SL and its Learning Curve

[Perrie Juran]

---

Bitsy Buccaneer wrote:

I had a box camera rather like that when I was a kid. Absolutely adored it and was very cross when my mum made me use a "better" one instead. The supposed upgrade was a thin, soulless rectangle which I loathed with every fiber of my 9 year old steampunk heart. If only it had been fashionable then. :matte-motes-smile:

It was a roll your own and since I didn't know automatic I didn't think twice about it. The focusing mechanism wasn't hard on mine (which had been my grandfather's). It probably would confuse a lot of people today, but just looking at the picture I can remember how to use one. Haven't thought about that wee beauty in decades, thanks for the memories Theresa.

---

<thread jack>

 



 

You've reminded me of one of my favorite street photographers, Miroslav Tichy.

 

</threadjack>

[Phil Deakins]

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I don't recall a scripting task from you. Does it have anything to do with this coversation? I can't imagine that it does.

Most of the stuff I sell has one or more scripts in it, and they were all written by me. The scripts range from the very simple to the very complex. So there are two things to mention about your scripting task - (1) I simply wouldn't do it as a challenge, let along an unnecessary 'task'. If you want to assess my abilities as a scripter, visit my store. (2) whatever it was, someone who has been programming for 30 years in various languages, including machine code, would find it easy to do. That includes me, of course. So if it's easy for you, it would be an absolute doddle for me.

---

page 7. message 64

i be interested to see how long it would take you. if is a doddle and you are a 30 year veteran then you should be able to post the solution by tomorrow ?

is a challenge for sure. Is something you have to work out if dont already know. I dont have to work out the answers to these kinda problems. I already know the answers

same as is a challenge for new people to work stuff out when they start in SL for the first time. Whats easy/difficult is always relative to what we know already

---

By 'complex' I mean from the point of view of SL, but nothing in SL is anywhere near as complex as some of the major programmes I've written single-handedly, which include two multi-user online adventure games, one of which was graphic long before SL came out, and both of which were hybrids; i.e. a high level language together with machine code. They weren't the only hybrids I wrote either. The probability is that your programming abilities, of which you're silly enough boast, only scratch the surface of programming, and you are a relative beginner.

Anyway, give me a shout when you've written the online multi-user text adventure game, and if it works we'll test you on a graphic one. Or even give me shout when you're capable of writing even a very simple programme in machine code. Or perhaps even give me a shout when you can realistically call yourself a competent programmer. You choose, but if it's the latter you'll be required to prove it.

---

is not a boast. Is a fact. I do know

the posted codes demonstrate algorithmic complexity. In this case O(n) complexity. For both the encoder which is posted and the decoder which is not posted

as a games programmer yourself apparently, you would know the significance of this algorithm to games programming. And know that it is a pretty basic 101 game engine algorithm found in pretty much any game engine API. Which any competent games programmer knows how its used, why its used and how to write it

as you say tho, you write furniture scripts, which is also a fact

+

what I always find interesting on the internets is that whereever there are lots of self-taught amateurs how they always rate themselves on what code they have written

when asked about algorithms and to show in code their understanding of stuff like O(n) vs O(n2) then they have no idea. And often start rabbit on about their ability to type lines of syntax into a text editor

+

ps

if you do know how to write this decoder, being a game programmer, then I give you a prize of 100L. Like the encoder, the decoder has to be O(n) complexity as well to win the prize tho 

---

You actually boasted about your ability to do it. You said it would take you 5 minutes - the time it takes you to type it - and you highlighted your speed by allowing me until the next day. That was a boast, but it didn't surprise me because, in this incarnation, you seem to be full of yourself. And the only reason that it would only take you the time it takes to type it (which you said), is not because you are clever enough to conceive and type the solution at that speed, but because you've read and remembered someone else's solution, or you would be simply typing a copy of what you're looking at - probably without understanding it.

