Full Version: Triangle buttoning cars
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) | ||
By that definition, your Westwind is a drone while you are allowing it to be run through gridguide or sending it someplace via its autopilot, and not a drone when you physically take the wheel or jack your control rig into the slot. Which is not what you're hoping for, and it may yet change. Got any pressing reasons why it should? |
I'd rather it be tied to a property of the machine rather than a fluxuating, dynamic state of being. Tying it to the non/existence of non-remote controls is a pretty direct and simple way of differentiating between a "drone" and "vehicle" as they are shipped from the factory.
I'll live with a definition/errata that says "drone=vehicle=drone", that all vehicles with Pilot are rigger adapted, and the rigger adaptation was a snafu left over from the editing process.
It won't be what I would do, but I'm not going to kick about it.
| QUOTE |
It is completely clear that you can send commands to your vehicle through the Matrix. You can even send it commands like "autopilot yourself to the following GPS coordinates". You can use these commands to start and stop a vehicle, as well as get a vehicle to go basically where you want it to. |
I'd like a page reference because it isn't completely clear to me that vehicles respond to remote commands by the owner. I could have missed a statement to that effect, but I sure don't remember one.
BBB page 36
Current RAW ruling on GrideGuide overriding the one in Rigger 3.
"GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works."
Please note "instructs" the "autopilot", nothing about drives your vehicle to the destination. The Autopilot or driver gets the vehicle to the destination. Instructions like turn left here, drive 3.1 km then turn etc. If the GridGuide system rigged the vehicles it would not need to instruct.
References to GuideGuide in BBB SR 4th ed., are one 159 about sensors and GridGuide
page 320 Mapsofts updating GridGuide traffic reports etc. So in 4th Ed BBB GuideGuide is mentioned/talked about three times.
But this may another too many cooks situation, reflected in the rules.
As of right now Frank the description on page 36, is unlike your description of how it works with your Westwind example.
WMS
Current RAW ruling on GrideGuide overriding the one in Rigger 3.
"GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works."
Please note "instructs" the "autopilot", nothing about drives your vehicle to the destination. The Autopilot or driver gets the vehicle to the destination. Instructions like turn left here, drive 3.1 km then turn etc. If the GridGuide system rigged the vehicles it would not need to instruct.
References to GuideGuide in BBB SR 4th ed., are one 159 about sensors and GridGuide
page 320 Mapsofts updating GridGuide traffic reports etc. So in 4th Ed BBB GuideGuide is mentioned/talked about three times.
But this may another too many cooks situation, reflected in the rules.
As of right now Frank the description on page 36, is unlike your description of how it works with your Westwind example.
WMS
| QUOTE (WMS) |
| "GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works." As of right now Frank the description on page 36, is unlike your description of how it works with your Westwind example. |
What? I'm pretty sure it's exactly like my Westwind example, which is now being reprinted for your delectation:
| QUOTE (Frank) |
| It is completely clear that you can send commands to your vehicle through the Matrix. You can even send it commands like "autopilot yourself to the following GPS coordinates". You can use these commands to start and stop a vehicle, as well as get a vehicle to go basically where you want it to. |
Right. You can instruct the autopilot to go to some other place (starting it), or that it is already at its location (stopping it). You can instruct it to go to pretty much wherever you want it to go.
I'm totally not seeing any disconnect with my example and the book example.
-Frank
There's not really any disconnection - but GridGuide doesn't micromanage.
| QUOTE (Frank) |
| By that definition, your Westwind is a drone while you are allowing it to be run through gridguide or sending it someplace via its autopilot, and not a drone when you physically take the wheel or jack your control rig into the slot. Which is not what you're hoping for, and it may yet change. Got any pressing reasons why it should? |
I was referring to the GruideGuide, the GridGuide from the book, does not mention the vehicles are being controlled/rigg etc by GridGuide.
As for you example of being able to send commands via the matrix to remote control enabled vehicles is correct. That I have no disagreement on.
WMS
When I read "GridGuide... shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works." what I comprehend is "Gridguide gives me directions when I ask for them but since they can't be trusted implicitly they are really just a recommendation." Which is different from the "Gridguide takes control of your car and your pilot AI obeys slavishly" that other folks see.
Both could be construed from that sentence and the context.
Both could be construed from that sentence and the context.
Taken literally, Gridguide only talks to your autopilot, and not to you. There's already certain features that bypass the driver, such as parts of OnStar and Lojack. Based on that, I'd say that GridGuide probably isn't communicating with the driver at all.
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| "Gridguide gives me directions when I ask for them but since they can't be trusted implicitly they are really just a recommendation." Which is different from the "Gridguide takes control of your car and your pilot AI obeys slavishly" that other folks see. |
in SR3, GridGuide talks to your autopilot, and your autopilot obeys unless and until you tell it not to by taking the wheel yourself.
