I started this post after thinking about simplicity in general. It doesn't have to do with the theme of the blog except when those thoughts escalated in computing. I will start by giving some short examples starting with life and then computers and programming.
I was walking down the road thinking about what I need to buy for household needs (as I am now a foreign student who recently arrived in London) also worrying about things I bought and maybe I will not need at the end or foods that might rot in the fridge. I also tried to understand the reasons I sometimes buy more than I think I need.
One reason is that I very frequently confuse the "must reason" with the "need reason". For example, I first thought I should buy a set of plates and utensils because a house "must" have all the essential. But then I thought, what the hell, I am just a student in a student hall with a shared kitchen. I don't usually cook (even if I should) I just buy something outside or make a sandwich with pure bread and salami. I would just need one of each kind (fork, spoon, knife) and maybe those paper plates (and one plastic bowl for cereal) but not a complete set. I also bought a bread with the thought that I "must" have some bread but now I didn't ate from it at all and I preferred some toast bread I bought later for my sandwiches. It's hard like a stone now and I doubt I will touch it. I didn't thought naturally here about the most practical food I will need but just that I need some bread because a household always needs some bread.
Immediately I started thinking at other aspects of life (not only about buying stuff but also organizing your time and choosing the essential while filtering the things that are a waste of your time) and how the laws of simplicity applied to everything and could also be a great savior of time and could make my life easier. Actually, one grand rule of life or programming simplicity looks very similar to occam's razor. You should avoid what is unnecessary, unneeded, redundant.
I still concentrated on thinking on the reasons to why I want to do something in my life or if it's not necessary to spend time on specific things and concentrate on others that are more close to what I need and less to what they told me I must. Using this tool could be a nice way to review my demoscene and other hobbyist activities and maybe find better solutions that both gives gain in time and happiness.
Yesterday I installed Ubuntu. I almost never have Linux in my system and I get those curious looks and comments. "But you are a geek, how can you not have Linux installed?". This is a "must" motive. I think that some people have Linux just because it's geeky or it's a rebelous thing or they MUST. I have no problem with that. But when they ask me why, I have my answer. I never needed it. Of course, some things in Linux may have the simplicity I am talking about (if you tell me that the linux API is simplier than windows I tend to believe you because the windows API is a mess (although I have just tried to code some MFC applications, I don't know how things are in the core)) but I got used to work fine on windows and it has everything that I need. Why change it (except from curiosity)? So what was the reason I installed it this time? A "need" motive of course :). There is no gamepark wiz devkit released for windows yet. Although till I start a true project on wiz they might have done that already. I just couldn't wait :)
So, the rules of simplicity are helping a lot when you start thinking what you are supposed to need for your computer and what apps you should use and which operations are necessary for a user or even a geek who just wants to do his job and doesn't currently have the curiosity to look deeper. And the most interesting thing is when you try to think about an application you are developing yourself. Or an API you work on to use on your future programs.
I have bumped into the question several times when I tried reusing my own demo framework that I started from scratch since my latest demo Quantum Retrofuture. I am currently trying to redesign some stuff but I think I will have to seriously stop programming for a while, take a piece of paper and a pen and actually ask myself: "If I was scripting my new demo right now how exactly would I want things to work? How would I like to set up shaders, load textures, models, move the camera, sequence the demo parts, time the transitions, call the music player? How simple can my functions and structs (or objects) be so that maybe a programmer newbie could script a demo out of it? How easier can it be for me to reuse this engine to script new demos during a strict deadline? All this simplicity without sacrificing the functionality of course."
Needless to say, currently to load a shader or initialize a texture from an image I have to edit at least three different source files, two header files to enumerate an ID for the shader or texture and the location in the disk and at least one to load and initialize it if not two for the image to texture case. Of course I had organization in mind when I designed this framework and so I had one source file for image loading, one for texture management, etc which is ok but somehow trying to be more organized than you think you can be can be messy sometimes. Maybe if I made a wrapper with simplified functions that did things directly using the non-simplified framework would be a solution but I'd prefer to think more about a new solution from scratch. The same complicated was my newest software rendered that I stopped working on it because of the complexity I wanted to integrate with different source files focused on an hierarchy of 3d meshes connected to objects connected to scenes connected to worlds connected to a screen struct for viewports and all these interconnected with other things. I had a big time of thinking to imagine this one. Maybe I will create from scratch a tiny 3d engine based on simplicity and live the other one for a bigger project (this was originally planned as an engine for GBA or Gamepark demos that need a fast software renderer).
I keep bumping in this question and each time I fix something although a redesign might be needed. I am not into object oriented programming yet, it's all pure C mostly and one question is whether I would need to create some classes and move more towards OOP for my next demo or I could nicely stick with C. Personally I think that with proper planning and having simplicity always in mind, also keep down the keyboard for a while and carefully plan in a piece of paper, a very easy to use demo framework could be feasable in C.
Why complicate things when you can easily make them simple?
Saturday, 3 October 2009
Thursday, 27 August 2009
Computer magazines and new generations
I am holding a greek computer magazine (PC Master) in my hands which recently celebrated the twenty years since it's initial release. Except from the massive articles on the history of the magazine and the software and hardware technology evolution since 1989, a PDF of the first issue of the magazine is offered in it's DVD. Browsing it's pages brought back a feeling of astonishment and made me wonder how things have changed during the years and the magazines aren't what they used to be.
My astonishment is not on the technological changes but on the shift in contents of the greek (and I suppose foreign too) computer magazines since the beginning of home computing. The phenomenon that I will describe can also be seen in other greek publications like Pixel, User and others (I am just browsing some of them in a forum archive on retromaniax website).
