20 May 2009

"Do, or do not..."

It finally reached 100 degrees Fahrenheit here. I might have to wear sun screen to avoid getting a tan. :/

Do you know why I write this? I don't know if I will exist, and I am afraid I will forget. In other words, the standard reasons for a blog . . . but also resonating in an interesting way with the financial terrorist's 'reflexivity' or fallibility principle. I do not trust myself.

But I do trust other people. Anyway I think I might be starting to get less sick. It isn't the influenza strain going around, but it does make my tummy hurt.

"Do not think dishonestly." This was one of the recommendations of a famous warrior. The problem is, there are so many lies that people tell themselves that it can be hard to predict whether you can live without any lies.
as long as she is trying to be happy...
This is equal to being happy. I don't really know what the generalization for this is. It's hard to say whether someone could use this; 'trying' in this context means exploring every single possible approach and doing the most extreme things to reach a goal, which is a scary thing. Having someone tell you what to do might mean you aren't trying hard enough. ((Or that they aren't...)) But I think it works.


You can't even tell anyone about this, because it means hurting them... but I can let someone I don't know find it here. /frowns but if that means that I can't tell anyone about this place, then it isn't true. Always keep your options open.

/waves to anyone I know


​

06 May 2009

The Son of Heaven,The Destroyer

A fire burning strongly, entrancing swirls and flickering brightness... captivating. But it may consume the path it travels on, existing only by continuing to find new places to go. In its wake it may leave ashes.

A culture is complicit in propagating attitudes like this. This culture in turn depends on what is possible, as there are always options in life and those who are not pleased with the options in one endeavor will find another. In a social game, options are dependent on the opinions and values of others. A short story . . .

There was once a country overrun with strife and conflict. This was thru the actions of an external source; but the country needed to cope with this and survive regardless of the cause. Strong social bonds and idealistic positions led to sectarian outrages, and all attempts to stop this could not succeed due to foolish actors on each side, due to extremist stances, criminal ignorance, or just being criminal. (terrorist.) A goon came to democratic power in the midst of political corruption, supported in his reign by other goons and thugs -- however, due to strong action as well as a resurgence from another sector, things became more peaceful . . .

Machiavelli did not consider his advice moral, but he did consider it effective. Under the idealistic position, this effectiveness does not excuse its lack of moral consistency. However, while actions and decisions may determine morality, the intent behind those decisions may be enough to change things... when there was no other way.

There is always the choice. Do YOU have it within yourself to become evil, when doing so would benefit persons other than you?


and don't be cr*p, and... another thing I don't remember, about a certain person, and... forgetting what it means to be happy




Defeating info sites, that may be run by companies with financial interests in exploiting edge of change
static directions, strategies, locations
static = predictable = defeated =
disappointment = boring

Adapting to overall player 'strategies'
item density in population affecting obtainability
How to determine, and adapt to locuses of tactics or information...?
Uncommon and current = good advice...

Locuses continued
Negating the value of 3rd-party sites by providing the same information by the game, and within the context of the story...
  • 'Legendaries' wielded by the correct individuals. stories & screenshot
  • changing text of dialogue in response to drastic loci jumps (compared to gradual loci drift at most times)

[BTW, clothing styles: graphical change for 'proficient' use of clothing in a style
        model changes when possible
        saturation or dampening/muddying of hues]


Dialogue change might be delayed. "We don't know, but there are rumors that..." participation of multiple characters, varying based on speaker, etc. Short-term memory of conversations and info given or not given. "I said I don't know!" Encourages knowledge sharing by players as well.

Respawn sensitive to players in area, encouraging grouping while maintaining difficulty afterwards

Possible to use 'community growth' concept for location of population concentrations?! Only works for social entities tho...
        same sense of dynamic story. Dialogue cues the location, etc.

Repeating myself: Uncommon and current = good advice

01 May 2009

Idle thoughts IV: "example"

Now that I've read (skimmed) [parts of] the articles for BitTorrent, DHT and a popular torrent implementation I can say a bit more.

