Slashdot Mirror


Quickie Twister

Start this one off with a creative hack: tim.kerby sent in just that: using a tortilla as a bread board when your local radio shack is out. Future creative hacks may involve i4u's link to camborg which tracks wearable cameras. Ant found cats and robots. You can practice by playing Kitty Lick 3, an FPS you play as a feline (thanks bjorky) But If cats aren't your pet of choice, how about pigs? Rookie sent in linkage to a story about a one in first class that you'll swear is fiction (but it isn't). radiator sent in a hilarious parody: first aid for a dying dot com. Some auctions worth noting: drDugan sent a picture autographed by Linus being sold on eBay (and donated to charity). Dirty Yanni noted that Metallica/Napster parody t-shirts are for sale on eBay. And the last auction (but not on eBay) is Spock's original ears from the original trek. Oh, and how about t-shirts mocking the MS breakin & source code theft? CArnesen noted that Anime Expo 2001 has been scheduled for this summer. I'm seriously considering going. Mothy notes that famed Rubber Chicken vendor Archie McPhee is now selling the Linux Voodoo Penguin (however the ad features a "Sysadmin" wearing a tie! Have to much free time? Ant does! He sent us a reflex tester (I've managed a .24) but thats nothing compared to Am I Hot or Not which is fun for hours on end if you're the type that amuses easily. And finally, tshell noted that that now that there is a complete O'Reily ate my balls site, the Internet is now complete. You can all go home now.

143 comments

  1. Pig! by Sawbones · · Score: 2

    I've never been more proud to live in seattle :)

    Now, time to track down all of those promised millions once pigs have flown...

    --

    Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
    1. Re:Pig! by llywrch · · Score: 2

      > I've never been more proud to live in seattle :)

      Why? Because a pig flew first class to your city?

      Hmmf! Let's drop the pig into the d00m parody, & fly a cat first class. Yeah! Not only will the players get k-rad k3wl special effects, a high score means you get BACON!!!

      (On an unrelated note, I only drank 3 Full Sail Stouts tonight before posting this. I guess my campaign to become the Homer Simpson of /. is d00med to failure.)

      Geoff

      --
      I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
  2. Anime Cons by Tetsujin28 · · Score: 1

    Enjoy Anime Expo, Taco -- and if you feel like a trip to Colorado, next year's Nan Desu Kan is scheduled for September 21-23, 2001. Registration info is here.


    --------------------
    WWW.TETSUJIN.ORG

    --
    - - - -
    The real Tetsujin 28 is a giant robot.
    1. Re:Anime Cons by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Don't forget www.acen.org =) -- Dr. Eldairon --

    2. Re:Anime Cons by Phil+Gregory · · Score: 1

      Also, don't forget Otakon, which will recur next August, probably at the Baltimore Convention Center.


      --Phil (Who was it that observed anime cons were better than trek cons because anime girls look better than female Klingons?)
      --
      355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
  3. Other Photos by Coward,+Anonymous · · Score: 5

    A lot of people are bidding on the Linus autograph linked in the article, but the seller has 4 other photos which as of right now have significantly lower bids ($31 to $60 vs. $255), you can see the list here.

  4. amusing by fjordboy · · Score: 1

    WOOHOO! I got a .11 but all it said was nice....did anyone get higher than a .11? This reminds me of a reflex tester we had at this farming expo when you had to release a simulated cornstalk before you got pulled into a harvester...we all went in thinking we could let go in plenty of time, but lo and behold, it would actually pull you in long before I could let go....gotta love those snap rolls. (i guess this is a hick thing)

    1. Re:amusing by phessler · · Score: 1

      I got higher. I got a .88 (Have you been drinking?)


      -Peter Hessler

      --


      -Peter Hessler
      phessler@DELETE.paychex.com
    2. Re:amusing by kirby697 · · Score: 1

      I just got 0 seconds.

      I don't know how... it was sort of an accident.

      Click here for a pic of it. It didn't congratulate me though... damn.
      0 seconds???

    3. Re:amusing by kirby697 · · Score: 1

      Well, in case that last one was a fluke, I just got 0.03. I have the reflexes of a snake. YAY!

  5. Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex speed by Kasreyn · · Score: 1

    I thought mine were fast, but I just can't seem to go faster than .22 seconds. I thought I was faster than that. I've tried it for about 15 minutes (it IS addictive) and I consistently get .22 seconds. Apparently that is the maximum speed of data transfer between my brain and my finger, round trip, including time to decide to click. Interesting thing to know about oneself =P

    Kasreyn

    --
    Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger /. flamers since 1999.
  6. Reflex tester by Enzondio · · Score: 1

    I got .17 seconds and this response "Nice!" My life is now complete.

  7. Tortilla. by mindstrm · · Score: 2

    Predrilled PCB != Breadboard.

    And his clock thing was not about 'resonant frequency of tortilla' but about induced capacitance form the tortilla; i'm sure it conducts somewhat.

    1. Re:Tortilla. by DoomHaven · · Score: 2

      I would doubt very much that tortillas conduct electricity. Induced capacitance, yes, of course; but not conduct electricity. To conduct electricity, you need either free-flowing electrons or ions - the base constituents of a tortilla has neither.

