I have been busy with many different things in the interim. School has kicked off, but that isn’t exciting except to state that summer has come and gone. With summer’s passing, the time for relaxation has vanished as well. This year, my summer felt especially short, but it was one of the most enjoyable. From June 27th to August 7th I was at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. I participated in a Pre-College program called the National High School Game Academy. NHSGA was just one subprogram in Pre-College. There were other programs: architecture, art, design, drama, music, and a program in which students chose two college classes and went through them at an accelerated rate.

The National High School Game Academy is a program that focuses heavily on the skills required to make a video game and how to be a member of the video game industry. When a student applies, he or she chooses a focus, either programming or art. The sections of the program are divided into art, design, and programming. Every student takes courses in all of the sections, however depending on what focus you select, you will learn more about either programming or art. Each student has the same design courses.

Students are then split up into beginner, intermediate, and advanced groups based on their skills in their focuses. The placement determines what level of expertise the student will start out at and how far they will progress in the section. There are a skills, tools, and concepts that students are exposed to during the program. I learned about conventional drawing, Photoshop (image editing), 3ds Max (3D modeling), level design, character concept design, story development, Python and Panda3D (a programming language and its corresponding 3D graphics engine extension), and 3D programming.

I learned a lot from the course. I am decent at art for an amateur, so I didn’t learn anything new in the drawing or Photoshop classes, but it gave me an opportunity to practice. I knew nothing of 3ds Max and I came out with a basic understanding of 3D modeling, which is very interesting. I plan to dabble a bit more in Blender, which is open source 3D modeling software. The video game design topics were the least interesting. We never got into very technical discussions of level design, story, art, music, and genre and how they all relate to one another. Instead, the purpose of the design classes were to teach students how to use a game editor. We used the Neverwinter Nights 2 Aurora Toolset. Neverwinter Nights 2 (NWN2) is a roleplaying game, and its toolset is very robust. We learned how to make interior environments, exterior environments, and how to script or code in the engine. While learning how to use a toolset was educational, and I did enjoy it, I would have rather focused more on the technical and theoretical design concepts. It is difficult to strike a balance between pragmatism and theory.

I enjoyed learning about Python and Panda3D the most. Python is a multi-paradigm language. It is used for scripting and full blown applications. Python runs on top of the C language. It compiles at runtime, and this allows the user to code interactively and see results right away. For very large programs, the code is still generally all written and then run, but I am emphasizing this point to demonstrate some of the capabilities of Python. Python can run interactively because it has an interpreter that executes code right as it is entered. The interpreter is written in the C language. Because it runs through the interpreter, Python is slower than C, so in a real develop scenario involving the Panda3D engine (which is compatible with C++ and Python), more intensive parts would be written in C++. Still, knowledge of Python and Panda3D is a valuable skill.

The NHSGA taught us many different things about 3D programming. We learned about how a 3D environment is represented on the 2D computer screen and the basics of the Panda3D engine–the knowledge is applicable to other 3D engines. We wrote a Whack-a-Mole® program, a Bejeweled® program, a submarine program, and a tank program. The first and third projects were introductions to new concepts, and the other projects furthered the exploration of the concept. Whack-a-Mole introduced us to the 3D engine and the 3D environment. Bejeweled forced the students to focus much more heavily on sorting and relationship inspecting algorithms while still allowing experimentation with environment features such as lighting. The submarine game taught me how to move an object in a 3D environment, and the tank game focused on 3D collision.

After four weeks at the program, the teachers finished instructing us and we were assigned two main projects: a quest made in the Neverwinter Nights 2 engine and a game we had to make from scratch. Students were organized into separate teams for each of the programs. The Neverwinter Nights 2 assignment only required a little more knowledge of the editor–instead, it was an opportunity to get really involved with the toolset and to try to make an entertaining game module.

The final game project was much more entertaining. The project was modeled after how the video game industry operates. Teams were set up with artists, programmers, and a producer and the group was given some design specifications to work with. The team had to come up with the rest. My group had to design a much more advanced tank game which utilized the Wii controller and a three-screen display. Contaminants fell from the sky and the user had to travel through the environment to collect ammo and then shoot the contaminants.

