[rumanchu]

There has to be *some* way to automate the process of inviting marks, otherwise the example on p.220 ("For example, the Seattle Public Library invites over 50,000 marks per day...") doesn't seem practical.

I assume that an IC would authenticate SINs and pass approved library applications, and an agent running on the Owners deck would perform the invite mark action on all vetted personas. All performed autonomously, while the spider is watching the trideo.

Except that agents and IC aren't the Owner (barring something that I've overlooked the bajillion times that I've read the Matrix chapter), so they can't by RAW they cannot Invite Mark.

 

[olg707]

The IC processes the library card requests, and passes validated SINs to the security spider. The spider is the owner, and has an agent running on his cyberdeck to perform invite mark to all personas that get referred by the IC. All automated, all while the spider is paying attention to other things.

OR it could be done once a day, where an owner checks on all the approved library cards requests and send out a mass invite [one action, many targets].

There are several ways to slice it, but it is still easy to automate.

[rumanchu]

The IC processes the library card requests, and passes validated SINs to the security spider. The spider is the owner, and has an agent running on his cyberdeck to perform invite mark to all personas that get referred by the IC. All automated, all while the spider is paying attention to other things.

OR it could be done once a day, where an owner checks on all the approved library cards requests and send out a mass invite [one action, many targets].

There are several ways to slice it, but it is still easy to automate.

I'm aware that there are any number of ways that the process *could* be automated; I was merely pointing out that there is no mechanism laid out in the rules to permit an Agent to take Owner-only Matrix Actions on behalf of the Owner.  The argument could be made, I suppose, that the wording on p.246 ("You can have your agent perform Matrix Actions for you") permits it, but that seems unclear to me (and just muddies the waters about what can or cannot perform Owner actions).

[Xenon]

People really think book should explain in detail how a public library keep track of it's users or how a library card request is processed...?

[rumanchu]

People really think book should explain in detail how a public library keep track of it's users or how a library card request is processed...?

When the main argument against being able to force a device to Invite Mark with Puppeteer is that the rules don't allow a device to take "Owner-only" actions, I think that the mechanics behind how specific examples in the book of devices appearing to Invite Mark independently of their Owner's direct involvement are extremely relevant. 

[grid_roamer]

People really think book should explain in detail how a public library keep track of it's users or how a library card request is processed...?

When the main argument against being able to force a device to Invite Mark with Puppeteer is that the rules don't allow a device to take "Owner-only" actions, I think that the mechanics behind how specific examples in the book of devices appearing to Invite Mark independently of their Owner's direct involvement are extremely relevant.

Any rule can have exceptions. In fact rules are expected to have exceptions applied to them if the circumstances warrent.
The exception is in this case is the assumption that a Technomancer can perform certain action independent of 'allowed' system standard in the Shadowrun world. The new applied rule to is among other simular rules, the one describing  'puppeteer'.

With this exceptional skill they can take actions that normal matrix users cannot. With normal matrix actions being described in the rulebook. With an exception to marks rules, devices rules, simular skill rules, etc....

Other than that the action works exactly the same intended way with the same intended results....

[olg707]

When the main argument against being able to force a device to Invite Mark with Puppeteer is that the rules don't allow a device to take "Owner-only" actions, I think...

My argument is not about ownership, but rather about personas.

SR5 pg 236

Only personas may mark icons.

It seems that marks are a form of access, one that can be shared only with other personas. In short, Invite Mark is a persona-to-persona action.

I believe that a persona could perform the invite mark action, but not a device. Puppeteer could be used to force a persona to make the Invite Mark action, but this does not answer MY QUESTION. Can my smartgun make the Invite Mark matrix action? Or any other device for that matter?

Please consider my thread question "[SR5] Can a device perform the matrix action Invite Marks?" because it DOES NOT mention puppeteer.

[Xenon]

It is safe to assume that you don't become a "legit user" of a device "for all future" by using puppeteer on it.


Even if you have enough marks on a device (from brute force, hack on the fly or from using puppeteer on the owner's persona) you still need to either use control device, spoof commands in the name of the owner or puppeteer to control it.

