avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • January 18, 2018, 11:54 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - TaoPhoenix [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173next
Living Room / Re: Any native english speakers?
« on: December 25, 2017, 09:50 AM »
Generally speaking one will not necessarily be able to establish a significant statistical trend from just 2 (or 3) successive annual data-points. A significant trend usually only emerges over longer time-series data. Thus, to be correct, there are no "trends" in the data given in the example.

In some of the business reading that's crossed my eyes in the midst of a wide project, I am confused here.
I "almost" agree that no *two* points make a "trend", but doesn't *three*!?

Linguistically, to me, it becomes questions like "sustainable trend vs short lived trend", because businesses "do business" in Year 1, click along, close the books. In Year 2, they "do more business", close the books, and someone does the subtraction and goes "uhh... Boss? What happened here?"

It's at least fundamental to American Accounting, that assuming no foul play, Management Reports "what happened" and it could be "anything".

But the *third year* comes along and when the books close, Management has to decide (and here's a cool linguistic trick):
Level 1. "Okay, what's going on."
Level 2 "Wait, what IS going on!?"
Level 3 "What is going ON?!!"

And it's legendary in business theory they either perform *briliantly* in year 4-5 (sometimes it takes a year of just ops to come in), or they MISSED a fundamental and can *crash*. (With varying years of market inertia etc. Sorta like the iPhone 3GS showed up, and I did that one right, it was EXACTLY the model to avoid early phaseout, but had *just* enough firepower to be a "supported model" and mine lasted me about *six* years!"

So then it takes a while for the Blackberry to grind out its endgame, but there it went.

So not counting a "tread-water" year in year 4, a business had really better have a GRAND "Stage 3GS" plan or they croak.

N.A.N.Y. 2018 / Re: NANY 2018 Pledge: Ready Bible Study
« on: December 25, 2017, 08:19 AM »
It has three Bible translations:

1) King James 1769
2) American King James 1999 (just a simple replacement of some 'archaic' words, mainly Thee, Thou, etc.)
3) Lexham English Bible 2012 (from Logos Bible software - more info)

There are several other free to use translations that I could make available.


What do you/Lexham have for the word "meek" in the "meek shall inherit the earth..."?
This is only a fast note to get this post on the board, but I have been listening to Jordan Peterson for a week (stay with his psychology and some religion, and away from the poitical gadfly stuff!)

He remarked in a clip (now buried in my notes) that instead of "meek" as near "timid", one translation of the phrase comes out "those who have weapons and know how to use them, but then vow to keep them sheathed if at all possible" ... shall inherit the earth!

Quite a new direction to think about!

@panzer: Thanks.
I stopped reading when  my eyeballs hit the word "thrilled".
Sheesh. That's worse than "excited".
... Give us a break.

Not counting back end IT matters, I have daydreamed for *decades* about Click of a Button automatic "tone versioning" of stuff, so the ClickBait can do its thing for Reasons, but then people like you hit a button and beyond my fast hack of a top-30-word swap above, the *whole article* shifts into something more balanced and reasoned!

@panzer: Thanks.
I stopped reading when  my eyeballs hit the word "thrilled".
Sheesh. That's worse than "excited".
... Give us a break.

Hi Iain!

It's been awhile since I was a force on the boards! I should probably fix some of that in 2018!
Would "pleased" do for you?

Then maybe yoiu can use one of those little browser thingies that just does a word swap for say the 30 most egregious emotionally over-laden words!

I'm reading a ton this year, and a fair deal goes back to management books "rebooting" from about 1985 on up, (Tom Peters "A Passion for Excellence" is a real milestone! Then the next important wave is from about 1992). I'm amused by the phrase "Today's world" ... which is now about 18-25 years ago!

(Interesting which books go after "Today's" vs "Tomorrow's". )

You're a real Meat and Potatoes kind of guy, so I'll add this remark. That time period (up to about 1996) is fascinating, because it was right before the craze of the over-hyped stuff you despise so much. Yes, change is happening, it's swift, it's sometimes colossal and exhausting, but the books had a nice tone of "what do we do to get through this year?".

Living Room / Accents
« on: November 24, 2017, 02:00 AM »
I saw a Tom Scott video recently about the British R, and I think both Kingscrusher and Simon Williams do it, and I do have to say it does bother me 5%.

