It can be hairy at times - but I get satisfaction that I know what does what, where, and when. It may take me a bit longer to set something up, figure out its dependencies, etc - but in the end, for me, it is worth it.
To be honest, this update from SuSE 6.3 to 7.2 has been less painful than I thought it would be. I can't say painless - but not the huge bear I was imagining. I was half expecting to end up moving my home area to another partition, then reformating the root, boot and swap partitions, and reinstalling (then moving the home area back), but so far, it has worked out great. Even the stuff I compiled under 6.3 still works (AFAIK - but I am going to recompile it in the end).
No - Linux definitely doesn't hold your hand for that kind of an update.
One thing I wonder though, and I hope to be able to try it someday soon - if I can gather the hardware together. I wonder how a "virgin" install of SuSE 7.2 would go - the update went smooth, with the installer and everything being very, very slick - better than what I remember from the Win95 or 98 installer. I just wonder how easy it would be with a fresh machine. It looks like it would be super simple, from what I can gather...
Just wait until you have to recompile your kernel, not once, but twice! This happened to me some time ago - I first recompiled it because my ZIP drive wasn't working properly (had to migrate from 2.2.13 to 2.2.14) - after I did that, my sound card died (because the OSS driver was for the old kernel). So, I had to go through the process again to set up ALSA (as a loadable module). Recently I had to do it again for my joystick.
The first time I did it - I forgot to run LILO (very important) - system refused to go past the load stage - break out a boot disk, go to root - vi lilo.conf, run lilo this time, reboot - everything fine.
This happened to me again recently (not scary this time - immediately recognized my mistake) - I upgraded my system from SuSE 6.3 to SuSE 7.2 - and when I rebooted, while I had KDE2 (well, I had to create a symlink because X kept choking on loading the accelerated X driver), I was still running the old kernel. Seems that SuSE 7.2 put it in/boot, but I had been running the vmlinuz in/, not/boot (probably due to the instructions I had used to make the patch previously) - so I moved it, but forgot to run lilo - blammo! - once I got over that, I just left it in/boot, cleaned up/, and reset lilo.conf to look at the right spot, ran lilo (important!!!) and went from there.
Then, of course, I found I was only running the old X - and not X 4.0 as I thought - finding out that the base upgrade only installed portions of X4 - so I had to add that, and run the config to move to X4 (can't remember the name) - then YAST2 wasn't setup, and I needed to get the drivers for 3D acceleration - ARGHHHHHHH!
Let's just say it has been an interesting few days (and I am still fighting to get the Samba server set up - will probably have to recompile the kernel to get my joystick set up - it "went away" after I did the update, so since the kernel was the only big thing that changed, it must be the issue - I think. I am also unsure whether Java, Perl, or my other custom compiled apps all work properly - fun, fun, fun!) - but I sure do like the new KDE2...
BTW - damn - that NVidia driver for 3D acceleration is much faster than what I had before - I don't like the splash screen every time I log off/log on to the system through KDM (anyone know if there is a way to turn this off - or know of a recompiled version of the driver - it comes with source, I am thinking about stripping that code out and recompiling?)...
Hmmm - seems like there may be OpenAL support though? I know very little about all of this. I suppose that if it doesn't, you could just use ALSA directly for the audio backend, and SDL for everything else...
Unfortunately, no - but I imagine you already knew that - but doesn't ALSA emulate OSS - so that calls to OSS would go through ALSA anyhow? Not as good as the real thing, admittedly...
Actually, it is rapidly becoming "Just use SDL" - from the FAQ:
Q: Does SDL support 3D acceleration?
A: Yes, as of version 1.1.0, SDL has full support for the OpenGL API.
Given that it also has support for joysticks, sound, video playback, CD playback, and a host of other things - there isn't much reason to use anything else. Plus, there are a ton of libraries and such that use SDL as the underlying base, allowing you that much more freedom and flexibility...
Re:Sounds like the SDL website would be more helpf
on
Linux Game Programming
·
· Score: 3
One of my next projects is going to involve SDL and possibly OpenGL - and never having touched either, I went to the SDL site first. Great info! I had one of the demo programs (load a bmp) up and going in a few minutes. Once I get my SuSE box back in shape (updated it last night to 7.2 from 6.3, and I am having some issues that need ironing out - like, oh, 3D Acceleration) - I plan to try modding that demo (my C is rustier than a 50 year old nail), and going from there.
I saw the NeHe tutorials - those have to be the BEST 3D tutorials I have EVER laid eyes on - covers everything - I dare say you could damn near create a damn good 3D game using that site.
There are a ton of places to find code for gaming - you outlined the best of them - hats off to you!
The reasoning behind needing polling booths is a simple one:
It blocks vote/voter coercion!!!
That is, by having booths in a central, guarded, public area - such that one, and only one, person may enter the booth - no one can put a gun to your head (literally or figuratively) and tell you how to vote, to further their (or the group they represent) agenda.
This is the current problem with absentee ballots - there is no real way of knowing that the vote on an absentee ballot wasn't coerced in some manner. Currently, we have a low percentage of absentee ballots, so we just shrug our shoulders and move on. However, with internet voting from the home or elsewhere, we would have, in effect, a HUGE percentage of "absentee ballots" that could be coerced ("Want your check/job this week, Johnson? Go into that room and vote - ahem - properly...").
It isn't about security, it is about voter coercion.
