Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Mon, 2010-12-13 14:58

#2

icekatze

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

hi hi Energy is probably the one thing you cannot fabricate with a cornucopia machine, as they most certainly require energy to operate. Many bio/cyber mods would require the blueprints to be custom tailored to the individual morph, and might also require some expertise to install. So if energy really isn't scarce in a habitat, I don't see why a character couldn't have any generic (non-custom) item they want. Honestly, thats the only way I can imagine farcasting being a viable option given most player's propensity for hoarding loot. If the players are ever feeling vulnerable about losing their possessions, then they're not playing in a post-scarcity scenario. If the GM can make it so they players aren't worried about their gear, the GM has probably done a good job of representing post-scarcity. There are other games out there that just cut out markets entirely, limiting characters by what they can carry with them at any given time. Furthermore, I question the assertion that free things will necessarily be lower quality. Firefox and Apache come to mind. So if I were a GM, my response would be: "Anything that isn't custom designed."

—

[url=http://knhauber.phpwebhosting.com/]Nothing Important[/url]

Mon, 2010-12-13 16:02

#3

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

But at that point I may as well give +30 everything to everyone (which feeds back into my original issue - when not directly competing against another character, rolls become almost meaningless - everyone can get up to 100+ with almost trivial work, and it also means that +30 is now 'average').

Mon, 2010-12-13 19:26

#4

Arenamontanus Arenamontanus's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Some things are hard to replicate - weapons need nuclear batteries that both require unusual isotopes and charging in a nuclear facility, many hightech devices require unusual elements (where do you get thulium at this time of the day?) and everything explosive need more energy than will be in the final explosion to nanofacture. Besides, your sousveilling neighbours might decide to sabotage your batch of nanotoxins for the good of the habitat. But the basic question remains: just how much can you get by running open source designs? And why not carry around a library of *everything*? I think the real answer is that just downloading something from the net is a recipe for disappointment. There is an awful lot of spam, sabotage blueprints (everything from griefers to ops aimed at sabotaging the foundations of the new economy) and blueprints that do not quite do what you want. The service is not so much having people invent things for you as review, dig up or customize designs. Do you really want to wear the noname spacesuit that you have no idea who designed, whether they actually tested and whether it is suitable for your environment? And do you even know what you need to look for in a good piece of AI code? Still, remember that the applications you get today with a basic Ubuntu installation covers an enormous domain that would have cost a pretty penny if you have bought its counterparts. The average Joe in EP is richer than most humans today. It is just that he cannot carry around everything he would like to have - there is no bag of holding.

—

Mon, 2010-12-13 19:29

#5

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

I think there actually IS a difference in the quality of open source blueprints/software - specifically in the interoperability of programs/devices. While I agree that you could generally get open source plans for X, will it work with Y? I say, let them have the things they want, within reason, but when everyone gets things at +30, then +30 is the new zero, no?

Mon, 2010-12-13 19:37

#6

Axel the Chimeric Axel the Chimeric's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Monjay has it right. There's a biiiig range in how useful things are, and, as noted, bonuses are relative. Whatever gear they can get their hands on, assuming they can get their hands on it, is probably only of baseline quality. Also, most of the time, the PCs don't own the cornucopia machine they have access to. Anywhere in the inner system will have you buying the gear, and anywhere in the outer system (besides the Jovian Republic) is going to have complications of its own (such as getting access time to the machine, or being allowed to access military grade equipment). That said, the software section does strike me as the sort of thing you could get Open Source versions of, but Open Source hacking tools and what-not are of questionable quality. In short, in the inner system, you'll always need to pay somehow, and in the outer system, you'll either get what you need (at questionable quality), have to wait to get machine access, face restrictions, or some combination thereof.

—

[img]http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/982/exhumanbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/4473/scumbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1396/gatecrasherbar.jpg[/img] [code][@-rep +1, f-rep +2][/code]

Mon, 2010-12-13 20:16

#7

icekatze

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

hi hi Everyone running around with a +30 is an artifact of the game system, not the setting. Even if you remove the catchall that is the amazing multipurpose nanomachine, I don't see why you would expect people to not have tools relevant to their area of expertise. Maybe there should have been a more dynamic interplay between aptitude, skill and technology; especially considering how integrated technology is in the setting. I know it can be difficult, especially since cost/reward paradigms are so ingrained into gamer culture, but it is possible to have a system where an item's value is not based on how many credits/gold pieces/DKP it costs. There are plenty of other practical considerations to take into account, some of which have already been mentioned, but if you can understand that walking through a habitat with a plasma rifle in hand might raise some red flags, you can see why not everyone carries one around with them. If it ever became a problem while I was GMing, I'd say you get a +0 with basic equipment, a -30 with no equipment, and you would need exceptional equipment to get a +30. Exceptional equipment would need to be either an alien super artifact or custom tailored to the character's ego as well as the morph. The smartlink is an example of something that was at one time an issue in Shadowrun but the issue carries over to Eclipse Phase. When the idea first came out it was state of the art, but after a few editions and decades of setting timeline, there's really no reason to expect any weapon to not have one. In Eclipse Phase, it is hard to imagine why any ranged weapon (especially beam weapons though) would not have one, the mesh is supposedly everywhere. With a few notable exceptions, most of the software I use is free. Anyway, if you are unable to judge the quality of a program you are using, perhaps you shouldn't be using that program in the first place and instead just leave that task to an expert. (or take the time to learn)

—

[url=http://knhauber.phpwebhosting.com/]Nothing Important[/url]

Mon, 2010-12-13 23:44

#8

theshadow99 theshadow99's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Just to toss my two cents in... The scale of gear to get a +30 bonus is what I tend to rule toward... as an example, you are an engineer (type doesn't matter to much), your gear goes like this: State of the art nano-fabrication and engineering lab +30 Ships engineering workshop +20 Semi-portable 'workstation' +10 standard toolbox/multi-tool +0-+5 (usually the former only when their is a penalty to the roll) As you can see the scale steps down with man-portable tools generally having no or little bonus. Software is a bit different, my resident 'hacker/programmer' player wanted to write or modify open source code to have most of the standard software... I ruled that as long as she pays for the time to do so it works, since if you are devoting all this time to making or modifying all this software you haven't been doing anything else. So those 'costs' are how you've gotten out of whatever you would usually do to keep yourself alive and feed. 'Whatever you can find on the net' I consider a zero sum addition, the software works but gives no real bonus... More than that requires more time...