It's actually kinda rare that chess vid makers post the moves - I spotted it and was impressed!

And also interesting "too advanced" (last time), so these are important things to think about because I think I have a tendency to be slightly disparaging of earlier stages of learning even though my skillset is sharp in some areas and falls off a cliff after that!

Developer's Corner / Re: Your First Programming Language vs Now
« on: November 24, 2017, 01:55 AM »

Commodore 128 Basic 7.0.

Then I retired.  : (

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 22, 2017, 03:30 AM »

ps after a few days thought tomos, sorry that I need to do better to just "suggest" stuff more lightly!

Over to you!

Living Room / Re: What books are you reading?
« on: November 19, 2017, 10:06 PM »
Yum books!
Bumping this, so I might see it better and post to it soon!
I've been reading like a fiend this year...

Living Room / Re: When is a raven like a writing desk?
« on: November 19, 2017, 10:05 PM »

One interesting thing here is I am reminded of a gripe I used to have about the Loebner AI tests - when I last looked at that stuff about 5 years ago, the testers often set about "hard abusing" the "black box replier" with semi-bogus questions "knowing they were in a Loebner test".

I got grumpy because it seemed few / none of the entrants had put in "anti-troll" code to deal with stuff like that. To me, anti-troll code should be fairly easy to write, because the bogus questions are often bogus, so "truncate low" with a defensive sweep like "scan nouns and compare class - why is a cake and the Queen in the same sentence?"

Same idea here - unlike those animorph pics as joke memes, to the human eye this is "clearly a turtle" so maybe use 3 scan algs and they should all "converge on the answer and if not, kick it to a decider module".

Maze Images.png:
I don't get it. Is it not just some QR Code?

I felt bad about my last response. I didn't want to explain the joke for fear of ruining it, but in hindsight, I suppose the joke can't be appreciated if it can't be found. So I updated my original post so that now the QR Code is a link which should be more helpful in explaining why I found it amusing to stumble across a QR code image named "Maze Images" seemingly randomly.

Shaka, when the walls fell!

Anyone want a career as a serial killer's victim? It pays well and is a long-term job if you have the talent for it. You get your first month's pay beforehand.

Oh I know this one!
With intense training beforehand, you can survive one of Saw's traps! (Sometimes).

General Software Discussion / Re: New faster Firefox browser released
« on: November 19, 2017, 09:26 PM »
v57 feels less of a resource hog, this is the first time I have been able to say this about Firefox. But I have only used it briefly, will see if it lasts.

The big use case that rips apart both Pale Moon and Sub-56 copies of FireFox for me is the hour long music mixes. I'm starting to get clusters of good recommendations, and these begin to chew up memory.

Brief glance, the new one looks multi-process, much like Vivaldi (also something I'm testing!). So I haven't pushed FireFox 57 to the hilt because it hasn't played nice with Dexpot virtualizer for some time now, and the v57 added a new bug.  :/

I'll try to remember to report in when I take a weekend and just do my thing but purposely load it all into FF.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 05:50 PM »
So looping back, about Agadmator, because he is a "lower level" presenter, *presenting three months ago in August 2017*, we have a dead even split.

He "didn't do his homework" on the "Secret Fischer games" video, so you have to turn your implicit learning *off* for that video (maybe mute?) because of my initial remarks about it very nearly proved that it was something to do with someone using a computer.

I glanced again at the Sultan Khan game, that video is much more balanced, but also because he is a weaker presenter, he burns through one of the most important parts of the game without any advice what is "going on".

Now back to accents! I am a New England American (with a few odd adjustments to my own accent from certain movies!), so I liked John Bartholomew's accent. However, if you found that "foreign", let's turn the tables!

Kingscrusher is also a "low master" (roughly same 'strength' as Jerry from Chess Network), pacing is a shade slower than agadmator's but you might need it for this game!

Same game, but compare how Kingscrusher *signals* he has done a few important things right. (Also, let me know about the accent! Kingscrusher is from somewhere in the UK, I think agadmator is eastern european.)

(Tip - 'copy video link at current time' is AMAZING for videos!)

1. At about 5:25 mark, Kingscrusher is good *because he knows he is only a low master* so he *doesn't guess* and "according to Rybka' means he DID take the trouble to computer check vs a common student question!!

