Archive for February, 2007

Star Trek Tri-Demensional 3D Modification compatible with Fidchell (Mythus) Chess and many other chess variants

Tuesday, February 27th, 2007
  • ChessVariants.org – Classic Chess
  • ChessVariants.org – Fidchell (Gary Gygax / Dangerous Journeys) / Mythus-Fidchell
  • ChessVariants.org – Three dimensional Chess (Star Trek )
  • I think these can be merged to form ‘Tri-Dimensional Fidchell’. Fidchell is in the Appendix of the “Epic of Aerth”, a worldbook describing a high-fantasy paralell-universe version of earth for the Dangerous Journeys based roleplaying game called Mythus, written by Gary Gygax (I personally see it as a sucessor to Dungeons & Dragons). Normal chess is a 2-D 8×8 board with 16 men of 6 types per side. Fidchell is a 2-D 12×12 board with 32 men of 16 types per side plus 4 additional off-board men of 2 types per side.

    The Orthodox2D to Trek3D rules mutation is mutating the 8×8 2D board to 3 fixed 4×4 boards with even-numbered height coordinate designations and two 2×2 movable boards (per player) that mount to the outside corners of the fixed boards and have odd-numbered height designations. It uses the same peaces as it’s 2-D counterpart and leaves the move-rules all the same except for rules for z-access movement (a moveable board must be between the two fixed board that you want to transition between).? The starting columns a-b and g-h are on the moveable boards instead. The number of squesrs on the 2D 8×8 and the 3D are the same (3×4x4 + 4×2x2 = 3×16 + 4×4 = 48 + 16. = 64). A3-A6 / B3-B6 / G3-G6 / H3-H6 are on the netural fixed board instead.

    Fidchell would do the same thing when applying the Trek3D mod template to it. It would be 3 fixed 6×6 boards and 4 (2 per player at start) moveable 3×3 boards, utilizing the same peices as the original Mythus-Fidchell 2D version. 2D 12×12=14. 3D: 3×6x6 + 4×3x3 = 3×36 + 4×9 = 108 + 36 = 144). A4-A9 / B4-B9 / C4-C9 / J4-J9 / K4-J9 / L4-L9 are on the neutral board.? As the portals on fidchell are completely on the middle six columns (D-I) and thus are easily mappable to the fixed boards, the portals rules should adapt quite well when applying the Trek3D modification to the Mythus-Fidchell chess variant. The Subterannian portals will more likely apply to the middle four squares on the neutral fixed board though, going by the center territory principle of their location on the 2D board even though the coordinate mappings (E6-E7 / F6-F7) are actually the middle two columns on the forward most rows on the blakc/white fixed boards.

    Tri-Dimensional Fidchell chess or ‘Start Trek Mythus-Fidchell’ would be truely complicated indeed that only true geniuses would be able to master (not me, i’m just above average). Larger board (12×12 vs 8×8), double the piece count (plus 4 more peices that startoff-board ), triple the piece types, more promotions. Then add the 3D and moveable boards from the star-trek tri-dimensional chess mod.

    Also Since the Trek-3D mod doesn’t alter any of the original pieces or their moves, it should be compatible with many other chess variants that are out there, turning them from 2D to 3D, likely with the same fan-collector’s chess set as many don’t change the board (bigger board, round, octogon, ‘plus shape’, etc).

    New Testament Cannon broken up into scripture-index categories among the fuzzy-logic spectrum with info from NTCannon.org

    Monday, February 26th, 2007

    I decided to put the New testament cannon and non-cannon into scripture-index zone-categories and defined the criteria for canon ‘black or white’ judgement line within the fuzzy-logic spectrum. It is based on the ‘Cross Reference Table: Writings and Authorities’ table at ntcannon.org.

    ************************************************************
    Canon
    ************************************************************
    —————————————-
    The Ultimate
    —————————————-
    Gospel according to Matthew
    Gospel according to Luke
    —————————————-
    Definitely Flawless
    —————————————-
    Gospel according to Mark
    Gospel according to John
    Acts
    Romans
    I Corinthians
    II Corinthians
    Galatians
    Ephesians
    Philippians
    Colossians
    I Thessalonians
    —————————————-
    Likely Flawless
    —————————————-
    II Thessalonians
    I Timothy
    II Timothy
    Titus
    Philemon
    I Peter
    I John
    —————————————-
    Has Blemishes
    —————————————-
    Hebrews (9/11 accepted; 0/11 Heretical))
    James (5/8 Accepted; 0/8 Heretical))
    II Peter (4/6 Accepted; 0/6 Heretical))
    Jude (8/9 Accepted; 0/9 Heretical))
    Revelation of John (11/12 Accepted; 0/12 Heretical))
    —————————————-
    Grey-Zone
    —————————————-
    II John (5/8 accepted; 1/8 Heretical)
    III John (4/7 accepted; 1/7 Heretical)