First of all listings. I remember several big listings of programs written in basic for various 8bit computers in Pixel magazine. The only bad thing with these listing was that they were given without explanation and you just had to type them trying to be careful not making any typos or you would get Syntax Error messages (at least on my Amstrad CPC) and not being able to know what the mistake could be (because you wrote the code blindly). Not a good way to learn programming but maybe that's where I got use to type so fast and blindfolded on the keyboard. But the astonishing thing was that the magazine devoted something like 30% (if I am not mistaken) of it's pages on programming listings! Nowadays magazines might spend two pages on visual basic programming (if they bother to have a programming column at all) because they need all the rest for game reviews and what hardware to buy advices. I will get back to this (even if the reason is obvious).
The first issue of PC Master (and the following issues for several years) except from the main articles on news, hardware and game reviews (which didn't take the majority of the pages) had at least three programming articles with a good amount of explained code (at least as much as it possible in few pages) in Basic, Pascal or C and an article explaining some DOS commands among others. The quality of code was more advanced than what you can find today in the two pages visual basic article when a magazine bothers to include one.
What astonished me even more was the column with reader's letters. The vast majority of the readers were asking things about weird DOS commands, batch file making or programming questions. What astonished me was the quality of the readers. Many of them were people experimenting with their computer. Compare this with a common type of letters in the same magazine after twenty years: "Hello, I have just installed Crysis but it's too slow on my GF8600. Should I get a GTX?". If it's not about games then it's something stupid like "Hi dood, I liekd your H4CK TH3 PL4N3T column. Ona day I wanna be the best haxor in teh world! Greetinx, Cyberg0d!!1". Oh yes, I have just noticed that they have a new column called "Hack the Planet". But no columns trying to revive the old good programming curiosity..
What is the thing that changed? It's rather obvious. First of all remember that the people who had a computer and spent hours with it in the past were mostly geeks. Computers were not mainstream, it wasn't everyone's business. The majority of the readers were more than gamers. Many of them might have started from the early 80s when most of the 8bit home micros of the time were coming with basic at boot. It was inevitable that out of curiosity someone would try to code something in basic and there were even big chapters in the manuals that came with the machines, dedicated in basic programming, system calls and maybe even assembly. Later on the PC, the environment was a boring black screen and sometimes you even had to change your CONFIG.SYS manually to get that desired free memory for running a specific game. Still, an operating system not attractive to the majority of the people.
And when computer graphics became more attractive, the operating system more classy and internet was a commonality, that was the moment where what consisted a computer user changed. Actually nothing has changed from the side of the geeks and hobby programmers. They still exist, you can find even exceptions of younger people getting interested in real programming instead of just playing WOW. What has changed is the majority of the readers. Today, most of the people who have a PC and spend hours in front of it are playing games, watching movies or youtube videos, surfing the net, updating their facebook status, downloading MP3s or just composing a document in word. Most of the people who might install a compiler and write a programm for a while are doing it in their studies or job. And only very few of them are also doing it as a hobby. It's quite logical that in our modern days where the majority who is interested in computers prefer the mainstream and fun stuff instead of programming, that the magazines of the same era will prefer to cover the same subjects that will motivate most people to read them.
So, the shift of the subjects covered in the new magazines compared to the ones two decades ago, mirror the change in quality of the majority of the people that own a computer. Also, the very few true programming geeks (that are lost in the swarm) do not need to read a magazine for their needs since they can find everything on the internet. Hobbyist programmers that remind me of that good old feeling of the old times, do exist in underground communities like the demoscene, linux, homebrew console developers and other communities. I just felt for a while an awe reading that first issue of 1989 and then a disappointment. But it's to be expected..
p.s. Another subject that I would like to write next time is about programming and the youth. Is it harder for the new generations to get dragged into programming than in the past? Is it odd that whenever I have a conversation with students of informatics here in Thessaloniki, most of them confess that they dislike programming? (even those who have taken their diploma). Or that (as a friend told me) most males are bragging that they are great hackers while they know shit about programming? But this phenomenon is to be analyzed in another post..
My astonishment is not on the technological changes but on the shift in contents of the greek (and I suppose foreign too) computer magazines since the beginning of home computing. The phenomenon that I will describe can also be seen in other greek publications like Pixel, User and others (I am just browsing some of them in a forum archive on retromaniax website).
First of all listings. I remember several big listings of programs written in basic for various 8bit computers in Pixel magazine. The only bad thing with these listing was that they were given without explanation and you just had to type them trying to be careful not making any typos or you would get Syntax Error messages (at least on my Amstrad CPC) and not being able to know what the mistake could be (because you wrote the code blindly). Not a good way to learn programming but maybe that's where I got use to type so fast and blindfolded on the keyboard. But the astonishing thing was that the magazine devoted something like 30% (if I am not mistaken) of it's pages on programming listings! Nowadays magazines might spend two pages on visual basic programming (if they bother to have a programming column at all) because they need all the rest for game reviews and what hardware to buy advices. I will get back to this (even if the reason is obvious).
The first issue of PC Master (and the following issues for several years) except from the main articles on news, hardware and game reviews (which didn't take the majority of the pages) had at least three programming articles with a good amount of explained code (at least as much as it possible in few pages) in Basic, Pascal or C and an article explaining some DOS commands among others. The quality of code was more advanced than what you can find today in the two pages visual basic article when a magazine bothers to include one.