2. The correct phrasing on that crucial part with the queen and rooks - Sultan K got a small advantage because Capa had doubled rooks and had to *give them up for the Queen*. Beginners do indeed do WAY better with the Queen side of that trade, but Kingscrusher knows this is *Capablanca* on the Black side and that fella was a BEAST! This is certainly a bad day for Capa, and he MUST have been unhappy to do that! So the phrase is "Black had to give up the doubled rooks" not "Won the Queen". Then this is just an "imbalance". Queen vs Two Rooks is one of the famous ones, and you can spend a week poking around when one side or the other has *other things* that swing it back and forth.

3. About the 6:45 mark, "We had a recent game with Michael Adams..." - Kingscrusher has *done his homework* and shown how "one of the famous classics" has themes that apply today! It's "entertaining" to look at these old games, but then to have the presenter actively point out exactly where you can do further study is HUGE.

4. 7:50 Again he computer checks it, this time remarking how using technology from some 80 years later, computers would take a different approach but "sometimes there are several ways to win and which one you pick" is also a grand topic.

5. Tip! Always click "more" in a Youtube video! It's the first thing you do because that's where people who do their homework stand out! Kingscrusher posted the moves to the game, so you can do whatever you want with them! Looks like it's a bit harder to nail down that exact Michael Adams game, but now you know where to look, it has to be "fairly easy to find" if you really wanted to hunt for it.

So come to think of it, merely because I had my own picks, I had some slight trouble with his accent, but I might glance more at K-C's channel now!


Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 04:57 PM »
"Jerry from Chess Network" is still "only" a "national master" aka rating about 2300. That's a whole order higher than a 2000 player - the ratings are *exponential*, not "linear*!
I didnt know that, makes a big difference.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

that was really good -- very enjoyable :up:

I reckon we have different interests here, in this thread, in our approach to videos -- that one from Bartholemew overlapped for me:
you (I think) are looking for instructional videos, I'm looking for entertainment. That, to me, was both. Advanced, pleasing, a good 'explainer', so a good teacher.

Going back to the YT channels you criticise -- I'll only mention agadmator here, because I hardly look at the other any more. He loves chess, he steeps himself in chess, new and old. He tells a good story, he explains well (I think) what's happening. Also looks at historic games, which as you say, (summarizing from memory), would be weak today. But so what! I could compare it to snooker: I love watching a good game of snooker. You go back to the 80's, the pockets were bigger, the standard of play a lot lower than today -- there's still classic games and matches from that time that are well worth watching imo.

You repeat the thing about them getting their info elsewhere: I've already said before it makes no difference to me where they get their info from, (and note btw that agadmator very often does check the moves via engine). If I'm starting to sound a bit defensive here, I think that partly goes back to the above (different interests / approaches). I watch to be entertained. Not to learn. (But I have learned a lot along the way -- which wouldnt be difficult given my standard :D). But also goes to you admitting you haven't watched much (or any?) of his channel, and still being critical. Note that I *completely* get the point that someone at that level would not be good enough to comment off the cuff about a game. So not as live commentators. But as someone who tells a story, and explains a game -- certainly, for my level (zero or so :p) at any rate. For your level, it's natural you would have different interests, and standards.

Not sure what you meant by the accent thing (are they 'cool' or something?)
Oddly, for me, Bartholomew's accent is a lot more foreign, because I have so little exposure to American accents (in media or IRL). But the accent, and moreso the voice, are important -- to me anyways -- if I'm going to be listening to someone, I'll want it to be pleasant (for want of a better word), or at least not grating.

Hope you understand my slant a bit better now!

Hi Tom,

After a few days delay, we have some more discussion!

I was working my way exploring your interests here! Some of it is our unique processing styles, but like they say in a lot of science fields, "we're going to converge soon" on things that make us happy!

I'll leave your note up above for reference, then start including some of your lines in text quotes for simplicity.

Here's some more comments!

"you (I think) are looking for instructional videos, I'm looking for entertainment. That, to me, was both. Advanced, pleasing, a good 'explainer', so a good teacher."