However, I do believe that the kiosks should contain computers running voting software - such software could show the candidate, a synopsis of what they are about (maybe with links to outside info - allowing the user to come up to speed on the candidate), and other info - with a set of buttons on the side (like an ATM) that say "Vote", "Next Candidate", "Previous Candidate" - maybe some arrow keys. Have synthesized audio with headphones (or make the booth soundproof) to aid the blind (along with braille on the buttons).
Such software would need to be simple and robust, so as not to crash - don't use touch screens, because they aren't as intuitive, and are useless (or near useless, I would suppose) to the blind. The software could report the votes back to a tabulating center for final count, etc via the internet - using a highly secure encrypted system - or maybe they should just all go back to the center over a leased line system, or maybe back to an armoured truck that uplinks the data via satellite.
Finally, allow a week or so for voting - so everyone can vote, and have the voting booth hours be flexible - heck, make the voting booths mobile or something, like they have mobile ATMS, etc.
All of this could be done today, and relatively cheaply. It isn't that hard...
I was pulling down a Flash animation at over 100K off my @Home connection - of course, where I live (northern outskirts of Phoenix, AZ) I can't get DSL, but then again, no one in my "neighborhood" has a computer besides me, so no one else is ever on, it seems.
Cheap galvs are going set you back at least $100.00 per channel (last time I checked) - and those aren't high speed, either (lotsa bucks for those). Pro laser show equipment is pricey - but it doesn't have to be this way for your next party.
In an old back issue of Scientific American (in the late 70's-early 80's, I believe) there was an Amatuer Scientist article on building your own laser show cheaply - where the "galvs" were right angle/ortho mounted speakers with mirrors glued to the cone - the trick is using two mirror/speaker combos, each acting on the X or Y axis. The laser bounces between them, and the speakers control the deflection in the X and Y axis - tone generators control the speakers.
The article also showed how to use two motors, each with a mirror glued to the shaft at an angle - using this arrangement, bouncing the laser between the mirrors, you can create lissajous patterns (fun to watch - I actually put an entry into the AOL CD contest that did this, but used the CDs as the mirrors). Add a motor spinning a "shutter" wheel (prior to the laser hitting the first mirror) for other effects. All the motors are controlled with rheostats.
Other possibilities:
Cut away the speaker cone to reduce its mass to get higher speed. It might also be possible to extend the shaft of a regular analogue voltmeter and superglue a small mirror onto it (might have to beef up the spring a bit). Use a solenoid to activate a shutter "digitally" (pro rigs use some kind of electro-optical shutter that works similarly to an LCD). I have given thought to using headphone style speakers, or gluing the mirror to a piezo speaker for higher speeds - haven't followed through on it yet, though.
Use a PC (and accompaning sound card) to control the speaker "galvs" - the parallel port could control a solenoid shutter. Multiple shutters could be controlled serially. Mirrors could be mounted on servos for simple "sweep" effects.
Buy the small mirrors at a craft store - they make them pretty small and lightweight. Another possibility for even lighterweight mirrors is to use a small piece of highly polished blank semiconductor wafer.
Pen lasers (ie, LED lasers) can be used for small informal gatherings, but if you want to do a better, larger show, get an HeNe tube laser - output and brightness tends to be higher. Unfortunately you won't be able to get other colors without spending a lot of bucks (I think there is a blue or green laser pen out there, but it is expensive - other colored lasers are of the gas variety, and tend to be expensive). But other light effects could be used instead (maybe focused high-brightness LEDs?)...
I have thought about this as well - but if you are in Mesa, the chance that me and you could get together and connect is pretty well nil. I live up around the 101 and Cave Creek Rd - so, there is Squaw Peak as well as possibly the South Mountain range in the way (depending on where you are at, possibly) - "A" mountain might also be in the way, though unlikely - basically, SP and Camelback mountains would be the big hurdles, unless we could find someone out in Scottsdale (to the west of me, about half a mile - litterally in my back-yard - is a mountain, so nothing to the west)...
But yeah, here is someone else who has thought about setting up a 2.4 GHz or laser link of some sort in Arizona - mainly the Phoenix area - surely there are others?
It also seems like they are using this with whatever is their latest ASCII cluster (Red? White?) to display data off it (I just noticed one of the projects name had ASCII in it - so I am making an assumption here - probably a wrong one).
What I still tend to wonder is - why do those damn projectors still cost so much? I mean, sure - prices have come way down, with higher resolution - but why don't they offer "low-res" consumer models - ie, a 640x480 projector for $500-800? The panels should be dirt cheap to make - and I would bet there is a market for higher-res TV projection systems (people still buy normal - ie, non-HDTV - rear-projection systems), right?
It just irritates me that one can't go out and get a new projection system cheaply (actually, I have yet to even see the high-end projectors being sold at a place like Best Buy or Fry's).
I recently set up a cheesy Fujix P401 video projector, coupled to an Avermedia VGA->TV converter. Good enough to watch VCDs, anyways - and it was inexpensive ($250)...
I went to the Phoenix show (1996?), and recently (October 2001) helped Mark Pauline and David Therrien set up for a demo here in Phoenix (at X.E.R.O/ChemLab) to show off one of the pulsejets that was to be used on their new hovercraft (which was supposed to make an appearance at the Ultraviolence show in Phoenix - but it got cancelled thanks to a lovely interaction between the SF Fire Marshal and the Phoenix Fire Marshal - thanks a lot, guys! Bastards!), and also a video showing of various prior shows.
