Story Monday October 24, 2016

[hkmaly 490]

43 minutes ago, Scotty said:

if Sarah doesn't know the process of how computers store information, how can she even attempt to accurately access it beyond what's initially displayed.

By not thinking about it? I know, you want the spell to be faking everything, but it is actually more likely that stuff will "just work" when she will NOT think about how they work to not make any changes by mistake. The spell can either just simulate it by moving atoms normally, or draw the information from outside - like, from the same place Abraham got modern knowledge when he de-petrified. (This modern knowledge was enough to make him able to travel without getting scared by iron horses or similar stuff, and speak modern English, but apparently didn't provided him with details about culture like the Mount Doom.)

58 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Chances are, mechanical clocks, ones with gears and a pendulum for the timing, might work, but electronic quartz bases clocks won't, at least not accurately, she could probably try to simulate an electronic clock, but it might be too fast or too slow if she can't accurately simulate the electronics.

She might have the same kind of problems with keeping timing with pendulum as with quartz. Difference is, when mechanical clocks have irregular timing, they will show incorrect time, but work. Meanwhile, computer with irregular timing will have all sorts of problems: the timing of quartz must exactly match timing of how fast will signals move over buses.

52 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Where the datacenter is located is irrelevant, the fact I'm trying to explain is Sarah could try, but the illusion would attempt to take from Sarah's imagination, there's a good chance that if Sarah just types in a random thing she knows little to nothing about, she'd either get something that's obviously fake, or nothing. Alternately for something local, she could open Windows Explorer (the file manager in Windows, not Internet Explorer) and if she had used Explorer before, the GUI would appear for it, but the drives, folders and files would either not exist, or be loosely based on Sarah's experiences if she ever rooted through Explorer on her computer, so nothing there would be accurate either.

I simply don't agree with this. Which, given the canon doesn't provide enough information to confirm or reject it, you need to accept.

52 minutes ago, Scotty said:

She may also be able to load up Solitaire or Minesweeper, but chances are she'd have a 100% win rate.

She can lose even expectation-based game if her subconscious will be sabotaging it. Like, if she would EXPECT she will lose.

[Scotty 1,061]

15 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I simply don't agree with this. Which, given the canon doesn't provide enough information to confirm or reject it, you need to accept.

This is something that feel I need to stand firmly on. Because what you're saying would make the spell completely OP, and while this is a high end spell, I don't believe that gives it the authority to do simulate everything down to the atom or electron or blood vessel. Dan made the comparison of this illusion to the holodeck, yes the holodeck can simulate computers and electronics and whatever, but consider what's powering the holodeck, a computer system programed with all the information about how these things should work. What's Sarah's illusion powered by? Beyond the initial spell cast, her brain is powering the rest of it, allowing her to view and manipulate what's there. The spell basically has 2 phases, phase 1 creates the illusion by doing a single pass of the area the moment it is cast, phase two is basically up to Sarah what happens, any physics involved will be based on Sarah's knowledge of physics which are likely fairly limited, so there's a lot of stuff she likely wouldn't be able to properly simulate. The computer analogy is the same as the brain analogy, it's all electrical impulses, if Sarah can't accurately simulate electrical impulses in a person's brain to interrogate them for information, then she can't accurately simulate electrical impulses running through a CPU to load top secret documents.

[hkmaly 490]

20 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Because what you're saying would make the spell completely OP, and while this is a high end spell, I don't believe that gives it the authority to do simulate everything down to the atom or electron or blood vessel.

Note that I did mentioned another option which could make computers works without simulating on electron level.

Also, note that Elliot's ability to merge with his smartphone might be similarly OP.

21 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Dan made the comparison of this illusion to the holodeck, yes the holodeck can simulate computers and electronics and whatever, but consider what's powering the holodeck, a computer system programed with all the information about how these things should work.

Nevertheless, Dan's comparison, while not exact information, is more relevant to what is canon than what YOU see as OP.

22 minutes ago, Scotty said:

What's Sarah's illusion powered by? Beyond the initial spell cast, her brain is powering the rest of it, allowing her to view and manipulate what's there.

Her brain wouldn't be able to keep all the informations in memory. Obviously, the spell is still in progress, and AT LEAST keeps all information AND makes the simulation not only feel but BE MUCH more real than any dream.

24 minutes ago, Scotty said:

The computer analogy is the same as the brain analogy, it's all electrical impulses

Grace behaved VERY differently than vegetable. Sure, she wasn't behaving like GRACE, but she behaved as body with working brain.