      My worries here would be heat retention and environmental conditions. Quick, what is the ignition temperature of an tortilla? (European or American? hahahaha). Will prolonged exposure to 5 volts ignite the tortilla? How long would a tortilla last in a very moist environment before failure? Since he is using the tortilla for outdoor usage, what precautions did he take to keep the tortilla safe from rain and from hungry creatures?

      --
      "Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
    2. Re:Tortilla. by ajc · · Score: 1

      Did you happen to notice the date on that page? (April '98... possibly the 1st of April 1998?)

    3. Re:Tortilla. by Mignon · · Score: 2
      Did you happen to notice the date on that page?

      Indeed I did, and I laughed all the way through the article. I also couldn't help notice the resemblance to the "potato-powered web server" from a few months ago. It got me wondering, though, of the possibilities for a rice and beans-powered circuit. What's got a higher energy density - rice and beans or a potato? My first vote would go to rice and beans, but if you throw a little cabbage in with the potato - look out! It must act like a catalyst, causing the potato to release more energy than by itself.

  8. I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by istartedi · · Score: 2

    If you don't believe me just visit here: http://www.vrml3d.com/temp/TIME.gif

    The secret? Don't actually try to react. Just try to judge a typical time for the delay, and play the odds. Sooner or later you'll hit really close. I would be surprised if we didn't see a 0.1 within the hour.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by istartedi · · Score: 2

      I meant I would be surprised if we didn't see 0.01 within the hour, assuming the resolution of their timer is sufficient.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    2. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by Modab · · Score: 1

      Call me a liar, I won't mind but I got a got a 0.0 on the second try, for some unknown reason.
      Just got a thought in my head, why haven't I pushed the button yet, so I clicked, and it changed right as I clicked. You'd think it would do something special, but nooooooooo.... Very weird though, I'm now having delusions of being psychic.
      It is easy to control all that you see,

    3. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by brundlefly · · Score: 1

      I used the keyboard and got a .10. I pressed Start, hit tab to select the Stop key, then hit enter when the screen changed colors. Easy.

    4. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by DeadPrez · · Score: 1

      No url but I got a .16 w/o cheating. At the beginning I was doing .24 everytime like 5 times then a bunch of .17s before finally getting a .16 and closing the browser.

      Here is a hint, try clicking and holding stop and then just letting it go when the color changes. Maybe that is cheating. =)

    5. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      0.01 is for wusses... Real cheaters get 0.00.

      (Only took me one try, too!)

      --
      The cake is a pie
    6. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      Or do even better!

      --
      The cake is a pie
    7. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by istartedi · · Score: 2

      For real, or did you pull out MSPaint and do a little font fiddling?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    8. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by pc486 · · Score: 1

      Cheater. If you even were took a look at the JavaScript (I don't even know Java!) you would realize that it is imposible to get that response. As far as I can tell, if you were to get under 0, you would have an empty string and thus an empty response. Heck, there is no response of "You are a living god!" at all. Next time you try to make a lie, work a little harder.

    9. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by MrScience · · Score: 1

      I just got a .08, without cheeting. No need to time (it's random, anyways, 1-30 seconds). Just hold down the spacebar on the stop button, and let up when it changes.

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

    10. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by titus-g · · Score: 1

      Users who recently... what?????

      --

      ~ppppppppö

    11. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by ucblockhead · · Score: 2

      Uh....if I hadn't looked at the Javascript (and more), I wouldn't have been able to get that result....

      Jesus, I said I fucking cheated, what'd you expect?

      --
      The cake is a pie
    12. Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated. by ucblockhead · · Score: 2

      Define "for real"... I edited the Javascript and ran it off of my hard drive, pasting the original URL into the address bar to make it look like I was hitting the original site.

      MSPaint would have been too damn much work!

      --
      The cake is a pie
  9. Re:Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex sp by decaying · · Score: 1

    Try 'pre-pressing' the stop button, then you only have to release your finger.... should cut some time down.......

    0.13 is my best so far.......

    --
    ----- One piece short of Legoland
  10. I don't know about pigs in first class... by Rombuu · · Score: 1

    ...but some of the flight attendents I've seen lately haven't been too hot.

    *insert comedy drum noise here*

    Thank you, drive safely, tip your waitresses, good night!

    --

    DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
  11. infrared critter detection by Booker · · Score: 4
    Infrared LEDs & gutted quickcams can be great for night shots of critters (like the robot/cat thing).

    I had raccoons coming in through my cat door, and wreaking havoc with the cat food and water. SO... I took the IR filter off the webcam, hooked it up to some motion detection software, and got some cool pics.

    Of course, that didn't solve the problem... but first, you have to know your enemy! :)

    ---

    1. Re:infrared critter detection by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      Excellent!

      These are the best racoon pictures I have seen on slashdot today.

    2. Re:infrared critter detection by ucblockhead · · Score: 3

      You wanna have fun? Don't just hook up a camera, hook up a hose, too!

      (And that will probably solve the problem.)

      --
      The cake is a pie
  12. Hold the button and release (reflex test) by +igloo · · Score: 1

    After pressing start, hold the end button down and release as the background changes. Cheating, I know... but you can impress your friends with super low scores!

  13. ate my balls by jhittner · · Score: 1

    who wants to bet that the "ate my balls" guy will be the next .com lawsuit??

  14. First Aid by CMiYC · · Score: 1

    I love the reference to fuckedcompany.com on the First Aid poster.

    I nearly laughed my ass off.

