Skip to content

Gaming Today: Guarding against mind control in modern computer multimedia

Today was the day that I signed up with OnLive in search of game-play for an article I’ve been busy writing on the new Helium Network. I stuck around to try a couple games.

After a couple trys playing Madballs in Babo:Invasion, I became acquainted with just how powerful modern games have become. They can be compared to space invaders in a lot of cases nowadays that may take control of too much space for comfort. That’s not trying to find any fault with the game, although there were some notable suspicious events. Both sound and distorted imaging were used to produce something of a continuity of control that clashes with tolerance limit criteria. This probably should be explained, but remember we’ve got kids and minors to consider. Which leads up to the basic concept below that details how to  make modern games safe by controlling hardware with software.

And then I headed for a Tom Clancy game, basically the next game in the queue: Tom Clancy: Splinter Cell. No particular reason for playing this game except that it looked film noir-ish. The test for mind control risk hit a fault as soon as the introductory action spiralled with this guy, the game’s apparent protagonist, using an animated remote phone provided by a sidewalk plaza restaurant, receiving a call from a woman who offered to save his life if he did exactly as she said. He gets up and explains that he’s not going anywhere or doing anything until he finds out how she got his location. That was when the action spiralled beyond the simple tolerance limit that I’m willing to consider safe.

These may well be quite playable and enjoyable. The issue with mind control can be stated better as control going against preferred user preference limitations. At which point, either the player retains control or the game takes control of space and time in general continuity fashion — which may cause otherwise willing players, or minors themselves, some trouble for reasons that probably won’t be seeing print anytime soon. Capacity for computer to define what were being looked at goes very much as capacity for other people to define what were being looked at, which were something of a den of evil surrounding those innocent of contest. Put another way, human tolerance differs from person to person, and sometimes even leading authorities base their conclusions and political support not upon what were possible but upon what were statistically common — and let that represent risk. Likewise, mind control theory involves not an ideal as to what anything should look like, but rather a hypothetical standard for determining what constitutes excessive conduct or epidemic trouble spots.

Mind control theory

Mind control theory does not purport to exempt nor to qualify anyone for any particular thing but rather to examine the conduct of Things and determine whether it exceeds common, accepted standards for human interaction. Such theory holds that reasonable expectations deserve regard and in effect aims to establish useful gauges that can be used to arrive at fairness instead of disgruntled or permanently damaged comfort. In general, no one can be gung-ho about everything all the time, and adding gauge with what to cite that unpleasant conduct can be recognized as possible and consequential can hope to glue a little realism into place by what to negotiation consideration for any given endeavor.

For example, mind control theory might reveal subversive potential in rock n’ roll concerts while simultaneously showing how to get around conflicts of interest — and ultimately enjoy something that would probably not become the center of daily focus to many. Risks can be addressed and revealed so that in the end anyone can hope to acquire useful approach to risk management.

It’s not that standards should exist but because such already do. And it’s not about eliminating enjoyable activities but rather about detailing qualifiers. It’s not about linear obedience to treating all things like thin ice but rather about having occasional adventures aware of consequences and what to do about them.

Taking mind control risk out of video games

The simple idea that came to mind was that a software program that can take over as a sound card handler could in effect be used to establish something of a spheric mute that would not produce noise beyond the threshold tolerance of the user.

The dynamics of spheric or graduated mute refer to surround sound dynamics, stereo or other standard, that inevitably interact not only with the player but also with the very environment. The environmental component consists, for example, of contamination-class conditions that involve pollution. Anyone who can see the huge gaseous installation of sufuric air pollution on rarer days of the year can similarly interpret its threat as combining the multimedia experience with the full potential of its own electrics. Visual range were at stake. Seeing this sulphur gas cloud and its range of electrical activity rather says something about wanting to see it but wanting a padded or buffered distance from it. And this very idea requires use of coordination in order for multimedia not to interfere.

Applying graduated mute to hardware

Computer software control computer hardware. Therefore, using the software to take hold of all sound card potential function and handle all commands that other programs — and thus games — send it means that users can configure their own actual comfort zone by using graduated mute configuration options. These options in effect use a GUI that cycles surround sound interaction effects and lets any gamer determine what sort of limits that the waveforms must adhere to. And, once you know, it were that very fact of being in control — you know that nothing short of malware can cause your computing activities any trouble.