    ************************************************************
    Non-Cannon
    ************************************************************
    —————————————-
    Grey-Zone
    —————————————-
    I Clement (3/4 accepted; 0/4 heretical)
    Epistle of Barnabas (3/5 accepted; 0/5 heretical)
    Apocalypse of Peter (2/3 accepted; 0/3 heretical)
    —————————————-
    Rejected
    —————————————-
    Preaching of Peter (2/3 accepted; 1/3 heretical)
    Didache (2/5 Accepted; 0/5 heretical)
    Shepherd of Hermas (4/9 Accepted; 0/9 heretical)
    —————————————-
    Bad / May be Heretical
    —————————————-
    Gospel of Truth (1/2 Accepted; 1/2 Heretical)
    Gospel of the Egyptians (1/2 accepted; 1/2 heretical)
    Gospel of the Hebrews (1/3 accepted; 0/3 heretical)
    Traditions of Matthias (1/1 Accepted; 0/1 heretical)
    Epistle to the Laodiceans (0/2 accepted; 0/2 heretical))
    —————————————-
    Likely to be Heretical
    —————————————-
    Gospel of the Twelve (0/1 Accepted; 1/1 Heretical)
    Gospel of Peter (0/2 accepted; 1/2 heretical)
    Acts of Andrew (0/1 Accepted; 1/1 Heretical)
    Acts of Paul (0/3 Accepted; 1/3 Heretical)
    Acts of John (0/1 Accepted; 1/1 Heretical)
    —————————————-
    Definitly Heretical
    —————————————-
    Gospel of Thomas (0/2 Accepted; 2/2 Heretical)
    Gospel of Basilides (0/2 Accepted; 2/2 Heretical)
    Gospel of Matthias (0/2 Accepted; 2/2 Heretical)

    ************************************************************

    Observed pattern of cannon:

    It appears that the hard ‘black or white’ line of judgement within the fuzzy logic spectrum for the NT cannon, within the scope of the table at the ntcannon.org site is:

  • at least 50% agreement as ‘accepted / true /scripture’ without need of modification
  • no consideration of heretical ratings
  • a minimum of 6 reviews of historically signficant and accepted entities (famous wise individuals, councils, etc).
  • So, basically, minimum of 51% ‘yes votes’ with a minimum of 6 total votes. 4/6, 4/7, 5/8, 5/9, 6/10 = ‘yes’; 3/3, 3/4, 4/5, 3/6, 3/7 = ‘no’

    ************************************************************

    Description of group categories:

    Cannon; The Ultimate
    100% marked as accepted excluding ‘Marcion and the Macionites’ (Marks nothing as fully accepted) covered by ALL (16) of the authorities in the table
    cannon; Mostly Flawless
    100% marked as accepted excluding ‘Marcion and the Macionites’ (Marks nothing as fully accepted). Covered by all-but-two to all-but-one (14-15) of the authorities in the table
    cannon; Likely Flawless
    100% marked as accepted excluding ‘Marcion and the Macionites’ (Marks nothing as fully accepted). Covered by at least half but less than all-but-two (8-13) of the authorities in the table
    cannon; Some Minor Blemishes:
    Most authorites marked as accepted. One or two of the authorities rated as questionable or spourious; No Authority marked the book as heretical
    cannon; Grey-Zone
    Most authorties marked as accepted, but exactly one authority marked the book as Heretical and two authorities marked the book as questionable
    Non-cannon; Grey-Zone
    Poor review coverage, but has at least 2 but less than 7 authorities have reviewed it; More than half of the authorities marked the book as accepted and no authority marked the book as heretical.
    Non-Canon, Rejected
    More than one authority reviewed the book and more than one and half or less of the authorties marked the book as accepted.
    Non-Canon, Bad / May be Heretical
    Less than two authorities marked the book as accepted. Exactly one authority marked the book as accepted or no authority marked the book as heretical.
    Non-cannon; Likely to be Heretical
    At least one authority marked the book as heretical and no authority marked the book as accepted.
    Non-cannon; Definitly Heretical
    Reviewed my more than one authority; Every reviewing authority marked the book as heretical.

    Edit 2/27/2006 — Lots of changes in the non-cannon section. Spaced the very bad category. Changed most of the non-cannon categories’ criteria.

    Copyleft License (GPL; GPL v3; GFDL; L-GPL; CC-by-sa; DSL; AgainstDRM) Info and Comments

    Tuesday, February 20th, 2007
  • Freedom Defined Wiki – Licenses
  • Free Software Foundation – Licenses
  • Free Software Foundation – GNU General Public License (V2)
  • Free Software Foundation – GPL V3 Draft 2 Comments
  • Free Software Foundation – Design Science License (Mirror)
  • FreeCreations.org – Against DRM 2.0
  • Creative Commons – License Picker
  • Creative Commons should expand their permision dimensions. I don’t know how to make such changes user-friendly to designate (CC-by-sa or CC-by-nc-noderiv or CC-by) though.