What astonished me even more was the column with reader's letters. The vast majority of the readers were asking things about weird DOS commands, batch file making or programming questions. What astonished me was the quality of the readers. Many of them were people experimenting with their computer. Compare this with a common type of letters in the same magazine after twenty years: "Hello, I have just installed Crysis but it's too slow on my GF8600. Should I get a GTX?". If it's not about games then it's something stupid like "Hi dood, I liekd your H4CK TH3 PL4N3T column. Ona day I wanna be the best haxor in teh world! Greetinx, Cyberg0d!!1". Oh yes, I have just noticed that they have a new column called "Hack the Planet". But no columns trying to revive the old good programming curiosity..
What is the thing that changed? It's rather obvious. First of all remember that the people who had a computer and spent hours with it in the past were mostly geeks. Computers were not mainstream, it wasn't everyone's business. The majority of the readers were more than gamers. Many of them might have started from the early 80s when most of the 8bit home micros of the time were coming with basic at boot. It was inevitable that out of curiosity someone would try to code something in basic and there were even big chapters in the manuals that came with the machines, dedicated in basic programming, system calls and maybe even assembly. Later on the PC, the environment was a boring black screen and sometimes you even had to change your CONFIG.SYS manually to get that desired free memory for running a specific game. Still, an operating system not attractive to the majority of the people.
And when computer graphics became more attractive, the operating system more classy and internet was a commonality, that was the moment where what consisted a computer user changed. Actually nothing has changed from the side of the geeks and hobby programmers. They still exist, you can find even exceptions of younger people getting interested in real programming instead of just playing WOW. What has changed is the majority of the readers. Today, most of the people who have a PC and spend hours in front of it are playing games, watching movies or youtube videos, surfing the net, updating their facebook status, downloading MP3s or just composing a document in word. Most of the people who might install a compiler and write a programm for a while are doing it in their studies or job. And only very few of them are also doing it as a hobby. It's quite logical that in our modern days where the majority who is interested in computers prefer the mainstream and fun stuff instead of programming, that the magazines of the same era will prefer to cover the same subjects that will motivate most people to read them.
So, the shift of the subjects covered in the new magazines compared to the ones two decades ago, mirror the change in quality of the majority of the people that own a computer. Also, the very few true programming geeks (that are lost in the swarm) do not need to read a magazine for their needs since they can find everything on the internet. Hobbyist programmers that remind me of that good old feeling of the old times, do exist in underground communities like the demoscene, linux, homebrew console developers and other communities. I just felt for a while an awe reading that first issue of 1989 and then a disappointment. But it's to be expected..
p.s. Another subject that I would like to write next time is about programming and the youth. Is it harder for the new generations to get dragged into programming than in the past? Is it odd that whenever I have a conversation with students of informatics here in Thessaloniki, most of them confess that they dislike programming? (even those who have taken their diploma). Or that (as a friend told me) most males are bragging that they are great hackers while they know shit about programming? But this phenomenon is to be analyzed in another post..
Thursday, 13 August 2009
The hermit and the stars
I am sitting here outside my hotel room watching the stars. The view from the mountain is magnificent. I am one and a half kilometer away from the place where I have to work the next days. I came here by foot, following the road in the dark. Magnificent view of the stars where there are very few lights. Just one think I am wondering about. Where the hell is the milky way? I see a faint thing. I have read somewhere that it's very hard to see it clear in the modern civilization where the places are full of city lights. I have seen some photos (which I am not sure if they are illustrations or the real thing) where it looks magnificent. Where can I see it like this? How far away from the lights should I go?
Someone would say that I am far away from civilization. Someone else would joke that I am still not far away from it because I am just writting this in a laptop. Although there is no internet, nowhere here. The village has something like twelve buildings and maybe thirty people are living here. Some dreamy ethereal music is playing in my laptop while I am sitting outside alone, watching high for the stars as I am writting this (blind writting ftw :). As I am intentionally creating some kind of wannabe romanticism one thing comes in my mind.
AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
p.s. I am wondering what has became of this blog and where is it leading. So far I like my posts. It's just that 90% of them have to do with my despise of the modern hacking culture. Which has totally something to do with the main inspiration that initially made me open this blog. My dislike of some mainstream aspects in the computer world accompanied by some kind of romantic feeling about the old times when things were just starting and were pure. The modern hacker seeks a target to attack just because it's trendy to deface websites and write a manifest or do anything stupid. Not many people understand the programming creativity of hobbyist communities and these same people speak of the best words about how they adore hackers who do stupid acts. Although I may be too obsessed with this anti-"hacking" thing (it shows) and I am thinking to shift to other subjects that still have to do with the good old things and how they have changed. And keep that romanticism (Don't take it seriously (I don't), just flow into it and dream :)
Someone would say that I am far away from civilization. Someone else would joke that I am still not far away from it because I am just writting this in a laptop. Although there is no internet, nowhere here. The village has something like twelve buildings and maybe thirty people are living here. Some dreamy ethereal music is playing in my laptop while I am sitting outside alone, watching high for the stars as I am writting this (blind writting ftw :). As I am intentionally creating some kind of wannabe romanticism one thing comes in my mind.
AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
p.s. I am wondering what has became of this blog and where is it leading. So far I like my posts. It's just that 90% of them have to do with my despise of the modern hacking culture. Which has totally something to do with the main inspiration that initially made me open this blog. My dislike of some mainstream aspects in the computer world accompanied by some kind of romantic feeling about the old times when things were just starting and were pure. The modern hacker seeks a target to attack just because it's trendy to deface websites and write a manifest or do anything stupid. Not many people understand the programming creativity of hobbyist communities and these same people speak of the best words about how they adore hackers who do stupid acts. Although I may be too obsessed with this anti-"hacking" thing (it shows) and I am thinking to shift to other subjects that still have to do with the good old things and how they have changed. And keep that romanticism (Don't take it seriously (I don't), just flow into it and dream :)
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Cracker --- goes good with cheese, smoked oysters and possible caviar.