Tue, 2010-12-14 00:51

#9

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

icekatze wrote:
I don't see why you would expect people to not have tools relevant to their area of expertise.

Spot on. If you're a professional level mechanic, it's reasonable to assume you have tools superior to what the average joe has, and can tell the difference. "How did you get this item?" - this is a great hook.

icekatze wrote:
if you are unable to judge the quality of a program you are using, perhaps you shouldn't be using that program in the first place and instead just leave that task to an expert. (or take the time to learn)

Spot on again - if you have the appropriate level skill, you are the expert. You will be able to determine (or perhaps create) the software you need, with plenty of plot hooks to be had. At the expert level it becomes less about evangelizing open versus closed source and what tool gets the job done. If some item/power sounds outrageous, have the player fill in the backstory. If their explanation is crap, feel free to add details! Maybe that sweet stealth program they picked up tries to install a trojan and hijacks their morph. Maybe that weapon requires exotic ammunition. You get my drift. Give 'em enough rope for you to gleefully hang them with the hooks they create. You're all there to have a good time, not emulate a court of law. If a player wants something and it doesn't destroy the story, let 'em have it. If it starts messing with the game, toss 'em out an airlock or apply some data corruption when they restore from their next backup. The important part is that it contributes to the story and the Good Time Had By All. If it's egregious, say no.

Tue, 2010-12-14 09:24

#10

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

So I'm hearing "characters should have +30 equipment, for free (unless there's a reason not to), because finding and customizing the blue prints and getting a chance to manufacture it is just a question of time (again, barring reasons not to)." Combined with "a character with high research but no background in the tool he's downloading can get the item for free - but he can't judge it's quality, so it may blow up when least expected." Yes?

Tue, 2010-12-14 10:56

#11

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
So I'm hearing "characters should have +30 equipment, for free (unless there's a reason not to), because finding and customizing the blue prints and getting a chance to manufacture it is just a question of time (again, barring reasons not to)."

"Free" being subjective, sure. If it works for your game - which it may not - and the player can make a backstory about it that fits the game. If it's just Munchkin Time then you'd have every reason to deny it. But keep in mind that +30 is of TITAN or alien manufacture, so there absolutely will be consequences to ownership of said software/items - at least at my table. Try to laugh maniacally when you tell them it's okay.

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
Combined with "a character with high research but no background in the tool he's downloading can get the item for free - but he can't judge it's quality, so it may blow up when least expected." Yes?

If it suits your story, why not? This is how I personally would handle it, but that's because I'm a lazy jerk and I like to let the story write itself while I sit back and toss wrenches into the gears. This method may not work at your table at all! If you've spent months planning a campaign in detail and someone's alien laser sword is going to mess it up, just say no.

Tue, 2010-12-14 14:43

#12

icekatze

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

hi hi From a game mechanics perspective, I don't think it matters what you choose as a baseline, so long as you apply it consistently between the abilities of the player characters and the challenges they have to face. In Eclipse Phase, there are several different types of economies described, so depending on where the action is taking place the circumstances may differ. If you went back in time and handed a caveman a jet pack, said: "go ahead and enjoy," then stepped back through the time portal, what do you think would happen?

—

[url=http://knhauber.phpwebhosting.com/]Nothing Important[/url]

Tue, 2010-12-14 14:58

#13

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

I would disagree with you. By the rules, the maximum bonus from equipment should be +30. The average skill of a Firewall agent should be around 60 (the maximum point they reach before they start paying penalties). By that understanding, equipment adds a +50% bonus to your skills, basically across the board. If you take the understanding that +30 is alien tech, that implies that most people are looking at +10 - barely a 10% bonus. Meanwhile, if you assume that +30 is the highest normally available from the start of the game, that implies that you can get a higher bonus once you get military-grade equipment - hypothetically getting up to maybe a +60 bonus! So the spread is from 10% to 100% - that's a hefty spread, based solely on GM interpretation of the rules, with characters having a 0% bonus (or even a -50% penalty) up to a 50% bonus just out of the gate, depending on how you rate 'free' equipment. That completely changes the importance of basic things like skills. If I can get equipment with trivial work that adds +30, I don't have much incentive to ever bump a skill past 60 (and less so if I can use complementary skills for another +30, and forks or my muse for another +30 on top of that, giving me +90(!!!!) without even necessarily having the basic skill at all!)

Tue, 2010-12-14 17:16

#14

Thunderwave Thunderwave's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
Combined with "a character with high research but no background in the tool he's downloading can get the item for free - but he can't judge it's quality, so it may blow up when least expected."

I know personally I know jack and squat about, say, mechanics tools. A wrench is a wrench is a wrench. I do, however, know tools used for working leather. If I download a free set of "AWESOME MECHANICS TOOLS" and the leatherman detonates in my face, I kind of deserved that. The way I see it, if you have a high enough skill to track down the blueprints/program/etc, and it's available (aka GM caveat[Yes, as a GM do go "No, you can't" and put my foot down on occasion*]), then I'd call for a roll with the skill that the item in question is used for to determine quality. Also, anyone that's poked around online for "Open Source" and "Freeware" programs knows that often they are full of bugs ("WHY won't OpenOffice auto spellcheck?!"), operate weirdly with other programs (Anyone remember the great I.E. fiasco?) that may already be in place, or just have horrid interfaces/functionality. As they say in Rome: "Caveat Emptor". * Usually I'm a "Say Yes" GM, but if something is way to off base for me I'll say no.

Tue, 2010-12-14 20:41

#15

icekatze

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

hi hi Nezumi.hebereke: from a game setting or thematic perspective, where the GM decides to leave the baseline certainly makes a difference, no argument there. The importance of skills vs equipment is something that will definitely alter the course of the narrative. I was speaking strictly from a game mechanics point of view, where as long as the GM and the players are operating under the same set of assumptions it will at least be internally consistent. If the average is 150 (60+30+30+30), then the average should be 150 across the board. Meaning that NPCs (of comparable skill) and other challenges take into account that people regularly get +90 from various sources. ((The first option for dealing with that scenario that comes to mind is to multiply difficulty modifiers by x3)) If on the other hand, the average is 60 (and the average bonus is [b]not[/b] also the maximum bonus) then the NPCs and difficulties should be consistent with 60 being the baseline, with bonuses on both sides being saved for the exceptional. If for instance, the players were operating on a 150 baseline but the GM was operating on a 60 baseline, then the PCs will probably get bored of the lack of challenge after a while. Honestly I always thought it was kind of strange, but not game-breakingly so, that the intangible human skill factor was so big in Eclipse Phase. I mean, is not mind not software? (program it!) Is the body not also a tool? If 99% is truly the "Pinnacle of current understanding and innovation" (p.174) then shouldn't the rules reflect that? Thunderwave: I have found very few programs in general that are bug free. I'm looking at you Microsoft Outlook! *glare* Another option is to allow equipment to have much higher ratings, up to 99, with the understanding that if 30 is the maximum one can assist with, once a program or tool reaches a rating beyond the character's skill rating, the character is effectively assisting the tool rather than vise versa, and perhaps make it so equipment and assist bonuses don't stack past 30.