SR4 doesn't have an autopilot, it's just got pilot. therefore, in SR4, when GridGuide tells your car where to go, it's issuing commands to the pilot--which is the same thing a rigger does.
That would be a waste. These vehicles still have manual controls and with internal displays/AR there's no point in them NOT showing that information to the owner. It would be a preference where each owner decides if they are going to manually drive, manually drive with AR assist, choose the route with Gruidguide input but let the pilot do the driving, or just tell the pilot to "get me home" and not think about it at all.
mfb,
BBB page 36
Current RAW ruling on GrideGuide overriding the one in Rigger 3.
"GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works."
This is the latest version of what GridGuide does, it supersedes the one from Rigger 3, so using what rigger 3 did, is not valid.
Instructing and commanding are two totally different things.
Cain
Onstar does not bypass the driver. Lojack merely reports the location of the vehicle, it has very little to do with driving the vehicle, or bypassing the driver.
As for GridGuide only talking to your autopilot, please review the following from the BBB page 320..
Mapsoft
"the mapsoft automatically updates itself with the latest data and will retrieve correlating online date (GridGuide traffic reports, restaurant menu's etc.) as necessary."
Ok here we see GridGuide communicating to a Mapsoft. If GridGuide is rigging the vehicles, there is no need for GridGuide Traffic Reports.
WMS
BBB page 36
Current RAW ruling on GrideGuide overriding the one in Rigger 3.
"GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works."
This is the latest version of what GridGuide does, it supersedes the one from Rigger 3, so using what rigger 3 did, is not valid.
Instructing and commanding are two totally different things.
Cain
Onstar does not bypass the driver. Lojack merely reports the location of the vehicle, it has very little to do with driving the vehicle, or bypassing the driver.
As for GridGuide only talking to your autopilot, please review the following from the BBB page 320..
Mapsoft
"the mapsoft automatically updates itself with the latest data and will retrieve correlating online date (GridGuide traffic reports, restaurant menu's etc.) as necessary."
Ok here we see GridGuide communicating to a Mapsoft. If GridGuide is rigging the vehicles, there is no need for GridGuide Traffic Reports.
WMS
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| That would be a waste. These vehicles still have manual controls and with internal displays/AR there's no point in them NOT showing that information to the owner. It would be a preference where each owner decides if they are going to manually drive, manually drive with AR assist, choose the route with Gruidguide input but let the pilot do the driving, or just tell the pilot to "get me home" and not think about it at all. |
i haven't said anything that contradicts this. if you're in your car, and someone tries to use GridGuide to steer you somewhere you don't want to go, you can always grab the wheel and steer yourself--or steer with AR assist, or even just enter a new route into GridGuide. though given that someone just tried to hijack you through GridGuide, that last option might be considered dumb.
| QUOTE (WearzManySkins) |
| BBB page 36 Current RAW ruling on GrideGuide overriding the one in Rigger 3. "GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works." |
do we have a game term definition for 'autopilot'? because if not, i'm going to assume that the autopilot and the pilot are the same thing.
mfb,
As for the definition, well in the 4 th Ed BBB, autopilot is mentioned twice, on that page only.
Rigger 3 had autonavs and pilots, in BBB we have pilots mentioned mostly, with the two exceptions above. In rigger 3 it was the autonavs that drove your vehicles but it had to be at least a autonav of rating 2 or higher.
The two systems, Rigger 3 and 4 th ed are too different to make an easy assumption on what an autopilot and pilot is for 4 th ed.
Too me it is too many cooks, ie one developer wrote the section on page 36 and other developer(s) wrote the section on pilots etc. The communication between the developers may not have been as complete as it could/should have been.
From what others have hinted at, this issue(s) is being discussed at length, and it appears there is more than one view on what means what.
Since the developers or freelancers have not spoken online here about it, nor has it been dealt with/addressed by errata or FAQ leads me to believe that it will be dealt with in future rules addition book.
So basically we can discuss the what means this or that, but in the end, the we do not get to make the call. More than likely it will not appease/placate anyone.
Again this is like the age old debate the Church had on "How many Angels can dance on the head of Pin'. Both sides can quote obscure text, and various experts opinion on the meaning of those obscure texts, but in the end, it is the Pope that decided it.
Again until the developers rule, we get to debate/argue like the theologians of old.
As for the definition, well in the 4 th Ed BBB, autopilot is mentioned twice, on that page only.
Rigger 3 had autonavs and pilots, in BBB we have pilots mentioned mostly, with the two exceptions above. In rigger 3 it was the autonavs that drove your vehicles but it had to be at least a autonav of rating 2 or higher.
The two systems, Rigger 3 and 4 th ed are too different to make an easy assumption on what an autopilot and pilot is for 4 th ed.
Too me it is too many cooks, ie one developer wrote the section on page 36 and other developer(s) wrote the section on pilots etc. The communication between the developers may not have been as complete as it could/should have been.
From what others have hinted at, this issue(s) is being discussed at length, and it appears there is more than one view on what means what.