The most surprising knowledge I gleaned from the program was about teamwork and leadership. I was a producer for the tank game project. Being a producer involved a lot of management, scheduling, and collaboration. Talking about the importance of learning teamwork always sounds clichéd, but looking back, it was a very important thing to learn. Developing a schedule and making sure that everyone is sticking to the schedule is a very hard thing to do. Unfortunately, we did not have a finished version of the game. All of the fundamental mechanics were implemented separately, but we could not put them together in time. Our game was also not very user friendly. Our team was still proud of what we produced; we were given a complex project and we accomplished a lot with it.

While many would loathe the idea of learning during the summer, I found it to be a great experience. Not only was the educational program entertaining, the people at CMU were fantastic. Being around such enthused and diverse peers is wonderful, as was the temporary freedom we experienced on college campus.

Now I am back in the normal teenage world. I am still programming, but I am not working on 3D games for a while. I need a break from that. School and sports are in full swing, and I am trying to enjoy my last year with my high school companions. If I motivate myself to write more I will probably get into more in depth discussions on what I learned at the NHSGA. Maybe a little article on the basics of 3D games? I’ll try to write sooner rather than later.

Mr. Mathematician

For all of you programmers or inspiring programmers out there: check out Project Euler.

Project Euler is a series of puzzles that are mathematical in nature that will require computer programming to solve. You should really check it out, no matter your skill level (Well, alright. You should have a basic understanding of some type of programming language). It is fun and it helps to hone your skills. Sign up and get to solving!

The entertainment industry is becoming public property. As various types of media have been converted to digital formats, they have lost the sense of singular ownership and have moved onto the Internet, where the content can be easily accessed by anyone. Users can share and distribute files to strangers over network. Long gone are the times when one would need to make a copy of a CD and manually give it to a friend. The ease of sharing files has led to widespread free distribution, much of which infringes on copyright laws and is illegal. Despite the dangers that come from breaking a law, the number of people who illegally share files is increasing in number. The increase in Internet connection speeds has allowed faster downloads and thereby made file sharing a valid form of obtaining all kinds of media, ranging from smaller songs to large movies and games.

One way of sharing files is through the use of BitTorrent. BitTorrent uses something called a torrent file, which is linked to the file someone wishes to share. When a user runs the file in a torrent program the file connects to others who are also running the file. If one of those users has the actual file to be shared, he or she can upload it while others simultaneously download missing components and upload portions they have as well. In order to find torrent files, there are many websites that share these files. These websites are called torrent trackers.

One of the largest torrent trackers is “The Pirate Bay”, located in Sweden. The website had been threatened with lawsuits on multiple occasions but it still continued operation. On January 31, 2008, Swedish prosecutors filed charges against The Pirate Bay for copyright infringement and the case went to court. Individuals, not The Pirate Bay, upload all the illegal files, but the Pirate Bay also does not remove any of them. The question is whether or not it was The Pirate Bay is actually propagating the spreading of files. The trials have finished, and the Swedish court will issue a verdict on April 17^th.

Whether or not The Pirate Bay is charged with breaking the law, file sharing will only continue to grow. It is becoming a part of the industry, and those who intend to make money off of intellectual property must adapt. Companies have attempted to fight this growing trend by using Digital Rights Management (DRM), which attaches code to a file that is used to either lock the content into a program, prevent it from being copied, or insure that it is a registered product. All of the DRM code is eventually broken, allowing people to do as they choose with the files, and it remains a nuisance to the regular consumer who might want to move a song from one program to another. Companies will soon stop fighting piracy to such an extent as they currently are and focus on taking advantage of the Internet capabilities.

The music industry is the one being hit the hardest by file sharing and the one that has been adapting to the new landscape the quickest. Success for a modern musician is defined as selling a huge number of albums in a short time. The one-hit-wonder is what record companies attempt to produce, with any long-lasting artists being an additional benefit. This business model is being indirectly challenged as a result of file sharing. There will be a shift away from this plan and towards instead developing a smaller but more devoted and consistent audience. Because files can be easily stolen, the people trying to sell music must find consumers that are willing to pay for the product. Those who would spontaneously buy a popular album might just download it illegally, but a band that has a loyal following will have paying customers.

