That would require rewritting the entire hacking system from the ground up. Everyting in the system is based on program rating.

I just want to toss out that I wouldn't completely discredit intuition based hacking. There are differences between instincts and intuition but I don't feel like getting into that argument.

All "logic" can be broken down into deductive or inductive reasoning. With inductive reasoning you take in a number of specifics and are able to deduce a general state. Deductive reasoning works from the general down to the specifics.

Many times, inductive reasoning can be reliant on intuition and logic. Einstein (Intuition 6, Logic 6) used inductive reasoning to come to some of theories and he had a nose for sniffing out how the universe worked. Patton (Intuition 6, Logic 6 [his ability to memorize things was incredible]) had an inexplicable ability to understand and grasp a battlefield far superior than other generals as well as having a keen understanding of what needed to be done to boost morale of his troops. An example would be taking Palermo in Sicily. The city was of zero strategic value but taking it gave US forces significant morale boosts.

Intuition should indicate the ability to change on the fly while logic is the ability to think quickly and act upon that. An intuitive hacker is going to be able to better grasp events as the unfold and identify weaknesses or other ways to exploit the situation. An Intuition 4/Logic 4 hacker should be better overall than an Intuition 2/Logic 6 hacker.

I think it's a bit of a deficiency in the system that Intuition, as an attribute, plays a highly narrow role where outside of Initiative and Perception, very few characters have an actual need to use it.

Threading seems to make perfect sense to me.

if I thread myself a rating 8 program as a technomancer, I can have 8 hits. That's pretty sweet.

Throwing a lot of cash at a problem often solves that problem. A script Kiddie with SOTA PRograms may get lucky on ocassion. Probably not, but there you go. You will still have a difference in Dice Pools.

The Absolute Best Agent you can have will be a Rated 6 Agent, so 12 Dice (Capped at 6 for max of Rating 6 program). The Typical Script Kiddies may have 6-10 Dice, capped by Program, whatever that rating may be (Once you go beyond Skill of 2, you are no longer a Script Kiddie in my opinion, you have become a professional hacker). While your Elite Hacker is going to have anywhere from 12-20 Dice consistently, and has access to those HIGH END Programs that the Script Kiddie cannot program himself, and has not got the connections to obtain on the black market, nor the skills to actually steal from the Military or other Government/Corporate facility.

In the end, the Hacker will far outshine the Script Kiddie, even at Caps limited to Program Rating. Program*2 will definitely extend those limits, which will make a difference at the middle Ranges, to be sure. But you would never need a program rated above 6 in that case. I like the fact that Programs go to Rating 10. Want the best you can get, get the best programs (beg, borrow, steal, trade, or create them yourself), which means ratings higher than 6.

Hopefully that makes a bit of sense.

Which is one of the benefits of a Technomancer in our games. No need to spend that Edge to break the Program Caps, just Thread it up a bit.

You can replace a lot of that with Attribute+Skill actually. Programs are only tricky to remove when their rating is a threshold for some test against it, really.




Intuition makes sense to use in Hacking, but,

A) Logic is so obvious too; it would be weird not to use it in hacking
B) It's better if you need more than one Attribute for hacking anyway; combat uses Agility, Body and Reaction (optional Strength, Willpower and Intuition), magic uses Willpower+Magic+Drain Stat. Why should hacking use only one Attribute?

That kind of sums up what bothers me about hacking attributes. You can, technically, do combat with just Agility. Body, Reaction, and Strength just provide enough incentives that they're worth taking. There's no other attribute you need aside from Willpower/Body to deal with biofeedback. Charisma is all but pointless and you can easily get away with taking an average intuition.

Personally I always wondered why it didn't work like lockpicking, Skill + autopicker + attribute. But to change that you'd have to modify all the thresholds to account for the increased dice pool.

You can include program options that you have to postmarket program in yourself that let you do things like:

Pushing the Edge:R1-3
This program optimization allows the user to increase the Hits limit of the program by it's rating.
A Rating 3 Program with R3 Pushing the Edge would have a Max Hits limit of 6, instead of the standard 3.

Logic+Software(Rx4)1 week
To install this optimization you must first break the copy protection and then modify the program to run on your commlink. OTS programs never have this optimization, though security spiders, and hackers often build this for their own systems.