Sorry as always for using 'you'. Browsing a torrent website for user-created contents, you find a file that you want to watch. There is a list of torrents or a link to a list of torrents which contain this file, with basic information such seeders, leechers, total downloads and date added. You click on one of these torrents which takes you to its download page.

Part of this page, maybe a tab, shows torrent history or which torrent collections it draws from, dates and authors and size and so on, maybe a quick summary of how many files it draws from each previous torrent and how many it adds that weren't in previous torrents. Might have a more detailed diff but that's not something everyone would care to see on the basic display especially for large torrents.

The other part of the page, other than author and date and so on, shows the files contained within the torrent. Every file that is tracked on this torrent site has its name on the site shown and a link to its page provided; it also includes the name of this file as listed in this particular torrent, as it may be different from the name on the website. It also lists the names, and maybe a hash or key for files which are not tracked on this site, as well as basic information such as their size and so on.


Due to tracker issues, it is not possible to individually track every single file in a torrent in all cases. This applies to DHT too, it seems like it would not be reasonable for every seed to publish hashes for thousands of different files, as DHT nodes have to store this information many times over for many different seeds. Even if uTorrent only shows up as 10MB memory usage in Windows, I'm sure (in the nontechnical sense) that it would be a significant burden to store DHT/tracker info for all files in a torrent, on some systems.

So the compromise in usual cases would be to track folders. Current torrent implementations haven't added a 'file layer' to their extensions because it seems an unnecessary burden on trackers and DHT nodes; not to mention the major benefits to reseeding can only be realized with integration with the file manager which there would seem to be no reason to do. But it's necessary for user-created contents, where the goal is not to mass download low-quality content in bulk such as in most torrent sites like The Pirate Bay; nor to download certain files the user is already aware of prior to looking them up, which all torrent implementations are currently capable of; nor to track a finite quantity of high-quality content, as with D-Addicts.

The goal for user-created contents is to encourage spreading, and keeping high-quality content, instead of feeling the need to collect more low-quality content so you can sort it out yourself to find what interests you. When there is no mechanism to keep and update high-quality collections of content, it encourages this 'race' mentality which not only affects the overall pattern of content sharing, it also affects attitudes towards the content itself which is especially important for socially-derived content like an MMO. (It also affects attitudes towards other types of shared files, which I won't mention. >_>)

I have no idea what any of that had to do with 'tracking folders is a compromise'. anyway!~ =p This would NOT be 'Mainline DHT', at least I don't think so; it would mean tracking keys or hashes that don't associate with specific names, and I don't know if that's how BitTorrent Mainline DHT works. Many things you can add onto a normal client as an extension, which will only work for interacting with other clients with the same functionality but will still be able to function normally in other cases.


Adding a torrent to a website: I've never created a torrent myself or read the FAQs on how to create one, but this is generally how it would work. Standardized hash boundaries and so on... this might get a little BitComet-ty in creating what look like bad torrents for other clients >_< Basically, if you were to create a torrent out of three files on your system, and someone else creates a torrent out of the same three files on their system, the hashes need to be the same. This means restricting whatever options are out there for hashing, at least if they are selected for inclusion in the semantic 'file layer' of this BitTorrent protocol extension.

So prior to adding a torrent to a website; creating a torrent. You have three files and a folder with 70 files that you want to put into a torrent.

File#1 is tracked individually, so it has standardized hash boundaries/piece size and its own, overall hash for inclusion in DHT. I don't know how this relates to Merkle Hash Tree torrents (future reading topic, maybe never...). It is a file that you created yourself and uploaded the standardized hash to the tracking website already, with a description of the file's content and credits.

File#2 is also tracked individually, but was uploaded to the website months ago and was created by you or someone else.

File#3 is a short descriptive file that you are not marking as tracked individually because it's too small to bother with DHT and not relevant to any other torrent collection. (This is the part I'm not sure about... it still needs to be included in any reseeding, so might it be best to compress it in the torrent file itself with regards to file management? Jigdo concept >_< Maybe it could have its own extension and the client could designate a single folder for these files so everything that downloads into the normal folder to be later moved, sorted and renamed as needed by the user would be 'content' like a movie that had its own place, instead of descriptive 'metadata' that just gets lost or deleted...? Sounds good.~ ) uhmm. So in other words, whether the torrents track a file is separate from whether the client, or 'torrent thumbnail' implementation-independent operating system standard, tracks the locations of files that are eligible for inclusion in torrent reseeding. Small files may still need to be tracked in the filesystem by the OS/client even if they are not included on trackers or DHT, including these unique-extension (or magic numbers) 'descriptive' files that go in their own folder.