25 minutes ago, Scotty said:

she can't accurately simulate electrical impulses running through a CPU to load top secret documents.

If the computer simulation will be based on general "modern knowledge", it might run normally and still fail to load top secret documents.

Or, you know, perhaps Sarah would be able to load those top secret documents if she would get near such computer, but DGB and their equivalents in other countries can make sure she don't. In fact, government computers might be ENCHANTED to not work in such spell.

Note, if you want to see truly OP power related to computers, look here.

[Scotty 1,061]

7 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Also, note that Elliot's ability to merge with his smartphone might be similarly OP.

Also Note, Elliot's phone was connected to him when he was morphed, the phone still exists and is functioning with Elliot. The computers in Sarah's illusion are illusions themselves, not merged devices.

12 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Her brain wouldn't be able to keep all the informations in memory. Obviously, the spell is still in progress, and AT LEAST keeps all information AND makes the simulation not only feel but BE MUCH more real than any dream.

Of course her brain wouldn't be able to keep all that information. Of course the spell is still in progress, but the initial scan was basically a sonar pulse on steroids, it created an image of the area around Sarah, nothing more, there's no storage of the state of what's on RAM or whatever.

17 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Grace behaved VERY differently than vegetable. Sure, she wasn't behaving like GRACE, but she behaved as body with working brain.

This part is in the wrong thread.

...Although, I just realized my mention of the comparison to the holodeck is wrong thread too....D'OH!

36 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

If the computer simulation will be based on general "modern knowledge", it might run normally and still fail to load top secret documents.

Not saying it would, just saying that at least the devices would function on a computer simulation, it would require a fair but of programming to make it accurate, but doable. Sarah wouldn't have even that knowledge to make devices function accurately. stuff that she makes appear on the screen would be from her imagination.

44 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Note, if you want to see truly OP power related to computers, look here.

Hmm, I read through that bit 3 times and can only believe that the "admin" just reported the guy to the actual admins just prior to sending the message and just said all that to make the other person feel better.

She said she barely knows computers, but knows about all the social media sites, it'd be enough to report someone for abusive behaviour to all of them and have him banned. Heck it's probably something she could have got the ball rolling on before she arrived at that person's place.

None of it really screams "OMG that's a super power!"

[hkmaly 490]

29 minutes ago, Scotty said:

1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Her brain wouldn't be able to keep all the informations in memory. Obviously, the spell is still in progress, and AT LEAST keeps all information AND makes the simulation not only feel but BE MUCH more real than any dream.

Of course her brain wouldn't be able to keep all that information. Of course the spell is still in progress, but the initial scan was basically a sonar pulse on steroids, it created an image of the area around Sarah, nothing more, there's no storage of the state of what's on RAM or whatever.

Sonar on steroid wouldn't be able to record what's written in books either. Or do you think that RAM, SSD and HDD wouldn't be recorded and CD and DVD would? Because pits on CD and DVDs differs from books or cuneiform script only in size, and you CAN read it with microscope.

32 minutes ago, Scotty said:

1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

If the computer simulation will be based on general "modern knowledge", it might run normally and still fail to load top secret documents.

Not saying it would, just saying that at least the devices would function on a computer simulation, it would require a fair but of programming to make it accurate, but doable. Sarah wouldn't have even that knowledge to make devices function accurately. stuff that she makes appear on the screen would be from her imagination.

What knowledge Sarah have is irrelevant.

33 minutes ago, Scotty said:

1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Note, if you want to see truly OP power related to computers, look here.

Hmm, I read through that bit 3 times and can only believe that the "admin" just reported the guy to the actual admins just prior to sending the message and just said all that to make the other person feel better.

She said she barely knows computers, but knows about all the social media sites, it'd be enough to report someone for abusive behaviour to all of them and have him banned. Heck it's probably something she could have got the ball rolling on before she arrived at that person's place.

None of it really screams "OMG that's a super power!"

Or she didn't do anything and just lie, right. Either you do believe what is she saying or you don't. And she says it's super power. Also, you can't ban someone from email. SMTP protocol is decentralized and doesn't support stuff like that.

[ijuin 572]

9 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Most people understand few gear wheels, but wouldn't actually be able to imagine all gears inside mechanical clocks correctly. Similarly, single transistor is easy to understand. So, no. The border between those is not as clear as you claim.