Alternatively, you could have the exact same thing as a hardware component. Or a combination of both. R1-2 software, R1 Hardware mod. If you have both, you're all set.
And anything that allows for more diversity and more customization of your programs and commlinks is good.

i present to you/remind you of:
The Ends of the Matrix

When you have time sure, but sometimes you just have to go with your gut rather than waiting for nmap to report back that they are running server 2003.

If you want to "go with your gut" in hacking, be a Technomancer. Then your Intuition counts as your Response.

Except you also need Logic, and Willpower, etc.

It seems pretty arbitrary, that's all.

Intuition doesn't fix computer code.

I'm actually going to revist this for a moment. I think what you're doing is equivocating "intuition," the bypassing of reason to come to a correct conclusion or the instinctive response, with "Intuition," the game attribute. They mean two different things.

If you apply little-i intuition to any skill in the game, you might turn up the same sort of rationale: "Well I just intuitively knew to pull the trigger, and my shot was perfect." Or, "I intuitively knew to cut the blue wire." Or, "I intuitively flung my arms out and happened to catch hold of a ledge before plummeting 20 stories to the pavement." The "instinctive response" angle you're looking for is really the result of training and practice.

That sort of intuition is pervasive. It's fair to say that, if you have to consider it in game terms, it's incorporated in any attribute + skill combo.

Big-I Intuition, however, is a game stat that covers things like perception and empathy. Intuition is what helps your character remember that the survivors are not, in fact, buried anywhere. Intuition is not, however, an understanding of "how to do the right thing." It's much more narrowly defined than that.

You make a good point.

Fixing computer code also has nothing to do with Computer or Hacking. That's Programming.

I'll play your game, Epicedion:These all sound like SR4 hacking to me. It's a fast, active process.

This, on the other hand, doesn't sound like Hacking or Computer Use at all. It sounds like Programming, Build/Repair, etc. Slow things, certainly not 3+ IPs of psychedelic VR hacking.

That's exactly what I was thinking; I just wasn't able to put it into words. Thank you, Yera.

I do love it when people play my games.

So would you then contend that AR hacking is Logic-based? That is, watching what the icons do and then typing at them to get them to respond how you want, at meatbody speeds?

Shooting a gun is Agility-based. Does the sheer speed of shooting that gun at 3+ IPs put it in the realm of Intuition?

These are all game mechanics.

In real life, every single one of your "attributes" factors into everything you do. A real life hacker would need Strength and Body to keep his limbs moving, the Willpower to stay focused for long periods of time, the Agility and Reaction to hit the keys quickly and accurately, the Logic to understand what he's doing, the Intuition to read a situation and make appropriate decisions, and the Charisma to convince the pizza delivery guy that he really only has two dollars for the tip.

In a game, though, you have to pick the most applicable one, since you can't make a Strength + Body + Willpower + Agility + Reaction + Logic + Intuition + Charisma + Hacking test. Just as you can't make a Body (resist fatigue) + Strength (manage recoil) + Agility (aim) + Reaction (quickly adjust to variations in the target's trajectory) + Logic (understand the operation of the firearm) + Intuition (predict the target's likely movement) + Charisma (psychologically affect the target to move where you want) test every time you fire a gun.

Every in-game action could conceivably draw on every attribute to some extent, but for the game to work you have to pick the best one. The most influential one.

For computers, that's Logic. Computers don't give a damn about what "feels right." Computers work under an incredibly strict set of rules, and the only way to be good at using them (coding for them, hacking them, etc) is to be able to quickly and correctly process those rules and respond with actions that exploit those rules to your own benefit.

In a nutshell, it's taking a rule the computer must obey, like "the sum of no more than two positive inputs less than two must equal 2" and saying, "ah HA, I can add .5 .5 .5 and .5 to equal two, which is FOUR positive inputs! Take that, program!" and breaking the whole program. Hacking is about exploiting flaws in code -- breaking programs and making them do what you want instead of what they're not supposed to do, and often are designed explicitly not to do. To exploit those kinds of flaws, you have to understand what logical steps the program is forced to follow.

Hacking in the Matrix is doing the exact same kind of thing, except much faster and with pretty pictures glued across the top of everything so your brain has something it can comprehend to work with.

Again, I really think that hacking in 2070 is basically playing a computer game. It's a twitchy FPS, not chess-by-mail; definitely not Infocom. You have to remember that *everyone* is a script kiddie, because the (conscious) mind just isn't fast enough. That's canon. I know that the Logic-hacker proponents are largely saying 'let's change that little bit of canon', and that's fine. I'm not saying that's wrong; you should extend the same courtesy, right?