You made a mistake though. I'm not a "games programmer". I'm a programmer who, among other major programmes, and a myriad of smaller ones, has written 2 complex multi-user online games from scratch, without refering to any known games algorithms or anyone else's work. For the graphic one, I even wrote my own graphics system - from scratch. When you are able to scratch the surface of what I've done, and am able to do, let me know and I'll show you a little bit of respect. Until then, I see you as someone who has learned a few bits and, on account of that, you think very highly of yourself. In other words, a beginner, maybe not even that. Very much like it was when you sought to teach the americans and british about themselves. I.e. you read something, and immediately pushed yourself as the all-knowing person on the subject. I have no doubt whatsoever that the solution to the coding problem only takes you 5 minutes (you said "the time it takes me to type it") because you've remembered, or would copy, someone else's solution, and not because you ever created it from your own mind.

[Correction to the above: I do use binary trees whenever suitable, and I didn't invent the binary tree method, even though I create the code afresh for it when needed. I've never actually seen anyone else's code or flow chart for it. Let me guess. You're rushing to find out what a binary tree is now. Right? lol]

Incidentally, after I'd written those 2 major programmes that I've told you about, and another major programme that I haven't told you about, I was a professional (employed) programmer for some time, during which I wrote yet another major programme for the company that employed me. Just the one major programme though. I didn't stay there many years. I've never been content being employed. I've spent most of my working life being self-empoyed.

I haven't even clicked the link you posted, so I've no idea what you are talking about. It's your silly game, not mine. If I remember rightly, you raised it to point out that some things are hard/difficult for some people but not for others, and I don't think that anyone disagreed with that. I didn't. Some things are easy for some people because of their previously learned knowledge (like you having seen and remembered the little bit of code for the solution, and me having learned programming in various languages), but others have to start learning from scratch, so the same things take more time. Climbing Everest is both hard and dangerous for everyone though. It's hard because it's so cold, so far uphill, and requires so much fitness. It's dangerous because things can, and do, go wrong and, when they go wrong on Everest, it can be life-threatening. It kills people, regardless of the precautions they take.

 

P.S. I ought to say that the graphic online multi-user game was 2D, not 3D like SL. It was back in the early to mid-90s, when the web was still quite new, and SL-like systems weren't possible. It couldn't hold the tiniest of candles to anything like SL. At the time though, I don't think there was anything like it on the web. I certainly hadn't come across any graphic online multi-user game, but, because I was able to do it, no doubt others had done it too, even if the games weren't online. There's nothing special about my programming abilities.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

'To the full' isn't time dependant at all.

---

Wasn't talking time, was talking depth. Full =/= Empty, right?

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

'Inherent' is never subjective.

---

That's weird, because you've

only

used this word in subjective sentences.

You

would find climbing Everest

difficult

, my shiny new Everest-climbing-robot sees it as a walk in the park - because that's how it was designed.

It seems you may be getting stuck in absolutist terms. Don't worry- my even newer, even shinier Phil-rescuing robot can handle it no problem.

---

Thank goodness for the new robot lol

If something has a property, then the property is inherent in that something. Yes, that's an absolute. It doesn't matter if some people can handle the property easier than others. It's still an inherent property of the thing.

Everest is steep, very cold, not much oxygen higher up, snow and ice covered, deep crevasses hidden by snow, etc. Those things are absolute about Everest, and they make climbing it inherently difficult and dangerous. Some people can handle them easier than others, but there is still inherent difficulty and danger for anyone who climbs Everest. People still die up there, irrespective of the precautions they took, and the general rule up there is to continue on past anyone who is in real trouble, knowing that the person will most likely die. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule up there - don't stop to help anyone who is in real trouble because doing so can put your own life in real danger.

Someone suggested that climbing Everest is just a long hard slog up a mountain and, as long as sufficient precautions are taken, not dangerous. She was wrong. Things can and do go wrong, regardless of precautions, and people do die. If you're going to have a go, do take the precautions, but don't even think about getting acute appendicitis up there

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Bitsy Buccaneer wrote:

That is the strangest definition of "using [something] to the full" I've ever heard of.

Now I'm wondering what your definition of "you're not up on all that has been said" is. Most people I think would hear that as an assertion that I hadn't read it all or hadn't read it carefully enough. I did read the entire thread and did my best to read it carefully and follow its twists and turns and convolutions. Perhaps the phrase means something else in your mind.

