Summary of conversation so far:

Neurosis: "I was told to make bonuses. I made up some bullshit, just so that there was something they could playtest. They don't make any sense."
us: "These make no fucking sense."
Wired_SR_AEGIS: "Well, see, they make sense under the assumptions of [technobable bullshit]. You just aren't aware of the context!"
us: "..."

so, in that logic, pacemakers, hearing aids and all other such things should, today, be bluetooth enabled per default then?
also, you do remember that the guy responsible for writing a big part of the gear chapter thought it was supposed to be PAN bonus NOT Matrix-Bonus?
and that he only defended these because of that fact? and that he called the other way a dumb idea?

Hahahaha. How could I resist all those crazy smiley faces. Okay, I'm with you. Getting my SR4A tattoo effective immediately.



Here's a better summary:

Neurosis: "I was told to make bonuses by some of the game developers who have a background in computer science. So I took their word for it that this stuff could work under some arbitrary implementation and made up some bullshit, just so that there was something they could playtest. They don't make any sense to me, but they don't have to. I don't have a classical education in Computer Science, and ten years in the field."
us: "These make no fucking sense."
Wired_SR_AEGIS: "Well, see, they make sense under the assumptions of [technobable bullshit]. You just aren't aware of the context! ...I'd recommend that you start with some of the open course CS offerings that MIT has, if you're really interested in understanding what a computer may or may not do."
us: "...Are you implying that understanding computer science is not an intuitive ability I have been born with? How DARE you use hominem attacks against me!"

Hehehe.

EDIT: I will say that Cochise, despite us hitting it off on the wrong foot, had probably the best attempt at dismantling the Matrix but couldn't wrap himself around what happens to packets after they exceed the scope of a network model. Like, that packets didn't exist just to be switched around then handed off to awaiting sockets, but that once passed to sockets, there were additional operations performed on the data contained that turned it in to... whatever a given system or application needed to turn it into.



That above is a great summary of what I am not saying, no.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

Wow! It's almost like I don't know how computers work!

I'd better reassess my job security due to inadequate college education.

http://s12.postimg.org/434g89hrh/0711131348_crop.jpg

Actually, I think I'm good.

So...

...I'm unclear. Do you agree now that a given, undetermined implementation of a system may favor a distributed (among a number of other things) architecture? Or are you in the camp that states that such a given, undetermined implementation must not favor a distributed architecture.

I couldn't infer any technical dialogue from your response. Or were we just going to stick with Option #1, where we talk about how we feel?

...because I feel sad.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

My position is still anti-yours. Because you keep spouting technobabble bullshit that makes no sense and use it to explain something that not only makes no sense, but is admitted by the author to be complete and utter bullshit that doesn't make any frakking sense.

epeen growing, growwwwwwinnnnnnng



Actually some of them make perfect sense to me, some of them kind of make sense if you squint at it in the right light, and some of them I didn't really think about whether they made sense or not and went with it because I thought it was cool.

The baton is an example of one that made a bit of sense to me, because thinking "baton: extend" is marginally faster than flicking your wrist just so (and I am assuming we're looking at futuristic wi-fi communication protocols where latency is almost always a non-issue). Ironically, the baton example is not a strong use of wireless bonuses in general because there's no real vulnerability there to hack; if a malicious hacker makes your baton pop a boner, so what.

The smartlink bonus is an example of one that doesn't make as much sense to me, but IIRC that's one that was specifically mandated by the powers that be.

I'm not sure if the wired reflexes plus reaction enhancers one makes sense, but I did think it was a fun way of addressing the age-old question of whether or not they stack, and I thought it was a cute little jab at the ambiguity in the existing rules: sometimes they do stack, sometimes they don't.

The idea of a dart-based taser having a little firmware package that could analyze your target's vital signs and report their health back to you was one that I didn't think too much about if it made sense or not, because I personally thought it was really cool.

It's not techobabble, dude. You're the one touting your familiarity with the subject.

Requirements drive design. Design determines implementation. Implementation determines efficiency.

You have none of those things at your disposal, and yet you are making claims about how something must operate. All you know is that the Matrix is an internet of things and that stuff gets really awesome when it connects to it. And you're like whoa--nyahah. Not getting awesome on my watch, brosky!