—

[url=http://knhauber.phpwebhosting.com/]Nothing Important[/url]

Tue, 2010-12-14 22:40

#16

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

icekatze wrote:
I'm looking at you Microsoft Outlook! *glare*

I was going to comment about Outlook and the lack of the ability to edit server side rules - even with the official Outlook for mac - in your last statement about open source. That was my point about interoperability - you could be an expert in Skill X and still not be able to perform a basic task with open source - so that's a nice tool to add to the GM's toolbox. I don't think that a high Research skill necessarily facilitates the ability for a player to get and/or use elite equipment, despite the assistance of a muse. For example, my mother might be able to use google to find nmap, and she might even be able to find a gui and run it, but that doesn't mean she'll find the output useful. I, on the other hand could write a port scanner in awk, and be able to use the output. My skill level dictates my ability to determine quality software, utilize it, and make my own if I can't. (I know, port scans are hardly elite, but I hope my example is apt.) If you've entered into an adversarial relationship with your players, e.g. they want to minmax munchkin your game and you don't want it to end up that way, dealing with it in-game might not be the best route.

Wed, 2010-12-15 00:47

#17

icekatze

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

hi hi Establishing a baseline isn't just about munchkins and players vs their game master. It also helps ground the setting in ways that the players can more easily understand. It doesn't have to be written in stone, it doesn't even have to stay the same throughout the game, it is just a matter of the players and the GM reaching an understanding about what is normal and what is exceptional in their game world. Say a new player is making his/her character and says: "I want my character to be a totally awesome marksman, an alright mechanic, and a terrible liar." It helps to know what that means in terms of gameplay, because failure or success will take part in directing the course of the story. If a player's expectations end up vastly different from the results that happen in game, it can lead to frustration and a loss of immersion. "Well, I [b]thought[/b] 60 meant that I was an expert, but I guess [b]not![/b]" or "I guess it doesn't matter if I'm a terrible liar, I get a +90 bonus anyway." ((Edit: Personally, I think the aptitude range and skill range tables on page 174 are great. However sometimes it seems like: aptitudes+skills are to classical mechanics what equipment and other bonuses are to quantum mechanics. Looking for a grand unified theory.))

—

[url=http://knhauber.phpwebhosting.com/]Nothing Important[/url]

Wed, 2010-12-15 09:27

#18

nikleonard nikleonard's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

In any case, we are assuming that the players are in a Autonomist colony or a permisive habitat. In the inner system, is very probable that all your state-of-the-art military grade gadgets will be taken away in the customs office and, in Mars, hacking the DRM of a Fabber/DCM have very steep fines and penalities (Prision, and hundreds of thousands of credits), and, I can assume that carrying a tool made with Open-Source or pirated blueprints will have repercusions too (because of patent litigations and the sort, and because buying pirated material is a crime too). If your players starts to abuse a lot of Open-Source or pirated equipement, send them to Mars, and the Hypercorp's patents & copyrights attorneys will solve the problem in no time :P. In any case, if one of the players have the skills for generating the blueprint by him/herself, they can build the blueprint very quickly (well, time is not really a issue in EP because you can design your blueprints in VR accelerated time, having access to a server and the design software), but for running the blueprint, you will need a "jailbreaked" DCM or Fabber because DRMed DCM's and Fabbers will only properly accept downloaded and signed blueprints from the "market" of the device's choice (iTunes anyone?) or by signing a "Development agreement" with the company, with a lot of restrictions (Apple Developer Program anyone?). In any case, I have a couple of questions about the limits of the nanofab devices: What are really the difference between a Desktop Cornucopia Machine and a Fabber? The size of the output, the complexity or both?. One can make a nano-swarm with a fabber or a DCM?, one can build a very complex device, like a Synthmorph, with a fabber (in parts, and assembling later, taking more time) or one will need a DCM?.

—

Playing Eclipse Phase the "Chilean Way"...

Wed, 2010-12-15 10:24

#19

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

"Fabber" is a broad term. Many fabbers are specialized, just for food or specific tools, for instance. A Cornucopia machine can make anything (just about), but clearly size may be a limitation.

Wed, 2010-12-15 10:37

#20

nikleonard nikleonard's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

I assume that the limitations are on hardware capabilities, or one can reprogram a fabber for making another cathegory of items? I remember that a TITAN virus reprogrammed the fabbers in one ship to propagate a nanoplague, but that was "TITAN's Magiks" or, for a character with Programming: Nanofabricators and Infosec it will be possible? (or depends in the especific capabilities of the fabber?).

—

Playing Eclipse Phase the "Chilean Way"...

Wed, 2010-12-15 12:16

#21

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

It is hardware restrictions. Presumably if you had a fabber which just makes food, you could also program it to make organic viruses, as long as it's still arrangements of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and trace elements, or use a tool fabber to make spare morph parts, but the software is not likely to be friendly for that. Imagine fabbers like printers with limited color palettes - your red printer is designed to print stop signs, it can also print pictures of red apples, but it can't print pictures of the yellow sun.

Fri, 2010-12-24 09:56

#22

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

So, I handled this by starting my group in Continuity... "You wake up sticky, broke, and confused. You're naked in a resleeve pod, and you don't remember the past 2 weeks. Your sweet sniper rifle is nowhere to be found."

Fri, 2010-12-24 11:19

#23

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Yes, that was my answer too.

Mon, 2010-12-27 11:58

#24

xPeregrine xPeregrine's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Heh - Nezumi wrote Continuity.