---

Alight. Maybe 'to the full' wasn't the best phrase to use, but I think the description of what was meant by it is good. With movement, communication, and TPing, there are no restrictions in SL. A user can go anywhere, do any activity, etc. Nothing else is needed.

Nope, "you're not up on all that's been said" means exactly what you thought it meant. For you, I repeated what had already already been said, because your post indicated that you weren't aware of it. If you had been aware of it, I would have expected you to have already known what was meant by 'to the full'. I credited you with having read part of the thread, but hadn't yet come across that explanation.

[Phil Deakins]

Your phrase 'box camera' surprised me. The photograph is of a camera that, if my memory is correct, was called a roll camera - something like that. The box cameras that I remember really were boxes - literally - with 90 deg. angles all round. A search on Google for 'box camera' brings up some images of what I think of as box cameras.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Bitsy Buccaneer wrote:

That is the strangest definition of "using [something] to the full" I've ever heard of.

Now I'm wondering what your definition of "you're not up on all that has been said" is. Most people I think would hear that as an assertion that I hadn't read it all or hadn't read it carefully enough. I did read the entire thread and did my best to read it carefully and follow its twists and turns and convolutions. Perhaps the phrase means something else in your mind.

---

Alight. Maybe 'to the full' wasn't the best phrase to use, but I think the description of what was meant by it is good.

With movement, communication, and TPing, there are no restrictions in SL. A user can go anywhere,

do any activity

, etc.

Nothing else is needed.

Nope, "

you're not up on all that's been said

" means exactly what you thought it meant. For you, I repeated what had already already been said, because your post indicated that you weren't aware of it. If you had been aware of it, I would have expected you to have already known what was meant by 'to the full'. I credited you with having read part of the thread, but hadn't yet come across that explanation.

---

Your bolded statement is simply false. To do most activities in Second Life the user will also need to understand how to grant animation permissions, and for many they will need to use scripted objects. They not only need to know how to operate those objects but to know why those objects they own won't operate in certain regions. Many activities, such as using a vehicle, also require knowing about object rezzing and how to find areas that will allow them to rezz objects. None of these things are general knowledge like how to press keys on a keyboard; they are specialized topics specific to Second Life.

[Phil Deakins]

I don't think it's wrong. With those 3 abilities, a user can arrive in a club, see people dancing, ask how to dance, and s/he will be told. Heck, after 10 years, I still occasionally need to ask how to join in the dancing when I go to such a place, but I don't often get out and about lol.

If permission is needed for scripted objects, a menu comes up on the screen. It has words that explain why it came up, and the person knows what s/he clicked that caused it, and why s/he clicked it. And so the user learns nice and steadily as s/he goes along. Similarly with parcels that don't allow scripts to run, uisng vehicles, rezzing things, etc. I didn't suggest that a user won't learn anything else along the way. Of course they'll learn as they go along, as and when things come up. I don't think it's possible not to learn things along the way. All I'm saying is that such steady learning doesn't constitute a 'steep' learning curve, and that, once those 3 intitial things have been learned, a user can go all over SL (notwithstanding ban lines and such), enjoying what's out there, and learn bit by bit as and when things come up. Of course, if a new user immediately decides that she (more likely to be female) wants to improve the look of her avatar, then there's a steepness at the start. I've already accepted that. But it isn't an essential in order to use the whole of SL. Similarly, when a user wants to buy land, perhaps to have a home, there's a steepness at that point because understanding all about land isn't particularly intuitive. That could happen right at the start too, but usually not.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I don't think it's wrong. With those 3 abilities, a user can arrive in a club, see people dancing, ask how to dance,

and s/he will be told.

Heck, after 10 years, I still occasionally need to ask how to join in the dancing when I go to such a place, but I don't often get out and about lol.

 

---

The bolded statement needs to be expanded to, "and s/he will be told if someone happens to be using voice if they ask out loud/is reading local if they type, and that person can communicate in the language they are using, and they feel helpful. Assuming, of course, they are a person and not a bot."