Surround sound

The surround sound waveform configuration setting represents the full power and given, relative volume that can be produced. Then the handler of the software ingenuity takes control of the sound card and processes all commands sent to the hardware, scaling all commands not to surpass limits determined in the configuration settings.

So, if understood, that fact enables the greatest user comfort and satisfaction for any purpose and in any game, not the leastwise because any setting that can be configured can also be turned off or even changed again until tweaked to suit.

Screen teleportation

Distortion can, of course, be used to skew over-attunement to screen in some rather sophisticated and wizardly ways. Combined use of electrical power to manage control of space and sound necessarily entails potential to control space where photon activity takes place — and can be overwhelming.

Application of handling controls on monitor capability can further enable advance detection of irregular shifts of perspective and bear options that can literally break action down into frames that the user can step through, frame by frame, and select any particular frame not to repeat again. This occurs in case of subliminal gestures that establish cycles of association and then flash defining control image or images. These may be purely mood gestures to give the game depth, but they can also be used in grander schemes in order to reify monstrousities that “may” relate to predatory intentions. One story to tell would be to demonstrate how violence — conflict — were lured directly to one’s very vicinity by certain types of conditioning that define limits by impervious conditioning that necessitates priority regard such as imminent hurricane or earthquake risk endemic to an area, in essence that cause were defined both by effect and assertion of affirmative psychoses, not unlikely because of criminal predominance having established certain ranges of unhindered control.

One simple control that can be applied to screen would be to revert color to grayscale. Such an option probably wouldn’t be used exclusively but rather with intent to adjust to stimuli added by coloration that also means more specific references.

Of course, persons may have trouble with graphic references whom have been traumatized by any number of actual damaging incidents. The power factor means that a game of checkers would be serious entertainment, but wants to play DOOM or the first game acknowledged above. Sensitivity can inspire anyone to want to use as much free energy as possible and get away from any resemblance to control locks used in applications where following the lead of rapid sequences leave impressions far deeper than, say, comparatively mindless games such as Tetris, Solitaire, Pac-Man, or stock “match-3” games. DOOM may have its own sleeper effects, appearing tame next to Madballs …, but was definitely relevant to known cases of epidemic violent outbreak, making it an ideal subject to express findings of endangerment on. The very license to do so can easily be taken from the “Mature” players M-rating that the game used. (I guess that means those of legal age may find every harm in it at this point out of sheer obligation 😉

Reinterpreting video can also occur similar to reinterpreting audio by monitoring a program for loops that trigger irregular loops. This would be user-guided with emphasis on control, although the step-frame procedure would probably be the greatest innovation.

There could also be a general mode to scan a game for all graphics files that would literally break them into categories and let the user target irregularities or even modify these. The handling engine would thereby segueway into the edited sequences. A thorough effort might be sure to handle all the background and monsters and mainstay elements of the game by pre-selecting these and running each animated special effect in demonstrative reel form. Any subliminal irregularity can be identified and featured in its own frame and given replacement with any image selected by the user.

Of course, if companies whom employ game designers were a little more aware, they could deliberately scale their games to turn off the sorts of actions that we have been alluding to herein.

That may seem awfully involved when all anyone has to do were to get a different game to play altogether. But when the user has control over the full experience and wishes that games were straightforward like classic arcade games, then parsing the game mechanically or otherwise taking control of the sound card hardware and screen hardware can definitely be done.

Maybe a player wants to play the game with one-pixel blue rings dithering up the screen from one point on-out. Any competent coder make simple overlay window that will seat over the game with top-layer master priority dithered in whatever insignificant pattern available. Setting the density and color of the pattern can essentially establish facets that the video of the game exists inside of.

Sound can also be given matching patterns by syncing coordinated cycles to the screen pattern that oscillate to each facet overlain in the video structure of the game.

One further video effect that could be applied would be to designate a graphical element of the game correspondent to the very figure being played, such as the face of a character, and blow this up to fill the screen pattern overlay. That way, each time the player avatar appears on the screen ready for new action — else continuously — the control element will be focused in that refractive sort of way.