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

To be fair, only one of three words in my job title is actually true.



"Baton: Extend" is faster, yes, but doesn't require distributed matrix processing (which is what Wired_SR_AEGIS uses to justify all of the bonuses). I'm totally cool with your explanation, it just doesn't match what "wireless bonuses" seem to imply.

Smartlink I think is totally cool...just that the bonuses could to be swapped. I could go either way, TBH.

Wired reflexes I think would have been better off without that jab. It ends up coming off as a complete joke, which is what it is, turning most of the entire "wireless bonuses" system into a joke.

Tasers: maybe. Ex-ex exploding bullets no.
The real question here is what does "health status" actually mean. From a real world perspective, things like "has a fever" or "heart defect" could be relevant. From a game-rules perspective, the only thing that matters is health boxes...which isn't...needed.



Requirements: run a motor.
Design: supply electricity to the motor.
Implementation: flick a switch.
Matrix not needed

When I wrote it, it was just for tasers, IIRC. Did it get tacked onto EX-EX ammo somehow??

Looking back at this thread it looks like I misread.

Wired_SR_AEGIS Temperance still totally "justified" it at one point, too, when I complained about it.
Edit, had to look up the post in question.

Oooops! Let me help you.

Requirements: Instruct a motor to begin to run with your brain., anticipate and accelerate motor instructions to occur faster than manual activation (Flip a switch - Simple Action improved to Free Action), with 0.000001% operational failure due to command interpretation errors, and all commands processed as real time computing (Hard cap: 48ms)
Design: Distributed queries, local reassmbly, heuristic/predictive algorithms
Implementation: Local Hardware + Interface to Matrix 3.0

There you go.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

Ok good because Explosive bullets that provide medical data on the target while exploding would actually be really dumb. If nothing else, they'd be you know, ACTIVELY IN THE PROCESS OF EXPLODING which makes it pretty tricky to transmit wireless data.

Well, in all fairness you don't need to transmit data back while its actively in the process of exploding.

You just need a sufficiently large database of case studies and a really good predictive algorithm, with some last minute pre-impact fine tuning transmitted back to you to.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

My brain is not wireless.



Given that electrical wires are already faster than nerves (120 m/s top speed baby!) this doesn't require the matrix.



Trivial. Does not require the matrix. In fact, the matrix would make the 0.00000001% failure rate bigger, not smaller (hooray signal noise and EM interference!)



Quite.



Precisely my argument.

...Your brain being wireless has no bearing whatsoever on the complexity of the signals it sends, and the intensity of the task involved in interpreting its signal, let alone interpreting its signal correctly and dependably.



Sure. Out of curiosity, what part of the electrical wires actually do the predictive anticipation of a command?

To my knowledge, electrical wires have no innate computational abilities? Are you implementing intelligent wires capable of executing predictive tasks with some degree of certainty? Do they have tiny transistors on them, or something?

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

How do you walk, read, or write a novel? How do you do a Pushup or Situp? I could go on. It is a learned response, just like extending your baton with a thought from your brain. Or activating your Wired Reflexes, or any number of other things that Cyberware is capable of in the Shadowrun universe prior to the ludicrousness of Online Bonuses.

Right, but we're not talking about use basic integrated functionality. That functionality has a defined speed of a simple action, right? We're discussing a more efficient implementation that acts faster than that base functionality.

How do you do that?

You can't. Not when we're talking about a perfectly optimized solution. There's a lower threshold that you can't travel beneath, if you want a perfect solution. There's no free lunch. So what do you do?

So you cheat: You guess. And if you guess really, really, really well...

...then it doesn't matter that you guessed. Leave the perfect state for philosophers and move on to the next practical solution.

As a matter of fact, guessing really, really, really, really well is kind of a thing these days. You could even say that it's a $#&@ing big deal, my friend.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

We can read brainwaves on a sufficient complexity today in order to perform complex tasks. It doesn't take a powerful computer to interpret them (in fact, a smart phone would be sufficient).



Who said they need to?
Input lag below about 60-70ms (which is entirely doable with nothing more than the brain-computer interface device and a wire) would appear to the user as being predictive already due to the 80-100ms in the "past" that we, as humans, experience as the present (and the taller you are, the bigger this delay). At 40ms and below, the result would actually appear to happen prior to our issuing the command.

