So if I understand correctly, the idea is to improve network security by making the terminals invisible, and putting subdermal implants on cleared employees so that they can interact with them. What isn't clear is whether the choose to use holographic terminals in order to improve security, or whether they had to use field terminals for some other reason, and then tried to come up with ways to make them more secure. I'm going with the second scenario because it makes more sense than the first one.
So holographic terminals have one very obvious advantage over material ones: they are much harder to vandalize. The one question then becomes why the employees need external terminals at all—if they can get cybernetic implants to access holographic terminals, why don't they just carry the server around with them in their person? Only they could see it because it would be projected directly on their optic nerve—in which case moving their hands around to interact with it might be entirely unnecessary. If this is not practical for some reason, then I would imagine that the implant is using some form of wireless technology to interface with a server at the location. This would be inherently much less secure, though—anybody who could purchase or reproduce the implant could also gain access (assuming they could learn the password, of course).
The other method, the employees carrying around their own internet modems within themselves, would bring the whole idea of biometric security to an entirely new level. You would have to "hack" the employee's brain to gain access to the network that way, and you could easily (as the author) establish that hacking organic brains is simply impossible (as it probably is). Brains are neurologically hard-wired, we aren't literally computers running some form of operating system. The physical connection between the neurons are our "operating system".
If you can't use that idea, and the employees must interface with a modem in the field, then security is only as good as the connection between the employee and the field modem. If it's wireless, then it's only as good as their encryption. So why use cybernetic implants at all? The most obvious idea is that they are acting undercover—that is they are the hackers and are using some sort of short range backdoor to gain access to local networks without anyone being the wiser. But I don't know if that fits the story you have in mind.
Edited by DeMarquis on May 31st 2020 at 1:25:33 PM
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.While I found that there's an attempt to do a solar-powered submarine here
, I have this to ask: is it possible to develop a solar battery that can generate as much power as an S6G reactor
?
Possible? Yes, strictly speaking its posible to get just about any amount of a solar system.... feasible? Hell no.
You would need 165,000 square meters of solar panels operating at 100% efficiency (which isn't physically possible, pannels tend to be 20% efficient on the high end) to generate as much power as that reactor.
As far as raw energy density goes you aren't going to beat a nuclear reactor until we get to anti-mater annihilation.
Edited by Imca on Jun 1st 2020 at 3:35:15 AM
Well, fusion beats fission if we can ever get it work, but otherwise that's correct.
@Imca and Fighter
If not as much as an S 6 G provides, what about enough for a submarine to have power for two days in which it will have to recharge after those two days?
Edited by HallowHawk on Jun 1st 2020 at 7:43:55 PM
So a sub is supposed to just hang out at the surface to deploy acres of solar panels? How? When?
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
As for the how, it's supposed to have it's own panels. Of course with what Imca said, I now have to think up how large should these panels be for the submarine to get enough power for 48 hours. As to when, the crew are to notify the captain that the submarine's is less than 40% in which the latter is to order that the submarine be surfaced for the panels to be brought up for recharging.
Question: What are the power needs for this "solar submarine"? Because it sounds like the place is running on a couple of flashlights powered by a hamster wheel and potato battery. And the engine is powered by the crew working bike pedals.
Nuclear powered subs require that much power to run everything and a lot of things on a sub are power-intensive to such a degree you'd never achieve that in a practical manner using solar.
It's not just about power, but energy storage. Back when subs ran on diesel, they had huge banks of lead-acid batteries to power them while submerged. With improvements in energy density and cost over the years, we could probably put enough batteries in a modern sub to run it for quite some time.
However, recharging those batteries on solar would take time. A lot of time. Way more time than a sub could afford to be surfaced.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You might be able to recharge while submerged but that both reduces light on the panels and increases your chances of detection.
That being said, solar panels might be useful as emergency equipment for a diesel sub. Let's say they ran out of fuel, lost their engine to damage, or had to purge the fuel tanks for additional buoyancy. Solar panels at least lets them get home.
"let’s just assume the speeds and delays would be relatively minor"
Ahem. The average ping for your gaming session between Pluto and Earth is 19,800,000 ms. I assume you've got a way around the speed of light, and if you have that, you can invent whatever else you want about your communications tech.
Asking about security protocols on FTL Internet is sort of like asking the chief engineer of a Federation starship how the door locks work.
Are you okay, dude? You keep asking these random questions that have no logical answer.
Edited by Fighteer on Jun 1st 2020 at 11:34:05 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Last sentence is completely unnecessary.
Anyhow, even with say, a signal lag being minimum, there are steps you can logically take. Take how current internet works. Right now under the ocean are thousands of fiber optic cables buried and maintained by numerous private sector interests. Even with Earth, attenuation is a major concern, either from noise, physical surroundings, travel distance or even poor cable design (this is relatively rare). That's why without signal boosters, the modern internet would be, at best, impractical, at worst, impossible.
With that in mind, you can set up numerous relays/satellites around the solar system that has your fancy FTL guided signals. We can just assume these relays are the equivalent of a 4G/5G cell tower. The trick here is making sure you have redundancy and regular maintenance schedules. That's tricky. Space is big, and you'll have to keep track of every relay at all times, as them being stationary is not a very good idea as it opens you up to A) Space debris, however minor,B) Wasted fuel resources on keeping it relatively in the same place and C) potential bad faith actors. Of course you could also have the relays follow an elliptical orbit, for easy tracking, but again, also once again, you have pros and cons to that as well. All of these options are basically pick your poison.
These are just off top of my head, I'm sure there's more you could do with it, as we haven't even gotten into various, military relays, new networking protocols having to be made up, ownership, legal issues, etc
Well, theoretically, quantum entanglement or small wormholes might offer bypasses to the speed of light for communications, but both will need existing infrastructure and for the latter we don't know where to even begin to create a wormhole. Unfortunately, the laws of physics are harsh mistresses when it comes to laying down their rules.
Edited by ericshaofangwang on Jun 2nd 2020 at 2:15:08 AM
This is the internet. Jokes fly over in private jets, and sarcasm has bullshit stealth technology.

Problem is shoulder surfing is the least likely avenue of security breaches and one of the least effective.
RFID is too easy to snap up with cheap sensors. That and god forbid there is any interference that gets to be fun.
Who watches the watchmen?