Using puppeteer to just get marks on a device seems highly counter productive. You simply don't need them.
Just skip marks and use puppeteer on the device to make it do whatever you wanted it to do in the first place.

[grid_roamer]

When the main argument against being able to force a device to Invite Mark with Puppeteer is that the rules don't allow a device to take "Owner-only" actions, I think...

My argument is not about ownership, but rather about personas.

SR5 pg 236

Only personas may mark icons.

It seems that marks are a form of access, one that can be shared only with other personas. In short, Invite Mark is a persona-to-persona action.

I believe that a persona could perform the invite mark action, but not a device. Puppeteer could be used to force a persona to make the Invite Mark action, but this does not answer MY QUESTION. Can my smartgun make the Invite Mark matrix action? Or any other device for that matter?

Please consider my thread question "[SR5] Can a device perform the matrix action Invite Marks?" because it DOES NOT mention puppeteer.

A wireless, Matrix capable device would in my opinion but 'would you need it to do so' would be need to be address before 'can it do so'....

Might you remote control lamp or stovetop need to be invite mark capable, or erase mark capable, or the even more unlikely crash program capable, or hop grid capable?
All associated with computers that reportedly everything has hooked up to it in Shadowrun as of 2075....

Maybe...

[rumanchu]

I believe that a persona could perform the invite mark action, but not a device. Puppeteer could be used to force a persona to make the Invite Mark action, but this does not answer MY QUESTION. Can my smartgun make the Invite Mark matrix action? Or any other device for that matter?

Please consider my thread question "[SR5] Can a device perform the matrix action Invite Marks?" because it DOES NOT mention puppeteer.

From a purely "technological" standpoint: yes, clearly any Matrix-connected device is capable of inviting a persona to mark it, just as any current-day smartphone is capable of placing a phone call to 1-900-MIXALOT.  Can they take the Invite Mark action?  Not by RAW, despite there being numerous references to devices/hosts/icons inviting marks without an Owner taking the Invite Mark action.

Now, going to your specific example of the street samurai somehow derping it up and trying to use the Control Device action to tell his goggles to Invite Mark (rather than just taking the Invite Mark action himself): I think that you're over-complicating the issue and letting game terms get in the way of the "reality" of the Sixth World.  If an Owner wants something that he owns to invite a persona to mark it, then the Owner is taking the Invite Mark action whether he knows it or not.  Even if he's somehow connecting through some weird remote-control via his commlink or whatever, it still boils down to an Owner telling a device to Invite Marks.  (That's my interpretation, anyways). 

Now, with all that said, let's get back to the concept of icons taking the Invite Mark action independently of a specific command from their owner (such as the 50000 marks issued daily by the Seattle Public Library system).  I can only think of a few circumstances when this might happen, with varying mechanical support for how they would actually work in-game:

1) Puppeteer: perhaps the gold standard of "can this Invite Mark or not debates.  Strictly by RAW it doesn't work, though I personally would argue that it *should*.

2) Spoof Command: under the most stringent of interpretations of RAW it might not be kosher, but it certainly appears that it should work (since you are ultimately pretending to be the Owner of the device)

3) Some manner of automation (such as your IC/Agent examples): nothing concrete from a rules mechanic sense, though the argument could be made that Agents (who can "perform Matrix Actions for you") could do it.

4) Some manner of blanket Invite Mark command issued by the Owner ("Invite the next 25 Emerald City Grid users who come by to mark you for 30 minutes"): I think that it's a stretch, but the argument could be made that it falls under the Invite Mark action.  Probably the "cleanest" way to assume that the mass Invites that the fluff seems to indicate occur actually work under the RAW.

5) Some manner of device malfunction: if the GM wants to say that some device or another just invites a persona to mark it for some technomalogical reason or another, then it does.  Strictly handwavium of the highest order.

[Greblin]

When the main argument against being able to force a device to Invite Mark with Puppeteer is that the rules don't allow a device to take "Owner-only" actions, I think...

My argument is not about ownership, but rather about personas.

SR5 pg 236

Only personas may mark icons.

It seems that marks are a form of access, one that can be shared only with other personas. In short, Invite Mark is a persona-to-persona action.