Currently, a few large corporations produce the media. Numerous TV stations all reside under the same network umbrella. Virtually all artists need a publisher or host of some sort in order to reach the masses, but this is changing. The Internet allows for quicker and cheaper distribution. Independent artists will become more common and they will be able to make a living producing and releasing their own content. For all the harm that Internet can bring to the entertainment industry, it will also bring about positive changes.

Technology has repeatedly mutated and reformed the entertainment industry. It has created new types of media and new ways to package it. The CD allowed music to be portable, and MP3 players made music even more portable. There have been previous crises brought about by technologic changes. Television brought free content to users and from this the television advertising industry boomed. The industry is undergoing a tumultuous time and the exact outcome cannot be predicted. It is certain, however, that the entertainment industry will not crumble, but will emerge refined and vigorous.

__                       __                      __

Many abstract strategy games have a enduring appeal. This is due to their dual simplicity and depth. An abstract strategy game is game in which there is no element of chance and there is no unknown information. All the moves or plays that have been made are clear to see. In essence, an abstract strategy game is a series of puzzles that all operate on the same foundation. Each turn the player must decide what course of action is best given the situation. Each game is a battle of logic and ingenuity. The premise is often simple, but the strategies and tactics are incredibly complex.

Two of the most well known abstract strategy games are chess and go. I assume that you all have heard of and understand chess, but go is not as widespread in the United States. The game of go originated in China. It is usually played on a 19 by 19 board. The board starts empty, and each turn players place a piece down anywhere on the board in an attempt to capture enemy pieces and secure the most territory by enclosing a section of the board. Go is a game of strategy, whereas chess is a game of tactics. In go, there is often a lot of empty space and the player must have a general idea of the ebb and flow of the game. In chess, the number of moves available is reduced, but the possibilities still very complex. It is a small scale battle where a one square shift of a piece may completely change the game.

The simple ruleset and complex possibilities inherent in both games make them very interesting for mathematical and algorithmic purposes. During the last half of the 20th century a number of chess programs were developed. The skill of these programs grew, and in 1997 Deep Blue, created by IBM, defeated Gary Kasparov, a reigning World Champion. From the point of artificial intelligence, chess programs are very simple. They simply employ brute force to explore a huge number of future moves and evaluate each of these future positions by having point values for each of them.

There has been no go program capable of defeating a World Champion. This is because the go board is so much larger and their are many more possible moves. The concept of territory is much harder for a computer to understand than the concept of capturing a specific piece. The brute force method simply does not work in this case. In order for a go program to play at a high level, it would need to have a better artificial intelligence.

The computer and the human brain appear to be fundamentally different. A human is capable of developing its mind, self-awareness, and a thought process devoid of systematic rules. A computer uses a set series of logic statements, loops, and commands to operate. The machine creates outcomes or “thoughts” using axioms and a strict set of rules. The mind is a medley of emotion, desire, rationality, reasoning, and the subconscious. Hence the mind is like a painting or a story, and the machine is like a science. The mind is interpretive. The machine is absolute.

The workings of our world are increasingly becoming more predictable due to numerous scientific developments. The path and behaviors of a proton can be predicted, the effects of an electrical current can be analyzed, and the mystery of the human brain is being unraveled. If every fundamental element, particle, or wave has a set of behavior patterns, then the mind is predictable as well. The human is composed of organs, which are composed of cells composed of elements, which contain protons and electrons. Complex systems are simply groups of less complex systems. The brain is composed of neurons. Neurons are nervous cells that process and transmit information by electrochemical signaling. Since the components of the brain follow scientific rules, then it can be inferred that the brain has a ruleset it obeys as well. The mind is like a machine.

If the mind has a strict set of rules and axioms that produce its abilities of thought, then is the mind always going to behave the same way under the same circumstances? Is there such a thing as free choice? How is it that we can be self-aware, ever evolving, and conscious? How can a machine be a human? In part two we will further explore the relation between the mind and the machine.

Systems:

For a time, it was thought that Newtonian physics was the correct scientific system. It worked under apparent circumstances, at least for a while. It was firmly grounded in mathematics and there were not excessive assumptions or axioms. As we all know, it did not hold true for everything. There were certain rare circumstances that Newtonian mechanics could not explain, such as how objects behaved as they approached the speed of light. From Einstein’s General Relativity came bizarre concepts, such as the fact that energy could be made into mass, and vice versa.