    ---

  15. where do I download it?? by emmons · · Score: 1

    I can't find the URL for Kitty Lick 3! I've been waiting for months for this game to come out, and now that it is, I can't figure out how to get it!

    Oh, and the MP3 propoganda at Modern Humorist is pretty sweet too...

    --
    Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    1. Re:where do I download it?? by Skater · · Score: 1

      That "Kitty Lick 3" ad has been up on The Corporation for at least 3 or 4 years. I remember writing on my webpage about 2 years ago that the site (The Corporation) hadn't been updated in several years...

      They have some great "humor product", so it's too bad the creators cannot update it more frequently.

      --RJ

    2. Re:where do I download it?? by ectizen · · Score: 1

      hey, if you find the url, let me know! damn i need that game.

      yeah, the ultra violent shoot-em-up fantasies have been fun, but damnit, i need to fulfil my mischevious kitten fantasy!

  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. Nothing Flat (was Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated.) by istartedi · · Score: 2

    OK, that played through way too quickly. I got nothing flat: http://www.vrml3d.com/temp/time0.gif

    In a reflex test like this, where the consequences of failure are zero, there is nothing to discouraging people from gambling using my statistical cheat.

    Now, if this were NHRA drag racing, I would be disqualified on almost every race, so my cheat wouldn't work. If you really want to measure someone's reflexes, you need to take a lot of samples and run some statistics. There must be a fairly good body of research on this, and I bet the math to account for guess-based cheating is non-trivial. Anybody out there experienced in the field of reaction time measurements?

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Nothing Flat (was Re:I Got 0.11 But I Cheated.) by rehannan · · Score: 1

      Bummer. And here I was all excited about my 0.03 second time!

  18. Re:Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex sp by Chang · · Score: 1

    Also, crank your resolution down to 640x480. On my system I was able to get it down to .10 but at 1024x768 the best I could manage was a .22

    My theory is it was taking longer to fill the screen.

  19. Tortilla-Board� by nmarshall · · Score: 1

    here at RadioShack, we really liked the idea of Tortilla-Board(TM) so much that i think we may just have to recemend it next time, 2 geeks^H^H^H^H^Hhardware hackers, come in and start fighting over the last, breadboard. not that we stock much of it these days, need all that room for cellphones and TV's.

    nmarshall

    The law is that which it boldly asserted and plausibly maintained..

    --
    nmarshall

    The law is that which it boldly asserted and plausibly maintained..
    --Colonel Burr 1783
  20. Hot or not? by ucblockhead · · Score: 3

    Hey, that site's so old it has already been parodied.

    --
    The cake is a pie
  21. Faster Reflexes in 2 minutes! by enneff · · Score: 1

    My best score is .06, using a special method I've developed.

    Click start and then click-and-hold the stop button, release when the colour changes. This will shave full microseconds off your times!!

  22. You might like one of these by Bilestoad · · Score: 1
  23. Oh, Please... by ewhac · · Score: 3

    The reflex testing page is written in JavaScript. Gimme a break. JavaScript is a slow, interpreted language found inside slow, bloated Web browsers. The measurements this program offers are highly suspect.

    Let's work it out:

    • JavaScript thunks out to OS to get current time, converts to internal format and stores it,
    • JavaScript thunks out to Web browser (which thunks out to the OS) to repaint the current page with a new background color (this takes a long time),
    • User clicks mouse, mouse driver generates a signal,
    • OS captures signal and builds an event packet,
    • Windowing system further interprets event packet, assigns target window/pane/button, sends to application,
    • Web browser receives event, where it rattles around for a while figuring out what to do with it,
    • Web browser calls back into the OS to render the button in the depressed state,
    • Web browser invokes JavaScript function handling that button,
    • JavaScript thunks back out to the OS again to get the current time,
    • Calculates the "delay" and presents the results.

    Question: Which bit of this sequence involves high-performance, low-latency software components? If you said the mouse driver, and OS and windowing system event dispatchers, you're right. Everything else is dog-slow.

    I wouldn't trust this thing to be accurate to finer than 80 milliseconds or so.

    Schwab

    1. Re:Oh, Please... by Johnny+Starrock · · Score: 1
      Don't forget:
      • Eye detects change
      • Impulse travels to brain
      • brain decodes change
      • brain rattles around for awhile deciding what to do with impulses
      • brain tells finger to move
      • signal travels to finger
      • finger twitches
      Obviously the human component of this system is highly suspect as well.
      --

      end communication
    2. Re:Oh, Please... by paled · · Score: 1

      you forgot:

      guess.
      Get lucky.
      obtain response time of 0.016 seconds
      "you have the reflexes of a snake"

      --
      .
    3. Re:Oh, Please... by Kiss+the+Blade · · Score: 1
      True, but at least in most Brain distributions it's easy to get a compatible finger driver. And the Brains kernel may be quite sluggish and large by most standards, but it generally acheives uptimes of 74 years!

      However, the 'English' communication protocol it uses to network with other Brains is rather ambigous, and does not manage very high bit rates, but is nonetheless quite flexible and powerful, like an inferior version of Perl.

      Another problem with the brain is the great many IRQS it uses, known as 'hormones'. They can wreak havoc, and are appalingly slow. The 'testosterone' & 'oestrogen' IRQs are among the worst offenders, sometimes rendering different Brains incompatible!