The demo went off without a hitch - though every time I saw the pulsejet running - glowing white hot and screaming like a banshee on speed, being manipulated by Mark and company using asbetos gloves, next to the 50 gallon tank of propane that powered it - I wondered if we weren't all going to end up crispy critters.
If you haven't seen an SRL show - you don't have any idea what you are missing - picture being in the middle of a war zone, along with a crash-up derby, and a lot of fire, heat, and smoke - plus a ton of noise that manages to rattle every tooth and bone in your body, while deafening you despite wearing ear protection, incidentally making your ears ring for hours after the show - and you might have some idea about what happens during one.
I put in that time to help on the show - all volunteer, mind you - hoping to help out later for the real show - and then it doesn't happen! Gah!
Anyhow - yeah - SRL makes Battlebots look weak, weak, weak - of course, SRL does beaucoup planning to keep accidents, etc from happening - while Battlebots is more "anachistic" in that fashion, in a way. I tend to think of Battlebots as a tamed down SRL real battle (whereas the destruction of SRL's machines, while real - doesn't tend to utterly destroy them, as sometimes happens with Battlebots), and a different form of entertainment (plus, without all the smoke, flames, heat, and falling ash - it is easier to see what is happening)...
Actually, the limiting factor on the VB cube is the fact that I was only using the GDI SDK calls for everything - the bottleneck is basically the low-level 2D Win32 SDK GDI interface. I am certain that it is more than possible to do great stuff in VB if one goes the DirectX route - DirectX and the video card then would be doing all the heavy lifting.
But hey, that is the way it should be - why should someone have to learn arcane graphics secrets to create a game - they should be able to concentrate on the design and gameplay of the game, and not the underlying low-level stuff. Considering that hardly anyone does low-level graphics engines anymore (what I mean by this is creating engines translating x/y/z coordinates in proper 2D screen coords and doing lighting, etc) - most concentrate on the higher level stuff. That doesn't mean one shouldn't learn the low-level stuff - it is useful knowledge. Just don't expect to use it a lot (though there are a lot of instances of it being useful, just to understand what DirectX or OpenGL are doing, for example).
You are right about 486's and C - I remember several good cube demos done on such equipment. And most certainly, things are going on in the background of that VB program - at minimum, it has to keep checking for messages from the OS, just for the event driven stuff.
So, I am not saying VB is the be-all/end-all of things. But it can be damn good at some things (and actually, if you drop the texture mapping, and rely on straight GDI drawing primitives - line, filled poly, etc - you can get mongo speed - I know of one dude, Jerry Chen, who created an awesome 3D library called Dex3D - I may have a link off the site - ultra-high speed with that). It really excells in the RAD area for business apps - which is something Linux needs.
In other words, you are not going to write something that is CPU intensive in VB like Quake or mr. mega encryption program.
Actually, it is possible - to a certain extent.
Both VB 5 and VB 6 are different from previous version of VB - the VB code is first translated into C++ code, then compiled and linked using the regular Visual C compilation tools. In fact, sometimes if you look into a larger project directory in VB - where the EXE is generated - you may find.o files lingering around. You can almost watch the compilation process happenning, if you point Explorer to the directory as you compile.
Unfortunately, it appears that the conversion to C++ is done in memory, and not to disk - so there is no way (at least that I know of currently) to get to the C++ code to tweak it further, prior to sending it on the the linker and compiler.
As far as speed is concerned - it is possible to get it - to an extent. My own personal example is a perspective correct texture mapping spinning cube engine - please don't email me about it - I don't support it anymore (nor do I use VB anymore at home - work is a different story, unfortunately - but I am doing more Java work here now anyway). But it does show what is possible.
Also, at one time (heck, it may be included in the ZIP) I had a custom scanline renderer (ie, the inner loop of the texture mapping routine) done as a C DLL that I called from the VB program, that dramatically speeded everything up - it was my intent to make the whole triangle texture rasterizer a C DLL, but I never got around to it.
So - it is possible to do fast things in VB - since the time I wrote that app - many other people have done even better things - many involving DirectX or custom routines. I have seen some amazing stuff - too bad it is M$ - I have since long ago moved on to Linux...
I ask this because if it is only the need for a browser that is keeping you on Windows (and I am not naive enough to think this is the only reason, I am sure there are others, but hear me out), then go ahead and switch now.
Pick a good distro (I personally use SuSE - currently on 6.3, but moving to 7.2 soon - Mandrake seems cool - but I haven't tried it) - or, choose a BSD or something. Install it, then set up Netscape 4.72.
This is anecdotal - but I have used 4.72 for a long while, and while it does have its faults - ie, it will crash, forcing you to do a "kill" to stop it - plus the annoying address book bug - it works pretty well. Mozilla is almost there - jump ship from Windows now, if you are that "tempted" - get familiar right now with everything. Once Mozilla is there (and I have to admit, it is so damn close - I am tempted to give it a shot as it is now), go for it.
Whatever else is holding you back, there are alternatives and replacements. Good luck!
The three legged robot uses simple solenoids to achieve directional and rotational control (talk about a cheap actuator), while the four legged "bug" uses a simple mechanical system and open loop design (ie, you could build one of these devices from Lego with zero sensors, and it would work) - makes me want to break out the Mindstorms set...
This has to be the one IJ adventure that was most like old-Hollywood serials from the 30's and 40's - it even had the "look" (albeit in color) and the "campiness" reminiscent of that time.