I don't keep voice turned on. A few days ago I was walking around one of my properties and a newish-looking avatar was in the area. The, came over and looked like they were trying to interact with me but no text turned up on my screen so I went upon my business. It wasn't until later that I realized they may have been trying to talk to me using voice and probably thought I was extremely rude for ignoring them. (Not that I can't be, of course, but I usually save that for specific people.)

[Phil Deakins]

I'm not even thinking about voice. By communicate, I've always meant typing.

Yes, it can happen that a user goes to a place, types something, and is ignored. That happened to me sometime in the last few months, and all I said was something like, "hello everyone". Maybe they didn't want to talk to someone they didn't know, or maybe english was a foreign language to them, or maybe they were bots. I'm scraping the recesses of my memory but I'm pretty sure they were talking to each other in english. That wouldn't mean they weren't bots though. I just don't know. After waiting a while, I left and tried somewhere else. I think that generally doesn't happen though. If it happened to a new user, they would be tempted to quit SL, or wonder if they hadn't done it right.

There can always be exceptions. I'm only talking generalisations.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

If it happened to a new user, they would be tempted to quit SL, or wonder if they hadn't done it right.

---

Sometimes is by design. I've already pointed to this effect in this thread.

One of the worst places I'm known to hang out does this on purpose as part of the emergent culture. Local chat (voice or text) is merely used to identify (and dismiss) new accounts - experienced visitors know never to use it. I don't know if the average user pays attention to the new user experience, would be inclined to say no. Maybe on some level they realise that fewer people = fewer monies into the ecosystem, but I'd hazard a significant percentage don't even have that realisation.

Someone doesn't seem like they know what they're doing? Eject and ban. It's more common than you might think.

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I'm only talking generalisations.

---

Haha. Keep walking that walk!

[Phil Deakins]

I thought I'd seen you somewhere other than in the forum, Freya. I feel sure that you were one of those who ignored me

 

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I thought I'd seen you somewhere other than in the forum, Freya. I feel sure that you were one of those who ignored me

 

---

LALALALALALALALALALA...

(Sorry, did you say something?)

:P:P

[Phil Deakins]

Thinks: "Huh. If they can't be bothered to speak to me and treat me as the very important person that I obviously am, I'm off somewhere else. Blow 'em!"

[Rufferta]

If there is anyone left here in the arena except the combatants, I would like to ask if you could tell me what you wish you had known when you first came to Second Life.  I know my list has things like:

Just because the viewer is the "official" Second Life viewer doesn't mean it is the best viewer for me, and

Everything that looks blue on the map is not water, and

It is always a good idea to teleport in flying mode, etc....

Just wondering...

[Phil Deakins]

I suspect that the "combatants" have left the building - except me, of course

It's a very interesting question, which perhaps some people will reply to. It would make a very good thread on its own. In fact, it might be better to copy your post and start a new thread with it. Probably many, or most, people are bored with this one and may not even see your post, so the question might not get many answers here. Anyway...

When I first came, there was only one viewer, so that part of your experience didn't affect me at all. Neither did your other two things. I've no idea why it's a good idea to teleport in fly mode, so it's not something I do. Maybe it's because you might TP to something high in the sky that is no longer there. If that's the case, it doesn't bother me. I can either get into fly mode, fall and see where I land, or TP to somewhere else on the way down.

I honestly don't think there is anything that I ..... oh yes there is. I wish I'd known more about land. I bought the first parcel very soon after arriving in SL - a couple of weeks later anyway. I'd narrowed it down to one of two plots. One was waterfront and the other was water with a big prim on it. I chose the waterfront. What I didn't know was that all that water was user-owned, and whoever owned the water in front of my land could put what they wanted in front of my plot. And that's what happened later. I ended up with no boat access to the main body of water. The water (sea) was inside  the north continent. If I'd have understood the ins and outs of land ownership, I would have made a much better choice.

I think that's the only thing I wish I'd known/understood when, or almost immediately after, I joined. If I think of anything else, I'll post it.

[wherorangi]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

I'm a programmer who, among other major programmes, and a myriad of smaller ones, has written 2 complex multi-user online games from scratch, without refering to any known games algorithms or anyone else's work.

