CODEX INITIALIZED
<LOG RESET @931.461.60231.14.vt920>CAS.QTERM
![FIELD OBSERVATION [401.3]](/assets/80B2B481_0-CvnAmPho.webp)
Constructs
tciv.art
Modifier
vslvsk
Connection
08.21.vt090
UESC Anomaly Investigations
ANALYZING…
FILE TYPE: UESC Science and Security Report
PERIOD: Present Day
TOPIC: TCIV Anomaly Investigation
SUMMARY: Stolen research report on UESC Security Forces investigations into the Tau Ceti IV Anomaly.
===================================================================
uesc.sci0003.tciv
[scidiv._tcivXXXXXXXXX]
—————————————————————————————————-
ACTIVE RESEARCH INVESTIGATION
SUBJECT: Securing Anomaly research sites [0000401 con't]
LOCATION: Agricultural Hub, New Cascadia [outskirts], TCIV
AUTHOR: uesc.sci0003.tciv
ACCESS: CLASSIFIED
—————————————————————————————————-
FIELD OBSERVATION [0000401.3]:
Runners are a problem.
We do not have the resources to properly protect our work against invasive scavenger activity.
We are employing all available deterrents, and Security Command has allocated a steady refresh of combat units dedicated to research defense, but any expectation that we can eliminate Runner interference will only set us up for disappointment. We must remain diligent and brutal in our response to their activities—there can be no "open door" policy—but I would like to suggest a caveat to our frustrations with their continued intrusion. Bear with me, as what I am about to suggest is counter to all existing mandates, but worthy of consideration given the realities of both the Runner threat and the general complexities associated with investigating truly alien phenomenon.
If we cannot wholly remove Runner disruptions from our workflows, then let's roll their activities into our planning, review, and outcome assessments. The bastards are near impossible to track, but if we focus surveillance not on the Runner themselves but on tracking energy sigs tied to the Anomaly, we can continue to gather and track anomalous data across the zone, at least up to the point of their exit.
This is not to suggest we allow Runners to hijack our facilities. I'm simply acknowledging that they will have their successes in subverting our defenses. Losing sight of that reality as an opportunity would be ignoring the truth of our circumstance—which is, plainly, Runners are here to stay. Until/unless those circumstances shift greatly in our favor, we must find ways to exploit their presence.
So then, where and how can we use Runner complications as unwanted but understood extensions of our own workflows? From a mission security POV, it is simply turning a known point of attrition—data and resources lost to interference—into a possibly reliable source of ancillary data. They're already here working for any number of cross agendas. It is my contention we need to find ways to make those agendas work for us, where and when we can, all while maintaining strict and violent deterrence as our main course of resistance to their activities.
===================================================================
TYPE: TEXT [X]; AUDIO [ ]
FILE TYPE: UESC Science and Security Report
PERIOD: Present Day
TOPIC: TCIV Anomaly Investigation
SUMMARY: Stolen research report on UESC Security Forces investigations into the Tau Ceti IV Anomaly.
===================================================================
uesc.sci0003.tciv
[scidiv._tcivXXXXXXXXX]
—————————————————————————————————-
ACTIVE RESEARCH INVESTIGATION
SUBJECT: Securing Anomaly research sites [0000401 con't]
LOCATION: Agricultural Hub, New Cascadia [outskirts], TCIV
AUTHOR: uesc.sci0003.tciv
ACCESS: CLASSIFIED
—————————————————————————————————-
FIELD OBSERVATION [0000401.3]:
Runners are a problem.
We do not have the resources to properly protect our work against invasive scavenger activity.
We are employing all available deterrents, and Security Command has allocated a steady refresh of combat units dedicated to research defense, but any expectation that we can eliminate Runner interference will only set us up for disappointment. We must remain diligent and brutal in our response to their activities—there can be no "open door" policy—but I would like to suggest a caveat to our frustrations with their continued intrusion. Bear with me, as what I am about to suggest is counter to all existing mandates, but worthy of consideration given the realities of both the Runner threat and the general complexities associated with investigating truly alien phenomenon.
If we cannot wholly remove Runner disruptions from our workflows, then let's roll their activities into our planning, review, and outcome assessments. The bastards are near impossible to track, but if we focus surveillance not on the Runner themselves but on tracking energy sigs tied to the Anomaly, we can continue to gather and track anomalous data across the zone, at least up to the point of their exit.
This is not to suggest we allow Runners to hijack our facilities. I'm simply acknowledging that they will have their successes in subverting our defenses. Losing sight of that reality as an opportunity would be ignoring the truth of our circumstance—which is, plainly, Runners are here to stay. Until/unless those circumstances shift greatly in our favor, we must find ways to exploit their presence.
So then, where and how can we use Runner complications as unwanted but understood extensions of our own workflows? From a mission security POV, it is simply turning a known point of attrition—data and resources lost to interference—into a possibly reliable source of ancillary data. They're already here working for any number of cross agendas. It is my contention we need to find ways to make those agendas work for us, where and when we can, all while maintaining strict and violent deterrence as our main course of resistance to their activities.
===================================================================
TYPE: TEXT [X]; AUDIO [ ]