    Attribution:
    ——————–
    Copyright notice only
    Basic credit (Name of author and/or source)
    Deluxe credit (Link back to author’s site or complex crediting directions)

    Deriviative Works:
    ——————–
    Unrestricted
    Weak Share-Alike (Weak copyleft; The way CC works now)
    Strong Share-Alike (Strong copyleft; Integration into a larger work requires the entire work to have this license or to have a compatible license)
    Nothing (NoDeriv / No Derivitive works)

    Commercial Use:
    ——————–
    Unrestricted
    Non-profiting commercial-use only (marketing ads, catalogs, commercial web-sites ok, but no sales or other direct profit exploitation such as $50 CDs or $40/yr members-only sites or site-sections or $200/yr medical journals)
    None (NonCommercial)

    Extras:
    ——————–
    No distributing with technical obstructions to distributee’s copying ability (No-DRM)
    Require source-code, source-material, or other modification-transparent copy (.html vs .chm; .doc vs .pdf; .psd vs .jpg) with distribution of verbatim or modified copies
    Extend license permission-grants and restrictions through media-domain transfers (songsheet->CD recording->public performance->concert ‘cam’->concert xvid)

    Comments:

    My preferences are ‘basic credit’, Strong Share-Alike, Non-Profiting commercial use only, No-DRM, source/transparent copy (except digicam photos), and multi-domain rights grant/transfer. I would be flexible for copyright notice only, and full commercial use (with the hope of free-copying volume to render profiting-sales unpractical) for compatibility with the rest of the open-source / copyleft community. Their is no license to match either version really. CC-By-SA is weak copyleft and acks rights transfer, No-DRM and modifiable source or transparent content. DSL is weak copyleft and the ‘new’ name requirement is very hassling for minor changes. So far it is a toss-up between the GPLv3 (draft) and the ‘Agaisnt DRM 2.0′ license. But a generic strong copyleft license with ‘yes’ on all the columns (CopyLeft, practical modifiability, attribution, related rights, anti-drm) in the table on the FreedomDefined license page is what I’d love.

    For No-DRM clauses I prefer it to only affect the ability of the distributee to re-distribute the work, with source/transparent copy (if required). The work (if software) should be able to operate a DRM scheme for data or media that it crunches, but if accompanying source code is required, it will be unpractical, as the source will be exploited and the DRM cracked in no-time (good cracking educational tool though!). The No-DRM clause should also not block the software from running a closed-source program that operates a DRM-scheme within itself (ITunes on Linux; assuming the music isn’t No-DRM copylefted). It should only pertain to the distributee’s ability to re-desitribute the direct-licensed work without the need to crack or loophole-exploit any DRM.

    USA Bringing Back the Draft?

    Thursday, February 8th, 2007
  • Wikipedia – Universal National Service Act of 2007
  • Wikipedia – Conscription in the United States
  • Wikipedia – Conscription
  • Claim homosexuality! You don’t have to be gay for real, just let go of your pride and munchkin-exploit the social stigma! When it stops working partially (homosexual sex testing), it would be good to have a close same-sex friend to have one-time gay sex with. When that stops working (they start permitting homosexuals, likely with segragation), dodging the draft works well too. Some dont’t make very good fugitives though, including me (though I may be able to exploit mental-illness cop-outs due to autism but its not gaurenteed as I am independant and high-functioing). Then you either serve, or go to jail (two possible paths).

    My father, with both navy (Electrician on the nuclear torpedo USS greenfish) and high-ranking federal (electrician->foreman->Foreman General->Facilities Manger->Central office Transportation Mangement) prison management experience, says it is far better to be in federal prison than in the military. If you can handle a nastier jail (maricopa county jails or worse) with possible beatings you could report for boot camp and insubordinate (court martial, fe months military jail time, dishonerable discharge) for less time in jail, but you still get the felony stigma.

    Oh yeah the induldgance in the piracy and secret-buster circles probably will render you completely unable to get a security clearance, which could ruin your ability to be drafted (without the need to deal with a homesexuality stigma) :) My father had to get a top secret clearance just to be an electrician on a diesel sub! Most knowledge of missions is probably classified confidential or worse and even if kept in the dark, one easily can munchkin it out of somebody (analytical brain required usually because leaking is often vague or general) or just eavesdrop it.

    Oh going to college no longer munckins you out of the draft automatically. So one must accept a stigma or record or spend some time in jail to not get their head sawed off or not get blown up by a roadside or become one of those Vietnam basketcases from a guerilla (terrorist these days) grenade attack (Metallica – One video).

    Google
     
    Web www.greatinca.net