      For the Brain to become a mainstream hardware platform it will have to overcome these problems, IMHO.

      KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.

      --

      KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
      There is no

    4. Re:Oh, Please... by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      If it is a Windows 98 box, the clock granularity is 50 milliseconds. If it is a Windows NT box, the clock granularity is 10 milliseconds. Regardless of the programming language, you can't do better than that without using really spiffy tricks.

      Doesn't really matter, though, because anyone who gets better than about 150 milliseconds is either lucky or cheating. The nervous system doesn't get faster than that.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    5. Re:Oh, Please... by Xevion · · Score: 1

      I got 30ms (Not 300). If anyone wants to contend with that just send me an email and I will respond with a picture :)

      --
      Only those who dream can grasp reality.
    6. Re:Oh, Please... by Caine · · Score: 1

      I managed to get 0.05 seconds =). With some luck and my lightning quick Kung Fu reflexes ;) (yes I do train a form of Kung Fu). You must either be very quick or very lucky =).

    7. Re:Oh, Please... by Fizgig · · Score: 1

      He didn't say it talked to the server. He said it talked to the OS. I'd be mighty surprised if Javascript gets by without one of those!

    8. Re:Oh, Please... by Speed+Racer · · Score: 1

      Windows 9x uses a timer with a resolution of 55 ms when using WM_TIMER messages. Windows NT uses a timer with a resolution of 10 ms as you correctly noted.

      It should be noted that all 32 bit versions of Windows can access a high-resolution performance timer if one is available in hardware through the use of QueryPerformanceCounter and QueryPerformanceFrequency which will vary in resolution depending on the hardware.

      --
      Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
    9. Re:Oh, Please... by vectro · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, the human brain has a terrible uptime. It needs to go to maintainance mode daily. Some units can postpone this maintainance period, but only for a relatively short time and only with reduced performance.

    10. Re:Oh, Please... by pclinger · · Score: 1

      So, in other words, you can't beat CmdrTaco's 0.24 time.

      --
      /. editors made it impossible to link to file:///c:/con/con in my sig. Please just type it in
  24. Trapping cats... by mwalker · · Score: 5

    For a computer engineer it did not take long to think of a solution involving a robot.

    For a computer scientist, it did not take long to figure out that you trap cats by putting a big pile of catnip on the floor, watching them eat it, and then carrying them outside, stoned out of their mind.

    the robot is cool too, i guess. (:

  25. 0.184 seconds by NeilO · · Score: 1

    It's faster if you press and hold the stop button, and release when the color changes....

  26. Am I Hot or Not.... by Overdrive_SS · · Score: 1

    What a great idea! A website where you submit your photo and let other people on the internet rate if you are hot or not. What a great way to break someone's ego or make someone's head too big to fit through the door. If only I could submit some small tidbit of advice too, like "Your nose is too big, get plastic surgery immediately". Coming up with comments would make this site that much more entertaining. Will the wonders of the internet never end?

    On a more serious note... How many of these photos do you think are real? I've seen one or two that look like they are probably ripped off of a website.

    1. Re:Am I Hot or Not.... by OnanTheBarbarian · · Score: 1

      I think it's sort of funny; a better name for it might be "Am I female or not?". I noticed that the men were consistently low-rated, and that there were really high ratings for things like upskirt shots and the like. My suspicion is that almost all of the raters are straight men (I suspect there are far more focussed sites for gay men who want to do this sort of thing - and more!). Of course, they don't gather data on this.

  27. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  28. I got .063 by cornette · · Score: 1

    I could consistently get about .203-.205.
    Has anyone been able to get less than their blood alcohol level?

    1. Re:I got .063 by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1
      Well since my blood alcohol level is always around .02 I'd say I can consistenly get less. :P

      The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him.

      --
      I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  29. Yep by xant · · Score: 1

    0.04. "You have the reflexes of a snake."
    --

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
  30. AmIHotOrNot much like real life by Lish · · Score: 1
    This seems a lot like real life...you have to wade through a lot of junk to find the good stuff.

    --
    "This message is composed of 100% recycled electrons."
  31. But its cool by acomj · · Score: 2

    I used to try to start and stop my digital watch's stopwatch in minimum time.. 0.11 was my record.

    weeee

    /Aram

    1. Re:But its cool by Goonie · · Score: 2
      I thought I was the only geek who found this amusing . . . but I think I beat you with 0.10. Must be all those years of piano lessons.

      Of course, I think we've got think is a case of *far* too much time on our hands if you pardon the appalling pun :)

      --

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
      --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
    2. Re:But its cool by MrScience · · Score: 1

      Hah! I have you all beat. I got a .08 once playing with those stupid stopwatches, and I was 23! I think the real reaction time should be halved, since you were both starting AND stopping the watch.

      Of course, I could only get to a .09 on this page. I only dinked with it a few minutes.

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

    3. Re:But its cool by PD · · Score: 1

      "Piano lessons"

      So is that what the kids are calling it these days?

    4. Re:But its cool by Mr.+Piccolo · · Score: 1

      Ha.

      I've gotten a 0.05 and a 0.06 just now.

      However, the best I can do reliably is 0.08.

      And I don't trust my watch much right now anyway, because I've had two clock in at 0.10 when one is definitely much shorter than the other.

