together the whole letter. You dig?

Also, you're making a distinction between a commlink and the Matrix. Check out the first paragraph under "Matrix 2.0 Basics" on page 206.

QUOTE (Ravor)
And we also know you can direct your traffic through black 'anomymizer nodes' whoes sole purpose is to confuse traces, ect...


Yep. That traceroute thing is done at level 3, too. To confuse a trace, all you have to do is fake your Matrix ID headings (mostly source headers; don't ask me to get into it without a whiteboard).

Incidentally, to create an anonymizer node in 2070, buy a commlink and load up Spoof and an agent, then have the agent spend its three actions per turn to perform the Redirect action; good anonymizers will have multiple agents running.

QUOTE (Ravor)
And speaking of Traces, if virtually the entire Matrix is no longer wired in lue of an ad-hoc wireless network why does RAW make such an effort to point out the effects of intercepting commcalls through wired Nodes, or tracing the Datatrail to a wired node?


Because they still exist, and make sense in undeveloped areas and high-security environments. Kinda like the way a USB mouse still ships with a USB-to-PS/2 doodad.

QUOTE (Ravor)
In fact, how exactly would a trace through an ad-hoc network work as the nodes involved would be constantly moving and changing in and out of each other's Signal Rating so the same pathway(s) most likely don't even exist anymore.

[...]
So how exactly would a Trace action be able to work in an ad-hoc network where the 'routers' that the Matrix traffic was passing through were continuely on the move and may not even be within range of each other anymore?


Glad you asked. Every incoming frame has a source header that indicates its last hop. Every incoming packet has a source header that shows where the packet originated. The trace in SR4 is probably just a matter of tracing the route from one device to the next, and triangulating the location of those hops by tracing routes to those nodes. This is why it takes a while.

Incidentally, if the target node is operating in Active mode, I imagine one could just log onto it and ask it its GPS coordinates.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Also I note that Trace mentions that it tracks the traffic through nodes and not routers, so in my mind we get back to Subscription Slots again.

You're missing one of my points. Most nodes have, among other things, a router attached (see the first paragraph of the description of a commlink on page 210 of your hymnal).

QUOTE (Ravor)
(True, it might not work that way in Real Life as you've explained, but since when has Shadowrun computers ever worked like they should in Real Life?)

I'm a geek. I don't care about Real Life, I care about Real Feasible.
Ravor
QUOTE (Aaron)
That says that there is an infrastructure for the city, not that it's wired. Plus, there's no specificity about whether data traffic that's destined to go across town uses the infrastructure. So if you want it to work that way in your game, keen.


No it doesn't specificy spell it out, but the mere fact that the Matrix 2.0 does require local infrastructure sure suggests it, because if you really could just ad-hoc your way across the city then the only infrastructure needed would be the long distant uplinks.

QUOTE (Aaron)
It states that a service provider gives you a Matrix ID. It doesn't say (or even imply) that it provides access.


Which is why I stated that it doesn't come out and directly says so, but consider this;

ISP = Internet Service Provider
MSP = Matrix Service Provider

As I said before, I don't think its a very large leap at all based off the chosen name. Still you are right, it doesn't come right out and spell it out one way or the other...

QUOTE (Aaron)
Er, this only applies to a wired medium, like it says. The whole idea of the wireless Matrix is that it's ... you know ... wireless.


Yeah, but it also explictly uses a comcall made from one commlink to another as an example of something which passes through a wired medium. As I read RAW the wireless part is basically only the surface interface that you use.

QUOTE (Aaron)
Are you suggesting that my data traffic goes from my commlink through the municipal infrastructure to the commlink of my compadre on the other side of the room?


No of course not, provided that your buddy is within your Signal Rating then you would directly connect with his commlink. Now if he was outside of your commlink's Signal then yeah, it would enter the municipal infrastructure (And be subject to the wired intercept rules.) in order to get to him.