Of course, I also liked "The Mummy" (haven't seen "Returns" yet)...
Seeing as your "script" is not likely from a typical game, what you might see is:
>Look You are in the living room of the house. To the east is a closed, locked door. Next to the door is a painting. To the north is a hallway leading to the kitchen. A mouse runs across the floor by your foot. >Look floor You watch the mouse. He scurries away into a hole in the baseboard next to the locked door. >Look hole You put your finger into the hole, and are bit by the mouse - OUCH!
At this point, one would realize "Maybe I can find some cheese" to lure the mouse out. Once you have baited the mouse (or, maybe you need the cheese, and a trap - which might be located in the shed outside! Hehe) from the hole, you can then reach in, feel for a key (or a button, or switch, or lever) to open the door (which of course leads to the basement).
A perfectly logical chain of events - one that might leave some scratching their heads (or banging them on the wall - you might even have the mouse run up a clock just for the hell of it!), but is perfectly obvious given some thought!
Yes - many. My favorites being from Infocom and Scott Adams.
Infocom especially - I love the Zork series.
A well designed adventure is not only entertaining, but thorougly logical. If you got to such a point in an adventure, as you describe, then:
a) You missed the key somewhere, or maybe there is a different way to open the door (a lever in the basement, perhaps?) or, b) (rarely happens) Something is wrong with the code, allowing you to get to a point without the key or whatever, and no way of going back.
I have played text adventures enough to know that when the answer appears, it is like "Duh!" - and a revelation occurs - causing me to descend deeper into the game. All adventure games should be mapped as they are explored (nothing beats making a map with pencil and paper, notes jotted down only to be smeared, etc) - sometimes you can study the map, and figure out where something may be, and why - and usually - it is there!
I enjoy adventure games because they give me situations to think in - they are more on the level of chess than other games. I think other games could come to this level, and some have, but they are rare - and for some reason, tend to bomb on the shelves...
Ok, maybe what I have to say won't be new - but why isn't it exciting?
Have you noticed how many people read? I mean, bookstores aren't going down the tubes, most all of us read, many other individuals read - just the other day I went with my SO to a book signing for one of her favorite authors (Janet Evanovich) - it was a standing room only crowd - over 450 people showed up. This is a typical showing at her book signings, from what I understand.
I am sure for other "celebrity" authors, it is the same way - in short, a ton of people read.
So why is it text adventures are looked upon as "stale" gaming experiences?
I know all about the z-engine games that are made by adventure game designers and such - the contests, etc - that have a following. What I wonder is why there is not a clammoring from people worldwide to play these style games?
Is it too much to ask for to type commands - or to read? Have game players become too enamored with glitzy graphics? Is it too much to ask for them to actually think, and not just point and shoot?
Don't get me wrong - I like 3D games and shooters as much as anyone - in fact, there is a lot of promise in making very interactive and immersive style games with this format...
I just wonder why we don't see text adventure game authors (and I mean this in it's utmost sense - the authorship being paramount - the game should read like a book, like many of Infocom's games did) today?
Get some low mass mirrors - go down to a craft store (like Craftmart), and purchase some small (1/2 inch) square or round mirrors.
Use epoxy or superglue, and glue them onto small speakers (buy some at rat shack, or pull some out of old radios). You will need two speaker/mirror combos.
Now, the hard part: arrange the speakers at orthogonal 45 degree angles, such that one speaker deflects the beam horizontally, and the second speaker deflects that beam vertically (note, you may need a bigger mirror on the second speaker, to make up for deflection).
A third speaker could be rigged to act as a "shutter" deflector, that would deflect the final beam into a "black box", or cut it off somehow.
Hook these speakers up to the stereo channels of your sound card, and have fun!
I read one of the comments about this being used for possible catching cheaters, by comparing faces to a database of known cheats...
One thing I have always wondered about, is the notion (reality?) of "card counters" - I mean, what exactly are they, and why are they bad?
From what I understand (and I am not a gambler - and I don't really like cards, outside of the mechanics of the games, etc - so I may be wrong) - is that a "card counter" is exactly that - someone who can keep track of, in their heads, of what cards may be "where" (ie, in what players) - and what the dealer may have left - through knowing what they have, as well as how many hands they have lost or won - etc. The idea of "shuffling" is to introduce some form of randomness to help alleviate (or eliminate) the ability to count cards...
If this is true (ie, if my "definition" of a card counter is correct), then I can see how it would skew the odds in their favor, and away from other players and the house. What I can't understand is why this is illegal - ie, why is it illegal to have the skill to remember cards and positions, etc - in order to make the odds more favorable - making such an ability illegal punishes those who have the brain "capacity" or "ability", and rewards (or at least protects) those with "lesser" (or nonexistant) skills in the area.
I can understand the bans against using computers to do the counting for you - what I wonder about is what happens when the time comes (if it comes), that humans are able to get "brain augmentation" devices - would these "trans-humans" be unable to gamble in casinos at that point? In other words, would they be banned? Probably...
Finally, if the cards can be actually counted, and the probability of the hands can be skewed or somewhat accurately determined by a machine or by a human card counter - are the games then not truely random? If that is so - then are the casinos really just protecting the possible fact that they may be found out as a fraudulant "business"?
Slashdot Mirror
It can be hairy at times - but I get satisfaction that I know what does what, where, and when. It may take me a bit longer to set something up, figure out its dependencies, etc - but in the end, for me, it is worth it.