Point is, I think only you are talking about Basic Functionality here.
DNI is vastly more efficient, in many people's minds, over distributed cloud computing FOR THINGS THAT HAVE NO REAL NEED of Distributed Cloud Computing. The devil is in the details, and that is where the problem lies. Nonsense is still nonsense.

So how does the matrix know that you want to flip your rifle to fully automatic before you start to do so, without also knowing that you have a fully automatic weapon in the middle of the mall, knowing you can't have a license for that particular weapon, and calling Knight Errant's High Threat Response teams? Why does The Matrix even allow you to use it to send that command to an illegal firearm?

On top of everything else, The Cloud is simultaneously helping the other guy dodge to cover since it knows that you are about to send 20 APDS rounds screaming in his general direction? Since your commlink is within a short distance of his reaction enhancer and wired reflexes, that means your smartgun link (and your commlink, and everything else you own) is simultaneously helping you hit and helping your target be harder to hit. Doesn't that strike you as idiotic?

DWC: THE CLOUUUUUUUUD! SHALL NOT BE QUESTIONED!

Ofcource it can, there is no history(quite literally, the new books history chapter is 5 pages IIRC)

Distributed cloud computing is so turn of the century.

Ubiquitous computing

Context aware pervasive systems

Physical computing

Add 60 years to these ideas. I happen to agree that Matrix bonuses are more than a stretch, but PAN bonuses are more plausible. I think a hacker might find a way to access your PAN with the right know-how and equipment.

Disclaimer: Neuroscience is not my schtick. (And in the interest of full disclosure, while I have had the opportunity to dabble in some predictive algorithm research, that's also not my schtick.) However, I would be extremely surprised if there exists brain wave interface today that is not limited to a very confined and controlled environment, with numerous controls to limit subject stimulus, tailored to a specific individual, with very simple and not complex machinery operated.

Additionally, I would expect that the reliability of such a system is poor, and the controls to correctly interpret fine variations of similar 'thought patterns' is primative at best.

While I accept that Shadowrun has gotten it down to a science, I think your characterization of trivializing the complexity of human thought patterns is inaccurate.



Because the basic, optimized time for command inception to command execution is already a simple action. The question is, how can a distributed system work better than an optimized direct connection? Obviously one such consideration that it must overcome the 'lag' of a transmissions between distributed system as that typically exceeds that of a local system.

However, really 'lag' is a poor choice to build a case upon because it is not solely the transmission of signals that defines command inception to execution. It is only one, of numerous, points that cause delay.

One such answer is: Predictive computing is able to adequately and rapidly determine when a command is going to be executed through extensive analysis with such a high degree of accuracy that it's non-perfect implementation doesn't matter, and it's non-directly wired interface doesn't introduce more 'lag' into the process than it saves from the process through accurate guesses and predictive shortcuts.



That's entirely an implementation detail. There's no reason why the available distributed computing model must also have knowledge of what is being computed. Only that it is being given requests, and that it generates responses.

Hash functions are probably the most basic, and easily digestible means of proving this. Your modern computer infrastructure has numerous applications where the actual values being checked are obfuscated through one-way transformations.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

Since we're pressing for resumes, I suddenly feel qualified to jump in again (I have 11 years in computer security and a degree in CS from one of the top 10 universities in the field. However, I don't play SR4 and haven't been tracking SR5 too closely, so I've felt content to be quiet.)

1) Advantages of Predictive Computing
Going off of SR3, a free action is something 'relatively simple, nearly automatic actions tha trequire little or no effort to accomplish. Examples are saying a word, dropping an object, dropping prone ...' (and included ejecting a smartgun clip when connected to the smartgun via skinlink or a cable to your datajack).

If you can do something faster than speak a word, it's still a free action. Predicting the future STILL makes it a free action (until there's some new category of action for time travel). So mechanically, predictive processing should have the same result as just old-fashioned smartlink wires.

2) Transmission speed
The actual processing power required for most of these activities, most especially predictive computing, is pretty minor. You have something watching the brain activity. If it detects the brain activity in a certain area, it triggers an event. That doesn't require a server farm. The major bottleneck for speed won't be processing power, but transmission speed.