QUOTE (Aaron)
To answer your question, though: that's my point. If I write a letter to my girlfriend, then split up that letter into five letters that carry every fifth character in the letter, then give those letters to five of my friends to carry to her via five different routes, it doesn't matter which one you intercept; you won't be able to figure out my message. If you catch them all together, however, when they're with me or when they're with my girl, then you'll be able to piece together the whole letter. You dig?


True, and I'm not agruing with you that in theory it would be more secure, in fact I'd already agreed that if comcalls were kept purely wireless then it would be more secure. However we do have to look at the examples that were given, under intercepting Matrix traffic via wire, we are given the example of listening into a comcall as something which would pass through wired nodes. But under intercepting wireless traffic we are only given an example of Mr Johnson's commlink talking with the other devices on his PAN.

QUOTE (Aaron)
Also, you're making a distinction between a commlink and the Matrix. Check out the first paragraph under "Matrix 2.0 Basics" on page 206.


*Shrugs* So? I don't see anything even remotely suggesting an ad-hoc network or anything that even concerns a commlink in that paragraph. Plus the example of how the Matrix is built under Matrix Topology superceeds it.

QUOTE (Aaron)
Glad you asked. Every incoming frame has a source header that indicates its last hop. Every incoming packet has a source header that shows where the packet originated. The trace in SR4 is probably just a matter of tracing the route from one device to the next, and triangulating the location of those hops by tracing routes to those nodes. This is why it takes a while.


Ok, I can buy that.

QUOTE (Aaron)
You're missing one of my points. Most nodes have, among other things, a router attached (see the first paragraph of the description of a commlink on page 210 of your hymnal).


Well I'd say that the 'router' bit was included because your commlink is supposed to be your PAN's hub, so once again we are getting into Subscription Slot limits.

QUOTE (Aaron)
I'm a geek. I don't care about Real Life, I care about Real Feasible.


Umm, if that is the case, then why didn't your head explode upon opening the Matrix Chapter? Shadowrun computing has always been 'magic' in nature. cyber.gif
Aaron
QUOTE (Ravor)
No it doesn't specificy spell it out, but the mere fact that the Matrix 2.0 does require local infrastructure sure suggests it, because if you really could just ad-hoc your way across the city then the only infrastructure needed would be the long distant uplinks.

Where does it say it requires it? Uses it, sure, but I use my PlayStation without requiring it. Ditto IM; my email works fine, it's just a question of expediency.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Which is why I stated that it doesn't come out and directly says so, but consider this;

ISP = Internet Service Provider
MSP = Matrix Service Provider

As I said before, I don't think its a very large leap at all based off the chosen name.


That's a shaky argument. Allow me a few counter-examples:

TV Guide, GridGuide
Dietary Fiber, Biofiber
Lipstick, Credstick
Entry Code, Commcode
Diet Sprite, Machine Sprite

QUOTE (Ravor)
Yeah, but it also explictly uses a comcall made from one commlink to another as an example of something which passes through a wired medium. As I read RAW the wireless part is basically only the surface interface that you use.

I think you're reading it as "commcalls are things that go through wires" rather than "commcalls are one thing that can go through wires." I forget the specific logical fallacy that applies, but it's the same as saying "some commcalls go through wires, therefore all commcalls go through wires."

QUOTE (Ravor)
No of course not, provided that your buddy is within your Signal Rating then you would directly connect with his commlink. Now if he was outside of your commlink's Signal then yeah, it would enter the municipal infrastructure (And be subject to the wired intercept rules.) in order to get to him.


If that's the case, where does the overlapping mesh network come in to the picture? You're describing a hierarchical topology, which is a) not efficient for wireless and b) never mentioned in the RAW (it mentions a bottom layer of a pyramid, but it then completely abandons that metaphor).

QUOTE (Ravor)
However we do have to look at the examples that were given, under intercepting Matrix traffic via wire, we are given the example of listening into a comcall as something which would pass through wired nodes.