The folder is selected to be tracked as a unit, which means it has its own DHT and tracker entry (for trackers which allow it) and can have its name changed, but the files inside of it cannot because there'd be no way to reference them in the torrent file (to map files on the seeder's filesystem to pieces that other peers request) if their names were changed. In contrast, files that are individually tracked in a torrent can be identified in the filesystem by their hash and size and other information stored in the torrent. This is appropriate for large numbers of files such as pictures, where the files are neither changed (as in the case with a program, as if anyone should be downloading executables with torrents....) nor renamed (because they're too numerous and there's no reason to do so since they're in their own folder with no namespace intersections). Folders could be combined and the files pooled, as long as there were no namespace intersections that would prevent a torrent from finding files by name. Note that trying to seed a torrent where this had taken place would only mean that certain pieces would not hash correctly so the seed would be just partially complete.


Finally you can upload to the website. This includes information about torrent history. You could start this process from an existing torrent, altho not without creating the torrent yourself to confirm that you can actually seed the torrent once you upload the torrent file; you could also start off fresh and search for known previous torrents to add to your torrent's declared history. After adding a description (POSSIBLY) it would analyze the torrent you uploaded and associate any files in the torrent with ones on the website, providing links as previously mentioned. I think that's it, the tracker would accept it and you could start seeding then.

Now if someone were to add your torrent to their client. They would ping the tracker or whatever stuff a client does when it adds a torrent. Their client would see you as a seed. It would look at the torrent file, and see that files 1 and 2, and the folder, are tracked individually. It would attempt to download file 3 from you as this torrent is the only one with that file, as well as any other similarly unique pieces of the torrent. It would ask the tracker if it knows any other torrents that contain file 1, file 2, or the folder. In this case the tracker is only allowing individual tracking of files uploaded to (might require full upload, not just hash, for authentication purposes..? maybe.) and described to the website, but other trackers and websites might be more expansive; or more restrictive if they do not support this 'file layer' bittorrent protocol extension.

The tracker only lists this torrent as containing file 1, since you only created and uploaded it today; but it does list three other torrents which contain file 2. This new peer, named Nishikado, asks one of the peers on those torrents for the torrent file via Magnet link to obtain information about where in the torrent the file is that he wants.

Right about now his client does something weird with the display, either it shows the torrents he's leeching from or it doesn't show the details by default... I don't know... it might only work for peers that support this protocol extension, and it might be best if it can only connect to such peers to prevent a perception that clients with this protocol extension are 'selfish'. . .

. . . I think that's it. Connect to peers, download file. o_O It does work a bit different depending on whether it supports all peers or just ones with this protocol as described above, but almost everything happens prior to finding a peer to download from. example done.

And then there's all the social implications of a bittorrent extension that allows the community to refine torrent collections, but that's a different story that hopefully will eventually be finished one day. . . .

Oh, and Nishikado's client also checks for the folder on DHT in case someone has it despite the tracker not viewing it as a separate file, since the torrent provides an overall hash, and standardized piece/hash sizes for the folder in case other torrents do contain it. Your own client for its part broadcasts file 1, file 2, the folder, as well as the overall torrent to nearby nodes in the hash space on DHT.


One day

29 April 2009

Two different perspectives

Asad al-Islam at http://majahden.com/vb/

"In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate...

"After Star Wars, Obama Invents New War Terminologies

"Praise be to God, and peace and prayers be upon the messenger of God, his family, and companions.

"Anyone who lived among and interacted with the beastly and arrogant American people will know that their verbal expressions full of cursing and foul words. They are a people who are not good at speaking, regardless of how well they decorate their speeches. What really distinguishes US foreign policy, since it was established by Henry Kissinger, is the manipulation of words serve the greed of their leaders. They killed two million Vietnamese in the name of 'war against Communism,' and did the same thing in Nicaragua in the mid 80's in the name of 'freedom and democracy.' Their successor Obama is following in their footsteps. He is continuing the US war against Islam and Muslims, but lies to them and attempts to trick them by beautifying his words.