Since the developers or freelancers have not spoken online here about it, nor has it been dealt with/addressed by errata or FAQ leads me to believe that it will be dealt with in future rules addition book.
So basically we can discuss the what means this or that, but in the end, the we do not get to make the call. More than likely it will not appease/placate anyone.
Again this is like the age old debate the Church had on "How many Angels can dance on the head of Pin'. Both sides can quote obscure text, and various experts opinion on the meaning of those obscure texts, but in the end, it is the Pope that decided it.
Again until the developers rule, we get to debate/argue like the theologians of old.
Bottom line, if you're letting a hacked GridGuide send cars careening off of overpasses, stopping dead in the middle of a busy freeway, or gunning the ignition into hairpin turns sure to cause the vehicle to roll, you're playing it wrong. Subscribing your car to gridguide is voluntary, and doesn't override the basic safety behavior of your car's Pilot.
Why not? Gridguide could feed your car false info on a car crash right in front of you. With a whopping Sensor of 1 on all passenger cars, it's not going to be able to tell the difference readily. The pilot would rely on the gridguide input more than its own sensors, because gridguide is much more far-reaching. Your car would come screeching to a halt, and all the attendant nastiness would follow.
Granted, it'd probably be easier to hack the car itself, but it is possible.
Granted, it'd probably be easier to hack the car itself, but it is possible.
That's very possible - depends on how you want to play the intelligence of the cars in question. But that's the kind of gridguide manipulation that's appropriate.
edit: imho.
edit: imho.
Wait a minute, what exactly is the difference between instructing and commanding?
-Frank
-Frank
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| Why not? Gridguide could feed your car false info on a car crash right in front of you. With a whopping Sensor of 1 on all passenger cars, it's not going to be able to tell the difference readily. The pilot would rely on the gridguide input more than its own sensors, because gridguide is much more far-reaching. Your car would come screeching to a halt, and all the attendant nastiness would follow. Granted, it'd probably be easier to hack the car itself, but it is possible. |
Your car wouldn't come screeching to a halt. Grid guide doesn't controll you car. Its pilot does. Gridguide is like that little map that you have on your dash except it also includes a traffic report and can remotely shut your car down. If grideguide was hacked and told there was a carcrash right in front of you your car would use it's sensors and keep driving straight as the cars in front of it have not stopped moving. Your car doesn't rely on gridguide more than its own sensors. You could hack gridguide and tell it there was traffic congestion on a bunch of streets and then cars would take an alternate route but all cars would get the same info.
Guideguide isn't a system that micromanages every car on the road. It's a system that includes all maps of the city, keeps tabs on how traffic is flowing, notes where accidents are, and relays that info to your car. If you were to hack gridguide and insert a crash at intersection A all cars would get a report that there was a crash at intersection A. Cars that could would avoid that area. Cars in that area would keep moving, guidguide would sense the traffic flow and remove the crash from it's data.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| Taken literally, Gridguide only talks to your autopilot, and not to you. There's already certain features that bypass the driver, such as parts of OnStar and Lojack. Based on that, I'd say that GridGuide probably isn't communicating with the driver at all. |
Ummm, no.
| QUOTE ( BBB p.36) |
"GridGuide, a system that theoretically manages traffic, shows you the quickest routes and latest maps and alerts, and instructs your car's autopilot how to get there--when it works." |
By the RAW, it communicates with me.
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
| Wait a minute, what exactly is the difference between instructing and commanding? |
yeah, welcome to my headache.
Command is an explicitly defined term in the game. "Instructing" is not.
| QUOTE (Dictionary.com) |
in·struct (ĭn-strŭkt') 1. To provide with knowledge, especially in a methodical way. See synonyms at teach. 2. To give orders to; direct. |
It could mean that Gridguide issues commands, as a rigger. OR it could mean that it provides knowledge, in this case navigational directions, said information then being evaluated by the Pilot or driver.
Both are valid. Both have completely different game effects.
instructing could fall under the ability of nodes that are subscribed to each other to share information. i think, actually, that this would work out quite well--the ruling could be that unless a vehicle with a pilot is rigger adapted, the pilot won't accept external commands--but it will still accept external information, such as what the best route to take to Suzy's house is. that doesn't quite jive with the existing rules, i know, but i think it might be the solution that requires the least amount of rejiggering.
the big problem with this concept is, there's no analog for agents. i suppose it could be a hardware thing; rigger adaption would basically be disabling that piece of hardware. this concept also would seem to make spoofing impossible, but i guess you could just say that a correctly-performed spoof can make the commands appear to be issued from within the vehicle.
the big problem with this concept is, there's no analog for agents. i suppose it could be a hardware thing; rigger adaption would basically be disabling that piece of hardware. this concept also would seem to make spoofing impossible, but i guess you could just say that a correctly-performed spoof can make the commands appear to be issued from within the vehicle.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.