My point is, things that appear to be obviously true may not be so. There is actually no way to prove that a system is completely correct, or that an observation will always be true in the future. Every system and all research require a starting point. One may be able to prove the validity of this starting point using another system, but what lays at the foundation of this colossal tower? There is an assumption, grounded simply in observation and logical guesswork. These basic axioms appear completely correct, but there is actually no way to prove so.

Even a system whose axioms are taken to be true cannot prove everything in that system. Mathematically, no system can be complete and consistent. In 1931, Kurt Gödel proved this. A system is complete if every statement inside it may be proven using the given axioms. A system is consistent if there is no statement in it that is both true and false. This means that any formal system that is consistent has statements that are taken to be true but are not provable. Even something that is true cannot always be proven.

The Man and the Polar Bears:

Besides systems, there are observations. One may say that an object always falls towards the ground even without needing to use General Relativity or some other system to explain their reasoning.  Under normal circumstances, this has always been the case. Humans have been around and have been recording observations and taking records for a very long time. If you were to pick up a book and let go, you would say without doubt that it would fall to your feet, and it probably would. There is no way to prove that this always happens.

Consider a person who is stranded in the Arctic. He was born there and has lived there his whole life. He has also seen a lot of polar bears. This man would probably assume that all members of the bear family have white fur. To him, it would appear obvious. In his whole life he has never seen a bear of a different color. As we all know, this man is wrong. But we need to forgive him, for he has not seen any any other type of bear. We also have no reason to know that we have seen every type of bear. There may be a bear at some point in the future whose fur glows with a radiant orange color. To be certain that an observation is always true, one would have to live an infinite amount of time, and observe every possible situation. One would have to see every bear that has ever existed and every bear that will ever exist in order to prove that bears are always a certain color.

At best, something is probably true. This is an important idea to keep in mind. There is a danger in accepting something as true without questioning and investigating alternatives. We would not have developed this far if people clung fast to old beliefs. Everything was once thought to be composed of the four elements, fire, water, earth, and air. If people still believed this, all advances in microtechnology would be impossible. It is important to approach situations with an open mind and to be ready for something different. You may just prove something false. But you still can’t prove anything. Not even falsehood. Just improve the probability of it.

Of course, this is not an absolute truth. Nothing is provable.

The idea of using a mouse on a computer was a very novel and innovative concept. Previously, people had only controlled computers through pressing keys. This would often take more time to select items and navigate through a program.  A mouse greatly increased efficiency of computer use. The first mouse was invented by Douglas Engelbart in 1968. Despite its obvious superiority to other means of computer control devices, it did not catch on. Its patent eventually expired and Xerox, Sun Microsystems, Symbolics, and a few other companies started to sell computer workstations equipped with mice. This did not catch on either.

In 1984, the mouse finally saw widespread use with the Apple Macintosh. That is 16 years after its conception. It seems strange that such an important and obviously superior method of navigating through a Graphical User Interface took such a long time to be used. The design of the mouse did not change that drastically over the 16 years since its invention and rise into public use. At the time, it was no doubt an unique concept. The user is essentially controlling an object in a virtual environment with its own dimensions. But the innovation and unique concept did not help the mouse to achieve widespread use. A good marketing campaign and presentation of the invention was necessary. It needed to be shown to the public, and its usefulness needed to be apparent.

It does not matter how great an idea is if nobody recognizes it or if the creator can not capitalize on it. There are many other people who can easily take your idea and use it, or if it is patented or copy-written, come up with a similar idea and market it better. There are many large companies and organizations with a lot of work-force who can easily take an idea created by someone else and spread it quicker and receive the recognition. This is not an evil thing, it is just a fact of business.

I am by no means belittling innovation, but coming up with a good idea is not good enough to guarantee success. One must create, and then implement and execute. Spread your idea around and make it clear why it is useful and important, otherwise someone else could take it and get the success. Find a way to make your idea not only new, but hard to replicate. You should provide a product or service which cannot simply be used better by someone with a larger work-force. It is not enough to come up with something new, one must also come up with something that will remain different from the competition, no matter the number of competitors.

Many types of programs are being developed for the web. Google is a major player in the push to get more applications online. They have introduced Google Documents, an application suite much like an online version of Microsoft Office (albeit, simpler). Calendar programs, storage services, games, and all other types of software are being developed for cloud computing. The programs being developed for the internet are becoming increasingly more sophisticated and are starting to reach a level comparable to desktop software.