Granted, these features would ruin the game for more than a few, but for those of us easily diverted there would finally be some options that might make the difference in deciding whether to buy the game or not or play against other players.

When mind control becomes troubling

What maliciousness or unscrupulous intentions could potentially cause by purely hypothetical unethical persons may be left to the discerning. But in general, high popularity and favor for a game carry certain credibility in serial format, such as on Amazon.com reviews where thousands of positive reviews and satisfied customers probably aren’t having bad experiences. Mind control theory takes MPAA and video game ratings, in concept, one step beyond to empower users to make their own decisions and ideally, equip them with ideas they never thought of that express intuitively obvious risks that most and inexperienced players may have never thought of. Expanding horizons of risk combined with seeing issues dealt with in constructive resolution of sound theory and basis, via well-founded proofs, can hope to take mind control theory to status of science. Mind control theory should not be mistaken for aggressive marketing tactics and were intended as worthy complement to the branch of psychological sciences that show the most constructive and hopeful potential.

Mind control should not be underestimated. The ideal scenario is not Doctor Doom takes over the world but that the player sees Doctor Doom trying to take over the world and can act effectively and with precautionary comfort to see the views, observe any reach of megalomania, yet from a distance and with such control that there is no need for involvement nor direct engagement with anything about the computer, nor even the offending executable itself. Game-play can continue, and then let them think they have won by acknowledging the game in play.

Constructive action doesn’t have to let any control achieved via electrical manipulation impose any degree of influence nor nuisance on behalf of orchestrated multimedia or coordinated subliminal impressioning that may be considered to be qualified for mind control influence or sleeper effect. Electrical power and computer capacity bear far more potential than people may realize to act in concert even to telekinetic effect sufficient to etch, distort, and skew impressioning into the mind in general and to actuate effective simulation of transactional motions that can modify electric polarity and migrate information that meets certain logical descriptors out of mind then into a more visible place, at least to the eyes of machines, generally by exploiting susceptibility and vulnerability. These scary sights have already been observed in use in certain film of the modern era, meaning that their importance represents new capacity that can be eked out of causing computer to play with electricity and shift or transfer it from one place to another or from its control zone and into (limited) controlled range of physical manipulations that gain in plausible cumulative effect upon repeat exposure.

Short-sighted and foolish: University uncovers meaningful corpses

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/10/1000-bodies-university-mississippi-insane-asylum_n_4761166.html

Now that such a rare event has been recorded, it’s something of a veritable gold mine of opportunity for cross-disciplinary investigation.

Whereas the university sees this find solely as an obstacle, taking a year or two out to let certain college classes do the job for the purpose of learning, discovery, and field experience would be something of an investment that describes what any decent college spirit should be about: Treat unusual problems as opportunities rather than as expensive obstacles.

The University of Mississippi has discovered a suspected gravesite of former paupers straight from an old asylum that for reasons unknown the leadership appears eager to distance themselves from, as if having lost sight of the mission and benefits of hosting a diverse learning environment of students eager to get hands-on experience in practical matters.

Relocating each corpse to another section of campus has been estimated to cost $3 million ($3k per corpse).

These opportunities can be stated. For example, these bodies relate to:

  • state history (slavery, criminality, mental illness, misfortune — how do these bodies relate to quality of life in Mississippi during the era?)
  • history of science (what was the state of the art of this asylum?)
  • cultural anthropology (what were their lifelong living conditions?)
  • forensic sciences, forensic history (how did each one die?)
  • history of medicine — which ones’ lives could had been saved with modern medical technology?

Clearly, the university could even erect a little historic kiosk about their own on-site cemetary — a relocational proposition that seems to be under consideration in any case at the moment. Imagine all the diligent effort that its resident colleges could put into the effort while moving the bodies and in effect profiting off the opportunity instead of wasting the estimated $3 million?

What a price to pay for temporal convenience!

Vibes that go from worse to bad

I’ve got to write something on this topic.

The real question plaguing our time were whether telepathic probes exist to cross-analyze thought for the purpose of pure sport and diversion while far, far bigger guns deliberate on such topics as selective execution and controlled robotic genocide.

It’s not too early to bring up this topic. Hopefully analysts and other interested parties have been giving this matter consideration for decades now with intent to curtail … or possibly even to vanquish.