---

only an amateur makes this kinda claim. Is self-delusional. Make this claim in a professional coding shop and you will get shown the door

we can see a lot of these claims on the LSL wiki as well. Codes posted without reference to sources, and a claimers license slapped on code as well, as if they invented what they posted. In the case of amateurs is understandable when happens. Professionals just dont do this

 

[wherorangi]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Someone suggested that climbing Everest is just a long hard slog up a mountain and, as long as sufficient precautions are taken, not dangerous. She was wrong. Things can and do go wrong, regardless of precautions, and people do die. If you're going to have a go, do take the precautions, but don't even think about getting acute appendicitis up there

 

---

you now introducing unpredictability into the equation

some thoughts

like how predictable the outcome of the next step in a pathway to achieving a goal may or may not be

+

a example

something that (you) Phil and me and others were engaged with for a time was the Star Child rallies. Drive a vehicle in SL quite a long way across multiple sims

mechanically driving the vehicle is pretty straightforward. The vehicle has its own quirks for sure, however it goes pretty much like another other SL vehicle

crossing from one sim to another sim is pretty straightforward mechanically as well. Point the vehicle at the next sim and go

+

what makes this kinda task complex is that we have no direct control over the server or the network. When there is a storm or outage on the network or server then successfully completing the crossing is not a certainty. Is some degree of probable

compounded to some extent by a partial inability to predict what that degree might be, or to predict the severity and timing of a network storm or outage. Ameliorated to some extent by our ability to anticipate, predict a likely outcome based on what we might know. And our ability to evaluate this in determining our next step. Go ahead, go round, or wait

when we need to perform multiple crossings of multiple sims then the probability that we will successfully complete the whole journey lessens

chuck in stuff like orbs, insim lag, parcel settings etc, some of which is predictable and some not, then the journey to completion gets more complex

in these kinda somethings then experience starts to factor in quite largely in terms of successful completion. Even tho the mechanics of these somethings can be fairly straightforward to learn, understand and execute

 

[wherorangi]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I suspect that the "combatants" have left the building - except me, of course

 

---

jejejjjeje (:

nevah !!! (:

 

[wherorangi]

ps

just a bit more on this

with games and any other app then we can often say that the design of the game/app as whole is a original work. Even tho it may sometimes contain elements common to similar games/apps in the catergory

when coding up these apps then very little of the code itself is original work. And the closer we get to the metal the originality of the code approaches zero. For sure is some original code work even at this level, but this is quite rare

+

over the street quite a while ago now was a chat about original works by residents in SL

i made a similar point. And suggested that the number of original works in SL was quite few relative to the total number of people who create stuff in SL

to show this then I suggested to just make a list of people who have contributed a original work to SL. What happens when you do then out of the millions of residents sign ups over the years (about 50 million now about) then we would struggle to list even 500 people

when we expand this to include those who have built off the original works in interesting and different ways then are list grows to a few 1000s. Be struggling tho to even list 5000 of these people

and then there are 10s of 1000s of people on top of this who replicate what they have seen made by others. By replicate I dont mean copybot. Just see something and they go I could make something like that and they do

 

[wherorangi]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

I have no doubt whatsoever that the solution to the coding problem only takes you 5 minutes (you said "

the time it takes me to type it

") because you've remembered, or would copy, someone else's solution, and not because you ever created it from your own mind.

---

just on this as well

is called reading the manual and doing research, and then applying what we have learned from this

as opposed to just using our super powahs

+

just on that code as well. The algorithm for the encoder and decoder was first published by Horst Feistel.  Which I did reference on the post

the post came about bc I was eating a ice block. On the wrapping was a alphanumeric code. And when text the code to the prize competition promotor can win a prize. I have seen quite a lot of these prize promos on other stuff as well

i noticed that the codes on the iceblocks in the same box were not sequential. They were in some random order and I wondered about how they did that

so I researched it and found out about the works of Mr Feistel. I thought thats quite interesting and I coded it up in LSL and posted it

 

 

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

I'm a programmer who, among other major programmes, and a myriad of smaller ones, has written 2 complex multi-user online games from scratch, without refering to any known games algorithms or anyone else's work.

