Game Rules: Robots can't survive jumpspace. It mucks up their robot brains.
Player: Then what's in a starship computer that controls jumps?
Game Rules:
o:
Player: ... I'm waiting ...
Game Rules: Um ... :CoW:
Player: That's what I thought ... :toast:
The closest I can get to solving this particular bit of rules lawyering conundrum would be to stipulate that starship computers have, by default as a minimum standard, the following:
LBB8 said:
Electronic Circuit Protection: Provides the circuits of the robot with radiation and harsh environment protection through the use of heavier circuit components, backup circuits, and shielding of critical circuits. including this multiplies the robot's final weight and price by 1.5.
Starship computers with
fiber optic backup have an even higher protection against hard radiation than the standard (so, milspec radiation hardening).
Well ... something has been discovered since 1977/1981 about ... the universe ... and computers.
The Universe Is Hostile To Computers (23 minute youtube link that is well worth your time to watch)
(also brings new poetic meaning of having stars in your eyes, since that's just cosmic radiation streaking through your eyeball(s)!)
So here's the extrapolation.
In "radiation normal" environments ... such as terrestrial worlds with magnetospheres of sufficient power, space stations and other "safe" locations in normal space ... the radiation exposure is predictable (within certain tolerances). So bit flipping in computers (single event upsets, as described in the above youtube video) are relatively rare, but can be known to happen and dealt with through error correction software techniques.
But jumpspace is ...
weird o: ... really REALLY WEIRD.
In jumpspace, the probabilities of radiation causing a bit flip in an electronic computer (a single even upset) just gets really "wonky" (to use the proper technical term). Rather than being a consistent randomization of probabilities (normal space), in jumpspace you wind up with a random randomization of probabilities that can cause bit flips in heisenberg unpredictable fashion in computers in ways that can get "randomly reprogrammed" which are dangerous to the integrity of robot (or computer) programming.
The solution to this particular challenge, from a robot programming perspective is a combination of hardening of hardware components and building in additional redundancy to enable error correction by cross-checking.
In other words, you wind up with jump "capable" robot brains needing to be built to a higher standard than is needed for robots meant to operate in "ordinary biosphere" radiation environments. It's a type of jumpspace radiation that biologics can survive just fine, but which can potentially muck up the programming of a robot's computer brain by random resets of bits of information in their electronics.
So rather than robots being "unable" to survive jumpspace as a guaranteed outcome, rather it's a case of being "unable" to exit jumpspace "unmodified" from the state they were in prior to entering ... and for sufficient levels of artificial intelligence, that becomes a "terrifying prospect" that a robot that exits jumpspace is "not the same robot" that entered jumpspace, because their underlying programming that makes them "who they are" might be edited and altered by jumpspace itself.
In other words ... the universe hates computers to a certain degree ... but jumpspace hates computers EVEN MORE than normal space does.
o:
And that's my best attempt to be able to square that particular circle without needing to gesticulate
too wildly with my hands.
Note that such a notion helps to explain why starship computer models only get LARGER with increasing tech levels, rather than smaller. That's because as computer sophistication increases with tech level, those computers become more susceptible to disruption of their programming in jumpspace. The solution? Increasing redundancy and hardening even further, causing computer prices and size and power requirements to increase as tech level and sophistication increases, rather than shrinking and going down like we see in the "terrestrial, normal space" computer market (since 1977
).