"The era of the despicable Bush was known for terminologies resembling the saying 'open sesame' to anyone who wanted to approach the White House, such as 'war on terrorism,' 'Islamo-fascism,' 'Islamic extremism' etc. These terms brought woe upon all the US. The war that was associated with these terms drained their powers, and displaced and starved them. On top of all that, the American is on the top of the wanted list anytime his filthy feet touch Muslim land. What was the result of that drunk's term? Imaginary profits gained by war companies such as Halliburton (the second house of Dick Cheney), and oil companies like Chevron, which honored 'Candy Rice' (former member of its board of directors) by naming one of its petroleum carriers after her. This is just a simple example of the 'conflict of interest' (as they call it in their administrative laws) inside the governing body of the United (but near separated) States. The rich are the decision makers and the executive team of the Federal Government. As for their people (the people of Coca-Cola and McDonald's, the people of adultery and gayness): Those who did not lose their houses to the mortgage crisis eventually lost their savings due to the collapse of banks and the economic crisis. Those who did not lose a son or brother were eventually killed by the mujahidin. Some lost their jobs at General Motors, where the mujahidin contributed to its bankruptcy. The best of them visits a psychiatrist three times a week, and a doctor purchased a weapon yesterday because fighting over bread is on the horizon.

"When the new administration felt the weight of the burden left by Bush, when it realized the signs of the collapse of empires that are surfacing in the US, it sought help from the 'think tanks.' They turned to a report released by the Anti-Terrorism Center on 14 March 2008 entitled Words that Work and Words that Don't: A Guide to Counterterrorism Communication, published by the expert Steven Emerson (who rose to fame when he accused 'Islamic terrorism' of blowing up the FBI headquarters in Oklahoma City on 19 April 1995, which was carried out by extreme rightist Timothy McVeigh). This report included many recommendations related to reconsidering the content of the US President's speech on the war on terrorism in an attempt to eliminate some terminologies (such as "open sesame"), which tarnished the image of the US in the Islamic world. Some of the important recommendations are:

"'Do not invoke Islam: Although Al-Qa'ida exploits religious sentiments and tries to use religion to justify its actions, we should treat it as an illegitimate political organization, both terrorist and criminal.'

"'Do not harp on Muslim identity: Avoid labeling everything 'Muslim.' It reinforces the 'US versus Islam' framework that Al-Qa'ida promotes. Be specific (Egyptian, Pakistani) and descriptive (South Asian youth, Arab opinion leaders), where possible.'

"'Avoid offensive terminology: We are communicating with, not confronting, our audiences. Do not insult or confuse them with pejorative terms such as 'Islamo-fascism,' which are considered offensive by many Muslims.'

"'Avoid the term 'caliphate,' which has positive connotations for Muslims, but is used to describe the goal of Al-Qa'ida and associated groups. The best description of what they really want to create is a global totalitarian state.'

"'Never use the terms 'jihadist' or 'mujahidin' in conversation to describe the terrorists. A mujahid, a holy warrior, is a positive characterization in the context of a just war. In Arabic, jihad means 'striving in the path of God' and is used in many contexts beyond warfare. Calling our enemies jihadists and their movement global jihad unintentionally legitimizes their actions.'

"The report also addressed avoiding phrases such as 'We do not hate Islam,' because the word 'hate' is the only word that will remain in the minds of those listening. Because the US Administration blindly trusts such reports, it began implementing everything in it. Hilary Clinton was the first to play her role in this play, which is aimed at misleading Muslims. This old woman stated that the US will abandon using 'global war against terrorism' in her speech about war on Islam. When asked why this decision is being made, she replied by stating it was the obvious and did not give a convincing answer. Why would she? She is only a button that can be pushed, nothing more. This was followed by Michelle Sison, the US ambassador to Lebanon, who stated to Al-Nahar net [Lebanese newspaper] on 3 April 2009 that: 'The new administration will use the phrase peace in the Middle East instead of peace process.' As for Obama, he announced from Turkey on 6 April 2009 that 'the US is not at war with Islam and will never be in a war with Islam.' Does the change in speech imply a change in policy? No not at all. No one is better at proving this other than their own.