Well, I was trying to describe a sort of sliding scale with objects with few parts which Sarah all understands being on one end and objects with millions of parts which Sarah mostly doesn't understand being on the other end. Most adults and teenagers understand the principles that make a mechanical clock work, even if they don't understand the job of every single cog or the numbers involved. Computers, on the other hand, are pretty opaque to anybody who hasn't taken college-level electrical engineering (at least in the "how do circuits perform the work" sense--programming a computer is simpler than designing that same computer).

[Scotty 1,061]

11 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Sonar on steroid wouldn't be able to record what's written in books either. Or do you think that RAM, SSD and HDD wouldn't be recorded and CD and DVD would? Because pits on CD and DVDs differs from books or cuneiform script only in size, and you CAN read it with microscope.

Ok, sonar itself is probably a bad example, I just wanted to use it as a reference for the fact that it can be an omnidirectional pulse used to create an image. Yes, it might be detailed enough to do pits and ridges for CD/DVD's, and Sarah could certainly open up a computer case and see all the parts, but actually getting it all to function accurately would require Sarah to have the technical knowledge of how all the parts work together and the instructions for each part. The reason it works with books is because it has physical pages that can be individually included in the image scan, and Sarah knows how to open a book and read. The CD/DVD/HDD/SSD could have a PDF version of that anatomy book she was looking for, but she has no clue what RPM the drive needs to spin at, how the read/write/optical heads are supposed to move, how the data is supposed to move along the buses and into and out of memory, and that's not including the fact that she doesn't know how a computer translates machine language into readable material.

[hkmaly 490]

13 hours ago, ijuin said:

23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Most people understand few gear wheels, but wouldn't actually be able to imagine all gears inside mechanical clocks correctly. Similarly, single transistor is easy to understand. So, no. The border between those is not as clear as you claim.

Well, I was trying to describe a sort of sliding scale with objects with few parts which Sarah all understands being on one end and objects with millions of parts which Sarah mostly doesn't understand being on the other end. Most adults and teenagers understand the principles that make a mechanical clock work, even if they don't understand the job of every single cog or the numbers involved. Computers, on the other hand, are pretty opaque to anybody who hasn't taken college-level electrical engineering (at least in the "how do circuits perform the work" sense--programming a computer is simpler than designing that same computer).

Designing modern CPU is something only few teams on whole planets are capable of doing, yes. But the basic principle is not that hard. Meanwhile, you might overestimate number of people who understand gears, as proved by this ad for example (and I saw several similar). Sure, there is difference: but  as argument for while something is "surely not going to work" it's pretty weak.

7 hours ago, Scotty said:

18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Sonar on steroid wouldn't be able to record what's written in books either. Or do you think that RAM, SSD and HDD wouldn't be recorded and CD and DVD would? Because pits on CD and DVDs differs from books or cuneiform script only in size, and you CAN read it with microscope.

Ok, sonar itself is probably a bad example, I just wanted to use it as a reference for the fact that it can be an omnidirectional pulse used to create an image. Yes, it might be detailed enough to do pits and ridges for CD/DVD's, and Sarah could certainly open up a computer case and see all the parts, but actually getting it all to function accurately would require Sarah to have the technical knowledge of how all the parts work together and the instructions for each part. The reason it works with books is because it has physical pages that can be individually included in the image scan, and Sarah knows how to open a book and read. The CD/DVD/HDD/SSD could have a PDF version of that anatomy book she was looking for, but she has no clue what RPM the drive needs to spin at, how the read/write/optical heads are supposed to move, how the data is supposed to move along the buses and into and out of memory, and that's not including the fact that she doesn't know how a computer translates machine language into readable material.

She doesn't need to. It's not a test, noone is asking her. In her experience with real world, it always just works ; therefore, it makes sense if it just works inside the simulation as well. See the comparison to Grace moving in other thread.

[Scotty 1,061]

2 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Designing modern CPU is something only few teams on whole planets are capable of doing, yes. But the basic principle is not that hard. Meanwhile, you might overestimate number of people who understand gears, as proved by this ad for example (and I saw several similar). Sure, there is difference: but  as argument for while something is "surely not going to work" it's pretty weak.

She doesn't need to. It's not a test, noone is asking her. In her experience with real world, it always just works ; therefore, it makes sense if it just works inside the simulation as well. See the comparison to Grace moving in other thread.