I just read that line and cracked in laughter :)
Finally some random forum in the web where someone addresses the predictable "hacker not cracker" argument and most people bring it to some good jokes, actually saying who cares how they are called, the fight for the meaning of the word "hacker" is lost and all those people are idiots anyways. Yep, the majority in that message board just didn't cared and cracked some nice jokes about it.
Why can't you find other places like this on the net? Maybe they were so pissed off by seeing their favorite community site crumble to nothing that just wanted to punch in the face anyone who comes with the silly "crackers not hackers" argument? Seriously I was positively surprised that the majority there addressed the definition and ethics problem differently that in several other sites. This usually doesn't happen!
As I address it in a post at the same forum thread, once the hackers where the programmers and hardware gurus but today the term has changed and nobody can do something for that. When you create a new term "cracker" to differentiate from the programmers, most people still understand "hackers" as the good security breakers and "crackers" as the bad security breakers. The myth perpetuates and now if some stupid person breaks uninvited in a computer and does anything questionable (even a simple website defacing is not ethical in my opinion) he claims to be a hacker (the good guy) and not a cracker. But as I said, it's like saying "I am a hero, not an asshole". Who would say otherwise?
I am currently reading a classic book by Steven Levy, Hackers, heroes of the computer revolution (1984). There are the early computer programmers of the sixties, the hardware gurus who build home computers and the early game developers and software copy protection crackers presented in this book. No mention of anything resembling the modern media definition at all. But today, saying "hackers" we mostly mean the later. And that thing is that has to be demystified or else more people on the net will create senseless havoc and even think they are heroes by doing that. We have to show them that it's not ethical, it's not justified and it's not the right spirit.
I even started programming at a very late age where the meaning had already shifted. I never called myself a hacker, it's demeaning. I called myself a programmer, coder, demoscener or geek. Maybe that's because I simply don't care for the preservation of the old definition of the term because it existed several years before my time. But there are tons of great hobbyist and underground programmers just being creative in the old sense with the "hacking spirit" as described in the book. Not calling ourselves hackers doesn't change the fact that some of us will always show signs of the creative spirit, the insight, the programming enthousiasm, the cleverness in computers, science, arts or any human discipline for all ages to come. We just don't need yet another idiotic definition, some kind of honorable title to mask our true intentions and justify questionable acts. We are what we do and we do what we are.
Apparently 45.652 people get it on the internet..
Finally some random forum in the web where someone addresses the predictable "hacker not cracker" argument and most people bring it to some good jokes, actually saying who cares how they are called, the fight for the meaning of the word "hacker" is lost and all those people are idiots anyways. Yep, the majority in that message board just didn't cared and cracked some nice jokes about it.
Why can't you find other places like this on the net? Maybe they were so pissed off by seeing their favorite community site crumble to nothing that just wanted to punch in the face anyone who comes with the silly "crackers not hackers" argument? Seriously I was positively surprised that the majority there addressed the definition and ethics problem differently that in several other sites. This usually doesn't happen!
As I address it in a post at the same forum thread, once the hackers where the programmers and hardware gurus but today the term has changed and nobody can do something for that. When you create a new term "cracker" to differentiate from the programmers, most people still understand "hackers" as the good security breakers and "crackers" as the bad security breakers. The myth perpetuates and now if some stupid person breaks uninvited in a computer and does anything questionable (even a simple website defacing is not ethical in my opinion) he claims to be a hacker (the good guy) and not a cracker. But as I said, it's like saying "I am a hero, not an asshole". Who would say otherwise?
I am currently reading a classic book by Steven Levy, Hackers, heroes of the computer revolution (1984). There are the early computer programmers of the sixties, the hardware gurus who build home computers and the early game developers and software copy protection crackers presented in this book. No mention of anything resembling the modern media definition at all. But today, saying "hackers" we mostly mean the later. And that thing is that has to be demystified or else more people on the net will create senseless havoc and even think they are heroes by doing that. We have to show them that it's not ethical, it's not justified and it's not the right spirit.
I even started programming at a very late age where the meaning had already shifted. I never called myself a hacker, it's demeaning. I called myself a programmer, coder, demoscener or geek. Maybe that's because I simply don't care for the preservation of the old definition of the term because it existed several years before my time. But there are tons of great hobbyist and underground programmers just being creative in the old sense with the "hacking spirit" as described in the book. Not calling ourselves hackers doesn't change the fact that some of us will always show signs of the creative spirit, the insight, the programming enthousiasm, the cleverness in computers, science, arts or any human discipline for all ages to come. We just don't need yet another idiotic definition, some kind of honorable title to mask our true intentions and justify questionable acts. We are what we do and we do what we are.
Apparently 45.652 people get it on the internet..
Thursday, 25 June 2009
Garbage on the web
It always makes me mad.
I like the feeling of being off-line. Away from the junk.
It can still be fun if you like to be in control of your computer.
Programming little things and little machines. The real thing.
Real and respectable computing. Alone.
I received another one of those emails. Someone I knew send it to me. He probably didn't know and he thought it was the right thing to do. Microsoft and IBM said one of the most dangerous computer virii is on the loose. Even CNN had that story! The virus can burst you hard disk in flames. It can also steal your email and your id. They warn you to close your PC the following days. Maybe it will be better to do so with that pyramid email shit floating around. Sigh...
It's common. It's nothing to be angry about. Pyramid emails. Stupid hypes. Annoying Spam and pop ups. Pseudohackers spreading virii and defacing websites. Stupid flaming and hip websites. Boring social community sites. Internet for the masses.