—

Mon, 2010-12-27 12:42

#25

Jürgen Hubert Jürgen Hubert's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

You aren't spending favors for just any set of blueprints. You are spending favors to get [i]reliable[/i] blueprints. Keep in mind that the Autonomist Alliance is hopelessly fragmented - and what's worse, their habitats are usually separated by many light [i]hours[/i] from each other. That makes exchange of information - like blueprints - very difficult, and making sure that they are high-quality even more so. No central quality control and all that. Added to the problem is the Cold War situation with the Planetary Consortium, who are doing their best to sow doubt about all those unpaid Open Source blueprints, many of which were pirated from them in the first place. How many of these have been corrupted by PC viruses and contain traps and other problems which will cause the device to blow up in your face at the worst possible moment - or just transmit everything you do to a remote hypercorp server? And that's not even counting sabotage from [i]other[/i] Autonomists. For instance, if a particular weapon destroys the favorite morph of a certain hacker, then that hacker might be motivated to program some virus which sabotages every blueprint of the weapon it comes across. Hackers can hold grudges like that... So yes, your player can in theory get a huge collection of blueprints for every conceivable type of equipment. However, if he didn't bother to spend the appropriate favors for them, you are fully justified to pull out your Random Amusing Mishaps Table every time he uses a new blueprint. What, you [i]don't[/i] have a Random Amusing Mishaps Table? Well, then you should create one as soon as possible! :D

—

[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/argo_userbar.jpg[/img] [url=http://arcana.wikidot.com/]Arcana Wiki[/url] - Distilling the Real World for Gaming [url=http://urbis.wikidot.com/]Urbis - A World of Cities[/url]

Mon, 2010-12-27 13:09

#26

nick012000 nick012000's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Or, alternately, you could just buy a Portable Solarchive with Interest (Open Source Software Programs) or Interest (Open Source Nanofabrication Blueprints); the AI will know enough to be able to give you an idea of the quality of the stuff it's got stored, and you'll be able to pick up basically any open source blueprint/software program you want off of them with a Research check. They're only a Low cost, too!

—

+1 r-Rep , +1 @-rep

Tue, 2010-12-28 00:00

#27

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

xPeregrine wrote:
Heh - Nezumi wrote Continuity.

Nezumi should be encouraged to continue! P.S. they're likely going to find the sweet sniper rifle a week from tomorrow. Or, the bullets anyway.

Tue, 2010-12-28 00:07

#28

It that must no... It that must not be named's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Jürgen Hubert wrote:
You aren't spending favors for just any set of blueprints. You are spending favors to get [i]reliable[/i] blueprints. Keep in mind that the Autonomist Alliance is hopelessly fragmented - and what's worse, their habitats are usually separated by many light [i]hours[/i] from each other. That makes exchange of information - like blueprints - very difficult, and making sure that they are high-quality even more so. No central quality control and all that. Added to the problem is the Cold War situation with the Planetary Consortium, who are doing their best to sow doubt about all those unpaid Open Source blueprints, many of which were pirated from them in the first place. How many of these have been corrupted by PC viruses and contain traps and other problems which will cause the device to blow up in your face at the worst possible moment - or just transmit everything you do to a remote hypercorp server? And that's not even counting sabotage from [i]other[/i] Autonomists. For instance, if a particular weapon destroys the favorite morph of a certain hacker, then that hacker might be motivated to program some virus which sabotages every blueprint of the weapon it comes across. Hackers can hold grudges like that... So yes, your player can in theory get a huge collection of blueprints for every conceivable type of equipment. However, if he didn't bother to spend the appropriate favors for them, you are fully justified to pull out your Random Amusing Mishaps Table every time he uses a new blueprint. What, you [i]don't[/i] have a Random Amusing Mishaps Table? Well, then you should create one as soon as possible! :D

Jurgen! How good to see you here! Wilkommen! I think Eclipse Phase is a much better near future game that "Transhuman space", don't you? As to your ideas, yes, don't forget that just because you've got a blueprint that says it makes a high power personal cannon the prints weren't made with deliberate flaws to make the gun blow up in your face when fired. A blueprint would have to be tested and certified, and even then it might be hacked and altered AFTER certification, and do you really trust the agency that certified it in the first place?

—

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." -Jesse "the mind" Ventura.

Tue, 2010-12-28 00:22

#29

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

It that must not be named wrote:
A blueprint would have to be tested and certified, and even then it might be hacked and altered AFTER certification, and do you really trust the agency that certified it in the first place?

This is the key point I keep coming back to. It's great story fodder, and these are the fun tidbits to toss around. Of course, I did just finish [url=http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=85816&filters... Wick's "Play Dirty"[/url] so I'm feeling particularly okay with turning the tables if someone wants to manipulate the rules to their advantage.

Tue, 2010-12-28 01:10

#30

Jürgen Hubert Jürgen Hubert's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

It that must not be named wrote:
Jurgen! How good to see you here! Wilkommen! I think Eclipse Phase is a much better near future game that "Transhuman space", don't you?

Actually no, I don't think that. I think they are both great games with a different focus, and I will continue to buy all new products for both lines.

Quote:
As to your ideas, yes, don't forget that just because you've got a blueprint that says it makes a high power personal cannon the prints weren't made with deliberate flaws to make the gun blow up in your face when fired. A blueprint would have to be tested and certified, and even then it might be hacked and altered AFTER certification, and do you really trust the agency that certified it in the first place?

And even if it doesn't blow up: Can you be sure that it's really from the latest weapon generation? Perhaps it's an older version with less power - or maybe it is less accurate. And it might not be compatible with all your favorite weapon accessories, either...

—

[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/argo_userbar.jpg[/img] [url=http://arcana.wikidot.com/]Arcana Wiki[/url] - Distilling the Real World for Gaming [url=http://urbis.wikidot.com/]Urbis - A World of Cities[/url]