*I'm* just saying you can't scoff at Tyro's position, not if you want the fluff and crunch on your side. The definition of Big-I Intuition doesn't support you, and the fluff doesn't.

AR hacking is basically the same as VR, just 2D. You can use DNI with AR, after all, and even manual AR isn't about typing.

Incidentally, shooting a gun *is* Intuition if you close your eyes. This is unrelated to anything, and doesn't make sense. Hehe.

Well if the video game analogy were true, hacking (and especially cybercombat) would really be more Reaction/Agility based, wouldn't it?

It is. Mentally, so Intuition. Agility is for moving your body correctly. Reaction is moving your body… away; and, for historical/balance reasons, driving cars.

Lets see if this analogy works.

When my computer in RL doesn't do what I want it to, a lot of what I do is look for pictures and words that I think ought to be the right ones and then click them and see what happens and then if that doesn't work click some other things until it works. And while I'm not the best at computers, I'm very far from the worst. When I'm asked to help someone with a computer problem I usualy can't tell them how I did it after.

That sounds like big I Intuition to me.

Now take current computer tech and advance it 60 years and up the metaphors and graphics and I can totally understand saying that hacking is Intuition based

That is intuition. However, it's neither the optimal nor preferred method for fixing problems on your computer.

If you're in a virtual space, I'd use intuition. AR hacking, I'd use Logic; Epicedion had a good point when they pointed out that AR hacking is much closer to traditional type-and-mouse computing. By the fluff, though, VR makes a LOT more sense as an Intuition-based medium.

You just described Intuition, not Logic. Intuition's value is the ability to short-circuit the need to go through rigorous logical exercises to come to the correct conclusion. There is a reason why many of the most successful people in various fields have been highly intuitive. I'll state again, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and George S. Patton Jr. are all either admitted to having a good intuition or known to be able to inexplicably grasp situations. Science, military strategy, these would be the sorts of things people would assume to be highly rational decision making or conclusions. Yet more often than not gut-checks are more appropriate.

Intuition relies on events. Logic relies on theories.

Logic requires time. Intuition is instantaneous.

Intuition can make predictions. Logic cannot.

The reason that human minds are more powerful than most computers is due to intuition and not logic. Do you realize the difficulty of making robots? How many bipedal robots exist that can walk? How far away do you think we are from a robot that can hit a 90+mph fastball into the outfield?

I'm going to conclude with a quote from Einstein.

"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

I think AR and VR are still very similar, but sure.

Right, Hacking on the Fly isn't optimal or preferred either... I'd rather have nmap report back to me what is on every IP in a scope but knowing most people put there servers on one end or the other I can focus on 24 IPs rather than 254. (if we are using IP4, IP6 I would save even more time)

And that's right back down the road of equivocating Intuition the stat with intuition the bypassing of all reasoning processes. Intuition the stat helps you notice shiny objects in the grass in rainstorms and tells you if the other guy is lying to you.

If you use Intuition for everything you could possibly be intuitive about, you'd have to make it a part of every skill check.

And that goes back back down to the descriptions of Intuition the stat and Logic the stat, where intuition is defined as the ability to take in and process large amounts of data.

The rules are completely right in divorcing Logic and Intuition stats from hacking because both are equally applicable (frankly with Intuition being more applicable in the moment with Logic being long term). The ugly truth of the matter is that when you're hacking in a situation where each action your taking is fractions of a second, it's just rather implausible that a human, is able to keep up with it if he's relying on logic. I question whether even linking skill into hacking actions (at the speeds which they are occurring) is even plausible. The human mind is just simply not built use Logic to arrive quickly at solutions. We lack the ability to digest input in a logical manner in order to perform those tasks in the time you're suggesting.

But the programs just provide results that you're acting on you say? You're still making a gut decision on what to do based on those results. Logical analysis is not something you can do in short order. Besides, someone already used logic to build the program.

A logical hacker should be, quite simply, unable to deal with the quickly unfolding events that can and often do happen during a run unless they have the intuition to back it up. The one caveat to a logical hacker is that AIs are the only hackers that would be logic based since their "brains" are wired, no pun intended, to operate that way (i'm not going to get into anything other than the basic metatypes and AIs in that regard).

Actually, Intuition is defined as "mental alertness." Mental alertness is defined as:



You could stretch that to "process large amounts of data" if you really wanted, but the meaning of the two stats is very clear.