I recently heard the word "darknet". I immediately fell in love with the concept. A private network for the few ones. Maybe it's a bit elitish. Maybe someone can't easilly get into. I don't even know where do they exist and how they look like. I wish I knew more about computer networks. Although they remind me the old times of BBS. I never had the luck to join one though. It was past my time. Maybe some people are still running them for the nostalgy. Private networks. Somehow it's appealing that besides the all well known internet there are some unreachable places out there. There is something in the concept that is so inspiring till the mass discovers it and it becomes mainstream and spoiled. But who is the mass anyways? I might be a part of the mass too :P
I heard another even more appealing word . It's called "off-line".
I like the feeling of being off-line. Away from the junk.
It can still be fun if you like to be in control of your computer.
Programming little things and little machines. The real thing.
Real and respectable computing. Alone.
I received another one of those emails. Someone I knew send it to me. He probably didn't know and he thought it was the right thing to do. Microsoft and IBM said one of the most dangerous computer virii is on the loose. Even CNN had that story! The virus can burst you hard disk in flames. It can also steal your email and your id. They warn you to close your PC the following days. Maybe it will be better to do so with that pyramid email shit floating around. Sigh...
It's common. It's nothing to be angry about. Pyramid emails. Stupid hypes. Annoying Spam and pop ups. Pseudohackers spreading virii and defacing websites. Stupid flaming and hip websites. Boring social community sites. Internet for the masses.
I recently heard the word "darknet". I immediately fell in love with the concept. A private network for the few ones. Maybe it's a bit elitish. Maybe someone can't easilly get into. I don't even know where do they exist and how they look like. I wish I knew more about computer networks. Although they remind me the old times of BBS. I never had the luck to join one though. It was past my time. Maybe some people are still running them for the nostalgy. Private networks. Somehow it's appealing that besides the all well known internet there are some unreachable places out there. There is something in the concept that is so inspiring till the mass discovers it and it becomes mainstream and spoiled. But who is the mass anyways? I might be a part of the mass too :P
I heard another even more appealing word . It's called "off-line".
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
I never understood 'hacking' and I never will
When I was at puberty I made this insane thought: I had to become a great programmer to distinguish myself from the average joe operating a computer.
Maybe it was my lack of self-esteem and general feeling of misfit at school that forced me to take that decision. I believe this is one of the forces (and one of the curses) behind trying to become a master of any art there is. The quest for fame and honor.
At first I was bothered with school exams that were needed to be selected at a university, that didn't left me much time for seeking this dream. I didn't do much back then but the thought kept breeding in my mind. Later, as I became a student at the university and got an internet connection in the university lab I discovered the first traces of the demoscene community. I had already seen some demos from an old magazine CD several months ago but didn't know anyone near my place being involved in the community. It was the time I made my first attempts at democoding, spent a lot of hours in the computer rooms happily communicating with other people interested in demos and also managed to be absorbed so much that I totally fucked up my studies for the next eight years :)
I really don't remember much about the so called 'hacking' trend at the time, I actually don't remember that this thing ever attracted me. Maybe I have heard something about it even before I started having this dream of becoming a good programmer. Everyone knew about it from the movies. Even if I could not imagine at that time how one could possibly invade in a foreign computer without 'touching' it, this activity never inspired me. Maybe my initial interests were focused on graphics programming and not computer security penetrating.
For someone seeking fame and honor desperately, it should be a number one choice. Everybody said great words about 'hackers' and the whole thing had become a myth. Of course most of them were thinking of 'hackers' as portrayed by the mass media. But it never touched me! I am not sure why but one reason might be that at that time I found the actions and attitude of the so called 'hackers' quite dumb.
During that time (it was 1998-9) there existed a greek 'hacking' site, hack.gr (It's history now). I remember that I was posting a lot of ugly texts in it's forums concerning my view on this 'hacking' trend. Even then, when I was a lame programmer (making 2d stars and scrollers in quickbasic :P) and didn't know much about computers, I could not feel any respect or reason for what 'hackers' did. It was neither impressive nor creative. I still don't know why it never touched me, I still haven't answered to myself why I always hated it.
So, I knew about the so called 'hacking' community. I knew about their web pranks, their 133t attitude and the whole myth revolving around them. Fame and honor was also a factor that motivated me to start learning programming and make demos. But I never shifted my activities into 'hacking', the supposedly ultra-cool computer activity which would be ideal to gain fame and honor.
I was misunderstood. I tried to show several times that what can be accumulated in the term 'hacker' as people understand it today (security penetrating/malicious software/coolness, attitude, trends and the myth) is not to be respected. And they were replying that I am recycling the opinion of the mass-media or that the are good respected 'hackers' or that I am clueless. But all I wanted to blame was the modern so called 'hacking' community and it's false reasons. I didn't know that the term was also attributed to underground hobbyist and clever programmers who were the respected ones and had nothing to do with modern 'hacking'.
Later as I became more involved in the demoscene community I started an endless race of programming more and more demos with the wish to become famous in the scene. While it was a kind of attitude that became an obsession and almost destroyed the fun behind demomaking, it was also a motivating factor that brought me were I am today. But as long as I wrote the next line of code, as long as I coded a new effect or released yet another demo, it felt like I was putting my brain into creating something that I can later watch and be happy of my achievement. If I was given a magic lamp that would instantly create a great demo and make me famous in the scene then it would mean nothing to me. I wouldn't feel any honor, I wouldn't appreciate myself at all.
I had to put a great effort and create something, either it was a demo or a game or an application or anything. This was a bliss, especially if it involved some insane optimization techniques or a crazy idea of my own (later, I even dwelved into z80 assembly and coded some nice demos for the 8bit Amstrad CPC). There was hacking spirit (with the old meaning of programming cleverness) in it and I could totally perceive that feeling. I was inspired by unconventional coding tricks that could be used to optimize computer graphics in such old and slow computers. The same inspiration to find crazy tricks to optimize or code new 'impossible' effects could occure even in modern PC demos (It's not about the vast processing power but the spirit).