      Regardless, there's definitely a difference between pressing a button repeatedly as fast as you can and pressing a button in response to another event.

      --
      Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
  32. It's just for fun. by Ravagin · · Score: 1

    The reflex testing page is written in JavaScript. Gimme a break. JavaScript is a slow, interpreted language found inside slow, bloated Web browsers. The measurements this program offers are highly suspect.

    I think a bit of lightening up is in order.

    I would doubt that the author of the page was going for high performance, nanosecond accuracy. It was just in fun.
    Complaining as you have is kind of like people who pester me for occasionally playing around with QBasic. OF COURSE it's not a totally portable, high speed, low-level language, OF COURSE it's interpreted, but that doesn't mean that it's not a good language for some things (some great games have been hacked out with QBasic) or that it isn't good for learning some principles of programming.

    For what I think this person was trying to accomplish (ie, let everyone have fun), javascript is a great choice. Why? Because most browesr that the average user uses support it, and it can be written right in with the HTML. Use Java? I doubt it. There is little advantage, and it can be slow. Java takes considerable time to load on any browser over my 56k connection. Javascript, here, is the optimal choice.

    The Reflex Tester is not a device for intensive research. It needn't be chock full of high-performance, low-latency software components.

    i hope this isn't taken as a flame. a vehement disagreement, perhaps. alternatively, if your tone is not the one which I interpreted from your post, I apologize.
    -J

    --

    Karma: T-rexcellent.

    1. Re:It's just for fun. by ewhac · · Score: 2

      i hope this isn't taken as a flame.

      Oh, heavens no.

      I have nothing against interpreted languages per se. I cut my teeth on BASIC about 25 years ago, and I think they're great for lots of stuff.

      But the accuracy of the result is massively dependent on the implementation and performance of the JavaScript interpreter, the Web browser, the OS, and the machine itself. As an example, I'm writing this message on my 166MHz Pentium laptop, in Netscape 4.73 running Debian Linux 2.2 (potato). Realistically, it'll take a couple hundred milliseconds for the browser/JavaScript to react at all to my mouse clicks, just because the software layers through which the measurements are being performed are so darned thick. So the scores people are posting are highly dependent on their system configuration.

      Schwab

  33. Reflex by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1
    I got a .08, which is 3 times faster than a certain other individual >:P. Want proof? www.geocities.com/auraburn/proof.jpg

    The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  34. I got .06 and I know the secret... by Loofah · · Score: 1

    Easy: After you hit 'Start' hit 'MouseDown' on 'Stop'. Just hold it until the screen changes. It's looking for 'MouseUp'; this puts you halfway through your reaction.



    -When I said 'we', officer, I was referring to myself, the four young ladies, and, of course, the goat

    1. Re:I got .06 and I know the secret... by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      Or you hit "View Source", then "Save", and then add "responseTime=0;" to the appropriate place.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    2. Re:I got .06 and I know the secret... by istartedi · · Score: 2

      I hacked in an "average" output, and sent it to the author. If his mailbox doesn't get slashdotted, maybe he'll put out a 1.01 version.

      Having the average there doesn't totally resolve the issue of cheating, but it makes it a bit more fair to compare results. So far, my average is about 0.34 out of 6 or 7 tries. Hmmm... I guess if he wanted to, he could make it add a 1 second penalty every time you cheated.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:I got .06 and I know the secret... by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

      I had the same idea you had... And got .05... :) I hope somebody gets 0.001 or something almost zero... :)

      --
      Q: How does a Unix guru have sex?
      A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umoun t;sleep

  35. How To Beat the Reflex Tester by nullspace · · Score: 1

    After you press the Start button, hold the Stop button down but don't release it until you see the background change. I was able to score a .199 on the test by this method.

  36. Re:Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex sp by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1
    You've gone too far. Please turn around and return the way you came.

    The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  37. Cool poster screwed up by corporate censorship! by LordEq · · Score: 1

    > Oh, and the MP3 propoganda at Modern Humorist
    > is pretty sweet too...

    Aaagh! Why'd they change it? The original graphic said "A reminder from the Recording Industry Association of America" at the bottom. The poster says "A reminder from <ugly-script>Your</ugly-script> Recording Industry".

    Had they not wimped out^W^Wchanged it like that, I would have bought a bunch of them.

    --LordEq

  38. I only get .22 after a few tries... by antdude · · Score: 2

    No wonder I suck in games :).

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  39. Re:Assholes by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1
    Surfing for pleasure while working? Tsk tsk. But I too was suddenly hitting ALT-leftarrow hoping to god my screen didn't freeze at that precise moment in time. I was nearly about to hit the power switch on the monitor, but that would've drawn attention from coworkers.

    The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all, is the person who argues with him.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  40. I can see it now... by Overdrive_SS · · Score: 1

    Alright! Who the hell ate my project for Digital Logic!?! I want answers and I want them now! I spent hours putting that together! I hate college roommates! How did I get stuck with you two? I should've never left food out where you guys could get to it, even if it did have logic chips and solder in it. I swear you two are hopeless!

    1. Re:I can see it now... by jbarnett · · Score: 1


      "Dam this soft taco is crunchy!"

      --

      "`Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.'" -THHGTTG
  41. ULTIMATE REACTION! by tweder · · Score: 1

    I've gotten the best reaction time so far - 0.007 seconds!

    Click here to check it out!