"On 4 April 2009, the Washington Post addressed this subject in a column entitled New Words for War. This is what was mentioned in the article: 'Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recently confirmed that the Obama administration has dropped the phrase 'global war on terror.' She didn't say why. 'I think that speaks for itself, obviously' was her elaboration. That raised a few obvious questions: Does the new administration believe the fight against Al-Qa'ida and other extreme Islamist groups does not amount to war? Is the threat to the US homeland less, in President Obama's estimation, than that perceived by President George W. Bush? And does the United States still expect its NATO military allies to join in this newly unnamed, speaks-for-itself endeavor?' It added: 'It seems the 'global war on terrorism' will continue, only without the name. There is some logic to that: Mr. Obama is acutely aware of the damage done by the Bush administration to American prestige in Europe and throughout the Muslim world, and he has spoken much this week of a fresh start. As many have pointed out, the old term was awkward- 'terror' describes a means of war, not an enemy. The challenge for the new administration is to describe that enemy and the campaign against it in ways that convey its urgency to both Americans and foreign audiences - and that unites rather than polarizes. In that respect, Mr. Obama made a good start in Strasbourg.'

"Peter Baker wrote in an article entitled The Words Have Changed, but Have the Policies?, published by International Herald Tribune on 2 April 2009. He wrote: 'They may be sending 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, as much as Mr. Bush did to Iraq, but it is not a 'surge.' They may still be holding people captured on the battlefield at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, but they are no longer 'enemy combatants.' They may be carrying the fight to Al-Qa'ida as their predecessors did, but they are no longer waging a 'war on terror.' He added: 'Indeed, for all the shifting words, Mr. Obama has left the bulk of Mr. Bush's national security architecture intact so far. He has made no move to revise the Patriot Act or the eavesdropping program. He has ordered Guantánamo to be closed in a year, but has not turned loose all the prisoners. The troop buildup in Afghanistan resembles the one Mr. Bush ordered in Iraq two years ago.'

"O brothers in religion, are there any doubts or confusions left after the confessions made by their own people? Republicans and Democrats share the same goal, except Republicans use the stick to achieve it and Democrats use the carrot. The actions of the White House slaves amount to nothing more than throwing ashes into the eyes of the Muslims in an attempt to hypnotize them in order to accomplish their goals. They have been exposed, however, by the will of God. Praise be to Him. The question that comes to mind is: What caused the Obama plan to receive such objections from some Americans who tried to expose it? The ruling entity in the US has caused the entire country to become divided. We have clear evidence to support that, but this is not the place to discuss it. Our last supplication is praise be to God, Lord of all creation."



Markus Ziener: "Moving Coolly Through the Crisis?" from Duesseldorf Handelsblatt at http://www.handelsblatt.com/

In the crisis, Americans appreciate, above all, one thing: leadership. And this is what Obama shows. Regardless of whether you agree or not with all the decisions Obama made in his first 100 days, the 44th President is meeting the challenges. He does not shun decisions.

If Obama wants to know what the people's concerns are, he talks to them directly, even now as President. When he headed for a townhall meeting just a few weeks after he had taken office, the political classes shook their heads -- perhaps he has not noticed that the election campaign is over, they stated sarcastically. Actually, however, the critics did not understand that this President works differently than many of his predecessors. From the beginning, his secret to success was to talk with the people, and not just about them.

A new style will not be enough. At the end of a presidency, success is measured by facts. In a few years from now, the Americans will judge Obama, above all, on whether he succeeded or not in overcoming the crisis. It is still much too early to answer that question.

It is clear that the financial and economic crisis can only be overcome if the President manages to change his country's psychology. It is not by chance that Obama often mentions Ronald Reagan: the republican from California was a symbol of confidence, a confidence that was so contagious that it enabled the United States to get out of the economic doldrums and the trauma from the Vietnam War. Because he achieved this, the Americans forgave him quite a few mistakes.