At the heart of all this is there is no limit to what you can like on the net! But with the theme I am exploring, "if you use a semi scientific method, you can pick the NEXT thing you might like much faster!" So American accent aside, (I might leave that off this post), I made a good guess with John B. Pacing, 'good explainer', entertaining (but in a "professional way"), etc.

Next fragment is that you didn't know as much about the strength of presenters, *or the 'intended audience' * combined with how old the material is. Some of this is because my themes begin to cover if you ever poke at chess literature. Of course videos are new, so "by artifact" the mood-of-the-time doesn't kick in. The first famous wave of books at "chess entertainment for the tomos 's of the day" were Fred Reinfeld and Irving Chernev. A word that floated around was "celebrated" (also comment on the times, when a game "got passed around" for 100 years! Now people laugh at you for things as little as 10 years 'behind the times'!)

But the MAJOR new theme is what I'll call "implicit learning". It has to do with of course there are new moves every year, but how ROUGHLY applicable is something to your chess? For a case study, let's kick it Old Skool With Adolf Anderssen and Party like it's 1851!


It's called the "Immortal Game". "I know, it's 1851, see the graphic, they didn't know how to play chess then, but it's very entertaining". So you have to turn your "implicit learning" OFF for that game! BUT if you have only a "weak presenter" who ONLY says "whee, look he sacrifices everything, YAY!" (2018 version of some of those 1957 books!), then you get hopelessly lost!

BUT ...

SAME guy - Adolf Anderssen - who was "World Champion" before they put the name to it ... ONE YEAR LATER ... unloaded THIS one: Aka "The Evergreen Game".


This is a PERFECT game to "know your classics" because it STILL looks EXACTLY like a cutting edge online game from today! And the moves make "sense" - It's a great demo of what gambits "do", and Black tried hard to deal with it. Black is a "low master of the day". The pawn push on d3 is what you might try to at least leave White with a few wrinkles to deal with, vs a famous type of "patzer game" of the era, where Black "just takes everything because yay pawns!!"

And because this game has ALSO been kicking around, I'm pretty sure I remember when I read up on this game a decade or more ago, there are reasons on a lot of the moves around Black's 13th onward, because as a low master, Black would have been itching to castle, so this is what "implicit learning" is for - when a "good" (ish?) player *doesn't* make a move, "70%" of the time there is a legit reason for it. I think I recall at least one of the problems is Black's queen gets trapped in a bunch of "variations" or "lines" ((good vocab to know!!)), so by the time he got things sorta out of the fire, there were frying pans.

YES a brand NEW perspective ONLY available in the last 15 years is that computers can now check all the older literature and newer players who don't know enough of the computer science keep asking "but my computer says he was fine etc etc".

That's because there is a SEVERE problem with today's presentation of computer chess! But a few computers have the option "FORCE the computer to show 8 lines no matter HOW bad", and then my phrase is "falls off a cliff". So YES there was some random point when a 21st century computer figured out how not to get checkmated, but when you do that new setting, what gambits do is create games where there MIGHT be a way out and the attacker even could know this, BUT to varying degrees vs the skills of the defender, it falls off a cliff then add one more mistake and you are toast.

So this is a great game "at all levels of presenter" because you can leave your implicit learning on and take your chess notebook (if you don't have one, start one! Little snips, whole pages, it's part of the fun! "Note to self - look up later why Black couldn't castle in the Evergreen Anderssen Dufresne 1852 game for most of the moves past a certain point." )


So even if you have an "entertaining" presentation, you still get a lot of legit things out of the game. The first one simply has an endless string of moves that will take you an HOUR fighting your "osmosis" aka implicit learning!

Yay Chess!

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 02:34 AM »

So right about here, we get into "audience". And yes, "pace of delivery" is huge too, Some students need the slower pace. A modern famous grandmaster still "working in the modern internet times" with that delivery is Yasser Sierawan. I agree with you, I need a faster cadence to really "get into the zone to learn."

So Jerry still is a key notch below "the minimum standard" you really need to "go cold". Basically that mark is right near full International Master. For another post, there are technical details between that title and full Grandmaster. It has to do with getting a series of tournaments "the best of your life then you retire" and if you got stuck, there a whole swath of world class IM's who just lost too many games one at a time to get the full GM title, their brain just couldn't deliver the last 10%. more on them in a big post later.