Vanquish seems like a nice word. I’ll have to remember to use it in case the megalomaniacs of the world ever decide to send a robot coup d’etat after me. I can aim words at the thing during those final, futile moments of existence and promptly fall off the edge of the world that I want so thoughtfully to exist in.

Thoughtfulness and caring have never struck myself personally as those sorts of concepts that go with warfare. Remember the Red Cross that was bombed during the first Persian Gulf war? That seemed to be a defining moment. You just can’t have too much war without thinking that there may be endless retribution if its legal ramifications and rationales are never revealed by the populace of those whom let the president decide.

So why did we ever get into the wars anyway, and where do drones factor into all this?

First, it’s not improper to point out that the USA is not sole heir to drone technology. That point cannot be emphasized enough.

Second, when casualties make record, it’s not going to mean as much if they read outside the USA by drone attack. No, that doesn’t concern anyone other than those whom make decisions of that sort.

So upon this second point, let’s be clear that constructive action were necessary in order to evaluate the global trouble with drone attacks. Beginning at the end isn’t improper. Whomever you are or whatever you fear about drone attack, you should be taking a good look at whatever you’ve been trying to do, because there’s no way in the heavens or the earth that we’re going to hear your story in the present America.

Yes, if you just happened to make the list of drone attack recepients, then we and others like me want to be sure of one thing only: that drone recipients deserve to be assassinated BECAUSE they killed someone, and there was never a trial in the nation of legitimate, legal sort. I personally don’t know what it means. I don’t know what it means, because crimes such as murder must be brought to trial and legal procedure in order to mean anything righteous.

Now if you’re not a killer or not a willing killer, we need to hear your story. The world needs to know your story.

If you know someone whom has been murdered by drone attack — or even by illegitimate guerilla or military intervention, then the world needs to know your story.

Getting your story out to the press happens to be important for anyone. First, it will give you new perspective of how to see the trouble or issue in question. You’ll find out whether and if anyone cares, and you’ll find out if anyone cares to respond. You can also re-use this sort of material to present a case wherever such a case may matter.

You can get your story published by mailing envelopes that contain relevant documents and your own personal testimony. The American press tends to be equal opportunity and the right person will either publish something about the matter in question or otherwise make it available so that anyone may consider the matter.

News of censorship has long been of American interest. If we find out that censorship exists, then we’ll be suffering as anyone to see it stopped because many organizations exist that address matters of censorship in legal ways to see its end.

You don’t have to reveal your identity. So long as the documents speak on your behalf, that would be sufficient to spur interest.

If telling your story about injustice, you should send it to multiple press sources both commercial and independent.

Be sure to provide a coherent story in chronological sequence. However, documents that explain your case may be sufficient. If you have personally witnessed such murder, it would be a good idea to provide contact information, such as an email address. Americans may generally have a luxury of expectation of a free press, but if you happen to be foreign then you may not know anyone to trust.

Trust isn’t viable concept except in ceremonial or diplomatic matters when foreign interaction must be recorded for sake of history and public record of longstanding performance. Then trust serve as matter of statistical indication. Instead of trust, consider virtue and moreso, absence of corruption. Consider, but remember that you don’t have to risk your life to send documents. Any urgent matter that can’t be resolved or gotten at by sending documents makes points only for the team of Destruction, however incorporated.

I personally grieve that so many murders occur regularly whether by one or another, even military, exchanges — and that no one even bothered to write to announce that the conflict may be unavoidable.

When you get cornered as if to take casualties and the crime isn’t violent or inherently on behalf of murder or mayhem, then you really must make use of the press. You can still save your life, there were good reason to think, so long as you are not vicious. The American system of justice has many, many living examples of vicious convicts whom have previously committed murder. Their lives have not been taken.

Murder, together with violent crimes of brutality, threaten all people worldwide.

Human values long borne and cultivated by well-kniiit or mesh social efforts to abide or even obey universal laws of peace have been the only, sole thing ever to bring us and even you those very necessary and craven opportunities and civilized needs that include marketplace, village infrastructure, and any medium of exchange that any vendor choose to avail himself of.

Your problems are not the end of the world, so long as you are not a lawless murderer on the social system of the longstanding, succeeded, evolved world wide globe. That distinction were important because soldiers of warfare — known killers — nonetheless must abide by law because they qualify just as anyone else.