Obama may hope for a similar outcome. Despite record unemployment and first setbacks in foreign policy, a large majority of Americans believe that the country is on the right path. In fact, the surprising thing about the first three months is that the big difficulties with which the United States is struggling do not seem to affect this President much. Obama seems to be "cool" -- calm and collected.

This is why his "Grand Design" - the strategy to tackle all problems simultaneously - is working. Obama has understood that health care reform, climate change and the economic crisis belong together. The weaknesses of the US social system are a burden on the companies, and so is the lack of adjustment to new global environmental standards. Hence, Obama does not only want to patch potholes. He wants to overlay the streets with a new asphalt surface.

Since his large-scale project for America will tie him to domestic policy for quite some time, Obama needs support from his allies in terms of foreign policy. This is why he extends his hand to partners, admits that the United States has made mistakes, and shows that he is able to listen. This is also part of the overall concept.

Does Obama always strike the right balance? Some goals may sound naïve -- for example, the noble goal of a nuclear weapons free world. Substantial progress in disarmament would already be success enough. But that is not the point. The point is the direction. It is the right one.

26 April 2009

Idle thoughts III

I was reminded of some of the flaws with current paradigms for sharing user-created content when I tried to find some old warrior movies. There weren't any links on a popular direct-download site; and despite this warrior's popularity there wasn't a single mention of them on the largest torrent site >_< I deleted everything I had from them a long time ago, partly because I didn't like paladin abuse but mostly to save space.

The current phenomenon of torrent collections has two interesting features. Torrent seeders rely on being able to describe the torrent contents to accomplish their goals: a sense of ownership of the files included in the torrent, and spreading their popularity as a torrent seeder or other provider of information such as a website. Some torrent sites offer exceptional ability to describe the contents and status of a torrent, such as a well-formatted description space and torrent classification or even forum threads that accompany torrents; when the source of torrent files does not allow this descriptive information, seeders rely on including text files within the torrent to support this sense of ownership of the files.


When you create an additional like semantic (mangle technical meanings) file layer beneath the torrent, the seeder no longer owns the files. Instead they control the connections between, and groupings of files. At the same time the particular collection that a leecher is constructing may not be the one held by the seeds they are leeching from, due to the 'JIGDO' concept from working at the file level. So once again it becomes the responsibility of the torrent site to provide this association between seeds and ownership.

There's no way around having an entirely new bittorrent client implementation, due to the requirements:
  • Download a torrent for the single file you are interested in, but leech off of collections of many files that include this one file
  • Create a new collection out of files previously downloaded, that is receptive to requests from other collections and single-file torrents
  • Seed a new collection by partly using old ones, to avoid dead torrents from losing seeds
  • Associate files with certain names in one torrent, with the same files in another torrent that are named differently
This last one in particular means you can't just transparently include several torrents in one, that would seed independently but show up as the sum of unique peers in torrent UI; because the current bittorrent protocol has torrent names, as well as file names as unique and part of the way to identify that torrent. Multiple seeders with different file names could not connect to the same torrent unless some or all single-file torrents within torrent collections were corrected to the same filename, but this is contrary to the idea of torrents being independent of any single website to be able to work. Seeders that could not connect to a torrent database would not be able to construct valid collections that linked to other torrents.

Anyway so I was wondering if you couldn't create linked torrents using DHT on a per-file basis because of seeder ownership requirements and you would instead have to just show very well all the torrents that contained a particular file you wanted; but this would prevent you from doing the first item in the above list, downloading the torrent for a single file. If you did want to seed after downloading, you would have to continue to manage single torrents and this leads to torrent clutter.

So that's why change is necessary. You can either keep trackers pretty much the same as they are, and rely on clients to create standardized hash things for pieces and files and then use DHT to find files in torrents on other peers; or you can do that AND also change trackers work on the file level by treating every major file as its own torrent without regard for its name, so peers can find seeders with the file by tracker as well as DHT.