Tue, 2010-12-28 12:43

#31

Camwyn

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

I just had this conversation with my players - who are creating characters and getting cranked to play :) "example conversation to illustrate my point: Player: I'm toast...time for a resleeve! Good thing we're in combat, since my backup morph is a fury... GM: Hm, didn't you start out on Ganymede? Player: Yes, why? GM: Because that is, I assume where your backup morph is, but you are now on Venus...too bad...'" Player: what do you mean I can't take Vera? (favorite gun) GM: well, you can, but the trip will take a month by ship...and the mission needs to be done within two weeks. Player: @#$%^! GM: You can likely find something adequate there, and who knows, perhaps you can story it in that you discover you really like the new weapon...but you feel like you are 'cheating' on Vera? Player: Ok, yeah, cool :) Now, if you plan on keeping your game to one planetary system/area then this might not apply as much, but egos get farcasted, not bodies, not gear...we're going to start with Continuity and I feel like I'm being nice in not putting them all in basic morphs, perhaps the job perk is that since they're out there for a while and it's just them, they get morphs built ahead of time by the time they get there... I'm playing this stuff up for them...post scarcity means if they need something, it is easy to come by...but if you are on a mission, you have what is available there...find something similar/adequate or McGyver it. Now, that being said, the players are down with it and looking forward to playing around with the idea...we have one asynch (who gets screwed every time he farcasts - asynch penalties for inhabiting a new morph), one player who (with some GM consultation) took 'right at home' for synthmorphs but max levels of 'morphing disorder', so he's screwed if he winds up in any other morph...and he's got story to go with it (char is under the mistaken beliefe that the synths are more TITAN resistant...chuckle...). One pre-fall scientist in a remade who understands that he will have aptitude penalties in any other morph...etc... It's gonna be a wild ride ;) and they will ALL wind up in different morphs at some point, most likely often. Now, we've played Shadowrun for years together, and we're all used to losing our pet weapons/toys/what have you at security checkpoints, due to combat damage, SOTA, etc...but all of the players are actually looking forward to the additional challenge. Should note here: we're going with the idea they are not yet Firewall agents, so no help there either... That said, we have hashed out a lot of this as they've been working on their characters. Yes, with enough rep you can get anything. Yes, most items can be obtained for nearly nothing. No, you still need to spend some rep - perhaps just in finding stuff, finding a fabber that's not restricted (or traceable!), or making new contacts in an area you don't yet to get access to the underground there.

Tue, 2010-12-28 16:24

#32

It that must no... It that must not be named's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Jürgen Hubert wrote:
It that must not be named wrote:
Jurgen! How good to see you here! Wilkommen! I think Eclipse Phase is a much better near future game that "Transhuman space", don't you?
Actually no, I don't think that. I think they are both great games with a different focus, and I will continue to buy all new products for both lines.
Quote:
As to your ideas, yes, don't forget that just because you've got a blueprint that says it makes a high power personal cannon the prints weren't made with deliberate flaws to make the gun blow up in your face when fired. A blueprint would have to be tested and certified, and even then it might be hacked and altered AFTER certification, and do you really trust the agency that certified it in the first place?
And even if it doesn't blow up: Can you be sure that it's really from the latest weapon generation? Perhaps it's an older version with less power - or maybe it is less accurate. And it might not be compatible with all your favorite weapon accessories, either...

Good point, but some people might actually want an older weapon than the newest one since the older one has been tested longer, has more service history, etc or is just beter because the new one is a piece of junk. I tell you, I know a marine who would jump over a pile of new m-16's to get to an old m-14. No kidding.

—

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." -Jesse "the mind" Ventura.

Sat, 2011-01-01 13:28

#33

draxar

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
A player asked, "why do I have to use favors to get software and blueprints? Open-source means it's available to everyone, not just people with a good rep. Right now you can get things like firewalls and anti-virus programs as open-source tools, just by doing a google search."

You don't. In-game, depending on where you are, you should be able to get a fair array of software and blueprints with a research roll. They generally won't be as good as you get for favours, but they can cover some needs.

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
I do see his point, but the logical conclusion there is that characters should be permitted to start out with, well, just about anything. If your character has been bouncing around for a year before the game starts (which is reasonable), they should also have had time to use their one moderate favor/month to fabricate just about anything they needed too, using those free blueprints. So as GMs, what is the proper response - "sure, have whatever you like"?

And the people that weren't spending time and favours accumulating blueprints and/or making items from said blueprints (which may require more favours if the items use rarer elements), do they just sit around doing nothing? The stuff that you buy with your 'credits' at character creation doesn't just represent your character earning and spending credits. It represents your character getting that stuff through whatever means, which includes effort and time. Someone who doesn't spend the time getting a blueprint library and/or making said things has more time to improve their aptitudes, use those favours to improve their rep/get stuff customised for them/whatever. I could see an argument for blueprints being cheaper to buy, or adding a specific thing where you could spend CP to directly get a library of blueprints of a given level of broadness. But you don't get to start off with infinite stuff just 'cause you've got a bit of time.

Tue, 2011-01-04 15:45

#34

Ataraxzy

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Thunderwave wrote:
Also, anyone that's poked around online for "Open Source" and "Freeware" programs knows that often they are full of bugs ("WHY won't OpenOffice auto spellcheck?!"), operate weirdly with other programs (Anyone remember the great I.E. fiasco?) that may already be in place, or just have horrid interfaces/functionality. As they say in Rome: "Caveat Emptor".

Not that this isn't so, in some cases. But I'm not sure that the people in this thread are quite cognizant of just how good OS software actually is. 92% of the worlds top 500 supercomputers (you know, the ones that do climate, nuclear reaction, protein, economic and physics modeling) run an open source OS (either Linux or BSD). Only 24 out of those 500 use Windows or Unix. (there are a further 16 'mixed' OS HCSCs, whatever that is). Linux is running on 100% of the top 10 Supercomputers. ref: http://www.top500.org/stats/list/36/osfam ref: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Linux Here's another statistic: Of the top One Million web servers, 63.7% are running Linux. That number goes to 67.1% market share for OS OSes if you include BSD. Amusingly enough, the server hosting the eclipsephase.com is provided by DreamHost, which supplies only *nix based servers. From their web page:

Quote:
Our choice to not provide Microsoft operating systems for any of our hosting products is one that is a common subject of inquiry. We feel strongly that the best products available for the job of serving Internet content are those based on UNIX TM, and that the efforts of the open source community specifically (Linux, Apache, MySQL and so on) are best of breed.