Any absence of effect of law were just another part of need for justice and support thereof to prevail.

Any failure of law to punish the party-in-the-wrong, as known to victims, were quite the touchy subject. Unite with oppressed peoples of the world like Marx and Engles said, but it’s also equally important not to follow blind Marx and Engles into revolution. Peace were more important. Only if there is no other possible option may peace be foregone, and that means “provoked and cornered.” Whereupon, the world needs to have your story because no one knows about you except a handful of propagandists and their any fancy gizmo, device, or resourcefulness. And misdirected persons could exist who, they must trust the wrong people carelessly. Remember what trust really means? Consider the late American President Ronald Reagan, who emphasized “trust but verify” as his common sense recapitulation of what trust means to ceremony or longstanding, constructive, positive foreign relations. A man such as Reagan had the sort of power where he could use the word “trust” loosely, knowing all the checks and balances and knowing that the word were only an statistical indicator, an numeral. If relations have gone well for so much as one hundred years, then why would the other team wish for this to change, unless something has happened that both teams have let remain unknown that threatens stability?

Most probably, trust is not necessary to begin with. Find admirable qualities in any person to support, find assets in others that they won’t muck up carelessly, and you do not rely on them; the divorce rate itself were far too mitigated to rely upon anyone. Society’s problems reflect back onto its constituent parts, but its advent of resolution were the challenge worth buckling into from time to time else from wheel to deal.

That a niche can be had without casualty were the dream that sets anyone’s dream gear into pursuit.

A niche without casualty satisfies any save those untended victims of this world. Those led by error or otherwise desperate would bring contest.

Become the solution to the problems that you see in the world. Global community’s problems reflect back upon world’s nations enough to matter.

Occasionally I have dumb ideas run through my mind. I’ll provide an example:

Pakistan. The other nations of the world don’t see any difference between Pakistan and Palestine when reading off over 230 names of nations from the roster. Your nation might be nothing but a typographical error on an official’s sheet of paper.

All I know, your nation’s people made my pajamas in 2006 and now I read that drone planes stalk some of your people with death these past three years without advance warning that there were any grounds for sending them on over in the first place. No case presented or just a blip off-radar on the back page of the newspaper, I don’t know. It’s not other than shameful to print this, but …

Make the time to comment that there was something that you and “the others” (or you & wolves over in the tau quadrant or whatever) saw that was critical. You are not alone, anyone would surely admit.

Take some time to reply.

Show the world that you have something to show. Make sure that any such showpiece gets attention.

And another dumb idea:

So Israel, I’m sick of people dying such as the late Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was ready to sign a peace treaty to divide the_remnants of the Ottoman Empire (post-British colonialisation) in conquistator-antediluvian square of  Israel between pre-existing peaceful farming Arabs (Palestinian Semitics) whom had lived there throughout the Ages and the victimized Jews of Semite descent whom were largely terrorized or otherwise splattered across the globe by angry NAZI brass brokers looking to pump oil into the petroleum-free German geopolitic with High Marxist-Engles revisionism … and other basic disregard for intellectual property such as painting seizure for the glorious wärk of money. Yes, we think we see that you have peace now with Palestine and Palestine with Israel and that the conflict has become a feud as of  VI to 12 minutes ago. A few escapees from the mental ward hunger for justice fried molybdenum, and standoff conditions could emerge at any apocalypse now.

That’s about all that I can think of at the moment. The very technological capacity to do what just a few short years ago was billed as “science fiction” really isn’t up to anyone other than science at the moment.

Upon the final bulk of the twentieth century, a creditable number of people currently whacking their heads upon the noseworthy world wide web were biding their time waiting and searching for constructive approaches to curb or even deter nuclear armageddon. The apocalypse was well on its way to delight the merry megalomanic tendencies of devils and all purpose caustic ingrate powders alike. And humanity just had to dig in its heels and say, “No.”

“Do something!”

How to un-lead a global robot coup d’etat

There’s not much substance to this

Humor: The sophomore’s gambit

There comes a time in any male high school teen’s life once reduced to addressing the inevitable father approval issue:

“Dad, do you really want me to look like a radiator heating the wiper of a windshield for the rest of my life so that I can blend in well with the trappings of Henry Ford’s formula to success?”