This only works for files you'd want to include in multiple collections... and I still don't know what impact it would have for large numbers of files >_< it's possible that streamlining things would end up reducing the total number of things tracked by the tracker; but some torrents have a lot of files. Maybe best if trackers in this implementation only tracked pre-registered files, for which it had a verified/official hash and so on. It might still be possible to search for other files via DHT, especially if using a smart algorithm which assumes that a seeder with one file from a large torrent may have many other files from it too; and in the case with a non-registered anonymous/generic tracker.




Torrent collection tracking could get complex. Again, the idea is that even when files have their own separate pages and the torrent collection seeder is neither required nor allowed to provide an in-depth description of the torrent contents (or advertisement for their website...), other details about a torrent can have a significant effect on someone's decision whether to use that torrent or another one. It would be possible to have an implementation where users could explore the torrent-space entirely within the torrent application, by showing which torrents you leech from and letting you select for download all files within that torrent, then branching these off into more primary torrents for you to explore or even provide feedback or discussion via a statically-linked website; but this would remove what little remains of seeder ownership under a file-descriptive system and would also lock implementation users to a specific torrent website o.0 So that's why any torrent UI feedback would just be informative, not supposed to lead to new torrents; this exploration would be done on any central site which describes the files themselves, as well as providing this information about torrent collections which I still haven't described. omg.


If I had more experience with open source project development maybe I could describe this better >_< Any particular collection of files may importantly be linked to previous collections. It may be a branch from a main collection by a different seeder than the creator of the original collection, it may also be a compilation of various sources or the evolutionary development of a collection that seeks to include a certain number, quality, or focus of files. This may show prospective leechers how a collection was derived and possibly what it led to, contributing to the feeling of ownership even if a different individual branches off a collection to create a more popular torrent that still leeches off the original seeders using the jigdo method.

The files contained in the torrent should also be referenced, this is possible when standardized hashes lets the files be uniquely identified regardless of whether they were renamed. This lets users see descriptions of the contents of the torrent, regardless of who created the collection or how much detail they used to describe its contents (if a description apart from the name is allowed at all)!



mm will say a bit about games. Could even have multiple worlds to live in. Some of these might not allow unique advancement, such as leveling or gaining experience; some might have different rules, such as 'infamy' for killing weak players of a different faction vs becoming a 'murderer' for killing same-faction players in a weakly free-for-all player vs player ruleset, allowing conflicting attitudes to exist in the same game. Or a world that emphasizes group combat and ambushing, lying in wait for convoys to pass by o_O somewhat mutually exclusive with an emphasis on solo PvP as reinforced by ruleset and the activities and progressions given in a game. This also increases the chance that an open source development model could be leveraged to provide more game content and options, using the OpenID authentication model. However, art style and consistency is a major concern and may be one reason for centralization of certain development resources.

Maybe I did, or didn't have anything interesting to say about items, but I need to go... it's late here.

MY SMILEY FACES MESS WITH HTML PARSER UPON EDIT

21 April 2009

Idle thoughts II

Torrent client that manages files that the user has decided can be shared from local storage. There would probably be several ways to display them, such as chronologically and by folder structure.

Separating torrents from the filesystem and confirming any sharing instance to prevent violations of privacy or security.

Standardizing hash methods and piece size allows quick adding of torrents once a file is located in the list of sharable files. This would be very similar to the thumbnail standard; torrents would be hooked into the file manager such that moving a file would change the location that the reference torrent file pointed to, without having to regenerate the hash. This pre-torrent file would need to include information to verify the file, such as size, file type if magic numbers or other methods are available, and possibly timestamp; the file's current location; and hash information for each piece. The requirements aren't exactly the same as for thumbnails. The actual 'torrent thumbnail' file name would not have to be defined the same way as media thumbnails, unless the torrent program doesn't load the entire directory into memory upon program start. The torrent sharing method might be such that it isn't necessary to do this. Hmm~

If separation is really maintained, then torrents would contain all the information (hash, and maybe name?) to find the right 'torrent thumbnail'. It would mean that you couldn't right-click and immediately start sharing a file (automatically creating a hidden torrent, or downloading one, using a predefined tracker), because the hash would be part of the 'torrent thumbnail' file name, but this is the objective because it reduces privacy accidents. I may be saying things that are totally wrong, I'm hardly an expert on the BitTorrent protocol >_<