ref: http://www.dreamhost.com/aboutus-thepresent.html ref: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Linux I'm viewing this web page using Firefox, and typing this reply in EMACS. The best security tools are all OS software. The most secure systems are ALL OS software, without exception. In just about every area, OS software is equal to, if not better than the commercial equivalent - to the knowledgable user. There are exceptions, OS software is a bit lacking in the area of sound manipulation software for example. There are others, I'm sure you guys can think of some. The problems one encounters with OS software aren't generally bugs or feature-lack (ever compared FF to IE?) but *ease of use*. OS software is generally designed to within an inch of its virtual life to be highly efficient, not coddle joe user. For example, EMACS is a text editor designed to do everything one might conceivably do with text files, and it was designed before the advent of the mouse. It accepts mouse input, it's even just as good as other programs at accepting mouse input (things like Notepad++, TextPad, &ct) but it is vastly more capable than anything but its major competitor, Vim. The program has had 25 years of refinement on it. Think about that: 25 YEARS. Getting back to relevance with EP, with a modern rep system implemented it would be trivially easy to obtain the best in class version of software for your needs: Just check the rep score of the distributor - like SourceForge - and programmers - like Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds, the Mozilla Foundation or Canonical, Ltd - after having your muse look up the possiblities for you. The problems are going to come in with having the ability to make your software product your own. OS software is vastly more customizable than its commercial cousins are. Interfaces are often bare, but blazing fast for people with the knowledge to use them, whereas commercial software is often pretty, and comes with menus and wizards and doesn't expect the user to know an input from a CPU. The EMACS manual is 500 pages long. The Org-Mode manual (a sub-system of EMACS) is a further 400 pages. EMACS has hundreds of modes, some are simple, some are programs in and of themselves. Taking all that into consideration, here's what I would do: [b]Open Source blueprints start off as standard versions of their item type. You have several options: spend some Rep to improve it (asking for help on message boards and the like); spend some time to improve it (every 3 months of use gets you a bonus of some sort); spend some intellect to improve it (research rolls, spending points, whatever the player and GM can come up with). That's the good. Here's the bad: Every improvement acts as a MINUS for anyone else to use it (divide the penalties by half if you're feeling generous). [/b] This parallels nicely with the way OS software works today: When you first get EMACS, it works as a basic text editor. Seriously, it's no better than Notepad to the untrained user, and in some cases, worse! As you gain confidence and experience with it, you start adding custom LISP code underneath the hood, you customize the interface because black-on-white makes your head hurt, you start 'req-iring esoteric modes that few people understand, &ct. Pretty soon, YOUR EMACS environment is nothing like anyone else's EMACS environment. To them, it's just Notepad. The same thing goes with programs like Firefox: My personal FF environment is blazing fast for what I do most often, other people can use it, but it might be a bit harder for them because of the non-standard way I have things set up. The rules should not reflect 'quality' differences because there are none: You want a super-excellent-caseless ammunition-sniper-rifle-of-Explosive-DOOOM!!? Great, pay through the nose for a commercial version now or spend some time improving an Open Source one. Open Source is about taking ownership of your stuff, and the rules should reflect that.

—

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Tue, 2011-01-04 16:16

#35

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Ataraxzy wrote:
But I'm not sure that the people in this thread are quite cognizant of just how good OS software actually is.

I run an entire company off open source software, with a few painful exceptions, and have been for (augh!) a decade and a half now. I think the salient argument here is that FOSS and non-FOSS don't always interoperate well, if at all. At least that's the point I'm trying to make, and how I plan to go forward in my games. It would be a fool's argument to say FOSS isn't a viable option now, and even more so when it becomes integrated into the mainstream mind. That said, I can't put Canonical bullets in my Apple clip and load them into my Microsoft pistol.

Tue, 2011-01-04 17:31

#36

Ataraxzy

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

monjay wrote:
That said, I can't put Canonical bullets in my Apple clip and load them into my Microsoft pistol.

Most FOSS tries very hard to interoperate with proprietary formats and standards - I can run Firefox on anything but iOS. I do like your analogy though. I don't necessarily agree w/ it and I'm not sure how you would model separate blueprint ecosystems, but the analogy made me laugh loud enough to get stares. Personally, I'm not sure the game benefits much from over-defining the distinction between the two. That said, maybe separate ecosystems would work something like this: FOSS blueprints are always base model to start with, but modable. Corporate blueprints tend to be precustomized and harder to mod: The H&L Shotgun is always going to have a larger magazine and less penetration than the base FOSS design. Then, come up with a list of mods, apply some mods to the Corporate stuff and allow the FOSS stuff to add them in a la cart but at a cost in time or rep. That pretty well matches what we see today. Not sure I would bother to model interoperability much, if at all. If it were too difficult, nobody would use the proprietary stuff and those loony anarchists win: In a firefight, you need ammunition for your shotgun, not "Nortel Ultra-Safe(tm) - Exclusively for H&L" ammunition for your shotgun. Then again, there's a need for ammo exclusivity when you need to control the weapons, but that's something that can and should be an option in FOSS blueprints as well. As for acquiring the blueprints in the first place, I would go with the following: FOSS: Time or Rep or both. Spend three weeks studying what blueprint is best for you then download it, or spend Rep for quicker answers. You end up with the basic model, but you can spend time or rep to improve it. Proprietary: Credit. Ask your GM for a list then buy whatever's available, or hire an agent to figure out what's best for you, then pay for the object and the agent - it comes pre-customized, but you have to buy it again if you want new options. This models the twin objectives of proprietary and FOSS methods: Ease of use vs. Customization.

—

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Wed, 2011-01-05 00:24

#37

monjay

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Hi Ataraxzy, I agree with your analysis that over-defining the distinction between FOSS and pay blueprints is not going to bring much to the table. We haven't even really crossed that bridge in my game, but, then again, we only have one actual session under our belts so far - we're still getting accustomed to the rules and the flow of the action. I don't think interoperability is a FOSS problem alone - I think I ranted about Outlook's server-side rules lockdown earlier so I'll spare the bits. Happy I could provide you with a laugh!

Wed, 2011-01-05 06:23

#38

Gee4orce

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

I just don't buy this 'post scarcity' economy stuff. Fabrication will always require resources that certainly aren't free or limitless: - matter - the raw elements, some of them will be rare and hard to obtain. We are already starting to run short of some rare earth metals here on Earth. - energy - fusion or solar may make this 'free', but there will always be the need to pay for the equipment to generate/collect/distribute/store that energy - time - this is the killer. Cornucopia machines don't work instantly - large and complex items will take time to fabricate, and assemble from sub-components. Look how huge and complex car plants are today - and they rarely actually manufacture anything from scratch, they are just assembly plants. Any time you have a limited resource market forces will dominate. Some people will be willing to pay to have their designs fabricated more quickly for instance. It's also human nature to want to use something for personal advantage - so whilst you might have 'open source' designs, the very best items will be custom 'closed source' designs that are protected and licensed for use by fabricators. At best I think EP is in a 'post scarcity bubble' - sooner or later market forces will re-assert themselves.