With cloud computing will come a new purchase model. There will be more focus on software as a service (SaaS). This pricing model involves a fee over time, much like a phone or cable bill. With this pricing users will always get the most up-to-date version of the software, instead of paying to buy a version of it. This model will be used because other companies are maintaining a server for you to store your data. The company has to pay an internet bill to keep this server running, and therefore, so will you.

Not all software will adopt the SaaS model. There will still be programs that use the current pricing model, as well as free ones. Peer to peer software will obviously not use SaaS, because there is no external server hosting your data. Information is shared directly between two or more different computers.

Eventually, the user’s whole computer system will be synchronized with the cloud. The operating system will be capable of uploading all data, allowing for a user to maintain their settings and workspace regardless of which computer they are working on.

There are pros and cons to this computing technique. Cloud computing will allow users to acess their data virtually anywhere, and will allow for seamless collaboration. On the flip side, the internet is never a safer place for data than a closed network.

Pros

• The user can access his or her data anywhere he or she can connect to the internet. This data can be updated offline, then synchronized online so the most up-to-date version is available for the user.

• Users can collaborate more seamlessly. Can not only share documents easier, but they can work on the same document at the same time in a real-time environment. Previously, someone would create and edit a file, then either give it to who he or she is working with in the form of a hard copy or some form of offline storage device (a thumb drive or disk) or send the file over email. The other user would review and edit the file, and then send it back. This could create discrepancies in the versions and is a slower process. With cloud computing, users can work together at the same time over the internet or just move files around easier.

• No need to focus on managing and updating software. There is also no need to maintain a server. The company that supplies the software does it all. The user always have the latest version of the software and can ignore some technical issues that detract from productivity and actual work time.

• SaaS model can be cheaper than buying the actual product in the short run. Of course, over a period of time, it could cost more. But if one factors in the cost for maintaining a server and updating software, under certain circumstances the prices of SaaS and software as a product (SaaP) could be equal.

Cons

• Someone else is storing data for the user. If the user has any confidential data, this could be an issue. It bears repeating, the internet is never safer than a closed network. The user might not want to use cloud computing software to share data that contains important information, such as credit cards or financial data.

• The user is always required to use the most updated version of the software. If this gets rid of features that they liked in previous versions or demands too much computing resources, there is nothing he or she can do about it.

• Right now, programs do not work as quickly and are not capable of doing as much over the internet as they are on the desktop. Soon this will not be an issue. Internet connections are getting quick enough to negate this problem.

In the near future, cloud computing will become much more powerful and useful. Data can and will still be stored on users’ computers, but all programs will have some way of interacting with the internet. More programs will move online or develop online components. Data will not be locked into one system or media device. Data will be synchronized in open and standard file formats, allowing more programs to utilize files. This will allow programs to better interact with one another and will increase the amount of things that can be done with a file. The user will not be locked into a certain program by its file format.

The sharing of files and data will also lead to cross-platform data and media. Computers, television, music players, and cellphones will all be connected. Users will not never be disconnected from their data. This is already taking place. More music is now sold digitally than through CD’s. Music can be uploaded onto an MP3 player and can also be connected to a stereo. It is not confined to a physical device.

As more data shifts online, some interesting scenarios will arise. Laws governing the internet will need to be developed. Right now, the internet generally abides by the laws of the country the data resides in. If a server is located in the US or a US citizen uploads or downloads data they must follow the US government’s laws. But cloud computing will cause this data to exist seamlessly in multiple countries. If the data is produced in the US but stored in England,  what laws must the data abide by? There will need to be new laws created and countries will need to work together to develop a “internet government”. This is already starting to take effect, but not on the same international scale. The USA has recently developed a new executive branch in charge of managing intellectual property. With illegal software and media downloading running rampant, creators are not getting paid for what they made. This new executive branch will help to insure that pirating data does not happen. This is just a sign of things to come.

There will be a change in how data is stored, sold, and accessed. It is hard to say what shape this system will end up taking, but be prepared to rethink the way we interact and deal with one another. Right now we are in a time of globalization and collaboration. The playing field between different countries is being leveled and different people are working together much more seamlessly. The world is starting to become more connected and this is just a small facet of the dramatic changes to come.