  42. .16 strategy for reflex tester by cacheMan · · Score: 1

    Hit start then hit stop but hold the mouse button, release the mouse button when the color changes. I had my best time with tomato as the color.
    --

  43. The Ultimate Cheat for the Reflex Tester by frenchs · · Score: 1
    People, people get creative :)

    Since it's all done in javascript, just start the timer on the page, then change the time on your computer back a minute! Instant negative score!

    Steve

    1. Re:The Ultimate Cheat for the Reflex Tester by Calle+Ballz · · Score: 1

      Tried it, didn't work -Richard

  44. You can trace the picture's origin by TBHiX · · Score: 2

    Found a way to trace the pics. Click "Page Info". The link to the pic is the second or third-last one listed. Open it in a new window. Usually, chopping off the last bit of the link's URL will get you to the page hosting the pic.

    My point? After following a few of the ones that looked.... professionally hot, shall we say, it seems that a large number of them are indeed links to professional pages. Not all of them, mind you. Just a large majority of them.

    All I know is, even if I wanted to risk my self-esteem, I'd never post anywhere where someone might be able to find my website.

    -TBHiX-

    1. Re:You can trace the picture's origin by Anonymous._.Coward · · Score: 1

      Or you could just right click in the frame, choose view source and look for the link in the HTML (just before "You can share this picture with a friend" link).

      --

      take a triptonica to subthunk

    2. Re:You can trace the picture's origin by TBHiX · · Score: 1

      There's quite a bit of code in the source, as I recall. It's easier just to pick the links out of the four or five in the info. YMMV.

      -TBHiX-

  45. Get faster times by DeadSea · · Score: 2

    You can easily cut your response time down by holding the second button half way down until the color changes and then letting the button up. I got .16 in just a couple tries. The button event is registered on mouseup.

    1. Re:Get faster times by ViGe · · Score: 1

      You can easily cut your response time down by holding the second button half way down until the color changes and then letting the button up. I got .16 in just a couple tries. The button event is registered on mouseup.

      Or simply by pressing the button on random times. I clicked on it a few times, and got 0.029 seconds :-)


      --
      --
      It has to work - rfc1925
  46. Cheating the Network Reflex! by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

    It is so easy to score in this game! I didn't need more than 5 minutes to achieve a response of 0.135 (the script says "Nice!") and, after a lot of other tries, believe me, I got 0.05 seconds! (the script says "Well done!"). The tip is:
    Click Start
    As fast as you can, move the mouse over to Stop and click it, but do not release the button
    Just as soon as the color changes, release the button. Having already pressed the button, you'll have a time that is much lower than the ones of people that click instead of releasing...

    Cool, eh? :)

    --
    Q: How does a Unix guru have sex?
    A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umoun t;sleep

    1. Re:Cheating the Network Reflex! by blue+trane · · Score: 1

      Then there's the "guess" method, which got me a 0 heh

  47. and the cats fight back by Johnny+Starrock · · Score: 1
    --

    end communication
  48. time and color by eagl · · Score: 1

    I found that the brighter colors made me flinch somewhat, which doubled my reaction times. Using dark slate gray, I got a .11 time, and the best I ever got with crimson was .22.

    I did the test by hitting start, then clicking and holding stop so my mouse-click speed wasn't factored into my reaction time.

    I wonder if a test could be made using a drag racing light setup, but with different colored lights, seeing if different colors could affect reaction times.

  49. Re:Pig! Hehe... by Soko · · Score: 2

    You must be a swine of the profiteering type, a - *Ahem!* - Capitalist Pig. Just like the rest of them in first class.

    LOL.

    --
    "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
  50. DMCA Notice by tarbabyxxxx · · Score: 1

    This is to advise you of my clients rights of your use of a tortilla for a breadboard that was designed by Radio Shack. ;)

    --
    Will the last company to abandon Linux please turn off the lights??!
  51. Am I hot or Not? by moz711 · · Score: 1

    Great!!! I think I'm already becoming an 'Am I Hot or Not' addict.
    Damn You Slashdot!!!! Damn you to hell!!!!

    Time for Betty Ford again

  52. I am *THE KING* by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

    If you don't believe, check this picture. Yes, my score is now 0.001. Yes, call me king.
    BTW, no hardware/software cheat used, I just had a lot of luck to release the button so fast. The kind of thing that happens once in a billion times. Yet, I am the king.
    If anyone gets a higher score (if there is one) and has a screenshot, send me the link!

    --
    Q: How does a Unix guru have sex?
    A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umoun t;sleep

    1. Re:I am *THE KING* by neuneu · · Score: 1

      My score is 0.0000000000000001 nanoseconds, check this picture.

    2. Re:I am *THE KING* by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

      Hahaha! Funny :)) In fact, I didn't cheat the picture, it is not a fake.

      --
      Q: How does a Unix guru have sex?
      A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umoun t;sleep

  53. .1 and no cheating. by os2mac · · Score: 1

    by pure luck I assure you.

    --
    "I don't code the things you use, I make the code your things use better."®
  54. 0 SECONDS by vw_bob · · Score: 1

    I actualy got *zero* seconds on that reflex thing! Don't ask me how... I must just be the man!

    1. Re:0 SECONDS by eastMike · · Score: 1

      Ha....You're lying!

      That's pretty good actually. I only got .17 seconds. Still trying though.

      "It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."