To be honest, this update from SuSE 6.3 to 7.2 has been less painful than I thought it would be. I can't say painless - but not the huge bear I was imagining. I was half expecting to end up moving my home area to another partition, then reformating the root, boot and swap partitions, and reinstalling (then moving the home area back), but so far, it has worked out great. Even the stuff I compiled under 6.3 still works (AFAIK - but I am going to recompile it in the end).
No - Linux definitely doesn't hold your hand for that kind of an update.
One thing I wonder though, and I hope to be able to try it someday soon - if I can gather the hardware together. I wonder how a "virgin" install of SuSE 7.2 would go - the update went smooth, with the installer and everything being very, very slick - better than what I remember from the Win95 or 98 installer. I just wonder how easy it would be with a fresh machine. It looks like it would be super simple, from what I can gather...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Just wait until you have to recompile your kernel, not once, but twice! This happened to me some time ago - I first recompiled it because my ZIP drive wasn't working properly (had to migrate from 2.2.13 to 2.2.14) - after I did that, my sound card died (because the OSS driver was for the old kernel). So, I had to go through the process again to set up ALSA (as a loadable module). Recently I had to do it again for my joystick.
/boot, but I had been running the vmlinuz in /, not /boot (probably due to the instructions I had used to make the patch previously) - so I moved it, but forgot to run lilo - blammo! - once I got over that, I just left it in /boot, cleaned up /, and reset lilo.conf to look at the right spot, ran lilo (important!!!) and went from there.
The first time I did it - I forgot to run LILO (very important) - system refused to go past the load stage - break out a boot disk, go to root - vi lilo.conf, run lilo this time, reboot - everything fine.
This happened to me again recently (not scary this time - immediately recognized my mistake) - I upgraded my system from SuSE 6.3 to SuSE 7.2 - and when I rebooted, while I had KDE2 (well, I had to create a symlink because X kept choking on loading the accelerated X driver), I was still running the old kernel. Seems that SuSE 7.2 put it in
Then, of course, I found I was only running the old X - and not X 4.0 as I thought - finding out that the base upgrade only installed portions of X4 - so I had to add that, and run the config to move to X4 (can't remember the name) - then YAST2 wasn't setup, and I needed to get the drivers for 3D acceleration - ARGHHHHHHH!
Let's just say it has been an interesting few days (and I am still fighting to get the Samba server set up - will probably have to recompile the kernel to get my joystick set up - it "went away" after I did the update, so since the kernel was the only big thing that changed, it must be the issue - I think. I am also unsure whether Java, Perl, or my other custom compiled apps all work properly - fun, fun, fun!) - but I sure do like the new KDE2...
BTW - damn - that NVidia driver for 3D acceleration is much faster than what I had before - I don't like the splash screen every time I log off/log on to the system through KDM (anyone know if there is a way to turn this off - or know of a recompiled version of the driver - it comes with source, I am thinking about stripping that code out and recompiling?)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Hmmm - seems like there may be OpenAL support though? I know very little about all of this. I suppose that if it doesn't, you could just use ALSA directly for the audio backend, and SDL for everything else...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Unfortunately, no - but I imagine you already knew that - but doesn't ALSA emulate OSS - so that calls to OSS would go through ALSA anyhow? Not as good as the real thing, admittedly...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Actually, it is rapidly becoming "Just use SDL" - from the FAQ:
Q: Does SDL support 3D acceleration?
A: Yes, as of version 1.1.0, SDL has full support for the OpenGL API.
Given that it also has support for joysticks, sound, video playback, CD playback, and a host of other things - there isn't much reason to use anything else. Plus, there are a ton of libraries and such that use SDL as the underlying base, allowing you that much more freedom and flexibility...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
One of my next projects is going to involve SDL and possibly OpenGL - and never having touched either, I went to the SDL site first. Great info! I had one of the demo programs (load a bmp) up and going in a few minutes. Once I get my SuSE box back in shape (updated it last night to 7.2 from 6.3, and I am having some issues that need ironing out - like, oh, 3D Acceleration) - I plan to try modding that demo (my C is rustier than a 50 year old nail), and going from there.
I saw the NeHe tutorials - those have to be the BEST 3D tutorials I have EVER laid eyes on - covers everything - I dare say you could damn near create a damn good 3D game using that site.
There are a ton of places to find code for gaming - you outlined the best of them - hats off to you!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
The reasoning behind needing polling booths is a simple one:
It blocks vote/voter coercion!!!
That is, by having booths in a central, guarded, public area - such that one, and only one, person may enter the booth - no one can put a gun to your head (literally or figuratively) and tell you how to vote, to further their (or the group they represent) agenda.
This is the current problem with absentee ballots - there is no real way of knowing that the vote on an absentee ballot wasn't coerced in some manner. Currently, we have a low percentage of absentee ballots, so we just shrug our shoulders and move on. However, with internet voting from the home or elsewhere, we would have, in effect, a HUGE percentage of "absentee ballots" that could be coerced ("Want your check/job this week, Johnson? Go into that room and vote - ahem - properly...").
It isn't about security, it is about voter coercion.
However, I do believe that the kiosks should contain computers running voting software - such software could show the candidate, a synopsis of what they are about (maybe with links to outside info - allowing the user to come up to speed on the candidate), and other info - with a set of buttons on the side (like an ATM) that say "Vote", "Next Candidate", "Previous Candidate" - maybe some arrow keys. Have synthesized audio with headphones (or make the booth soundproof) to aid the blind (along with braille on the buttons).