The transmission speed of wireless is less than the speed of light © because of bandwidth restrictions, but it's still on that order of magnitude. However, the distance is much greater, and it still hits wires inside of the server, plus it's chopped down significantly because each transaction requires a back-and-forth plus processing (so if it's as simple as one message there and one back, it's half the speed of light, divided by distance. Two exchanges makes it one quarter c divided by distance, and so on). Fiber optics also move at c, but have a much, MUCH shorter distance, and have no bandwidth restrictions due to traffic congestion. If your servers are 1 kilometer away, but the distance from your head to your hand is about 1 meter, this makes the fiber optics transmission 1,000 times faster than wireless. So overall, having the processor local and transmitting directly should be faster than cloud-computing.

While PAN doesn't suffer the distance penalty, it does suffer bandwidth limitations. Your PAN restricts itself to a slice of a certain frequency (usually using modulus operations to cut a frequency into multiple channels.) This is because there's just too much stuff out there and your PAN has to share a limited RF spectrum with every other device it MIGHT encounter. If everything is wireless (as we see in SR5), that means more traffic, and more bandwidth restrictions. Fiber optics don't suffer this, since it doesn't suffer from unintentional interference. I don't have the specific numbers, but as a point of comparison, think about how fast your wireless router is compared to plugging a cable in (and then account for the fact that your cable is copper and the wireless is radio). So fiber optics should be faster than the PAN as well.

3) Processing restrictions
This is the only area where I think the cloud may have a clear advantage over implants, but it's only for a small subset of cases. Specifically, it's for the cases where the processing requirements are so onerous that the processor can't be carried/worn/implanted, but that the transmission requirements are light enough for it to be functional over a limited wireless connection. So let's take a moment and break this into two separate questions.

Processing capabilities: per Moore's Law, we should expect the processing power in 2075 to be approximately 2^60 times better than it is now, or approximately 1000000000000000000x faster. There are cases where your processing requirements will still require a server, but those will be things like cosmology and particle physics. But for the sake of argument, let's assume Moore was wrong, and in Shadowrun the capabilities are just enough that a handheld device can represent a full three-dimensional environment and a full sensorium. I still find it difficult to imagine many cases where your cyberware will require more than that amount of processing power in order to work at full speed.

Transmission requirements: Imagine you have a cloud processor. You send up an equation, you get back the solution. You need to calculate the cost of processing + the cost of transmission. If the cost of transmission is high, the total calculation may be more expensive than the cost of processing on your little commlink. For complex systems such as weather modeling, the input data required is intense. The break-even point for time is where your cloud processor is calculating factors after many repetitions (so for your weather computer, if it's calculating the movement of fronts a week in the future). If you're calculating the weather for the next five minutes, the time spent uploading data will be greater than the time saved by calculating it on a supercomputer. In this case, I don't see most cyberware requiring (during combat) predictions more than thirty seconds in the future. Anything further ahead than that will require newer data, and newer data means you lose that speed advantage again. Processing the data locally is in this case ideal.

4) Infrastructure
"But the infrastructure doesn't support it! This is a dystopia, and the corps like EA want 'always on' because it benefits them."

I think I've made a pretty compelling case so far as to why every runner would prefer cyberware processing be done locally rather than on the cloud. But if doing it locally just isn't an option because the infrastructure and products won't support it, it's a moot point. (I'm also ignoring the obvious security holes of having your cyberware always transmitting your precise location to the corporations.)

So if corporations pushed for this, would it be possible for the little guy to push back?

In some cases, I think the answer is pretty obvious. There's no technological depth to an extendable baton that can't be reproduced, right now, by anyone with a machine shop. If you already have a datajack, getting from A to B should be pretty trivial. And once one guy on the street knows how to do it, it's going to spring up everywhere. So can we put this to bed? Even if wired extendable batons aren't available At Decks R' Us, they'll be available on the street, and that's what the smart runner will buy.

So what about tougher gear, like cybereyes or wired reflexes? That's hard core, proprietary equipment that isn't easily hacked or reproduced. It's especially difficult to predict whether DRM will actually be effective in the future. So it is hypothetically possible that this tech won't be available with local processing in the future because the corporations won.