      --

      Time is fun when you're having flies.
      -Kermit the Frog
    2. Re:0 SECONDS by eastMike · · Score: 1

      yay! I got 0 seconds too!

      "It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."

      --

      Time is fun when you're having flies.
      -Kermit the Frog
  55. am i hot or not by British · · Score: 1

    The easiest way to find the image linked in "am i hot or not"'s site(in ie5) is to rt click on the page(its framed), view the source, and do a search for "you can share", and just before that is the image tag.

    That's whats great about angelfire pages. the directories are left open, and often people just stick pics in the /images/ directory, and many of them are ones you weren't supposed to see.

    OF course, on amihotornot, I'm getting a lot of mostly empty geocities directories or empty websites.

  56. Re:Assholes by Jason+Skomorowski · · Score: 1

    But I too was suddenly hitting ALT-leftarrow hoping to god my screen didn't freeze at that precise moment in time.

    Ah, so you found the *other* reflex test site ;-)

  57. Replex this by aufecht · · Score: 1

    Ha, .19 and I have been drinking. Maybe that is my blood alcohol?

  58. Re:reflex speed by atrowe · · Score: 3

    I've found that my score on the reflex test is directly proportional to the number of beers I've had.

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

  59. Hot or Not? Ratings skewed?! by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1
    OK, I was pretty grossed out by this page. Not because somebody linked to goatse.cx, but because, uh, the voters are obviously predominantly male chauvinist 12-year-old boys! I mean, after seeing picture after picture of symmetrically-proportioned, pleasant-looking young women, whom I would consider "reasonably hot", I despaired of seeing them voted as 1.5 or 2 out of 10 just because they're not Jenna Jameson. I didn't check the guys' pictures, so I dunno if they got undervoted too.

    But then, the whole website is a f**ked idea anyway. Um, hello, it's the 21st century, not 1950! A true geek should appreciate women (or men!) for their minds, not their looks.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  60. Re: Blood alcohol level by Dinsdale+Piranha · · Score: 1

    Has anyone been able to get less than their blood alcohol level? I'm getting close. I can consistently get a time of around 0.22; which is only 0.05 off my blood alcohol level. ... excuse me while I go puke.

    --
    I'd rather be rich than stupid.
  61. Am I Hot Or Not? by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 1

    Damn, those ratings are not fair at all! There are lots of cuties on there that got rated way too low. Don't people like brunettes?

    It's silly to rate people's looks based on some sort of popularity contest! EPID - every person is different and I'm sure for each photo on there, somebody in the world thinks they're hot.

  62. I win. by snol · · Score: 1

    Hah! I got 0 seconds. No decimal point, no nothing. Beat that...

    (ummm, don't ask me how...)

  63. Re:Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex sp by snol · · Score: 1

    You've got it backwards - at least in my browser, the larger the screen the slower it fills up and the more time you have to press. At 1280x1024 with the browser maximized it's fairly easy to get 0 if you pre-press the stop button. In other words, the game means nothing.

  64. Kitty Lick is *old*... by flieghund · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I got a kick out of the Kitty Lick 3 parody when I first saw it -- over three years ago. It's part of The Corporation, which is AFAICT a proof-of-concept diversion. It was (and sometimes still is) funny, but not really since they stopped updating it with fresh content (though I noticed recently that they added another icon section).

    I used to feature some of their original icons on my old (and I mean old) website; I have it archived here, though I'd be surprised if it works properly.

    --
    "I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum. I'm all out of bubblegum." MSE USC APX AIA CSI CASp
  65. .04 seconds! I am not human! by batmn42 · · Score: 1

    Heh if you just hold down the reflex button, you can release it right when the screen changes-- before I realized this, I was hitting about .22 regularly, but one I just released the button I got down to about .04! :)

    Of course, all this reflex testing is just honing my skills of nabbing a first post... if I can get a post up in .04 seconds, I think I have a pretty good chance...

  66. Cheating the Reflex Tester by pen · · Score: 2
    I'm not sure if this would be called cheating, but you can get significantly better scores on the Reflex Texter by holding down the Stop button and then letting go when the color changes. This way, you have to make only one motion, which takes less time. This may not work with some browsers though.

    --
    Can you even play MP3s on that thing?

  67. I did. by Thaelon · · Score: 1

    I got .015s here. also a couple of s.

    --

    Question everything

    1. Re:I did. by platos_beard · · Score: 1

      I guess y'all aren't boasting about your amihotornot.com scores, are you?

      --
      What's a sig?
  68. The photography by xant · · Score: 1
    Is how you tell. It's not how hot the person is - it's how good the photographer is. Shots that are totally in focus, set in some exotic location, with the model perfectly posed, etc. are obvious BS.

    I made a point of rating them 1's. I like real women.
    --

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    1. Re:The photography by TBHiX · · Score: 1

      There is the occasional one that appears to be of "real" people (as opposed to somebody trying for free publicity for their portfolio or luring you into a pr0n site.) Quite a few cute girls I know have tried their hand at modelling, and have professional-quality pics to show for it. But they aren't models. Why shouldn't they use these pics?

      Similarly, some people are good at photography, or know someone who is. Still, I agree that the more of the elements you mention occur in one picture (particularly the exotic locale - vacation pics just don't get done that way!), the less likely it is to be anything other than a glamour shot.