I believe that a persona could perform the invite mark action, but not a device. Puppeteer could be used to force a persona to make the Invite Mark action, but this does not answer MY QUESTION. Can my smartgun make the Invite Mark matrix action? Or any other device for that matter?

Please consider my thread question "[SR5] Can a device perform the matrix action Invite Marks?" because it DOES NOT mention puppeteer.

No.
Your smartgun is not an owner. Their is no reason to think it is. Only an owner may preform the action invite marks. The previous explanations were toexplain why, but to stay on point there is no reason to think your gun is an owner. Therefore it would fail to meet the requirement of the action. We can rest assured that our smartguns are not out making friends while we sleep.

[Namikaze]

I don't see why a device doesn't inherit the same permissions as what it is slaved to.  Otherwise, the whole process of creating a PAN would be a nightmare.  It seems reasonable to me that some of these tasks can be automated.  If a device is commanded to invite marks, it should be able to handle that without any trouble.

[olg707]

@ Namikaze

I don't see why a device doesn't inherit the same permissions as what it is slaved to.  Otherwise, the whole process of creating a PAN would be a nightmare.  It seems reasonable to me that some of these tasks can be automated.  If a device is commanded to invite marks, it should be able to handle that without any trouble.

I reason  I believe that devices do not have permissions is from SR5 pg 236 "RECOGNITION KEYS" paragraph 2

Only personas may mark icons.

[Namikaze]

@ Namikaze

I don't see why a device doesn't inherit the same permissions as what it is slaved to.  Otherwise, the whole process of creating a PAN would be a nightmare.  It seems reasonable to me that some of these tasks can be automated.  If a device is commanded to invite marks, it should be able to handle that without any trouble.

I reason  I believe that devices do not have permissions is from SR5 pg 236 "RECOGNITION KEYS" paragraph 2

Only personas may mark icons.

Okay, but look at this from a realistic perspective, rather than from a rules-oriented perspective: in real life, when I log in to my network administrator account, I don't necessarily have to log in every single time that I want to do something.  The account provides a degree of administrative freedom.  In essence, the device that I'm connecting to sort of inherits my permissions.  In terms of rules, this would be like having 3 marks just because I'm logged in to the network as an administrator.  It makes sense in Shadowrun too - why should a network administrator have to essentially attack their own devices in order to put marks on them?  They don't.  Therefore, if you want a device to invite marks I don't see why not.

[olg707]

@ Namikaze

why should a network administrator have to essentially attack their own devices in order to put marks on them

A network admin should never have to attack a device to mark them. The marks would be invited by the owner. The owner would hire admins to administer the network, and invite marks to those who should have access. In this way, an admin would never have to make an attack, because access is provided. When marks are given, they are specified by A) how many marks B) how long they last C) who they are given too.

In sixth world terms, an Ares corporate administrator would be given owner status over an Ares host. This administrator would invite marks to corporate personnel so they can perform their job duties, such as security personnel would get marks over security devices. In no way would an administrator need to  attack devices. Remember that the Control Devices matrix action is not the only way to operate a device; the Change Linked device Mode can be used to operate devices.

...in real life, when I log in to my network administrator account, I don't necessarily have to log in every single time that I want to do something...

As for the real world analogy; I would disagree. You DO have to provide authentication for EVERY action that requires elevated privileges. Usually your program will remember your credentials and provide them for you. Clicking on " keep me signed in" on Facebook tells your browser to keep your credentials on file, to provide them to this url when asked. Try administering a debian system without invoking the "sudo" command and see how far "not logging in" will get you.
@ Namikaze

...Therefore, if you want a device to invite marks I don't see why not...

[SR5 pg 263] RECOGNITION KEYS:Last paragraph "You can give other personas permission to mark devices you own with the Invite Mark action (p. 240)."

If you read this section from beginning to end, it seems clear that personas can place marks on icons, as well as personas can give other personas permissions to place marks. It does not say that devices can mark icons, or that devices can invite marks.

I am not trying to embellish, house rule, or "fix" the rules here, but just to "play it as it lands".

Let me put it this way. I can find sections in the RAW that allow personas to Invite Marks to other personas, sharing permissions of devices they own.

Can you show me where it states that devices can place marks, or invite marks?