Write Your Own Freenet-based Game 55
lhdentra writes "Linux Journal is carrying an article by Brandon Wiley of the Everything Over Freenet project explaining how you can create your very own turn-based game, running over Freenet. He claims it's faster than playing chess by post."
Re:Jesus (Score:2)
Don Negro
If only Chessmaster Hex from Cowboy Bebop's... (Score:1)
http://www.genkiland.net/CowboyBebop/Sessions/sess ion14.txt [genkiland.net]
Besides that, I really can't think of a practical use for this, besides reworking FreeNet's topology and such. In any case, it's interesting.
Optional Pseudonymity for reliable interaction (Score:2)
Now really, the EOF project is cool, as it gets more and more diverse developers to come play in the freenet world. Some applications will be just silly, but some will provide useful functions where freenet's caching, security, anonymity, or pseudonymity (or a combination of the above) can add some really cool features.
Freenet has some webpages published within it (images and everything are distributed around the freenet network) already, and I believe there's a webcam project as well.
Re:Turn based? Hahaha (Score:2)
Turn-based pen-and-paper RPGs are as fun as they've always been.
And have the advantage that you see your friends in real life, and can throw popcorn at the DM when you encounter a beholder.
Interesting, but is it really feasible? (Score:2)
I think this is a very clever design, and nicely illustrates how to use Freenet's signed-subspace keys to avoid interference from a third party. I do believe, however, that it suffers from a couple problems inherent in the design of Freenet--- although only the first looks like a showstopper to me.
Perhaps a better algorithm for searching could help (for example, finding the "next" number on game creation by doing a search for 1, 2, 4, 8, etc., and then searching in the partially-used interval you find.) But--- I don't see any way of making it faster to find games that have been created but not replied to. Random search doesn't seem promising either unless many more games are created than actually get played--- which may well be feasible.
I don't fully understand the mechanisms by which Freenet prevents duplicate keys, but I believe it is vulnerable to network partitioning (or just insufficient TTLs). In any case, heavy contention on a small portion of the namespace could quickly bring to light any flaws in the protocol or implementation. :)
A natural idea is to have an indexing service which keeps track of which games have been started but not replied to yet. But once you introduce such a mechanism, you might as well use that instead for game setup.
Games may also appear in retrospect to contain illegal moves if a move is lost by the system and and replaced--- but this is not a big problem, since the "cheating" can only be done by the player who would stand accused.
(I realize that the article was only meant as a sketch--- and that the author admits Freenet isn't reliable--- but the protocol can and should address how to handle the unreliability.)
Re:But (Score:1)
But how about Chess over Slashdot? (Score:2)
Ehh.. I don't even know the terms.
Gaute
Re:balloons and honey pots (Score:1)
I didn't say that there wasn't any content, just that all the content is built on top of a model where the only two actions are putting something in, and taking it out again (I mean requesting, not removing). The same thing goes for all of the various more advanced protocols. Also that we are loosing a lot data from the network at the moment, which is true, but I am hopeful that I will be able to improve that by the end of the summer.
&& oskar
balloons and honey pots (Score:3)
Brandon's creative ways of adding any service on top of this limited base are fun, but they aren't really specific to Freenet as equivalent protocols would work over any system that provides a secure way to put things in and take things out. In fact, it is pretty easy to see how TCP could be implemented over any such system be enumerating each packets name (it would be faster than rfc1149 anyways...)
&& oskar sandberg
But (Score:2)
Quote (Score:3)
--
Quake - Type (Score:1)
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
Re:Turn based? Hahaha (Score:1)
Turn based definetly slows the pace down, but it allows many people (100's) to play in the same game.
Its not quake, netrek, or even nethack, but it has its place.
--
Re:Faster than playing chess by post? (Score:1)
Re:technology (Score:2)
Technology is driven by two factors:
1. Its ability to enable sex.
2. Its ability to enable game playing.
So the ultimate way to develop technology is to find ways to apply it to sex based games!
(Making InterSextions (basically a sex based Monopoly game) one of the most important programs of the 20th Century)
--Ty
Re:Nice, but... (Score:1)
The good points of a distributed system like this is: 1) no sentral server 2) no snooping parties or middle-man attacks 3) anonymity, you don't have to worry about getting cracked, DOSed or pinged to death. The bad news is 1) high latency 2) more complex and unreliable 3) need for a trust-model.
As a final point, if every inventor on earth listened to negative talk like this, we'd still be smashing rocks together.
- Steeltoe
I can see it now... (Score:4)
Found [1,103,038] hits for chess.
Displaying 1 - 5
1. Chess_Christina_Ass_Chess_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_
2. Christina_Ass_Porn_Chess_Britney_MP3_Wares_games
3. Christina_Chess_Ass_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_games
4. Christina_Ass_Porn_Britney_Chess_MP3_Wares_games
5. Christina_Ass_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_games_Chess_
G.H.
And of course (Score:1)
Re:Interesting but useless (Score:1)
Re:Nice, but... (Score:1)
This implementation may be just proof of concept, but the possibility is there for some really interesting interactive applications of Freenet.