Overall goals for this proposed expansion of torrent functionality in order to better support user-created content sharing:
- can download the files you need
- can easily share files that you feel like sharing, matching between torrent and files on the hard drive
- can clearly and simply define the files you share


This last one, as well as privacy, is why not to have a system that lets you 'share every possible file on my hard drive that I have marked for sharing', despite that changing OS support and standardizing hashes would let you accomplish this. The fact that you cannot do this is due, as far as I understand, to the problems mentioned before here of torrent clutter and lack of freedom to manipulate files in the filesystem when sharing; but it is also due to the way torrents work with sharing collections of files. If you change the way torrents approach the download objective, by changing from searching for pieces within the swarm for a single torrent to instead searching for files within the like meta-swarm of all torrents on available trackers, it becomes easier to update and replace old torrent collections with new ones, which accomplishes the goal of reducing torrent clutter and keeping clear definitions of what to share while also allowing the addition of new files into the meta-swarm.

This goal is somewhat similar to that program for debian repositories, that lets you synchronize an iso image with new packages. It's on the Ubuntu distro server but I forget the name.

It somewhat involves treating each individual file as its own torrent. It would mess a little with tracking seeders and leechers for torrents; but since it works both ways it should all work out. As I understand it (aka not very well!) it increases load on the tracker, but I don't know how significant this is and you can always split torrents up on different trackers.

Name should not matter, because it's easy to change and people arbitrarily change the name of a file and include it in a new torrent... maybe less for user-created content where a file has more of an identity that it can be found as, but still~. If you open a torrent, it should automatically populate files you have previously decided to share if the hash file allows it; if there are files that look like they might match but the hash boundaries are wrong (is this how torrents work? I don't know, lol) it will check the hash again; in all other cases it will look for similarly-sized files within your filesystem as you allow it and suggest checking, or automatically check to see if any of them have the right hash. And if a file is still being downloaded, it could still check it if the hash boundaries are standardized.

I think knowing exactly what it is you're sharing has important psychological effects on overall swarm behavior. Some people may seed 300 torrents at once but they are in the minority.

20 April 2009

Path of Death

I don't really want this to be the place I put important things. But at the same time, there are some places you might only be able to go to once.

I don't have control when indulging myself. If I stop eating, it's because I'm not hungry anymore or feel like eating something that isn't available.. not because I feel I've eaten too much. Right now I'm not hungry >_<

A movie said that if you hold a bird too tightly, it will die, and if you do not hold it tightly enough it will fly away... maybe I'm saying too much, but you can't hide forever :P So that's why to know that something could exist is enough.

It isn't mind games.

i'm still afraid.



"To end": thread + winter

I was thinking. First, is there really no way to leverage an open source code base for an MMO? One of the problems of trying to share an MMO across multiple providers is not just trusted vendors, but also authenticating users of content and a particular transaction of that user with content providers. Trusted vendors is closely related to the attitudes that develop within the community towards progression and character identity. If a game allowed transfering a 'character' or other specific information between different vendors of a game, besides the basic technical issues there is also the validity of things that are viewed as achievements, and deciding whether to change any aspect of presentation in-game. Anyway, the point is that an OpenID-style model would let a game that has solved these problems transfer information from one provider to another, while being assured that the same person is in charge of both copies of this account until proven otherwise.

Second, a free alternative would probably change opinions towards banning as seen in current popular MMOs. Being able to switch providers might change it back and make this not a problem, but becoming a 'ghost' might be a different way, for things as simple as illegal account selling or trading. Someone wouldn't be banned, they would just become noticably different. Just a little too predictable, as if they weren't really there. Disturbing in strange ways. A silly smile and a repetitive argument... any normalcy is just evidence of the monstrous perversion that must be lurking behind this facade. A name that fuzzes out once in a while.

Someone could, of course, apply to fix any misinterpretation of evidence, but it importantly allows the retention of the idea that a character in-game is associated with a certain individual assuming that identity, while presenting the reinforcement of that idea entirely within the game's rules and not making reference to outside factors.