Slashdot Mirror
A Game Played In the URL Bar
Kilrah_il writes "Whether you think it is useful or useless, you can't ignored the sheer cool geekiness of a game played entirely in the URL bar. From the article: '... While getting lost in a three dimensional virtual world amongst increasingly thoughtful plot and character development may be an adequate pastime for some, the only new title the gaming world should be talking about is URL Hunter, an experimental keyboard-character based game played entirely in your browser's URL bar.'"
Amusing for a few seconds, this uses JS? :(
Disappointed that he didn't incorporate a blink tag somehow into the url bar though
4 animals in 23 seconds. Woohooo!
Dragon Age 2 by far.
Well that filled up my history nice and good.
to get back to slashdot.
it's a goatse mirror
Is it a good game? Not really. The gameplay is pretty awful, and the concept is naturally pretty limited. But it's clever and unusual, and highlights something that is both useful and not widespread enough (the ability to set navigation without leaving a loaded page) as well as something that is of questionable utility but novel (manipulation of an interface element that's currently guaranteed to exist in any desktop user agent to act as a presentation element).
People can dismiss it, as they have done and surely will do until this article falls below the fold, but it's pretty neat conceptually. It's not earth-shattering. Just neat.
This is a different game compared to the round of 'get around the filtering software' usually played in the URL bar.
I usually win more interesting stuff with that game.
If you use firefox, clear all the data from the last 1/2 hour and you should be good...
is the real game being played.
I've managed to avoid it for nearly a decade. I can't believe it was the old "color FreeCell bash script" that got me.
Twinstiq, game news
This is pretty evil to your history.
Also don't accidentally hit ESC multiple times when starting a new game.
Don't work.
(nt)
I don't even have an URL bar. :'(
Working...
Are there any trusted URL shorteners? The link in my sig is shortened because it's too damn long to fit otherwise. I never thought about people avoiding it for fear of a ninja link.
Your brain is not a computer.
Use history.replaceState to avoid clogging people's browser history and effectively disabling their back buttons.
HermesPod: Free Podcast Download Manager for Windows
Make 'em paranoid - but entertain them at the same time - love it!
Been there, done that, paid for the T-shirt
and didn't get it
Sort History by site (& date), right click domain, delete.
Can we get the IE9 and FF4 benchmarks for this? It's important.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
in lynx.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
DEFENDER played in the favicon.
http://www.p01.org/releases/DEFENDER_of_the_favicon/
Seriously, everyone, open the link in an incognito window or similar if you have one, it eats into your history as soon as it starts.
Well.. status bar manipulation, they did that on GeoCities sites (pre-cursor to MySpace?) in 1999!
It's very easy to have marquees, etc, and of course, something like this which also reacts to key press events.
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Amusing for a few seconds, this uses JS?
Yep.
Here, I wrote a JavaScript: URL that creates a Tetris game at the top of whatever page you're on.
URL Tetris
Protip: Create a Bookmark, set the Location of the bookmark to the tetris code... Click the bookmark and play tetris on any web page.
Nope, that is in fact the standard convention for the plurals of lowercase letters:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/621/01/
I won't call you a punctuation nazi, because Nazis at least made an effort to know their own rules.
Not totally sure why, but that reminds me of a very old Star Trek game we used to play on PDP 11 computers.
#DeleteChrome
(please excuse the self-reply)
In case anyone wanted to see the source code:
Here's the unencoded version of the URL Tetris.
That was a lot of fun. This version of Tetris was not stingy on the line pieces :)
Come on, do you really expect the intelligent people of slashdot to paste a highly-obfuscated blob of javascript from an untrusted party into their url bar?
I did a "stateless" CGI othello game back in like '94 that stored the game state in the URL. The difference is that I also displayed a board on the screen via HTML generated on the fly. Automatic reload in X seconds was used to have to computer make its response move. The back button worked too. Of course tons of people on /. did similar things back then too.
Ctl+shift+H to open history window
Type in the common keyword or url: "points" or "url hunter"
C-a all the selection and press delete
This also works well for other sites
do you really expect the intelligent people of slashdot to paste a highly-obfuscated blob of javascript from an untrusted party into their url bar?
Yes, because JS in a browser is sandboxed. It's not like running a shell/Perl/Python script with full user privileges.