A commcall. Not all commcalls. By this logic, the example on page 18 ("a player character may hold a grudge against a certain megacorp, or dislike how a certain gang treats people in his neighborhood") indicates that all player characters either hold a grudge against a certain megacorp or dislike how a certain gang treats people in his neighborhood.

QUOTE (Ravor)
But under intercepting wireless traffic we are only given an example of Mr Johnson's commlink talking with the other devices on his PAN.

Not to mention that surprise only applies when walking in on a shadowrunner strangling your partner (p. 156), medium machine guns only fire six-round bursts (p. 142), multiple spells can only be used for manabolts (p. 173), magicians only cast spells at a Force equal to their Magic Rating (p. 195), and you can only learn five different things from an Analyze Test in the Matrix (p. 217), right?

QUOTE (Ravor)
Well I'd say that the 'router' bit was included because your commlink is supposed to be your PAN's hub, so once again we are getting into Subscription Slot limits.

Go back and read my description of why a device can route traffic without using a subscription slot. Repetition is not refutation, regardless of what some pundits may think.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Umm, if that is the case, then why didn't your head explode upon opening the Matrix Chapter? Shadowrun computing has always been 'magic' in nature. cyber.gif

The reason my head doesn't explode is because it really is feasible. And it's not "magic," it's abstract; it's not any more magical than your computer turning on and connecting to Dumpshock. If it wasn't abstract, it would be more like Starfleet Battles, which is a fine game, but bad for an RPG.
Ravor
QUOTE (Aaron)
Where does it say it requires it? Uses it, sure, but I use my PlayStation without requiring it. Ditto IM; my email works fine, it's just a question of expediency.


QUOTE
Main Entry: in∑fra∑structure† † Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: infr+-
Function: noun
Etymology: infra- + structure
: the underlying foundation or basic framework (as of an organization or a system) : SUBSTRUCTURE; especially : the permanent installations required for military purposes


The last time I checked one's Playstation or Instant Messager wasn't considered something's infrastructure. The mere fact that it exists and is labeled as the Matrix 2.0's infrastructure means that it is "the underlying foundation or basic framework of the system". Gee, sounds like it might be something important, which it clearly wouldn't be if you were right in your ad-hoc theory.

QUOTE (Aaron)
That's a shaky argument. Allow me a few counter-examples:

TV Guide, GridGuide
Dietary Fiber, Biofiber
Lipstick, Credstick
Entry Code, Commcode
Diet Sprite, Machine Sprite


*claps* Nice attempt, but if you actually want to prove a point try finding some examples that has a sense of logic behind them instead of merely dredging up some words which happen to sound vaguely similar.

For example, we currently have Internet Service Providers which oddly enough provide access to the Internet. In Shadowrun the Internet was replaced by the Matrix and oddly enough they have something called Matrix Service Providers.

QUOTE (Aaron)
I think you're reading it as "commcalls are things that go through wires" rather than "commcalls are one thing that can go through wires." I forget the specific logical fallacy that applies, but it's the same as saying "some commcalls go through wires, therefore all commcalls go through wires."


No I think I'll take the third option, the fact that comcalls go through wires often enough to be used as the sole example in intercepting wired traffic says that comcalls do go through wires often enough the the devs thought of them when writing their examples. Which in turn means that it can't be that uncommon for comcalls to go through wires.

QUOTE (Aaron)
If that's the case, where does the overlapping mesh network come in to the picture? You're describing a hierarchical topology, which is a) not efficient for wireless and b) never mentioned in the RAW (it mentions a bottom layer of a pyramid, but it then completely abandons that metaphor).


Well I might add that ad-hoc networks are never once mentioned in RAW. Although don't you think that its even alittle bit strange that the diagram of a hierarchical topology as found on wiki sure looks like the pyramid structure as described in the one place in RAW where they actually explain how the Matrix 2.0 is set up?