---

only an amateur makes this kinda claim. Is self-delusional. Make this claim in a professional coding shop and you will get shown the door

we can see a lot of these claims on the LSL wiki as well. Codes posted without reference to sources, and a claimers license slapped on code as well, as if they invented what they posted. In the case of amateurs is understandable when happens. Professionals just dont do this

---

What on earth are you waffling about? Do you mean that anyone who has done something good would be shown the door if they say what they have achieved? Or do you think that a person isn't capable of doing those things alone? Or do you think I'm lying? You do think I'm lying, don't you. Lying to myself and, therefore, to you. I'm not lying. Every word, and every syllable, is the absolute truth.

At the time I wrote those games, I was an amateur programmer - full time, but not professional. Later I became a professional programmer. I've already told you that.

I think you can't stand the fact that I am actually a competent programmer, and you aren't. It doesn't sit well with your high sense of yourself. You're actualy envious LOL.

[Phil Deakins]

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I suspect that the "combatants" have left the building - except me, of course

 

---

jejejjjeje (:

nevah !!! (:

---

Then you should leave the building, because you are wandering much too far into the fantasyland of wishful/hopeful thinking. And it's envy that's taking you that way. You previous incarnations would throw their hands up in despair if they read the stuff you write in this incarnation. Also, your only argument is that I'm lying, which is total wishful thinking, so you've lost already and you might as well leave this building.

[Freya Mokusei]

For clarity, I don't care about this point. I understand Wherorangi's reason for bringing it up (same as mine and Theresa's point that difficult is subjective), my feeling though is that for one reason or another this failed to land. While I don't know either of your skill levels, you've both clearly got brains. If I was to pick a point, it's that Phil keeps spelling it 'programmes'!

However I think I can see what Wherorangi's getting at - I had a friend recently get hired into their second programming job (web applications). As part of their application they were given a small task to complete. My friend wisely used Node.js to complete the task, saving time and reducing "reinvention of the wheel". Other applicants - writing "from scratch", feeling that original work was superior to relying on external resource - failed due to the time constraints imposed, and not realising the actual depth of the task.

Braininess and fluency aren't necessarily the leading points that get you hired in 2016. Reinventing the wheel costs agile companies their lead.

Don't make me drink script you both under the table.

[Phil Deakins]

---

wherorangi wrote:

ps

just a bit more on this

with games and any other app then we can often say that the design of the game/app as whole is a original work. Even tho it may sometimes contain elements common to similar games/apps in the catergory

ALL of the coding was my own orginal work, conceived in my brain and nobody else's. That's all the high level language coding, and all of the machine code coding. The only thing that owed anything to anyone else was the use of the binary tree, which I coded myself, never having seen anyone else's implementaion of it, either in flow design or in actual code. Someone once explained the idea of a binary tree to me, and I've used it ever since - because it can be so useful.

The first game was a scrolling text adventure. That owed the idea to other people, but ALL of the coding of it came from my head and from nowhere else.

The second game was the graphic one. It owed the idea to a game called Jet Set Willy, where the character moves from screen to screen. I added to that idea my making it multi-user, where the users could see and interact with each other, just like in a scrolling text game, except that it had graphics. ALL of the coding for it was done by me - all the high level, all the machine code, and even the graphics system itself was created by me; i.e. I didn't use any of the standard graphic formats. I created my own format.

NO PART of the games owed anything to anyone else or to anyone else's work, other than when an idea crops up, it is always a development of something.

when coding up these apps then very little of the code itself is original work.

That may be how you would be forced to write programmes, if you were capable of writing programmes, and it may be how most major programmes are written these days, but it's never been how I write programmes. Every little bit of the code in every programme that I've written have been ALL my own work, and nobody else's.

And the closer we get to the metal the originality of the code approaches zero. For sure is some original code work even at this level, but this is quite rare

You may be right these days, but not back in the 90s. At least not in my programmes. I have never - NEVER - used anyone else's code for any part in my non-SL programmes.

It's obvious that you really dislike the idea that I could create such things absolutely alone. It's just envy, because you are not even capable of writing a small part of it. You didn't even know what a binary tree is until I mentoioned it, did you?