Intuition is for perception and gut feelings. Logic is for complex reasoning and higher-order thinking.

Take a look at the Astral rules if you really want to get a good idea of what each mental stat means:

Logic ~ Agility
Intuition ~ Reaction
Willpower ~ Body
Charisma ~ Strength

The way you want to describe Intuition is as an analogue for Agility.

Edit:

I forgot to address this:



That's not a problem with Logic, it's a problem with AR hacking. Decking, the proto-concept of hacking in Shadowrun 4, was based on the premise that meatbody speeds were no longer sufficient to keep up with data transfer, and that the solution was to plug your brain into the computer so that everything could operate at full processing speeds.

It's not supposed to be a problem of the brain being too slow to keep up. It's supposed to be a problem of the computer->screen->eye->brain->PROCESS->arms->hands->fingers->keyboard->computer chain being too inefficient to keep up.

I've already addressed this. It's simply false, as presented; at best, grossly misleading and intentionally ignoring aspects of the rules that don't agree with the point.

The fluff says it *is* the brain that can't keep up, not the body. Again, Logic-hacking proponents are specifically changing this; there's no reason to dump on Tyro's suggesting when you're literally already changing the rules to suit *your* side.

I dunno about other people, but I'm *not* saying that Logic-hacking is stupid or wrong. Intuition-hacking *does* make just as much sense, though, by crunch and fluff. You don't have to attack it just because you support an alternative. Personally, I prefer program-hacking, so I don't prefer either of these.

I'm examining the game's Intuition + Skill combinations. All of them, at least as many as I have access to.

Intuition active skills are: Artisan, Disguise, Navigation, Perception, Shadowing, and Tracking.

Intuition is also used for Intuition + Con when defending against Charisma + Con. Intuition is combined with Charisma to perform Judge Intentions tests. You also use Intuition to get your Astral Reaction and Technomancer Response ratings.

Logic active skills are: Aeronautics Mechanic, Armorer, Automotive Mechanic, Computer, Cybertechnology, Cybercombat, Data Search, Demolitions, Electronic Warfare, First Aid, Industrial Mechanic, (Hacking), Hardware, Medicine, Nautical Mechanic, and Software.

Logic is combined with Willpower to perform Memory tests. You also use Logic to get your Astral Agility and Technomancer System ratings.

All of these things lead me to the conclusion that Hacking should be combined with Logic, as the game designers decided when they made Hacking a Logic-linked skill. The further argument is whether or not you should actually use Logic with Hacking, which is only supported by optional rules.

The notion that Intuition should be used for Hacking is somewhat interesting, though thoroughly unsupported in the manner in which it has been suggested. Otherwise you would be rolling Intuition tests to avoid bullets, since bullets move too fast for the brain to keep up with, making Reaction useless to dodge them.



You'd have to point out where in the fluff that it says that. Game-wise, the brain can keep up, since otherwise only gear and programs would matter, and Hacking skill wouldn't ever enter into it. I'm reminded of a story I read about space combat being too complex and the speeds being too high for humans to actually influence, so ships would execute all combat maneuvers and weapon firing based on automatic programs, leaving the human crew sitting there hoping not to die.

And I'm not dumping on his suggestion. I'm arguing against his position. Someone Is Wrong on the Internet, and all.

I agree that looking at the Intuition skills implies one thing, but the description of Intuition I quoted very clearly says something else (or something more). Besides, let's look at those Logic skills: with the incredible outlier of Cybercombat, and some applications of Electronic Warfare, they're all slow, methodical, memory-based, reasoning-based.

I still don't agree with your attempt to cast the Intuition argument as a foolish misunderstanding of 'intuition' vs. 'Intuition'. I think that's unfair. Reaction is described as body reflexes, Agility is described as body skill (-ish), and Intuition is described as mental speed and processing. That doesn't seem like a fallacious argument, and no one's actually made the argument that everything is Intuition cuz it's fast.

Now, there's room to argue that this *oughtn't* be the canon fluff, and that's exactly the argument that Logic-hacking proponents make.

Back to an earlier discussion in this thread, I had a thought that if you're going to do Logic + Hacking, with program rating capping hits (either directly or *2), you might consider splitting the difference:

Either cap hits at rating + 2, or something like rating x1.5 (round down).