I mean, I have been involved in low level programming for years, wrote several lines of assembly and C code, I have created a lot of demos where many people wish they could do the same and even if initially I was struck by the same fame virus that you use to see in the people who wish they can be 'hackers', I loved programming and creativity and I could never understand the other side. I observed and lived the feeling of finishing another piece of code that does something clever, I have created a lot of demos to satisfy my need to be special, my road was somewhere between this obsession of becoming a well known good programmer and learning some real programming in a such creative and unknown community as the demoscene but I never understood the so called 'hackers'. They were just seeking ways to penetrate security so that they make cool internet pranks and become famous for nothing, while I was trying to create something because of my interest in become better at programming (even if one of my initial motivations was fame too). Such a gap between me and them..
I mean, even at the beginning when I was a newbie in programming I still didn't understand their motives and attitude. The so called respect was about the programming ingenuity and hobbyist underground of the old definition which I later persued. When I present some of the demos I created to computer illiterate friends, many of them are not impressed and they ask me the dumb question: "That's boring. Can you 'hack' instead?". That says it all!
Good programmers and clever people with a conscience don't call themselves 'hackers'. I am sorry, the H-word has died for me. It's only used to denote something I cannot feel respect for.
Maybe it was my lack of self-esteem and general feeling of misfit at school that forced me to take that decision. I believe this is one of the forces (and one of the curses) behind trying to become a master of any art there is. The quest for fame and honor.
At first I was bothered with school exams that were needed to be selected at a university, that didn't left me much time for seeking this dream. I didn't do much back then but the thought kept breeding in my mind. Later, as I became a student at the university and got an internet connection in the university lab I discovered the first traces of the demoscene community. I had already seen some demos from an old magazine CD several months ago but didn't know anyone near my place being involved in the community. It was the time I made my first attempts at democoding, spent a lot of hours in the computer rooms happily communicating with other people interested in demos and also managed to be absorbed so much that I totally fucked up my studies for the next eight years :)
I really don't remember much about the so called 'hacking' trend at the time, I actually don't remember that this thing ever attracted me. Maybe I have heard something about it even before I started having this dream of becoming a good programmer. Everyone knew about it from the movies. Even if I could not imagine at that time how one could possibly invade in a foreign computer without 'touching' it, this activity never inspired me. Maybe my initial interests were focused on graphics programming and not computer security penetrating.
For someone seeking fame and honor desperately, it should be a number one choice. Everybody said great words about 'hackers' and the whole thing had become a myth. Of course most of them were thinking of 'hackers' as portrayed by the mass media. But it never touched me! I am not sure why but one reason might be that at that time I found the actions and attitude of the so called 'hackers' quite dumb.
During that time (it was 1998-9) there existed a greek 'hacking' site, hack.gr (It's history now). I remember that I was posting a lot of ugly texts in it's forums concerning my view on this 'hacking' trend. Even then, when I was a lame programmer (making 2d stars and scrollers in quickbasic :P) and didn't know much about computers, I could not feel any respect or reason for what 'hackers' did. It was neither impressive nor creative. I still don't know why it never touched me, I still haven't answered to myself why I always hated it.
So, I knew about the so called 'hacking' community. I knew about their web pranks, their 133t attitude and the whole myth revolving around them. Fame and honor was also a factor that motivated me to start learning programming and make demos. But I never shifted my activities into 'hacking', the supposedly ultra-cool computer activity which would be ideal to gain fame and honor.
I was misunderstood. I tried to show several times that what can be accumulated in the term 'hacker' as people understand it today (security penetrating/malicious software/coolness, attitude, trends and the myth) is not to be respected. And they were replying that I am recycling the opinion of the mass-media or that the are good respected 'hackers' or that I am clueless. But all I wanted to blame was the modern so called 'hacking' community and it's false reasons. I didn't know that the term was also attributed to underground hobbyist and clever programmers who were the respected ones and had nothing to do with modern 'hacking'.
Later as I became more involved in the demoscene community I started an endless race of programming more and more demos with the wish to become famous in the scene. While it was a kind of attitude that became an obsession and almost destroyed the fun behind demomaking, it was also a motivating factor that brought me were I am today. But as long as I wrote the next line of code, as long as I coded a new effect or released yet another demo, it felt like I was putting my brain into creating something that I can later watch and be happy of my achievement. If I was given a magic lamp that would instantly create a great demo and make me famous in the scene then it would mean nothing to me. I wouldn't feel any honor, I wouldn't appreciate myself at all.
I had to put a great effort and create something, either it was a demo or a game or an application or anything. This was a bliss, especially if it involved some insane optimization techniques or a crazy idea of my own (later, I even dwelved into z80 assembly and coded some nice demos for the 8bit Amstrad CPC). There was hacking spirit (with the old meaning of programming cleverness) in it and I could totally perceive that feeling. I was inspired by unconventional coding tricks that could be used to optimize computer graphics in such old and slow computers. The same inspiration to find crazy tricks to optimize or code new 'impossible' effects could occure even in modern PC demos (It's not about the vast processing power but the spirit).