Re:Nice, but... (Score:1)
Re:Nice, but... (Score:2)
Also from EOF (Score:2)
Various other pieces of software have been developed, notably freeweb [sourceforge.net] and Snarfzilla [sourceforge.net], to help with freesite insertion and/or browsing for stuff. HTH
Re:balloons and honey pots (Score:2)
That doesn't sound like the Freenet I know. There is actual content floating around, and I don't just mean porn. Take Snarfoo [127.0.0.1] and Content of EVIL [127.0.0.1] for example, to name but two.
You will have to be running fproxy for those links to work, btw.
Re:Namespace corruption? (Score:3)
Re:But (Score:3)
Go left.
Aim up.
Select rocket launcher.
Fire.
Until next week,
Joe Fragger.
Re:Namespace corruption? (Score:1)
e.g.: When Microsoft put out their Active Accessibility API to make it easier for us to make Win32 applications that can be accessed by people with disabilities, I doubt any one of them thought some jackass (me) would use it to turn AOL's Instant Messenger into a magic hate ball (think magic 8 ball but this one answers your questions with rage & spite instead of vagueness). The easier way to do it of course would be to just create a quick plugin for TiK (tik.sourceforge.net), but nooooooooooooooo, not me. I see a cool new technology (shut up, AA API was new to me...) and I decide to abuse it. This freenet game thingee is the same thing...
Peace,
Amit
ICQ 77863057
technology (Score:5)
1. Its ability to enable sex.
2. Its ability to enable game playing.
With anonymous porn, freenet clearly had the first all set up, but now that it has the second, there are no more obstacles to its widespread adoption.
Thank you for reading
Peace,
Amit
ICQ 77863057
Re:Namespace corruption? (Score:1)
I don't know if anyone actually has these goals. I think most people would prefer to play at a reasonable speed. But the actual point was to teach people how to write applications for Freenet. I figured it was more fun to show how to write chess than to show how to write, say, an Enterprise Application Server.
Re:Faster than playing chess by post? (Score:1)
Every few months the mail would arrive by plane with the other guy's next move. Then, one month, the guy at the North Pole doesn't get the expected letter. He figures the guy at the South Pole didn't mail it in time, and it'll be in the next batch of mail.
A few months go by, and the letter isn't in the next batch of mail, either. A few more months, nothing. Six months go by, and finally a letter arrives from the South Pole. Excited, he tears the letter open and reads:
"J'adoube." (I adjust.)
(In tournament chess there's something known as the "touch move rule" which means that if you touch a piece, you have to move that piece. You can nudge a piece only if you first announce that you're just adjusting it by saying, "I adjust," or, in French, "J'adoube." Classy chess players prefer to say it in French.)
I don't know if Freenet would be that bad, but if you wanted a more secure game of chess it would be cheaper to just run some other protocol through SSL.
Dave Conrad aka Dr. A. van Code
Well a friend of a friend of a friend told me
What is the point? (Score:2)
Is there some government somewhere that is repressing chess play? Who would gain from anonymously playing chess?!?
If you want to play chess remotely with high lag, just play by postal mail. It may cost a buck or two, but it is private, and if someone decides to read your mail, you will know about it.
Nice, but... (Score:2)
There is absolutely no way I would ever play chess online on a truly anonymous system. Cheating (the use of chess programs to boost a fragile ego - yes, some people view online chess as a "get the highest score by whatever means" type of game and, like they're UO/Diablo/Whathaveyou counterparts, are utterly baffled that there are people who don't) is already a problem on systems like ICC and USChessLive with registrations and moderation and sophisitcated detection systems. The only people I'd play over freenet are people I know in real life and then... what's the point?
Re:Nice, but... (Score:2)
I've heard one-time boxers positively gloat over the fact that they got crushed by the world champion. I've heard a local Chess IM fondly recall when he got trounced by Mikhail Tal. People pay good money for the chance to get beaten by Grandmasters they've not even heard of.
Getting beaten in a test of skill by a person who is much better than you - even repeatedly and without sign of end - is an honor (well... except maybe in the boxing thing, where it'd probably involve death eventually). Getting beaten by a twirp with a computer isn't. I don't need to know who my opponant is - I've played hundereds of people I don't know on ICC. I just need reasonable assurances that I'm playing another person when that is what I'm choosing to do. If I want to play a computer, I can (and do) do that as well.
And the trust model doesn't work at all. If only people you had past experience with or reliable sources vouching for were allowed to play you, that's not really all that anonymous, is it? You know them possibly better than I know the guys I played at the Chicago open a few weeks ago. If you don't require that, it's not at all difficult to keep coming back as a different random string of characters.
I do agree that there are strong possiblities for the technology. Chess is not one of them. I can think of no non-masochistic reason why any tournement player would take part - and while that's far from the majority of people who play the game, it's the vast majority of people who are at all decent at it.
Re:Nice, but... (Score:3)
And you enforce "The point" how? Are Freenet users going to somehow be more honorable than everyone else? Is this like Marxism's "point" that absolute power, if just in the hands of a different group of people, would be a wonderful thing?