The rating + 2 method would cap hits as:

Rating:cap
1:3
2:4
3:5
4:6
5:7
6:8
And then so on in that fashion for 7 and higher.

Which would be reasonable limitations. A very good starting hacker with (augmented) Logic 6, Hacking 5, and maybe some other bonuses which got him up to 12 dice or so probably wouldn't need a rating 5 program, but it wouldn't be a statistically insignificant upgrade. A rating 6 program would be mostly unnecessary. By the time you got up to 20 dice, however, a rating 10 program wouldn't be a statistically insignificant upgrade, but a rating 6 program would only serve as a limitation about 20% of the time.

Going by the rating x1.5 (round down) method:

Rating: cap
1: 1
2: 3
3: 4
4: 6
5: 7
6: 9
7: 10
8: 12
9: 13
And hopefully you can spot the trend from there.

This means that the 12-dice hacker would see about the same benefits to upgrading from rating 3, 4, or 5 programs as with the first method above (with 3 and below seeing much reduced effectiveness and 6 having a little extra 'oomph'). However this method would reduce the need to upgrade beyond rating 7-9 for the 20-dice hacker, keeping bleeding-edge program ratings from having to be 10+ to be effective.

Or even Program Rating + 1. It does also depend on what range of ratings you plan for your game. Some games don't really have 7+ (insane military grades), while others are crazy.

You wouldn't use intuition to dodge bullets because reaction is slower than intuition because you have that brain->body transmission that must occur first. But if I want to be precise, you would have to roll intuition to see if you're afforded the chance to dodge, which would be reaction to see if you can successfully dodge. Of course, the book mostly indicate that you dodge bullets not by dodging the bullet itself but moving in erratic and unpredictable movements that make it harder for the shooter to hit you.

Intuition is the stat used when making checks to learn new skills or improve existing ones (Intuition + Current Skill Rating, Threshold New Skill Rating x 2, Interval 1 week [if memory serves correctly]). Intuition AND logic are both used in hacking albeit indirectly since hacking is skill which is improved via Intuition and programs are improved via Logic. Thus Intuition does play a part in EVERY check that involves a skill as one can infer that the usage and application of the skill is intuitive and you are leveraging another attribute to use that skill more effectively.



It's scientific fact. Transistors work about a million times faster than neurons and that's assuming that they're not using quantum computing in Shadowrun. All you're doing is removing the physical impediments of your brain telling your body what to do. The computer->screen->eye->brain portion won't see much of an improvement in speed over a direct neural interface. You're removing the screen and eye so you have computer->brain which will function about as fast as computer->screen which is slower than screen->eye. It's the brain->body->input device portion that you're eliminating. You're reducing input times much akin to how you can work much faster in a command line environment over a GUI in modern times.

Double post

So one line in the description should hold more weight than the following 300 pages of rules systems? I disagree.

If you look at those Intuition skills, they have nothing to do with anything technical and everything to do with "feeling" a situation. Even Navigation isn't defined as a technical skill (plotting courses with maps), but rather as an "I guess I should go this way" skill.

This discussion is entirely the fault of the designers who decided that splitting Intelligence into Logic/Intuition would be fun.



Not foolishness, rather equivocation.

As for "Intuition = mental speed and the ability to process lots of data," the lack of Logic is likewise defined as:



So, by those descriptions, a high-Intuition but low-Logic character would both excel and suck at processing a lot of details.



What's the page reference for that? I can't find it.

I think Logic is a better fit, not only thematically (from descriptors of the attributes themselves) but from a game balance point of view. Intuition is already used for several important day-to-day tests that a Shadowrunner might make at any time (Perception and Initiative being two of the most important). Logic would be even further relegated to the realm of "outright dump stat" in a game that house ruled Hacking to work this way.

If that's you're intent, fine, but I think Logic and Strength are a little underpowered already; further tweaking things (even as house rules) to remove their relevancy feels like a step in the wrong direction, to me.

SR4A p226.

It's sounds like you're saying that both Logic and Intuition, judged by their skills, are wrong for Hacking. Which is my pet (the RAW) position, heh. Anyway, I'm just playing your game. You attacked Int-hacking on the basis of the description, so I compared Int/Log descriptions. You attacked it on the basis of the linked skills, so I compared the linked skills (in which case, they're both wrong). If you think Matrix hacking is like Automotive Mechanic, I have to disagree.

I do agree with that, Critias. I'm just talking about these 'thematic' lines of attack.