"I won't call you a punctuation nazi, because Nazis at least made an effort to know their own rules."
I have. You are wrong, and Purdue has its head up its ass. Here are just a few other references:
Grammar Book
Your Dictionary
Davis School District K-12 usage guide
Georgia Southern University Writing Center
In Wikipedia's entry on it, the mentions of using it for plurals lack citations. But the refutations of those usages do have citations.
The vast majority of evidence and authority is on my side. You lose. Try again.
What, no music? This plays well and I can't believe I pasted something unknown into my browser. If you can do this, certainly you can fix the gray text on gray background on Slashdot...
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Rule 6 from your Grammar Book explicitly uses the apostrophe to show the plural of a lower case letter (i's). Your own references refute you.
i did :D
warning pointless sig
Yeah, Rule 11 of your own reference explicitly contradicts you. The Wikipedia article does also: "It is generally acceptable to use apostrophes to show plurals of single lower-case letters, such as be sure to dot your i's and cross your t's." The other references simply don't deal with the issue. I would say that you are clearly wrong here, and you should, as they say, stop digging. If you continue to disagree, please write a sentence using the plural forms of the following letters: a, i, and u. Do you see what hapened there? Congratulations, now not only do you know that you were wrong, now you know why.
I could see a really cool use of this on news sites- a scrolling ticker at the top of the page.
Sent from my CR-48
It's called "change the numbers to find more porn."
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Thank you for that snippet. Nice feature. Mod parent up - informative.
It's now been tested in Chromium.
The q(') key moves the piece to the right. The enter key drops the piece. The space bar will also drop the piece if there's nowhere to scroll down on the page behind it. The arrow keys do nothing unless there's somewhere to scroll the page left or right, in which case they do.
It's currently unplayable on Chromium due to these issues, but it's still a pretty impressive demo.
Chromium version is 11.0.696.3 (dev) Mandriva 2010.2 for the record. I get the same results from Google Chrome 7.0.517.41 on the same system.
It works well in Opera.
Version information
Version: 11.01 Build: 1190
Platform: Linux System: x86_64, 2.6.36.2-desktop-2mnb
Browser identification: Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux x86_64; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01
Some of the lesser-known browsers:
So, I think there you have it. You support Firefox and Opera well right now. If you can figure out WebKit compatibility you should be able to waste everyone's time, as everyone should have at least one of Firefox, Opera, Chrome, Chromium, or Safari. If not, WebKit should also get those freaks with none of the mainstream browsers who happen to have Arora, Midori, or some other minor WebKit browser.
My Galeon installation is currently broken and not worth fixing with all these other browsers around, but I'm guessing it should work the same as a really old Firefox since it uses Gecko. I was unable to find a version of it newer than 2006 anyway, and that's ancient when talking about JavaScript in a browser. I read that the project was completely discontinued in 2008.
So, there's a testing report and a brief survey of the randomness installed on my systems for cross-browser testing purposes. HTH. HAND.
Oops, I did intend to refer to Rule 11, not Rule 6. So Grammar Book, Purdue, Wikipedia, and the books Eats, Shoots & Leaves and The Well-Tempered Sentence (currently on my desk) all agree with using the apostrophe with lower-case letters to indicate plurals. For upper-case letters, and numerals, usage is currently mixed: formerly, the apostrophe was considered correct; now, it is usually omitted except when this would cause confusion. However, the New York Times, for one example, still uses the apostrophe when pluralizing upper-case letters.
Looks Way Better than "change the numbers to get MS points"
Please be more specific about what kind of cross-site scripting vulnerability you're thinking of, other than say some PHP page that forgot to htmlspecialchars() a field.
Impressive. Hat tipped in your direction, Sir.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
The fun thing about that game is, you never even know how many levels there are! Also, you don't have to beat a level to proceed to the next one...
Reminds me of a game I played in uni where there was a clue as to the next URL on each page. A quick google didn't find it, but I'm pretty sure the name had something to do with being a hacker (coz who else knows how to use an address bar?)
Is 1563649 a prime number?
"So Grammar Book, Purdue, Wikipedia, and the books Eats, Shoots & Leaves and The Well-Tempered Sentence (currently on my desk) all agree..."
You seem to have had the same trouble actually reading what I wrote that the other respondent above had.