This blog is my attempt to analyze and discuss the world we have created for ourselves and how it affects each and every one of us. Of course, I will deviate from this purpose often. I will not strictly focus on just this subject. My blog will evolve as well, and it may or may not retain its original purpose. But right now, I will pretty much just be writing about how technology, culture, and politics pertain to our modern life.

I started this blog because I am fascinated with the innovation and workings of human society. It is a way for me to talk about what I am interested in and share my opinion with other people. I had attempted to make a blog before, but I had rushed into the process and came up with a title and subject matter that was too narrow and too careless. I lost interest in it because I had not taken the time to create it with care. It was not worth anything to me and was a failed start. I am taking a new approach to this one. Instead of trying to update on a continuous basis, I will change my focus to coming up with quality (well, at least time-consuming) posts. If I write articles that I take the time to edit, hopefully it will differ my blog from the sludge of other halfhearted attempts (which I was part of). My goal is merely to create something of merit, something that I can be proud of. I am not guaranteeing anything to readers; I am just trying to make something that I enjoy.

The Celebrity of Politics

I know that the election is now over and Obama is our nation’s newest president-elect, but this event is still new enough for me to comment on it, and I think that it pertains to many facets of our political system, and indeed, any political system. An election is determined by popularity. Quite simply, whoever the public favors the most will win the vote. Unfortunately, the way popularity manifests itself in our system too often disregards the political platforms of the candidates and instead is determined by party affiliation and media popularity. Granted, party affiliation is not bad in and within itself, but when people choose not to actually investigate the party nominee’s plans and instead just vote for said candidate because he or she is from the same party their parents voted for or the party they first identified with, then it can be harmful to our system. If someone votes solely on the principal of party affiliation then they are essentially assuming that the candidate is a perfect representation of the party’s views, which is very much not true. No one is exactly like their party, and even the party has no definite stance on many issues.

But another major component is the aforementioned media popularity. Virtually everything we hear about the election comes from some form of media. The only way to get information not filtered by an outside is to do direct research, or hear from the candidate him or her-self. The second option has a filter as well: no candidate will present the negative aspects of their platform. Media coverage for a campaign is a good thing and it is expected that most media will at least have a slight bias. That is why it is beneficial to get information from multiple sources. But the main problem is how the media and citizens focus their attention on the candidates. There is a heavy prevalence of the “gotcha” media. Many people search for any controversial or attention-garnering sound bite and snatch it. They then capitalize on this short piece of information, which rarely represents the complete view or story. This piece of information is blown out of proportion and people hold on to these easily memorable sound bites and it influences their vote.

This is one example: (and here comes my political bias): During Obama’s campaign, there was a point at which Joe Biden said something about the distribution of wealth in regards to Obama’s tax plan.This small clip was seized by the news organizations and was taken to be a communist statement. Surely, redistribution of wealth is not aberrant to the way our government functions.  Biden said a small and stupid phrase and it was immediately taken by many to be the primary point of Obama’s whole governing strategy. This is ludicrous. Obama wanted to increase taxes on the wealthy and provide some programs to help needy people. This is not redistribution of wealth in the strictly communist sense.

But still, many people took this misrepresentation and used it as their primary reason for voting for McCain. This should not happen. Such statements should not garner such a large amount of attention. It is obviously a simple slip-up statement blown out of proportion in an attempt to make headlines. This component is part of the greater and more encompassing issue of media coverage. People have very little tolerance for in depth and informational news. Most just want to be entertained. We are addicted to sensationalist media. This type of coverage leads to the presidential race coming down to a popularity contest. Because very little in depth information is presented, most are not exposed to the actual and true stance on issues. Opinions are decide by such superficial things as Joe Biden’s slip-up comment.

Our nation’s next president is not chosen based on his or her political platform, but by whoever is the media favorite. People do not formulate their own opinions, but simply go with “the popular candidate”.

* My position on taxes: It is hard for me to form an opinion on this matter. On one hand, it hardly seems fair that those who have worked hard to earn their wealth should have to pay a much higher rate than everyone else, but we also need ways to help those of a lower class. I am unsure of how we should do this, and I find it hard to take a side.