You can't actually "dodge bullets" since bullets of course move too fast for you to spot and move out of the way of intentionally. The best you could do would be to predict where the bullet is going to go, and then try not to be there when it arrives. Or flail a lot to confuse your opponent (putting the Intuition burden on him to predict your movements).



Oddly enough, Intuition is the only attribute commonly used in RAW hacking (with Willpower taking a backseat for Black IC defense), and then only in Cybercombat -- to arrive at your Initiative score. My thoughts are that while Intuition is good for that, it's not good for actually using Cybercombat to hit/damage the target. Much in the way that Reaction is used to determine your Initiative in meatbody combat, but Agility is used to actually hit/damage the target.

There could be something said for using Intuition as a factor in avoiding attacks in Cybercombat, again going with the Intuition ~ Reaction parallel, but by RAW that's already taken as Response + Firewall. An interesting house rule there would be to make Response + Intuition be your defense, instead, and a nice way of splitting the difference between Logic and Intuition being used in Hacking.

Besides, Firewall already gets used in resisting damage.



That's an argument for abandoning both attribute and skill in favor of something like System + Program rating, or abandoning hacking altogether in favor of carefully scripted Agents.

As a game, however, Shadowrun is more focused on the abilities of individuals. Being The Greatest Hacker of All Time is supposed to be a personal goal, and not something that you can simply spend cash on. While it may not be the most realistic interpretation, it's more in line with the neo-noir atmosphere.

I like the following rule. Skill + Program, Hits limited by Intuition x2 OR Logic x2, whichever is lower. Then you can't dump either stat.

It's almost like Skill+Program is the happy medium between your two positions.

Ooh, nice, StealthSigma. That's a pretty high hit-cap, but of course Attribs are expensive.

It's in the same ballpark as Automotive Mechanic, just with different technology.

Remember that Hacking is primarily used in all the methodical actions: breaking in via hacking on the fly or probing the target (think password crackers today, or methodically trying all of the potential exploits like logging in guest accounts) which are both extended tests. Crashing program/OS, which are both extended tests. Disarm data bomb, which while not an extended test is the attempt to disarm a complex program to keep it from activating. Hacking is also used for Spoofing, Editing, and Intercept Traffic. None of these actions sound like Intuitive responses.

Hacking is never used for something that you don't have to actually think about, or for anything that has to be run on pure gut instinct.

Except maybe Full Defense in Cybercombat is +Hacking, which I'm not really clear on.

If we're strictly talking about Cybercombat, that's different. Intuition is already a part of that (and I would seriously consider that house rule making Intuition a part of Defense, in place of Firewall).

Maybe make it Response + Intuition (+Firewall for Full Defense). Hmm..

That might be workable. I'll have to think about this.

I still hate hit caps. It feels like the game system taunting you. "Ha ha, you rolled too well, suck it!"

I agree, of course. That's why this whole debate is fun and difficult.

I don't think 'Extended Test' is a fair litmus, though. Auto Mechanic has intervals of hours, while Hacking actions are fractions of seconds. Even then, I don't want to focus too much on the pure question of speed. Data Search (just for example) is more reasonably Logic, whether it's 1 minute or 1 turn.

I'd argue that spoofing is appropriately an Intuition linked action. Look at it's effective meatspace counterpart. Disguise.

Sure. Solving a math equation would also be an "extended action" that some people could solve in fractions of a second. Still logic.

My position is that hacking actions are always inflicted on the system, and never in response to anything the system does. Just because you can do them very quickly doesn't mean they're not calculated and planned. Probing the Target takes hours or days. Hacking on the Fly can take 3, 6, 9, 12 or more seconds, depending on how bad/slow the hacker is or how tough the system is to crack. In fact, there's no difference between methodically Hacking on the Fly with one test every 3 seconds or cracked-out speed-hacking five tests every 3 seconds except for the time it takes to finish the job -- the system only gets to hit back at you per action, not per round. Cracked-out speed-hacker could spend 1 pass Hacking on the Fly and the other 4 reading War and Peace -- or simultaneously hacking 4 other nodes on the fly. That's just because he's fast, it has nothing to do with his Intuition.

Extended Test kind of is a fair litmus, because the argument for Hacking being Intuition-based up to this point has been that these things happen "too fast to process." Nothing in the rules says you can't take your sweet time doing them, and nothing in the rules says anything about super-fast actions requiring Intuition.