Just because it "just works" doesn't mean it's going to work exactly how it should work in the real world, that's why I keep saying that Sarah could likely open programs that she's seen before and it would be her subconscious putting that information on screen, if she goes to open a program she's never seen before, it not going to work properly. Sarah could talk to someone, and they'd talk back based on information from Sarah's subconscious, but she could never ask them personal questions she doesn't know the answer to. The illusion created in her head is just an image that can be touched and manipulated at will but it has limits to how much detail it has, computers are not books, and for all intents and purpose, I consider computers in the same grouping as people in the simulation, they'll work to the best of Sarah's imagination, but I don't expect her to be able to discover any information that she never knew about before.

[Don Edwards 548]

There are probably no nameservers within the scope of Sarah's spellscape. Let alone the servers she might actually want to connect to. So she wouldn't be able to retrieve reliable real-world information from the internet, even if a computer works, within the spellscape.

On the other hand, she possibly could explore what IS on THAT computer.

[hkmaly 490]

45 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I consider computers in the same grouping as people in the simulation, they'll work to the best of Sarah's imagination, but I don't expect her to be able to discover any information that she never knew about before.

I don't, although I would make exception if the computer we talk about would be Data. Computers are mostly deterministic and closer to books than to people, IMHO - at least our computers, computers in sci-fi tend to be more advanced.

(Also see the answer in other thread.)

48 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Just because it "just works" doesn't mean it's going to work exactly how it should work in the real world

Well, it would be what I understand by "accurate". Of course, pending more information from Dan.

27 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

There are probably no nameservers within the scope of Sarah's spellscape. Let alone the servers she might actually want to connect to. So she wouldn't be able to retrieve reliable real-world information from the internet, even if a computer works, within the spellscape.

On the other hand, she possibly could explore what IS on THAT computer.

There may be. I have one nameserver on every computer and one on router. While Sarah is unlikely to have such configuration at home, Tedd might, or possibly Edward has similar configuration for security purposes.

That of course doesn't change the main part: she is definitely not able to retrieve real-world information from the Internet.

[Don Edwards 548]

Well, technically, pretty much every computer that connects to the internet - including some routers - runs a nameserver. But it's typically a cache, not a repository. If a particular site isn't part of a network that the specified computer runs, and no request for a given site has gone through that computer since (typically) the last reboot, then it cannot find the IP address without outside help.

[hkmaly 490]

11 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

Well, technically, pretty much every computer that connects to the internet - including some routers - runs a nameserver. But it's typically a cache, not a repository. If a particular site isn't part of a network that the specified computer runs, and no request for a given site has gone through that computer since (typically) the last reboot, then it cannot find the IP address without outside help.

I'm running bind. You can't get more "full" nameserver than that. But DNS is distributed: no single computer has whole tree. The root nameservers typically ONLY know who is authoritative for which top level domain. Not counting caches, you need to ask three computers before getting IP address of www.google.com (for example 198.41.0.4, 192.5.6.30 and 216.239.32.10, although you have multiple options to choose in each step).

[mlooney 3,417]

1 hour ago, Don Edwards said:

Well, technically, pretty much every computer that connects to the internet - including some routers - runs a nameserver. But it's typically a cache, not a repository. If a particular site isn't part of a network that the specified computer runs, and no request for a given site has gone through that computer since (typically) the last reboot, then it cannot find the IP address without outside help.

Unless, of course, you have data in /etc/hosts (or it's Windows equivalent) for the site in question.

[hkmaly 490]

57 minutes ago, mlooney said:

2 hours ago, Don Edwards said:

Well, technically, pretty much every computer that connects to the internet - including some routers - runs a nameserver. But it's typically a cache, not a repository. If a particular site isn't part of a network that the specified computer runs, and no request for a given site has gone through that computer since (typically) the last reboot, then it cannot find the IP address without outside help.

Unless, of course, you have data in /etc/hosts (or it's Windows equivalent) for the site in question.

That's cache. It's manually managed cache but cache nevertheless. If google decide to move www.google.com, they won't contact you to change your entry ; they change their DNS server and will expect all caches to expire and update itself. In 5 minutes (that's the TTL of www.google.com A entry). Which shows how bad idea is to put www.google.com into /etc/hosts

[ijuin 572]

Indeed, the logistics of keeping hosts directories synchronized was the driving factor for having centralized DNS name resolution, more so than the sheer size of the IPv4 namespace (tens of gigabytes needed to hold it all in an era where single hard drives were smaller than one gigabyte).