  Get over it.

+

over the street quite a while ago now was a chat about original works by residents in SL

i made a similar point. And suggested that the number of original works in SL was quite few relative to the total number of people who create stuff in SL

to show this then I suggested to just make a list of people who have contributed a original work to SL. What happens when you do then out of the millions of residents sign ups over the years (about 50 million now about) then we would struggle to list even 500 people

when we expand this to include those who have built off the original works in interesting and different ways then are list grows to a few 1000s. Be struggling tho to even list 5000 of these people

and then there are 10s of 1000s of people on top of this who replicate what they have seen made by others. By replicate I dont mean copybot. Just see something and they go I could make something like that and they do

I have no idea whether or not what you say is true. AND NEITHER DO YOU! The last paragraph is different. Nobody comes up with an idea that isn't a continuation of previous ideas. My online scrolling text game came up because I'd used another person's scrolling text game, and decided to see if I could write one myself. The graphics game came up because I'd enjoyed playing Jet Set Willie, and, having done the scrolling text one, I decided to create a similar thing for online use and make it multi-user. Other major and minor programmes that I've written are just the same, as are all the scripts in the stuff I sell. For instance, here in the forum, someone mentioned that animated furniture exists that doesn't use poseballs. One person took me to where some were sold so I could see for myself. Until that time, I'd used the MLP system, but I decided to write a no-balls system, which is what I did.

But none of that matters. We aren't discussing where the ideas come from. We all know that they come as a result of previous ideas. We are talking about coding the ideas, and whether or not I used other people's code for parts of the major programmes that I've written. I didn't. You don't hold even a very small candle to me when it comes to programming, so get over it.

---

Whilst I'm here, I tell you about the other 2 major programmes that I've written.

One was a programme that played the musical backings for me when I was singing for a living. The whole of the music-playing was written in machine code. The whole of the front end, which included a myriad of features, including lyrics that kept pace with the music, was written in VB6. And, like the games, the two necessarily interacted with each other. It was described in the business as "the bees knees" for solo performers. There was nothing else like it at the time.

The other (the last one I wrote) was a programme for search engine optimisation. You put your target searchterms and other details into it, and set it running. It searched the web for topic-related text, which it used to create 'doorway' pages for each searchterm for each major engine. Then it submitted each page to the engine it was created for. After that, it kept tabs on how well each page was doing in its engine, and, where necessary, made changes to the page to move it up the rankings, etc. etc. In short, it automatically created and promoted webpages in each of the major engines. That was back when there were a number of major engines to cater for. And it was the time when I was employed as a professional programmer.

Those are the 4 major programmes that I've written, and none of them used any code that was written by anyone else. I've wrriten a myriad of minor programmes, of course. You, of course, not being a programmer, and having no experience at all, but only knowing what you read, can't imagine anyone sitting down and, over months, writing such things without any code input from external sources. You imagine that you know how it's always done (because that's what you've read) and, therefore, anyone who says they do it differently must not be telling the truth.

[Phil Deakins]

---

wherorangi wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

I have no doubt whatsoever that the solution to the coding problem only takes you 5 minutes (you said "

the time it takes me to type it

") because you've remembered, or would copy, someone else's solution, and not because you ever created it from your own mind.

---

just on this as well

is called reading the manual and doing research, and then applying what we have learned from this

as opposed to just using our super powahs

+

just on that code as well. The algorithm for the encoder and decoder was first published by Horst Feistel.  Which I did reference on the post

the post came about bc I was eating a ice block. On the wrapping was a alphanumeric code. And when text the code to the prize competition promotor can win a prize. I have seen quite a lot of these prize promos on other stuff as well

i noticed that the codes on the iceblocks in the same box were not sequential. They were in some random order and I wondered about how they did that

so I researched it and found out about the works of Mr Feistel. I thought thats quite interesting and I coded it up in LSL and posted it

---

Ah. So you are capable of a modicum of coding. Well done! You're a beginner. Now you need to get over the fact that others, such as me, are able write major programmes without any need of anyone else's pre-written code parts.