Games are, by the nature of most of them, competative. The more anonymous they get, the more they get dominated by those who don't wish to play fairly by the rules - because on the one hand you have lusers who just want to feel the momentary thrill of having "won" (even if, in the case of Chess, it's Fritz or Crafty or Junior who won) and on the other hand you have people actually interested in the game who don't want to deal with the former, so the only one's left are the lusers and the naive.
In RL situations, cheating is rarely a viable option - the ways to cheat are fewer and the chance of getting caught are higher. Go into a digital world - be it the equivilant of Chess or Paintball - and all of a sudden it's both easier to cheat and harder to get caught. You can't have your laptop next to you in over the board chess, and you can't use a dupe bug on your pellets in paintball. You can on ICC or in any of the myriad of FPSs and the like. And you're much less likely to get caught with much less effort to hide yourself. And what happens? People cheat more. Golly, what a surprise.
So this is somehow going to get better in a totally anonymous environment? Never happen. Well, barely ever happen. What will happen is the owner of the freesite will make it known that he wants to play chess and dozens of adolescents (maturity-wise) will flock to his site and test out CM8000 against him.
Or, for a slight decrease in anonymity - the operaters of the site know who you are, but none of the other players do - the owner of the freesite can play on ICC or USChess live or any of a number of other sites, and have reasonable cause to believe that the people who just beat the crap out of him were, in fact, better than him, and not just fronts for a chess engine he could play without logging on at all.
Complete anonymity and playing competative games that require a LOT of work to become even marginally skilled at for real just don't go together well.
Someone else mentioned the idea of proof of concept - and, indeed, the people behind this don't seem to see it as a particularly serious endeavour. As a way to see what can be done on Freenet, great. Looks cool, and maybe there are some games that will fit nicely on it (turn based strategy-war games spring to mind). As a way to play a game like Chess online, however, it's a complete wash.
So? (Score:2)
Just my $.02 (but these are mine, mine, mine)
Re:Nice, but... (Score:1)
I can't imagine never being willing to play a game because someone else beat me at it. If anything, by playing against a better player, it's a chance to be exposed to better strategies, to at least better your own playing abilities.
Faster than playing chess by post? (Score:2)
Re:Turn based? Hahaha (Score:1)
Good point, however (Score:2)
IMHO Freenet is worse than post. It doesn't let you send secret decoder rings in the envelope, you can't include photos of your cat balancing on a high tension wire, and it's not possible to put a whole mess of glitter inside Freenet as you can with a well-designed postal envelope.
Some of us used to give away nifty badges, fake coinage, and various artifacts via post, so Freenet is definitely not even close in the end-user experience as a good snail-mail based game.
Even if it is used for chess.
Impossible (Score:1)
Mail might be a good application to run over Freenet: simple and fast enough. I don't know how they handle the fact that Freenet is an unreliable network by design (basically the documents you insert into Freenet are not supposed to stay forever), but EOF seems like a neat project.
Turn based? Hahaha (Score:1)
No one has either the time or the attention span to wait for another human being to make a move. This is the future, baby, and if you don't move quickly, you are dead. Games that are based on waiting are dead.
There's no time to strategy. Strategy is formed at the business end of a gun. Read and react. There's no time for deep thinking. Think too long and the game is over.
Kinda like fp'ing on
Dancin Santa
Coming next week: (Score:1)
Freesites (Score:1)
Perhaps... (Score:2)
Are you gonna do this every day? (Score:1)
That way, when it happens, you will be able to prove your prediction?
Only about 30 years too late. (Score:1)
I get it, it's spy code sent to your spymasters in Tajikistan. What's next I wonder?
BTW, Louis Armstrong died on July 6, 1971 at his home in Flushing Queens. I don't believe he and his last wife Lucielle had any children.
Interestingly enough, he celebrated his 71st birthday on the 4th of July two days earlier. However, Gary Giddings, noted jazz critic and author discovered that Louis was actually born in August 1901, which made him 70 when he died.
As Duke Ellington once said "Louis Armstrong was born poor, died rich, and never hurt anyone along the way".
Yes, That's it (Score:2)
Re:Stephen King, author, dead at 54 (Score:1)
Re:Protect the Chess players (Score:1)
* Patent Pending, (c)2001 TikkaMassala.
Re:The breakdown of freenet traffic is now (Score:1)
there is hardly any warez at all and
very few mp3s.
Go look on http://www.freegle.com or Snarfoo to
see keys posted daily for evidence.
Re:So? (Score:2)
Really the only thing about the Freenet system is that it guarantees privacy, at least as good a guarantee as one can get on the Internet. Now I can't come up with too many valid reasons for this level of protection, we're all better off if there's accountability at some level. This game is just a first step in developing somewhat realtime applications that use the Freenet engine. One could imagine future versions of Freenet being optimized to the point that they could create a virtual socket between computers. You could realtime chat with people without anybody having a hope of tracking you down. But as I said before, I'm not sure this is a good thing.
neat! (Score:2)
Good move! That's the way to promote! (Score:1)
- Yuioup "I could think of an interesting quote, but I couldn't be bothered right now - Yuioup"
Interesting but useless (Score:2)
Namespace corruption? (Score:4)