As for wireless mesh networks, sure, if you are able to subscribe your commlink to a wireless router(s) that are in turn subscribed to your friend's commlink then sure I suppose you could hook up with your friend directly instead of using the local Matrix infrastructure. Or who knows, maybe its possible that the local Matrix infrastructure is in part a series of dedicated wireless routers, either way ad-hoc networks are never once mentioned as being the way the Matrix 2.0 works.

QUOTE (Aaron)
A commcall. Not all commcalls. By this logic, the example on page 18 ("a player character may hold a grudge against a certain megacorp, or dislike how a certain gang treats people in his neighborhood") indicates that all player characters either hold a grudge against a certain megacorp or dislike how a certain gang treats people in his neighborhood.


Addressed above.

QUOTE (Aaron)
Not to mention that surprise only applies when walking in on a shadowrunner strangling your partner (p. 156), medium machine guns only fire six-round bursts (p. 142), multiple spells can only be used for manabolts (p. 173), magicians only cast spells at a Force equal to their Magic Rating (p. 195), and you can only learn five different things from an Analyze Test in the Matrix (p. 217), right?


Nope, but what it does mean is that monitoring someone's PAN was the best example of a likely game event which the same writer (I presume its the same writer, could be wrong.) who wrote the comcall example a few pages before could think of at the time he wrote the rules for intercepting wireless traffic.

QUOTE (Aaron)
Go back and read my description of why a device can route traffic without using a subscription slot. Repetition is not refutation, regardless of what some pundits may think.


Repetition is not refutation except when it is right. In Shadowrun in order for Device A to talk to Device B they need to Subscribe to each other, just because it doesn't work that way in Real Life is meaningless, the world of Shadowrun deverged from our history sometime in the 80s or 90s if I remember correctly.

*Edit*

Well if you count the Earthdawn Crossover it diverged alot futher back then that, but you know what I mean. wink.gif

QUOTE (Aaron)
The reason my head doesn't explode is because it really is feasible. And it's not "magic," it's abstract; it's not any more magical than your computer turning on and connecting to Dumpshock. If it wasn't abstract, it would be more like Starfleet Battles, which is a fine game, but bad for an RPG.


Ok, so let me get this straight, you are actually claiming that the Matrix is feasible? It is feasible to have unlimited bandwidth and zero lag whether you are logging into a site next door or in Earth Orbit while bouncing your datatrail through hundreds of uplinks and nodes? It is feasible that seeing the internet in VR will turn you into a super hacker capable of slicing through anything not also built with VR in mind?

Abstract only carries you so far. (Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I don't like the way the Matrix works, but I can't believe that you are claiming that its actually feasible.)
Aaron
Thank you for breaking the rudeness barrier. It lets me do this:

QUOTE (Ravor)
For example, we currently have Internet Service Providers which oddly enough provide access to the Internet. In Shadowrun the Internet was replaced by the Matrix and oddly enough they have something called Matrix Service Providers.
[...]
the world of Shadowrun deverged from our history sometime in the 80s or 90s if I remember correctly

That's cute. You argued similarity and divergence in the same post.

Also, you're arguing from ignorance (in more ways than one) and from personal incredulity. Both are logical fallacies.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Repetition is not refutation except when it is right.

*Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha*

Seriously, though, I have neither time nor motivation to explain it all again at one go. If you want to know how it works and are going to Gen Con Indy, I'll be happy to sit down, buy you a drink (chemically inoffensive if you're underage), and explain the whole thing to you, with diagrams and everything.

If not, you're welcome to come visit me when I'm teaching computer science. I can get you parking on campus. Thursday night is the networking class.
Ravor
Next time I'll have to remember that getting heated in my discussions allows you to feel free to ignore relevant points. So, I'll apologize for getting heated but leave you with this, taken by itself RAW still supports my agrument that ad-hoc networks aren't the way of the Matrix 2.0 whether they would make more sense or not.

Oh and thanks for the offer of a drink, but I can never get away from work and family long enough to attend CONs so I'll have to take a raincheck.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012