Such software would need to be simple and robust, so as not to crash - don't use touch screens, because they aren't as intuitive, and are useless (or near useless, I would suppose) to the blind. The software could report the votes back to a tabulating center for final count, etc via the internet - using a highly secure encrypted system - or maybe they should just all go back to the center over a leased line system, or maybe back to an armoured truck that uplinks the data via satellite.
Finally, allow a week or so for voting - so everyone can vote, and have the voting booth hours be flexible - heck, make the voting booths mobile or something, like they have mobile ATMS, etc.
All of this could be done today, and relatively cheaply. It isn't that hard...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Should be k and not K (I only wish)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I was pulling down a Flash animation at over 100K off my @Home connection - of course, where I live (northern outskirts of Phoenix, AZ) I can't get DSL, but then again, no one in my "neighborhood" has a computer besides me, so no one else is ever on, it seems.
Generally, I get well over 70K most days...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Make that with a capital "E"!
Cheap galvs are going set you back at least $100.00 per channel (last time I checked) - and those aren't high speed, either (lotsa bucks for those). Pro laser show equipment is pricey - but it doesn't have to be this way for your next party.
In an old back issue of Scientific American (in the late 70's-early 80's, I believe) there was an Amatuer Scientist article on building your own laser show cheaply - where the "galvs" were right angle/ortho mounted speakers with mirrors glued to the cone - the trick is using two mirror/speaker combos, each acting on the X or Y axis. The laser bounces between them, and the speakers control the deflection in the X and Y axis - tone generators control the speakers.
The article also showed how to use two motors, each with a mirror glued to the shaft at an angle - using this arrangement, bouncing the laser between the mirrors, you can create lissajous patterns (fun to watch - I actually put an entry into the AOL CD contest that did this, but used the CDs as the mirrors). Add a motor spinning a "shutter" wheel (prior to the laser hitting the first mirror) for other effects. All the motors are controlled with rheostats.
Other possibilities:
Cut away the speaker cone to reduce its mass to get higher speed. It might also be possible to extend the shaft of a regular analogue voltmeter and superglue a small mirror onto it (might have to beef up the spring a bit). Use a solenoid to activate a shutter "digitally" (pro rigs use some kind of electro-optical shutter that works similarly to an LCD). I have given thought to using headphone style speakers, or gluing the mirror to a piezo speaker for higher speeds - haven't followed through on it yet, though.
Use a PC (and accompaning sound card) to control the speaker "galvs" - the parallel port could control a solenoid shutter. Multiple shutters could be controlled serially. Mirrors could be mounted on servos for simple "sweep" effects.
Buy the small mirrors at a craft store - they make them pretty small and lightweight. Another possibility for even lighterweight mirrors is to use a small piece of highly polished blank semiconductor wafer.
Pen lasers (ie, LED lasers) can be used for small informal gatherings, but if you want to do a better, larger show, get an HeNe tube laser - output and brightness tends to be higher. Unfortunately you won't be able to get other colors without spending a lot of bucks (I think there is a blue or green laser pen out there, but it is expensive - other colored lasers are of the gas variety, and tend to be expensive). But other light effects could be used instead (maybe focused high-brightness LEDs?)...
Have phun!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I have thought about this as well - but if you are in Mesa, the chance that me and you could get together and connect is pretty well nil. I live up around the 101 and Cave Creek Rd - so, there is Squaw Peak as well as possibly the South Mountain range in the way (depending on where you are at, possibly) - "A" mountain might also be in the way, though unlikely - basically, SP and Camelback mountains would be the big hurdles, unless we could find someone out in Scottsdale (to the west of me, about half a mile - litterally in my back-yard - is a mountain, so nothing to the west)...
But yeah, here is someone else who has thought about setting up a 2.4 GHz or laser link of some sort in Arizona - mainly the Phoenix area - surely there are others?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
It also seems like they are using this with whatever is their latest ASCII cluster (Red? White?) to display data off it (I just noticed one of the projects name had ASCII in it - so I am making an assumption here - probably a wrong one).
What I still tend to wonder is - why do those damn projectors still cost so much? I mean, sure - prices have come way down, with higher resolution - but why don't they offer "low-res" consumer models - ie, a 640x480 projector for $500-800? The panels should be dirt cheap to make - and I would bet there is a market for higher-res TV projection systems (people still buy normal - ie, non-HDTV - rear-projection systems), right?
It just irritates me that one can't go out and get a new projection system cheaply (actually, I have yet to even see the high-end projectors being sold at a place like Best Buy or Fry's).
I recently set up a cheesy Fujix P401 video projector, coupled to an Avermedia VGA->TV converter. Good enough to watch VCDs, anyways - and it was inexpensive ($250)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Doh!
So much for previewing my post...
:)
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I went to the Phoenix show (1996?), and recently (October 2001) helped Mark Pauline and David Therrien set up for a demo here in Phoenix (at X.E.R.O/ChemLab) to show off one of the pulsejets that was to be used on their new hovercraft (which was supposed to make an appearance at the Ultraviolence show in Phoenix - but it got cancelled thanks to a lovely interaction between the SF Fire Marshal and the Phoenix Fire Marshal - thanks a lot, guys! Bastards!), and also a video showing of various prior shows.
