11-01-2013, 07:16 PM | #71 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
For that matter the auto-shuffler can probably wipe every card clean of any smart dust. Or maybe there's no electronics in the cards and the inside of the shuffler is a Faraday cage with an EMP emitter that will fry all the smart dust before the card are dealt again. When the cheating tech has to be subtle and the anti-cheating tech doesn't it's advantage to anti-cheating.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-01-2013, 07:44 PM | #72 | |
Computer Scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
|
|
11-02-2013, 02:10 AM | #73 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: U.K.
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Noting that the anti-cheating tech can frequently be reduced to the famous $5 wrench or similar.
__________________
-- Phil Masters My Home Page. My Self-Publications: On Warehouse 23 and On DriveThruRPG. |
11-03-2013, 08:48 PM | #74 | |
Computer Scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
The smart dust is more properly called surveillance dust in the TS corebook, about p.169. Canonically they are found with Microscopic Vision, chemscanners, and bughunter swarms. |
|
11-04-2013, 07:43 AM | #75 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
"The place" in my statement was in physical contact with the card and not just "the casino".
It doesn't matter, since once it came to me the idea of the shielded box with the EMP inside was obviously superior. Call it a "nano-clave" and they might be as common in a setting with nano as paper shredders are in the current day. It does bring up the issue of what do you do for high density storage that's EMP-proof. An improved version of microfiche (nanofiche?) might do the job.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
11-04-2013, 02:09 PM | #76 | |
Computer Scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
Nanoclaving the cards may not be reliable unless its also strong enough to wreck the animated cards. It'd be simpler, cheaper, and probably more popular to use a CSM that pulls from racks of visible, unused cards, and remove used cards from the game. |
|
11-04-2013, 02:14 PM | #77 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
How is your nanodust going to read the cards? A spot of dust on the surface of the card won't be able to determine anything beyond the color of the spot of the card surface it's on, and won't even be able to do that if it's in a lightless area, such as the inside of a deck.
|
11-04-2013, 02:51 PM | #78 | |
Computer Scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
|
|
11-04-2013, 03:08 PM | #79 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
Quote:
|
|
11-04-2013, 06:02 PM | #80 |
Computer Scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Re: Gambling in 2100?
I'm sorry, I mis-typed. It would be flexible and established on the card as the motes are emplaced, a literally ad hoc, improvised configuration rather than the particular, scalable activities the term of art "ad hoc" means in current networking IT. It might even involve some other channel, like sonics.
|
Tags |
gambling |
|
|