THEN we get "presentation tone". So broadly, we start getting a few 2-dimensional graphs of things. So if both NM Jerry from Chess Network and Yasser Sierawan have a "slow delivery",they are also both still "classically professional" in tone. is interesting. If you check their Youtube channel, they ARE putting some legit money this year into various events. BUT you have to deal with Danny Resnch. He has a very slip-slide tone where it's a tough call he tries a bit too hard to be a full comedian and misses a lot. IF you like chess comedy, try it.

So for my next recommendation of a playing IM without a lot of excessive comedy but who is legit good enough to "be valid on the fly", but with a faster delivery, try John Bartholomew. And you said you liked attacking chess. That comes down to style. Current Championship and his recent contender are both "grinders" and I can't study them either. But there are tons of other "exciting" grandmasters out there. Lemme try one good link.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 19, 2017, 02:20 AM »
A quick rundown of "chess strength":
"About 2000" - the bare minimum a chess presenter needs, to even make sense with "legit advice". But watch out the whole "online ratings" thing for another day! For the moment, assume ratings in long games over live boards In Real Life.

These guys borrow HARD on existing notes made by full masters and computers - left to themselves, I am learning more and more "chess advice in 2018" is not "what 3rd rate teachers presented in 1992".  So if they just describe advice "blind" without AT LEAST checking it on a computer, in this day and age, it's a prescription for disaster. So I haven't checked agadmator's channel much, accents ARE a thing! But maybe he's good enough.

But you also have to look at "what they are presenting" - Sultan Khan really is nothing more than a "Fred Reinfeld story from 1955".

Next up, "Jerry from Chess Network" is still "only" a "national master" aka rating about 2300. That's a whole order higher than a 200 player - the ratings are *exponential*, not "linear*! So that IS right at the lowest levels to teach beginners. But he too has to rely on a lot of homework and computer checking and preferably other grandmaster notes. It IS a legit market niche to take the "compact" grandmaster notes and package them for students. But if he just said "stuff cold", he too would get laughed off the net.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: November 05, 2017, 09:12 PM »

There's some good chess streams coming up for November ...

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: October 29, 2017, 07:21 PM »
So, semi bumping this thread. was laughable about three years ago, then they managed to get some cash flowing, and have started hosting blitz championships with the elite grandmasters (GM) and really scored a coup when they got arguably the second best bullet super speed GM on the planet, Hikaru Nakamura, starting new stream games live with commentary and he SO knows what he's doing. (World Champion Magnus Carlsen is actually quite terrifying in his own right, but tends not to play online.)

It's a nice change of pace because what used to happen is talented enough grandmasters basically ground down with the brutal effort curve at that level, because somewhere on the run up if you're good enough to start edging past low master in talent, it stops being a fun hobby! 0.o

Put another way, anyone about two grades up above me can "snap" a good game against hobbyists, but then they start nudging up against the pros. So then they retire from actually playing, and join the ranks of instructors and lately, web commentators.

So it's nice to see the blitz championships with all the legit players, and Hikaru is just something to behold. The funniest of all is "people" are starting to create some cultural growth in the game - a quite talented GM from Canada named Eric Hansen collected a few more titled masters under the "brand" "Chessbrahs" and their streams are fun because they slide into low R rating for language, which chess desperately needs to stop being stodgy.

So then the epic grudge matches between Eric Hansen and Hikaru Nakamura "Naka" are next level commentary. On a few occasions the "visiting masters" (Hikaru plays a few other masters online in his shows) have even left the audio stream on and Hikaru explains how he's going to win ON THE FLY.

"Oh, yeah, he's trying to put his knight there, he began trying to set that up a couple moves ago, but it's not going to work because he forgot I have Knight h5, then Rook Takes Knight Takes Queen Check Queen takes Rook takes, takes takes, push, and then he can't stop my pawn. So I'm just waiting for him to resign while I run him out of time on the clock. So hello you guys in the chat...."


Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: October 13, 2017, 10:17 PM »

So what'cha got going tomos?

And do ya ever wanna visit the DC chat to talk chess!?

Living Room / Re: Interesting read: Apple is really bad at design
« on: October 08, 2017, 06:18 PM »
"Haven't read yet" type remark in passing.

So maybe some "notch" thingie" might not be so hot, but "Apple is bad at design" is a pretty big stretch!