But history would seem to suggest otherwise.

Media protection has been in place for hundreds of years, and it's never been truly effective. DRM continues to hurt consumers (in this case including the military and the corporations themselves) and offer only a minor hiccup to pirates (i.e., Shadowrunners). I'd love to play a shadowrun where my PC has cracked wired reflexes, but a flick of his jammer shuts down the military team's cyber when it can't connect to the cloud to validate their licenses. And even in those cases where DRM is effective, it's given rise to competition who will sell their gear without. In the world of shadowrun, the market for non-DRM ware is a big one.

SHadowrun also has had non-DRM cyberware since around 2020. That's 50 years of fast, effective gear without requiring any cloud functionality. That it's not compatible with the Matrix 3.0 is irrelevant. Wired reflexes weren't compatible with Matrix 1.0 or 2.0 either, because they didn't connect to the matrix. That's the point. If new WR now requires a cloud connection, that means that old WR will be pulled out of corpses, rebuilt, copied, sold on the streets, etc., specifically because it doesn't. And technological innovation will continue with that line of ware, especially among all of those nations that DON'T keep with the corps (and there are plenty). Plus of course the moment someone figures out how to get around the DRM on the modern equipment, that new cyberware will be used by everyone as well, and the only difference between the runners and the military will be that one is vulnerable to jamming because they're idiots.

5) Game Balance

I do have a game-writing resume, but it's not nearly as impressive (two, soon three titles). But I've been playing for a while, so I still feel like I can say a thing or two.

Yes, deckers in Shadowrun have historically been the loser role because they can't interact with the rest of the party. That is, unless you gave them a gun, because there's no requirement that your decker can't shoot. But that's not the point. The point is, shadowrun has a cool little rock-paper-scissors thing going on, and the decker doesn't really fit into it. Historically it's been Street Sam is your swiss army knife, but Sam < Mage < Rigger. Logically, the decker should beat rigger. Instead, it's now Decker > Sam < Mage < Rigger. It doesn't quite make sense to me. This would seem to be disrupting game balance. Right now a Sam doesn't have any real way to defend himself against ANY other archetype (except by going first, but he doesn't have any bankable advantage there either). So from a game design viewpoint, this seems to be a terrible idea.

6) Rule of Cool

Okay, but hacking cyberware is fun. That's what kicked off this whole thread, isn't it?

Sure it is. Sometimes. But getting hacked by someone else probably isn't (especially if you can't do anything to prevent it). So this would seem to be a wash at best, although you can argue that getting your stuff taken away is more or less fun than getting to take away someone else's. That's a qualitative argument, so there's no way to win.

But this setup isn't the only one that lets you hack cyberware. Instead, give cyberware some super bonuses if it's attached to the cloud. Or set it up so if the sam runs a virus, his cyber is now vulnerable to hacking (which is also much more realistic, since phishing is currently the most common method of directed cyber attacks). Or create tactical networks that have specific vulnerabilities. I can think of dozens of different setups that lets you hack the mooks and have a great, fun time without your opening up the whole can of worms of making a character class (but only one!) vulnerable to having all his toys seized without warning or a way to defend himself.

I think I've covered most of the salient points. The end conclusion, I think, is pretty clear. There are some perks to requiring cyberware be wirelessly enabled, but there are significant logical and balance conflicts which make it a poor game design choice.

That isn't the question at all. Conclusion drawn from a false premise.

I heard that got retconned as well so it never happened.

Teasing

So the better question is, what are we going to use to tweak this situation?

I just finished work so now get to go download my copy and I guess sit down and try and wrap my head around it all.

It isn't? Isn't this whole discussion spawned from the root question of: How can task X be performed more efficiently through matrix aware gear than through non-matrix aware gear?

Okay. Well. My mistake. That's what I've been discussing, at least.
Feel free to disregard my rambling.



I think that definitely gives you a lot of room to weigh in on a number of topics here, and the security background should particularly help tie in numerous areas where 'overhead' can eat its way into otherwise simple processes.

Let me make some targeted responses:



Correct. However, the context of the topic is accelerating a simple action into a free action. Obviously, no improvement exists to make free actions into even more free actions. (Unless, I suppose, you were able to take an additional free action I suppose. Regardless, that's conjecture, and not proposed.)