      -TBHiX-

  69. Trader Joe's Tortillas by Cy+Guy · · Score: 1

    If you haven't been to Trader Joe's and you have on in your area than get on down there ASAP. They have great food (like habenero tortillas) and GREAT prices.

    They are kind of like one of those generic stores, since they sell everything under their own label (with a few exceptions, such as Ghirardelli chocolate) but the quality and selection rival Zabar's. This is how they keep the prices so low.

  70. Archie McPhee and Linux by caffeineboy · · Score: 1

    There has got to be a linux geek there somewhere.
    I remember back in the day they had a geek purity test that would give you crazy bonus points if you were running linux.

    --
    +++ ATH0 +++
  71. Can't modify constant item in postincrement by Howie · · Score: 1

    There's a syntax error in your perl ball-eating code, dude.

    Bareword instead of a variable.

    --
    "don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
  72. Internet poll "U Syndrome" by dmorin · · Score: 2
    The problem with stuff like the hot/not poll is that the majority of people on the net only know how to offer polarized opinions. Give people a rating system of 1-10 and the majority will vote either 1,2,3 or 8,9,10. Unlike the expected bell curve, you instead get a U. Sure enough, any chick in a bikini rates a 9.8 while face shots of nice average girls usually rack up a 1.3.

    There's evidence of this in Amazon and IMDB ratings, which is probably one of the reasons Amazon has started rating the raters so that you get to have some idea of whose opinion is actually worth listening to. I'm sure it's also part of the reason that you only get a 1-5 rating on Amazon, so that the effect is not as noticeable.

  73. spock's ear :o) by Frederic54 · · Score: 1
    this one come from me
    • 2000-06-21 13:41:51 sound of spoon in coffee (science,humor) (rejected)
    • 2000-07-21 14:05:28 Light can break its own speed limit (articles,science) (rejected)
    • 2000-07-27 20:29:15 Potata web server II (articles,hardware) (rejected)
    • 2000-09-25 18:00:39 download QNX RTP for free! (articles,news) (rejected)
    • 2000-10-24 17:43:05 news from PetrOS (articles,news) (rejected)
    • 2000-10-26 15:36:14 Spock's ear sold at Christie's (articles,movies) (rejected)

    --
    --
    "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
  74. Is your canidate HOT? Or not? by kordless · · Score: 1
    Looks like the preliminary "amihotornot?" election results are favoring Al Gore.
    Gore has a strong lead, and at this time is ranked a solid 4.3, hotter than a lot of the other guys on the site.

    Bush is not so fortunate, being at the bottom of the pack at 1.5.

  75. Re:Assholes by Narf+Narf · · Score: 1

    Go to hell...

    --

    "There's one born every minute." - Steve Case
  76. You know you're a chemist when by edremy · · Score: 1
    You read the quickie as "Amine Expo 2001" and wonder if it's a biochemistry or nitrogen fixation seminar...

    Eric

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
  77. Re:Hmm, perhaps there is an upper end to reflex sp by iank · · Score: 1

    Clearly what is required is to be rid of the low response arm and have your mouse pointer driven directly by your brain.

    Then maybe I could get rid of my entire legacy body and live as a brain in a jam jar. :-)

  78. Rich Hatch Ate My Balls! by mudge42 · · Score: 1
    In my quest to view all 'amb' pages, I discovered this interesting one

    Rich Hatch From Survivor Ate My Balls

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=

    --

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=
    No sig
  79. A flying pig! by brutusbuck · · Score: 1

    Does this mean the Browns will finally win the Super Bowl? Woo hoo!

  80. Re:Hot or Not? Ratings skewed?! by jbarnett · · Score: 1


    damit man, your link sucks, there is like 5 dam pop up windows. At least link to a respectable porn site!


    --

    "`Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.'" -THHGTTG
  81. Hours of entertainment for the whole family! by Cramer · · Score: 1

    There are lots of sites around like that (I call it the near porn revolution)... The only conclusion I can draw is that beauty is truely subjective, but ugly is rather universal -- in a random group of people, it will be hard to get a concensis on beauty, however, everyone will quickly agree "damn, [s]he's ugly."

    As an aside, I don't think the numbers are statically valid until there have been thousands of votes cast (like > 10000.) It's far too easy to stuff the voting (just like a /. poll.)

  82. Timing resolution by Misagon · · Score: 1

    I have also found that under Windows, different executables of Netscape with differences in their minor version numbers have different timing resolutions in Javascript... The most common is 100 milliseconds, so you don't even get down to Windows' resolution no matter which version of Windows you run.

    --
    "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
  83. Re:You can trace ... tell the Mail on Sunday by Ella+the+Cat · · Score: 1

    I came across (oo-er missus) amihotornot courtesy of the UK newspaper "Mail on Sunday" (it could have been the Daily Mail, the weekday version). Their woman reporter posted an appalling photo of herself, got 2.2.

    What's really funny, is that these papers are forever scaremongering about the corrupting power of the internet, yet they print a double page article about a site which is so obviously exploitable in this way.

  84. Re:I am *THE KING* of BSD faggots ! by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

    1: I am not a "BSD people" (wtf is that?).
    2: I was just celebrating. I didn't come up with the "king" thing myself, you can see that in the source of the page.
    3: Fuck you.


    --
    Q: How does a Unix guru have sex?
    A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umoun t;sleep