The demo went off without a hitch - though every time I saw the pulsejet running - glowing white hot and screaming like a banshee on speed, being manipulated by Mark and company using asbetos gloves, next to the 50 gallon tank of propane that powered it - I wondered if we weren't all going to end up crispy critters.
If you haven't seen an SRL show - you don't have any idea what you are missing - picture being in the middle of a war zone, along with a crash-up derby, and a lot of fire, heat, and smoke - plus a ton of noise that manages to rattle every tooth and bone in your body, while deafening you despite wearing ear protection, incidentally making your ears ring for hours after the show - and you might have some idea about what happens during one.
I put in that time to help on the show - all volunteer, mind you - hoping to help out later for the real show - and then it doesn't happen! Gah!
Anyhow - yeah - SRL makes Battlebots look weak, weak, weak - of course, SRL does beaucoup planning to keep accidents, etc from happening - while Battlebots is more "anachistic" in that fashion, in a way. I tend to think of Battlebots as a tamed down SRL real battle (whereas the destruction of SRL's machines, while real - doesn't tend to utterly destroy them, as sometimes happens with Battlebots), and a different form of entertainment (plus, without all the smoke, flames, heat, and falling ash - it is easier to see what is happening)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Actually, the limiting factor on the VB cube is the fact that I was only using the GDI SDK calls for everything - the bottleneck is basically the low-level 2D Win32 SDK GDI interface. I am certain that it is more than possible to do great stuff in VB if one goes the DirectX route - DirectX and the video card then would be doing all the heavy lifting.
But hey, that is the way it should be - why should someone have to learn arcane graphics secrets to create a game - they should be able to concentrate on the design and gameplay of the game, and not the underlying low-level stuff. Considering that hardly anyone does low-level graphics engines anymore (what I mean by this is creating engines translating x/y/z coordinates in proper 2D screen coords and doing lighting, etc) - most concentrate on the higher level stuff. That doesn't mean one shouldn't learn the low-level stuff - it is useful knowledge. Just don't expect to use it a lot (though there are a lot of instances of it being useful, just to understand what DirectX or OpenGL are doing, for example).
You are right about 486's and C - I remember several good cube demos done on such equipment. And most certainly, things are going on in the background of that VB program - at minimum, it has to keep checking for messages from the OS, just for the event driven stuff.
So, I am not saying VB is the be-all/end-all of things. But it can be damn good at some things (and actually, if you drop the texture mapping, and rely on straight GDI drawing primitives - line, filled poly, etc - you can get mongo speed - I know of one dude, Jerry Chen, who created an awesome 3D library called Dex3D - I may have a link off the site - ultra-high speed with that). It really excells in the RAD area for business apps - which is something Linux needs.
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
In other words, you are not going to write something that is CPU intensive in VB like Quake or mr. mega encryption program.
.o files lingering around. You can almost watch the compilation process happenning, if you point Explorer to the directory as you compile.
Actually, it is possible - to a certain extent.
Both VB 5 and VB 6 are different from previous version of VB - the VB code is first translated into C++ code, then compiled and linked using the regular Visual C compilation tools. In fact, sometimes if you look into a larger project directory in VB - where the EXE is generated - you may find
Unfortunately, it appears that the conversion to C++ is done in memory, and not to disk - so there is no way (at least that I know of currently) to get to the C++ code to tweak it further, prior to sending it on the the linker and compiler.
As far as speed is concerned - it is possible to get it - to an extent. My own personal example is a perspective correct texture mapping spinning cube engine - please don't email me about it - I don't support it anymore (nor do I use VB anymore at home - work is a different story, unfortunately - but I am doing more Java work here now anyway). But it does show what is possible.
Also, at one time (heck, it may be included in the ZIP) I had a custom scanline renderer (ie, the inner loop of the texture mapping routine) done as a C DLL that I called from the VB program, that dramatically speeded everything up - it was my intent to make the whole triangle texture rasterizer a C DLL, but I never got around to it.
So - it is possible to do fast things in VB - since the time I wrote that app - many other people have done even better things - many involving DirectX or custom routines. I have seen some amazing stuff - too bad it is M$ - I have since long ago moved on to Linux...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
...through the GRAPEvine?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I ask this because if it is only the need for a browser that is keeping you on Windows (and I am not naive enough to think this is the only reason, I am sure there are others, but hear me out), then go ahead and switch now.
Pick a good distro (I personally use SuSE - currently on 6.3, but moving to 7.2 soon - Mandrake seems cool - but I haven't tried it) - or, choose a BSD or something. Install it, then set up Netscape 4.72.
This is anecdotal - but I have used 4.72 for a long while, and while it does have its faults - ie, it will crash, forcing you to do a "kill" to stop it - plus the annoying address book bug - it works pretty well. Mozilla is almost there - jump ship from Windows now, if you are that "tempted" - get familiar right now with everything. Once Mozilla is there (and I have to admit, it is so damn close - I am tempted to give it a shot as it is now), go for it.
Whatever else is holding you back, there are alternatives and replacements. Good luck!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Check out the three and four "legged" robot section:
Biomemetic Walking Machines
The three legged robot uses simple solenoids to achieve directional and rotational control (talk about a cheap actuator), while the four legged "bug" uses a simple mechanical system and open loop design (ie, you could build one of these devices from Lego with zero sensors, and it would work) - makes me want to break out the Mindstorms set...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
No!