I mean, I have been involved in low level programming for years, wrote several lines of assembly and C code, I have created a lot of demos where many people wish they could do the same and even if initially I was struck by the same fame virus that you use to see in the people who wish they can be 'hackers', I loved programming and creativity and I could never understand the other side. I observed and lived the feeling of finishing another piece of code that does something clever, I have created a lot of demos to satisfy my need to be special, my road was somewhere between this obsession of becoming a well known good programmer and learning some real programming in a such creative and unknown community as the demoscene but I never understood the so called 'hackers'. They were just seeking ways to penetrate security so that they make cool internet pranks and become famous for nothing, while I was trying to create something because of my interest in become better at programming (even if one of my initial motivations was fame too). Such a gap between me and them..
I mean, even at the beginning when I was a newbie in programming I still didn't understand their motives and attitude. The so called respect was about the programming ingenuity and hobbyist underground of the old definition which I later persued. When I present some of the demos I created to computer illiterate friends, many of them are not impressed and they ask me the dumb question: "That's boring. Can you 'hack' instead?". That says it all!
Good programmers and clever people with a conscience don't call themselves 'hackers'. I am sorry, the H-word has died for me. It's only used to denote something I cannot feel respect for.
Friday, 22 May 2009
Demoscenes and mainstream
After posting the previous article about the demoscene, I remember and rechecked something else and interesting or scary thoughts popped in my mind.
What happens if something like the demoscene reaches the mainstream? What could be the common misinterpretations from the average joe? Could there be some dangerous ones? Which elements worked out well as a connection bridge between the one who can understand it deeply and the common person who hasn't heard about it before?
Currently there is a kinda funny term misrepresentation floating around the web, which is most probably harmless (even though the idea that such a mistake can be passed so easilly by the majority without anyone inside the scene being able to correct this, scares me). Several people, are mistakenly calling the demos as 'demoscenes'. Phrases like these are floating around blogs and forums right now: "Hey, have you seen the demoscenes I sent you?", "The Debris demoscene is only 170k", "The demoscenes are wonderful graphical programms of small size".
Just for the records, the programms are called demos, people! Demoscene is the community of people creating them. There is no such a thing as 'demoscenes' (in plurar). Learn that!
Now, as long as the meaning of demos hasn't changed (people are still impressed by the realtime graphics and the small size of some of them) there is no alert that there will ever be a wrong interpretation of the essence of the scene as we know it. It's maybe not that important if people are calling them demoscenes or megascenes or whatever. It's just that chill on my spine when I think about the power of the mass especially through the internet. Even if the term 'demoscenes' is wrong, if I now visit every forum or blog that misuses the term and clearly state the mistake for all, there will still be people around the globe calling them demoscenes. I am powerless over the influence of several people using the wrong term.
Let's examine also some more facts. Why 'demoscenes'? I even remember the time several years backs when I met some other greek people interested in the scene, one of them being a good coder and knows the difference between the terms, although the very first time I explained him about demoscene and those wonderful programms called demos, he somehow used the wrong term and also called them 'demoscenes'. He even face-slapped himself then (lol, not exactly) for spreading the whole mistaken term to every other people in his village who never had heard about demos before. I never made this mistake when I explained demos to him or in some of my articles about the demoscene. Why was he confused the first time? What drives people to prefer 'demoscenes' over 'demos'?
A simple answer. When people speak of 'demos', a misunderstanding is happening because the same term exists as in demos of games or commercial software (limited, time-trial versions, etc). Maybe the people, not exactly intentionally, but to avoid confusion they have to speak of them with another similar term. And
'demoscenes' could be what jumped easier in their mind. I am not sure but I think that this is one important factor. Which of course was a problem even in the 80s but it's only recently when I saw the new lame term 'demoscenes' circulating around the internet. Maybe that's because the demoscene and it's productions became more known through the internet only recently. In this one, efforts for scene outreach (which one I am watching with a positive eye), big companies being interested in the demoscene and of course kkrieger helped it to happen. It's quite interesting for me to see where this path leads.
I once described this recent phenomenon as the good mainstream. Big companies, siggraph, software houses, conferences at demoparties, demos digged, game sites with a demoscene section, maybe this is something good for me when I mention my involvement in the demoscene on my CV and suddenly the computer world outside the scene appreciates it. But what about the scene itself? The good thing here is that demos are becoming mainstream to the computer literate outside the scene who is not exactly the average joe. The average joe speaks of hacking as seen in the movies and he is of course thinking of security breaking (which he finds ultracool), not programming (which he finds boring). The scene is about programming realtime graphics, pixeling/3d modelling, writting music and generally being purely creative with a computer instead of playing games or dreaming of hacking the pentagon :P. This is why even with this shift to the commercial computer world, the inner notion of demos and demomaking will never change.
At the moment, I am not sure whether this shift might change the scene in other ways (some people think it will miss it's underground spirit but I don't believe so). Nevertheless, I think I am exactly tripping at the point in time where such a shift could occure. And it is interesting to me to observe and analyze what happens. To see an important computer community dramatically changing (or possibly not) through history and make my own conclusions while living this history. I can stare and see how is it possible for something to change so much (if it ever does) as something similar happened with the 'hackers' notion but I wasn't there living in the historic times to actually observe the change. Interesting times for the demoscene.
Another point. A primary element that currently is making the demos interesting in the eyes of non-scene people around the internet is that of size. Currently, the most blog/forum posts describing the demos (and even calling them wrongly 'demoscenes') give mostly as examples the small and tiny sized ones, namely 4k or 64k intros. Of course. People cannot be impressed by the realtime graphics notion. Demos are traditionally non-interactive and the big ones that weight several megabytes could be mistaken for videos so they would be just plain boring (even if video captures of such image clearness and resolution would need hundreds of megabytes, not only 10-20MBs). Only a tiny sized file of something less than 64k displaying smooth crystal clear visuals and sound would make the average joe being impressed. Most people keeps in mind only the <64k category when refering to demos. Another problem I see here is that year by year the size of the traditional demos is growing up. People are also posting demos at youtube. If the video capture (even as a low quality divx rather than the crystal clear realtime rendered frames) reaches the size of the executable demos then what's the point? Will there be a schism? Most probably not because sceners appreciate the traditional demo category as they can relate to the fact that it's still an executable producing realtime graphics. But what about the mainstream who just discovered demos as impressive tiny sized executables?