Ignoring all the privacy type problems in that other policy thing they do, I think Apple nailed some 85ish out of 100 design decisions they have made across some eight products. Enough to pulverize entire businesses!

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: October 08, 2017, 07:26 AM »

I am thinking in chess.
Is a mental sport. So I will practice in my sport area.
That is simple. While deciding the next move I will excercise with the hands and feets in front of the tactile screen.

I will a photo to clarify this and make clear how before 30.10.2017 my weight will be less than 90 kilograms.

Who will gain the party ?


Well fidgeting with your hands isn't necessarily efficient exercise!

Many scientists agree you have more energy to play if you are in shape, but you have to concentrate first! Otherwise you make a bad move, lose the game, then get lots of exercise punching pillows!


Living Room / Re: Disabling autoplaying videos in Chrome goes viral
« on: October 08, 2017, 03:17 AM »

"Why do sites insist on annoying visitors" I think is a more economically dangerous question than just marketers are scum".

I think mouser's note above is a good starting point, and maybe relates to a quick article I just passed by a few days ago that "if a property doesn't pull in top dollars compared to b,c,d,y, and Q, pull it".

The Collective We has lamented the clash of quality vs "clickbait" and "cultured vs TV" so on with different lingoes for about 70 years now.

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: October 08, 2017, 03:10 AM »

"Much faster moving" - what do you mean by that?

Also, chess channels is a fascinating topic, and before I say a whole lot answering "the wrong question" I need some clarification what you like and don't like in a chess channel.

Your first clue:
How strong is the presenter?

"National Master" - this tend to be about the 2250-2375 level, certainly enough to hold the airspace, but it also depends heavily what they are showing. I'm about 3 grades below that, but when showing famous material drawn from existing games especially backed by already existing grandmaster annotations and this decade's twist of computer checking, you can "back your way" into a chess lecture.

So I don't know how "strong" (the word in the culture) agadmator is. But having the Fischer item presented straight up is a little unfortunate. However, there aren't too many of those.

Sultan Khan is a little more obscure - several decades older, and also dating from a time in chess culture where we now cover more ground in 5 weeks than they did in a year "back in the day".

I'll have more to remark on current channels soon when I hear back from you!

Living Room / Re: Chess?
« on: October 08, 2017, 03:01 AM »
Sorry Tomos,
Be careful about the "Secret Fischer" thing - it's one of the urban legends and other people's research say it's pretty likely it was a (now aging and vanished) computer of the time.

In a complex "roll-forward to roll-back" kind of time jump, modern cheat detection concepts show things like high matches between moves from a computer engine and that story. Also "it's not 1994 calling" either, so a famous trick is to intersperse other moves in between the computer ones.

Fischer was simply in a state of human collapse, and those kind of factors also sadly lead to this kind of thing being unlikely Fischer pulverizing a fresher modern top GM (grandmaster). He was one of the only "urban legends" the game had. Nearly every other top GM is "accounted for".

DC Gamer Club / Ludum Dare 2017 Thread
« on: October 03, 2017, 11:45 PM »
I've certainly been away from the boards for a while! And I'm in an off year for my Ludum Dare interests, instead focusing on chess all this year.

But here's a topic just to keep it all alive. This is a one-quarter energy post kicked off by acouple of comments and a Linus Torvalds style "ream men use the DC Gamer Board as a backup"!

Ludum Dare and themes:

It's a running inside joke, that because each "episode" of Ludum Dare game making competition has a loose theme, sometimes some "bad" themes show up... 75% of the time! So everyone whines for an hour about the bad theme then gets down to work.

but I think we had a pretty good one for April's entry of "Small World", especially for my gaming style.

I retired from serious gaming right about the advent of 3d and multi-player. But "small world" seems to have a narrow enough mood to it that my "snap" strategy forming style can sometimes lock on.

I haven't yet made a serious dent in the April set. And I think they just finished the August event and I have NO idea what that one even was!

But a fun entry from April is so relaxing, because it's on a queue-idle system, and no lose condition.

So you can just set up your dirigibles to move your supplies, and it's actually so soothing for me it has potential as a sort of meditation!

Maybe ion a medium short while I'll do a full posit on it with pics and things.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173next