Wed, 2011-01-05 10:25

#39

Ataraxzy

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Gee4orce wrote:
I just don't buy this 'post scarcity' economy stuff. Fabrication will always require resources that certainly aren't free or limitless: - matter - the raw elements, some of them will be rare and hard to obtain. We are already starting to run short of some rare earth metals here on Earth. - energy - fusion or solar may make this 'free', but there will always be the need to pay for the equipment to generate/collect/distribute/store that energy - time - this is the killer. Cornucopia machines don't work instantly - large and complex items will take time to fabricate, and assemble from sub-components. Look how huge and complex car plants are today - and they rarely actually manufacture anything from scratch, they are just assembly plants. Any time you have a limited resource market forces will dominate. Some people will be willing to pay to have their designs fabricated more quickly for instance. It's also human nature to want to use something for personal advantage - so whilst you might have 'open source' designs, the very best items will be custom 'closed source' designs that are protected and licensed for use by fabricators. At best I think EP is in a 'post scarcity bubble' - sooner or later market forces will re-assert themselves.

You are correct - market forces will indeed assert themselves. This is an unavoidable consequence of two factors: information and resource asymmetry. As long as there is an asymmetry [i]somewhere[/i], there will be a market to adjust it. However, what the post-scarcity people are saying is that certain functions of the market will be decentralized, notably currency. This is exactly what Rep is, a decentralized currency for dealing with both information and resource asymmetries. With Rep, the participants are directly responsible for both the creation of value and the value of the currency itself. Nobody has the power to decide that Rep deflation is bad and go print more Rep. Now, the game does make some assumptions, ones that are implicit like the idea that psychological effects such as those that lead to GPA inflation are some how adjusted for, but that's fine, this is an RPG about exploring a little bit about ALL aspects of a post-singularity society, not a market simulation. There are some major differences in a post-scarcity economy and one that is either based on real scarcity or manufactured scarcity (DeBeers, anyone?). In an economy like the one we're used to, the following items have a significant cost [i]that varies with the cost of the materials[/i]: Everything. In a post-scarcity economy, there are vast swaths of items, as in: the absolutely huge majority that [i]cost exactly the same[/i] per unit mass. A new car is exactly the same cost as an equal mass accumulation of food or tanks of gasoline, or arrowheads or laser guns. As for 'limited supply' of access to cornucopia machines, well, that's quite easily solved, use your CMs to build [b]more[/b] CMs! Build them in various sizes, give everyone a desktop model, give every floor of every building a hallway model, give every city block an industrial sized model. Want to build something that's too big for your desktop CM? The vast majority of things can be created in pieces. Think IKEA or Lego. But what about all that energy this must take? Well, you use your CM to build fusion reactors of various sizes. Need one for the home? Build a small one. Need one for an entire habitat, build a BIG one. Hydrogen is in unlimited supply. Find someone who wants to earn some Rep scooping it from the nearest gas giant, use your CM to manufacture a spaceship with a big ol'e scoop on the front and go. The main idea behind a post-scarcity economy is that it isn't the material that produces prices, but mass/energy consumption. When you've got an unlimited supply of mass at the nearest gas giant, or an unlimited supply of energy closer to the Sun, then the economy changes in very distinct ways that vastly improves the [i]baseline[/i] living standard for the people living within it. As a side note (this post is getting long enough already!) if cornucopia machines are to work as advertised, then there's absolutely no reason whatever to assume that you can't feed one a supply of hydrogen and energy at one end and get plutonium out the other end. The question becomes, then, 1. how much [i]energy[/i] does it take to take a mass of hydrogen and turn it into plutonium, or lawrencium, or unobtanium and 2. how much [i]time[/i] does it take to do so? The game has nicely abstracted this question away by saying that certian objects take enough energy or enough time to create that people spend their Rep to acquire them. The takeaway is this: E=MC^2, mass times a constant and energy are equal to each other and that is the only thing that matters in a post scarcity economy: How much mass energy and time are you using that could be used for other projects? Nothing else determines cost.

—

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Wed, 2011-01-05 14:09

#40

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Ataraxzy wrote:
As a side note (this post is getting long enough already!) if cornucopia machines are to work as advertised, then there's absolutely no reason whatever to assume that you can't feed one a supply of hydrogen and energy at one end and get plutonium out the other end. The question becomes, then, 1. how much [i]energy[/i] does it take to take a mass of hydrogen and turn it into plutonium, or lawrencium, or unobtanium and 2. how much [i]time[/i] does it take to do so? The game has nicely abstracted this question away by saying that certian objects take enough energy or enough time to create that people spend their Rep to acquire them.

Actually, this is incorrect, and may be feeding the rest of your post. CMs cannot rearrange subatomic particles to make hydrogen into plutonium. They can build things at the atomic level though. So give it a pile of coal in a puddle of water and it can assemble a ham sandwich or a puddle of gasoline. So with that in mind, there are three restrictions: 1) Time - this can be reduced by building more CMs, so an established habitat shouldn't have this issue, but pioneers or people under artificial constraints will. 2) Energy - If you're close to the sun or a major gravity well, this shouldn't be a real issue, although it may impose a time limit again. However if you're free-floating or a brinker or planet-side, this might be an issue, at least until you stand up your stellerator drive. 3) Feedstock - This is mostly based on location. Organics are tough to find in the inner system, rare or refined elements may be scarce in the outer system, and all are tough to find in empty space. But the cost here still isn't that great. There are hundreds of automated miners across the asteroid belt, comet-catchers delivering organics everywhere and so on. The population has bottomed out, so demand is lower. Getting a thousandth of an ounce of gold from someone who has twenty pounds won't be such an issue. The only cases I really see these turning up are for pioners, brinkers, under emergency conditions or other weird situations. Certainly if you have months of time floating around, this shouldn't be a serious issue, unless you're trying for something really extravagant.

Wed, 2011-01-05 16:11

#41

Ataraxzy

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

nezumi.hebereke wrote:
Actually, this is incorrect, and may be feeding the rest of your post. CMs cannot rearrange subatomic particles to make hydrogen into plutonium. They can build things at the atomic level though. So give it a pile of coal in a puddle of water and it can assemble a ham sandwich or a puddle of gasoline.