Despite outward appearances, Wikipedia does not agree. The statements that agree are all marked citation needed. The statements that authorities disagree with that position actually have references.
So -- if you bother to read carefully -- Wikipedia actually agrees with me.
Eats, Shoots, & Leaves was written by a journalist, not an English professor, school, any other organization with some claim to authoritative knowledge.
Karen Gordon, author of The Well-Tempered Sentence, may actually have some legitimate claim to knowledge.
But that still puts the "authorities" who claim that is acceptable at just Purdue, and two individuals. Believe me, I have checked, and references I have found that say an apostrophe is never to be used for plurals easily outnumber those that say it is acceptable, by more than 10 to 1.
Come on, do you really expect the intelligent people of slashdot to paste a highly-obfuscated blob of javascript from an untrusted party into their url bar?
Luckily, the code didn't work in Opera at work on Windows. Phew!
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
I made a similar thing in 2002, but even more limited because it used the one line of a grey pushbutton as both the input and the output of the game!
http://kirkjerk.com/features/gb.html
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Could you explain what risk these intelligent people would be avoiding that they are not subjecting themselves to every time the click on link to an unknown site on Google?
To the point, what risk does Javascript in the URL bar pose that Javascript in the page not pose?
notpron.com
"All your sources either disagree with you or don't cover the particular topic."
Simply wrong. I have already explained why Wikipedia actually agrees with me, twice. The other sources (with the exception of a rather ambiguous entry in Grammar Book), state specifically that apostrophes are not to be used to form plurals. Honestly, I think you may need reading lessons.
"This is (1) a very common convention of English orthography..."
An error made frequently is no less an error. I know of a lot of other common mistakes, too. And they aren't in the rule books, either.
"and (2) kind of obvious if you think about it, since otherwise 'as' and 'is' and 'us' would cause confusion."
Not at all, since instead of how many a's are there in this sentence?, it is ridiculously easy to write the letter "a" occurs how many times in this sentence? No ambiguity whatsoever. If anything, it is using an apostrophe there that could cause confusion, because in other cases it is used only to show possession.
A number of references that are considered very authoritative, like The Elements of Style by Strunk & White, mention apostrophes only in relation to possessives, never plurals.
Of all the sources I found that mention the subject at all, those that say it is unacceptable to use apostrophes to form plurals outnumber those that say it is by 10 to 1 or more. That is good enough for me.
"I saw where you said it, I just don't believe you. Provide actual evidence or GTFO."
With statements like GTFO, you are lucky I'm answering you at all. You sure as hell don't deserve it.
How can you "not believe" me? I didn't ask you to believe me. It's right there in Wikipedia. I explained right where it was, and gave all the details you need to understand. If you still can't find it, you are hopeless.
I have nothing further to say.
I see that somebody who disagrees pulled out their "troll" wand and cast a spell.
Whoever you are, "troll" is not an acceptable substitute for "I disagree."
"I notice that you aren't actually providing any quotations of your Wikipedia "sources,"
That and other comments merely prove that you're a moron. Everything else has already been said, and I repeat: if you still can't find what I was referring to, after I explained exactly what I was talking about and linked directly to it, then there is nothing further to say.
this is awesome, but needs more levels
Have you ever heard the phrase, "The pot calling the kettle black?"
"... your numerological reading of the citations to a Wikipedia article that explicitly contradicts you... "
I repeat: the statements in Wikipedia that say it is acceptable are ALL marked with "citation needed". That means they are unsupported statements that anybody can make. Like you, for instance. But the parts where it says that authorities disagree, all have actual references. Imagine that.
The fact is that just about anybody can post just about anything on Wikipedia. But what matters -- even the folks at Wikipedia will tell you this -- are the references. So if you really want to keep making the same losing argument, go ahead. I think it's pretty funny.
And I will repeat this, too: I, too (as I mentioned a long way back in this thread) have already seen sources that say it is okay to use apostrophes that way. But the sources I've seen that say you can't have outnumbered them by 10 to 1.
That's good enough for me. If it's not good enough for you, fine. But arguing about it here won't get you anywhere.
Brilliant! I like it! :-D Doesn't work 100% perfectly in Opera[1] though as pressing the right arrow makes the page scroll to the right, covering up the playing field.
[1](Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-GB) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01