Mmmm. My stock answer has been: That really depends, with 'minor' really being relative. While I respect that you have provided a thoughtful response, I'm going to stick with that stock answer.

Consider the following:

The overhead of creating new data vs. just grabbing data that's already been computed can indeed have significant savings. Passing a hash of 'brain activity' out into my limitless cloud of data and examining a small subset of matches replies could be an order of magnitude simpler than computing the results locally. So we aren't strictly considering distributed computing (Though that plays a role in a number of the 'under the hood' features that pull this all together), but we're also considering the implication of BigData in 2070.

Therefore, combining highly effective hash algorithms (possible) + near limitless data (possible), we find yet another cost savings afforded by an implementation favoring non-local capabilities: Fingerprint criteria. Pass fingerprint. Collect results. Simple Analysis. Loop.

Additionally, your security background likely recognizes that the actual implementation likely needs to be biased towards rejecting valid signals, rather than accepting invalid ones. So the subsequent problem isn't strictly 'transmitting open', but confirming that 'open' is indeed 'open', not 'fish' or 'apple pie'. This overhead of additional checks taxes a local process that executes serially in a way that parallel computations are not taxed.

Such an implementation could provide rapid predictive capabilities in conjunction with nearly 'free' error checking, as in the above example error checking is baked into the pre-existing data set.



I think this is a fair treatment of the topic. Expense incurred by transmission vs. Expense saved by local processing.



Really this can be extended to anything computationally complex. Anywhere from bullet dynamics to weather calculations. The key being that the data being processed does not necessarily need to be transmitted for processing from the local cyberware, merely references to that data, which may be minute in comparison.

And so the transmission overhead need not include, in all cases, the full set of data. That data may, or may not, enjoy much lower transmission latency between the point of storage and computation. And the final resulting data, likewise, need not be as massive as the set of data to be operated upon.

The received answer may be as simple as a transmitted: "YES" or "NO".

The end result simply goes back to a question of unknowns. There is a resounding chorus of voices that says: It must not operate this way! I think your expertise may instead reinforce a more rational conclusion of: It may or may not operate this way.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

See, you're confusing "General Task X" with "Specific Task X."

General Task X, I would not disagree...if there's a reason for distributed processing (e.g. anything that could conceivably be used with a tacnet).
But I didn't ask that.

I asked, "What reason does an extendable baton have for distributed processing?"

Your answer was interpretting brain waves, yet we already know that this is untrue, due to everything else you can do with your brain-computer interfaces that doesn't require the matrix. For example, an implanted cyberdeck with no wireless connection.

Okay, I think my answer stands then:

An optimized direct connection takes a simple action.

How can that be accelerated?

A free action is possible by being connected to the Matrix using predictive algorithms combined with near infinite pre-existing data sets.

Instead of needing to think about opening a Baton, having that thought interpreted reliably and accurately, and executing that thought (Simple Action)...

...Something anticipates you opening the baton with such reliability that effectively 'always' works, is done before you knew you wanted to do it (free), and is reliable except in the rare cases that it causes your gaming group to snort mountain dew through their nose because you like extended your baton at an inappropriate time, or something.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

And then we go into meaningless technobabble again. Congrats.

I can do it more simply:

By using a DNI connection I can think "baton: extend" and the signal rushes down the wire at 0.97c, causing the baton to extend more rapidly than if I were to move my thumb a quarter of an inch and press a button, because that takes more coordinated though (signal propagation through nerves at 80m/s, plus the feedback to make sure my thumb is on the button, etc. etc.).

Occam's Razor.

I am trying to read through some of the speculative reasoning attempting to explain the wireless bonuses. Some are honestly well thought out.

However, the ones that assert that either technology will somehow evolve in ways we can't predict, or that you need specialized education to understand, those simply don't hold any water for me.

Why? Because you can't do that when writing for a game.

You need to come up with both mechanics and fluff that support each other, but you also need to have them be accessible to the general customer base. Mechanics need to be relatively simple and logical, as does the fluff.

The moment you start throwing in stuff that requires specialty knowledge to understand or acceptance of unknown factors to work, well, you might as well say, "BECAUSE MAGIC".