I'm not so sure about that. Don't get me wrong, that's how it's depicted on a first reading of the rules. On the other hand, it's relatively easy to generate neutrons (as in there are thousands of extant neutron generators operating today) and any system capable of high-capacity nanoscale-to-classical scale engineering is certainly capable of bombarding some atoms with neutrons and letting the weak force do it's work to change neutrons to protons. To my thinking, to create something atom-by-atom that masses in the kilogram range on a time scale sufficiently fast for normal everyday use entails this ability, limited only by the available energy. This is not to say that nanofabs won't happily use metals and molecules, just that out of necessity, they must be able to transmute as well. Another reason why a nanofab must be able to transmute is that in the case that they are not, you are left with two ultimately undesirable options. The problem is that highly toxic waste materials like arsenic (which is present in small amounts in virtually all organic matter, if you don't like that one, pick your poison, there are millions) and other virtually unusable materials will build up to significant amounts rather quickly, leading to vast overabundances of the stuff. You can either have the nanofab produce waste pellets of toxic materials to be discarded (discarding anything on a hab is probably not a good business plan) or you can have the nanofab destroy those waste products (this is just another method of discarding). But really, the only way to get rid of an element like arsenic without transmutation is to get it to react and form molecules that are harmless but that leaves open the questions of what to do with elements and compounds that are harmful but non-reactive and what to do with those harmful compounds that are molecularized into easily extractable compounds. None of this is to be taken to imply that the various economies don't need mined minerals to operate at [i]peak[/i] efficiency, but given enough hydrogen, enough time and enough energy, you can easily turn lead into gold, or carbon into gold, or hydrogen into carbon, or whatever element you need. Transmuting the stuff you don't want into the stuff that you do want is easily the best option, and by the preceding paragraph, is not a difficult feat for a culture building cars and robots atom-by-atom. Just my take on the matter. YMMV.

—

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Fri, 2011-01-07 15:41

#42

The Doctor The Doctor's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Thunderwave wrote:
Also, anyone that's poked around online for "Open Source" and "Freeware" programs knows that often they are full of bugs ("WHY won't OpenOffice auto spellcheck?!"), operate weirdly with other programs (Anyone remember the great I.E. fiasco?) that may already be in place, or just have horrid interfaces/functionality.

No more so than closed-source software that I cannot fix, but have to pay someone lots of money to patch for me. Case in point, certain ADA interpreters that I fight with every day... With open source software, you can fix the bugs yourself, or chances are someone else has. With closed software the best you can hope for is a post to the effect of "It should be fixed in the next hotfix." By the way, OO.O does: Tools -> Options -> Language Settings -> Writing Aids -> Check spelling as you type.

—

[img]http://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/info_userbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/argo_userbar.jpg[/img] [url=https://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/blankbadge.png][img]http://drwho.vir...

Fri, 2011-01-07 15:45

#43

The Doctor The Doctor's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Ataraxzy wrote:
The most secure systems are ALL OS software, without exception.

It is true that some of us do have nothing better to do on a Friday night than audit source code.

Quote:
For example, EMACS is a text editor designed to do everything one might conceivably do with text files, and it was designed before the advent of the mouse. It accepts mouse input, it's even just as good as other programs at accepting mouse input (things like Notepad++, TextPad, &ct) but it is vastly more capable than anything but its major competitor, Vim. The program has had 25 years of refinement on it. Think about that: 25 YEARS.

You neglect to mention that EMACS was designed to be extensible, and to that end it has an embedded LISP interpreter which is used to add and modify existing features. The only thing it lacks, at this point, is its own boot loader. :)

Quote:
Taking all that into consideration, here's what I would do: [b]Open Source blueprints start off as standard versions of their item type. You have several options: spend some Rep to improve it (asking for help on message boards and the like); spend some time to improve it (every 3 months of use gets you a bonus of some sort); spend some intellect to improve it (research rolls, spending points, whatever the player and GM can come up with). That's the good. Here's the bad: Every improvement acts as a MINUS for anyone else to use it (divide the penalties by half if you're feeling generous).[/b]

Excellent work.

Quote:
Open Source is about taking ownership of your stuff, and the rules should reflect that.

Would you mind if I quoted you on that?

—

[img]http://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/info_userbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/argo_userbar.jpg[/img] [url=https://drwho.virtadpt.net/graphics/blankbadge.png][img]http://drwho.vir...

Fri, 2011-01-07 15:49

#44

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

Although actual comparisons of companies using open vs. closed-source software (most commonly Linux vs. Microsoft) has found no significant cost benefits between the two. Microsoft costs more up front, but normally works quicker right out of the box. Linux costs less up front, but normally you spend much more in configuration and customization services, and other contractor work. I do wonder though how that will change now that Russia has required that the government use ONLY open-source software. It would be neat to see a flavor of Linux come out of the box as straight-forward as Windows (yeah, there probably is one already, but I don't know of it, which I guess is sort of the point.)

Fri, 2011-01-07 16:17

#45

Ataraxzy

Re: Free is free - Post-scarcity and the Infinite Equipment list

The Doctor wrote:
It is true that some of us do have nothing better to do on a Friday night than audit source code.

Man, even I'm not that hard up for activities!

The Doctor wrote:
Ataraxzy wrote:
For example, EMACS is a text editor designed to do everything one might conceivably do with text files, and it was designed before the advent of the mouse. It accepts mouse input, it's even just as good as other programs at accepting mouse input (things like Notepad++, TextPad, &ct) but it is vastly more capable than anything but its major competitor, Vim. The program has had 25 years of refinement on it. Think about that: 25 YEARS.
You neglect to mention that EMACS was designed to be extensible, and to that end it has an embedded LISP interpreter which is used to add and modify existing features. The only thing it lacks, at this point, is its own boot loader. :)

[i]Linux[/i] is the EMACS boot loader. You even get a decent backup OS out of it.

The Doctor wrote:
Ataraxzy wrote:
Taking all that into consideration, here's what I would do: [b]Open Source blueprints start off as standard versions of their item type. You have several options: spend some Rep to improve it (asking for help on message boards and the like); spend some time to improve it (every 3 months of use gets you a bonus of some sort); spend some intellect to improve it (research rolls, spending points, whatever the player and GM can come up with). That's the good. Here's the bad: Every improvement acts as a MINUS for anyone else to use it (divide the penalties by half if you're feeling generous).[/b]
Excellent work.
Ataraxzy wrote:
Open Source is about taking ownership of your stuff, and the rules should reflect that.
Would you mind if I quoted you on that?

Not at all, take a look at my newly updated sig.

—

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.