Only time will tell. It will be interesting to me to observe any possible (good or bad) transformation through the years. How will the scene be in 2020 or 2050?
What happens if something like the demoscene reaches the mainstream? What could be the common misinterpretations from the average joe? Could there be some dangerous ones? Which elements worked out well as a connection bridge between the one who can understand it deeply and the common person who hasn't heard about it before?
Currently there is a kinda funny term misrepresentation floating around the web, which is most probably harmless (even though the idea that such a mistake can be passed so easilly by the majority without anyone inside the scene being able to correct this, scares me). Several people, are mistakenly calling the demos as 'demoscenes'. Phrases like these are floating around blogs and forums right now: "Hey, have you seen the demoscenes I sent you?", "The Debris demoscene is only 170k", "The demoscenes are wonderful graphical programms of small size".
Just for the records, the programms are called demos, people! Demoscene is the community of people creating them. There is no such a thing as 'demoscenes' (in plurar). Learn that!
Now, as long as the meaning of demos hasn't changed (people are still impressed by the realtime graphics and the small size of some of them) there is no alert that there will ever be a wrong interpretation of the essence of the scene as we know it. It's maybe not that important if people are calling them demoscenes or megascenes or whatever. It's just that chill on my spine when I think about the power of the mass especially through the internet. Even if the term 'demoscenes' is wrong, if I now visit every forum or blog that misuses the term and clearly state the mistake for all, there will still be people around the globe calling them demoscenes. I am powerless over the influence of several people using the wrong term.
Let's examine also some more facts. Why 'demoscenes'? I even remember the time several years backs when I met some other greek people interested in the scene, one of them being a good coder and knows the difference between the terms, although the very first time I explained him about demoscene and those wonderful programms called demos, he somehow used the wrong term and also called them 'demoscenes'. He even face-slapped himself then (lol, not exactly) for spreading the whole mistaken term to every other people in his village who never had heard about demos before. I never made this mistake when I explained demos to him or in some of my articles about the demoscene. Why was he confused the first time? What drives people to prefer 'demoscenes' over 'demos'?
A simple answer. When people speak of 'demos', a misunderstanding is happening because the same term exists as in demos of games or commercial software (limited, time-trial versions, etc). Maybe the people, not exactly intentionally, but to avoid confusion they have to speak of them with another similar term. And
'demoscenes' could be what jumped easier in their mind. I am not sure but I think that this is one important factor. Which of course was a problem even in the 80s but it's only recently when I saw the new lame term 'demoscenes' circulating around the internet. Maybe that's because the demoscene and it's productions became more known through the internet only recently. In this one, efforts for scene outreach (which one I am watching with a positive eye), big companies being interested in the demoscene and of course kkrieger helped it to happen. It's quite interesting for me to see where this path leads.
I once described this recent phenomenon as the good mainstream. Big companies, siggraph, software houses, conferences at demoparties, demos digged, game sites with a demoscene section, maybe this is something good for me when I mention my involvement in the demoscene on my CV and suddenly the computer world outside the scene appreciates it. But what about the scene itself? The good thing here is that demos are becoming mainstream to the computer literate outside the scene who is not exactly the average joe. The average joe speaks of hacking as seen in the movies and he is of course thinking of security breaking (which he finds ultracool), not programming (which he finds boring). The scene is about programming realtime graphics, pixeling/3d modelling, writting music and generally being purely creative with a computer instead of playing games or dreaming of hacking the pentagon :P. This is why even with this shift to the commercial computer world, the inner notion of demos and demomaking will never change.
At the moment, I am not sure whether this shift might change the scene in other ways (some people think it will miss it's underground spirit but I don't believe so). Nevertheless, I think I am exactly tripping at the point in time where such a shift could occure. And it is interesting to me to observe and analyze what happens. To see an important computer community dramatically changing (or possibly not) through history and make my own conclusions while living this history. I can stare and see how is it possible for something to change so much (if it ever does) as something similar happened with the 'hackers' notion but I wasn't there living in the historic times to actually observe the change. Interesting times for the demoscene.
Another point. A primary element that currently is making the demos interesting in the eyes of non-scene people around the internet is that of size. Currently, the most blog/forum posts describing the demos (and even calling them wrongly 'demoscenes') give mostly as examples the small and tiny sized ones, namely 4k or 64k intros. Of course. People cannot be impressed by the realtime graphics notion. Demos are traditionally non-interactive and the big ones that weight several megabytes could be mistaken for videos so they would be just plain boring (even if video captures of such image clearness and resolution would need hundreds of megabytes, not only 10-20MBs). Only a tiny sized file of something less than 64k displaying smooth crystal clear visuals and sound would make the average joe being impressed. Most people keeps in mind only the <64k category when refering to demos. Another problem I see here is that year by year the size of the traditional demos is growing up. People are also posting demos at youtube. If the video capture (even as a low quality divx rather than the crystal clear realtime rendered frames) reaches the size of the executable demos then what's the point? Will there be a schism? Most probably not because sceners appreciate the traditional demo category as they can relate to the fact that it's still an executable producing realtime graphics. But what about the mainstream who just discovered demos as impressive tiny sized executables?
Only time will tell. It will be interesting to me to observe any possible (good or bad) transformation through the years. How will the scene be in 2020 or 2050?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