-k

I guess Star Trek is right out, then.

What's the Razor have to do with speed? This was a discussion about accelerating action into response, not suppositions on the most probable explanation of a given event...

...But yes, I think we're probably at the point where we can say: Agree to disagree.

EDIT: Oh, I see. DNI is the simplest explanation for receiving a free action, therefore there's no need for complex WiFi silliness. Cool. Out of curiousity, if you could DNI into a 'weapons port' on your palm, that interfaces with modern weaponry, would that satisfy your objection? Kind of like the induction pad for a smartlink?

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

Glad to see you are finally on board with the current level of silliness with the Online Bonuses...

But I am not really sure what you meant by your Edit (the highlighted part). Could you explain?

If writing roleplaying games, completely out.



-k

Hold up, dude. I'm still in the chair getting this SR4 Tattoo.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

You could go the other way, though. Just as a hypothetical; what if some free actions from previous editions were bumped up to simple / complex? Or the older wired reflexes / reaction enhancer combo was equivalent to the current wired reflexes?

No worries, as long as it covers your Back, it moves around due to its wireless bonus, and it is in full color...

We want a logical explanation on WHY!

So far the only reason we were given is this: "It's this way BECAUSE WE SAY SO!"

Unless something drastic has changed since I got my degree, the benefit of distributed computing is only material if the computation, not the transmission or execution of the command, is the cause of the bottleneck.

I will point out that cyberlimbs do not have wireless bonuses, but perform operations orders of magnitude more complex than your example.

In a world where an entire cyberlimb can not only operate flawlessly without requiring distributed computing, but can do so faster than a natural limb, computational power is clearly not a bottleneck.

I will also point out that wireless bonuses work even if there is very poor matrix reception in your area, (wilderness, 1 mile underground or underwater, inside a faraday cage.) This suggests that the communications were conceived to be local in nature: cyberware communicating with other gear on your person or even other cyberware to achieve the desired result.

I can therefore only conclude that the wireless bonuses are not about distributed computing.

You don't need to be a mile under water. 2 inches of salt water or 18 inches of fresh water will block damn near any device from the Maix and deny wireless bonuses.

On the surace it seems to nake sense. But how are my thoughts getting to it? My thoughts are not on the matrix unless I am in VR.

My solution to the speed problem was simpler.

"Among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected."

Mine has no assumptions. Yours has at least one (that interpreting brain commands is a data-processing heavy task).

There's also the fact that computing has progressed by orders of magnitude we can hardly imagine, and I was able to present a simple bit of pseudocode that would allow, at the very least, free actions without anything approaching the need for cloud computing, even via wireless signals.

Ultimate point: we would not lose the ability to create/mod such code into existence, even on the new architecture; at worse, we'd need a gimped version of the 2075's Virtual Machine program to run the simplified code on, requiring no actual systemic instability, negligible processing power comparatively, and negligible amount of presence digitally. This is why my first character will be breaking all of this stuff to work as it should, with plenty of justification in-world for why s/he's able to do it. It's already a matrix action to change boot code; rather than disabling, I'll just insert code so that it works as good as it can instead of as good as the matrix lets it.

Additionally, say you're connected to the Public Grid... wouldn't that mean that any actions taken by your matrix-connected gear (which, by necessity, will need to, according to proponents of bonuses requiring network connections) be at a negative modifier (-2 perhaps?) since it's not going to be as efficiently sending and receiving all those commands and their impossibly, infinitely-self-compounding security checks?

So I have the 5th Edition book.
Wired Reflexes went from a FREE action to activate to a Complex action to activate with out wireless and a simple action with wireless? WTF? Why does a mental command need to be routed through the matrix to turn on wired reflexes? And what is happening that suddenly it is hard to turn on? and why is something that used to be a free action suddenly a complex action? And why don't they wire reaction enhancers through the body like they used to? Enhanced reflexes by definition is something you want to bring up AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. Especially in combat situations...
This makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. Did the corps somehow become stupid?

Note that changing firing modes on a weapon without a smartlink is still a simple action as well. So clearlt they haven't forgotten how to wire a simple switch.

For the thrill of potentially getting your CNS bricked?

*coughs* it's called wireless reflexes now *cough*