This has to be the one IJ adventure that was most like old-Hollywood serials from the 30's and 40's - it even had the "look" (albeit in color) and the "campiness" reminiscent of that time.
Of course, I also liked "The Mummy" (haven't seen "Returns" yet)...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Seeing as your "script" is not likely from a typical game, what you might see is:
>Look
You are in the living room of the house. To the east is a closed, locked door. Next to the door is a painting. To the north is a hallway leading to the kitchen. A mouse runs across the floor by your foot.
>Look floor
You watch the mouse. He scurries away into a hole in the baseboard next to the locked door.
>Look hole
You put your finger into the hole, and are bit by the mouse - OUCH!
At this point, one would realize "Maybe I can find some cheese" to lure the mouse out. Once you have baited the mouse (or, maybe you need the cheese, and a trap - which might be located in the shed outside! Hehe) from the hole, you can then reach in, feel for a key (or a button, or switch, or lever) to open the door (which of course leads to the basement).
A perfectly logical chain of events - one that might leave some scratching their heads (or banging them on the wall - you might even have the mouse run up a clock just for the hell of it!), but is perfectly obvious given some thought!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Yes - many. My favorites being from Infocom and Scott Adams.
Infocom especially - I love the Zork series.
A well designed adventure is not only entertaining, but thorougly logical. If you got to such a point in an adventure, as you describe, then:
a) You missed the key somewhere, or maybe there is a different way to open the door (a lever in the basement, perhaps?) or,
b) (rarely happens) Something is wrong with the code, allowing you to get to a point without the key or whatever, and no way of going back.
I have played text adventures enough to know that when the answer appears, it is like "Duh!" - and a revelation occurs - causing me to descend deeper into the game. All adventure games should be mapped as they are explored (nothing beats making a map with pencil and paper, notes jotted down only to be smeared, etc) - sometimes you can study the map, and figure out where something may be, and why - and usually - it is there!
I enjoy adventure games because they give me situations to think in - they are more on the level of chess than other games. I think other games could come to this level, and some have, but they are rare - and for some reason, tend to bomb on the shelves...
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
New and exciting games...
Ok, maybe what I have to say won't be new - but why isn't it exciting?
Have you noticed how many people read? I mean, bookstores aren't going down the tubes, most all of us read, many other individuals read - just the other day I went with my SO to a book signing for one of her favorite authors (Janet Evanovich) - it was a standing room only crowd - over 450 people showed up. This is a typical showing at her book signings, from what I understand.
I am sure for other "celebrity" authors, it is the same way - in short, a ton of people read.
So why is it text adventures are looked upon as "stale" gaming experiences?
I know all about the z-engine games that are made by adventure game designers and such - the contests, etc - that have a following. What I wonder is why there is not a clammoring from people worldwide to play these style games?
Is it too much to ask for to type commands - or to read? Have game players become too enamored with glitzy graphics? Is it too much to ask for them to actually think, and not just point and shoot?
Don't get me wrong - I like 3D games and shooters as much as anyone - in fact, there is a lot of promise in making very interactive and immersive style games with this format...
I just wonder why we don't see text adventure game authors (and I mean this in it's utmost sense - the authorship being paramount - the game should read like a book, like many of Infocom's games did) today?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Get some low mass mirrors - go down to a craft store (like Craftmart), and purchase some small (1/2 inch) square or round mirrors.
Use epoxy or superglue, and glue them onto small speakers (buy some at rat shack, or pull some out of old radios). You will need two speaker/mirror combos.
Now, the hard part: arrange the speakers at orthogonal 45 degree angles, such that one speaker deflects the beam horizontally, and the second speaker deflects that beam vertically (note, you may need a bigger mirror on the second speaker, to make up for deflection).
A third speaker could be rigged to act as a "shutter" deflector, that would deflect the final beam into a "black box", or cut it off somehow.
Hook these speakers up to the stereo channels of your sound card, and have fun!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
I read one of the comments about this being used for possible catching cheaters, by comparing faces to a database of known cheats...
One thing I have always wondered about, is the notion (reality?) of "card counters" - I mean, what exactly are they, and why are they bad?
From what I understand (and I am not a gambler - and I don't really like cards, outside of the mechanics of the games, etc - so I may be wrong) - is that a "card counter" is exactly that - someone who can keep track of, in their heads, of what cards may be "where" (ie, in what players) - and what the dealer may have left - through knowing what they have, as well as how many hands they have lost or won - etc. The idea of "shuffling" is to introduce some form of randomness to help alleviate (or eliminate) the ability to count cards...
If this is true (ie, if my "definition" of a card counter is correct), then I can see how it would skew the odds in their favor, and away from other players and the house. What I can't understand is why this is illegal - ie, why is it illegal to have the skill to remember cards and positions, etc - in order to make the odds more favorable - making such an ability illegal punishes those who have the brain "capacity" or "ability", and rewards (or at least protects) those with "lesser" (or nonexistant) skills in the area.
I can understand the bans against using computers to do the counting for you - what I wonder about is what happens when the time comes (if it comes), that humans are able to get "brain augmentation" devices - would these "trans-humans" be unable to gamble in casinos at that point? In other words, would they be banned? Probably...
Finally, if the cards can be actually counted, and the probability of the hands can be skewed or somewhat accurately determined by a machine or by a human card counter - are the games then not truely random? If that is so - then are the casinos really just protecting the possible fact that they may be found out as a fraudulant "business"?
Comments?
Worldcom - Generation Duh!