Surrounded surrounded surrounded … by technological capacity

Three components go into building an equivalent object. And whatever it may happen to be nudging up against can be felt as if it were really there as simply as electromagnetic compression. In filing this preliminary report, you get to find out about some of the more obscure aspects of computing.

The rules had all changed with the introduction of 32-bit graphics, but most users have not been aware of the meaning of all this. In the old days, we were lucky enough just to have benefit of sufficient pixelations that could be used just to depict or portray something as distinguishable as a sprite such as Mario or Luigi out to rescue Princess from Donkey Kong. The very idea taught us aspiring screen format designers to think in terms of supplying distinction via limited tools. These idea s progressed on into 16-bit, that still wasn’t enough to realize quite true color. Following the introduction of 32-bit in 64-bit, the capacity for rendering became superlative. No longer was the matter about depicting what were sufficiently distinctive. The limit was now set by imagination itself, still glued to a 2D limitation that was never any trouble for painters and artists to roll with. Anything that you wanted to see on the screen could now be materialized. The implications of this very fact were not readily understood nor grasped.

After the pixelation limitation was overcome, newer monitors arrived on the market that diverged from the RGB mainstay and provided VGA capacity and modulation opportunities. The computer monitor would still function off the same 50 Hertz NTSC electrical standard, for example, but the possibilities for screen resolution were no longer motherboard hardware dependent because a graphics card could be purchased to enable any capacity that would support the potential that was, for example, state-of-the-art pixel grid. Users could also set screen resolution options that were capable of using less than the maximum number of pixels gridwise; or, more precisely, OS software were willing to combine many pixels in essence into one pixel that interpreted into another, lesser map of screen grid attributes in scope. To explain: Instead of the maximum which might be 4096 px × 2960 px, the screen will be re-scaled into an 800 px × 600 px display limitation applied to all standard graphic function calls of your favorite operating system. Specific software applications or games might still launch codes for actuating greater resolution, but any application function calls that conform to OS screen policy abide by the limited grid array.

Throwing this logic into disarray, it is no longer the case that any apparent limitation on screen resolution of any Web browser page will be indicative of the resolution of actual, formatted objects used on the screen. There is no longer any viability to the trend that represents that the apparent resolution of these screen objects shall follow suit. The deceptive fact lets computer graphics purport to be of lesser resolution while bearing certain capacity to apply any particular effect of higher resolution, such as may apply to trillions of possibilities for coloration in-object. In essence, any prior conditioning that might lead to such expectation of simplistic animations that appear nostalgic as if drawn with simpler graphics can betray such expectation in any variety of ways. Put again, computer graphics shown in various sub-frames of a browser screen can be trojans in disguise that seem simplistic in presentation but that use sophisticated effects not seen other than at the highest resolutions supported by graphic card architecture.

The upshot of the claim being presented indicates that there is no such thing as “following suit” that concerns the contents listed on any Web page unless otherwise determined by CSS-specific templates selected by users of custom configuration. CSS indictes the HTML-supported capacity to format objects on the browser page according to a more specific design, such as demanding that a page render in all-text and omit graphics altogether. The Web browser Opera offers one prospective application for creating these settings.

Things get funkier

Although the point might be quite clear that any particular object on the Web page that pretends as if to follow suit to a more simplistic theme can actually be bearing maximum potential to function as the most sophisticatedly-rendered object available, the implication is not insignificant. Obvious screen rendering sets electrical expectations for any given page, and the mind — i.e., perception — tends to associate the vastest degree of screen effect with being representative of the given resolution. This little hangover comes from being exposed to applications that expressly and explicitly dictate their own screen resolution and that necessarily follow suit according to user-configuration preferences.

Since actual degrees of resolution that fit any particular frame bind user to the sort of electrical field activity that occurs as continuity between screen and hardware agreement, looking at a screen that appears 8-bit (which is easy to conceptualize, though atypical of most Web pages) that actually has been rendered to the densest pixel grid available in — mostly — 8-bit leaves plenty of room to provide user with disproportionate experience in electric field expectation. The assertion would be that the sort of limitation expected by a user to be representative of one particular trend can be easily subverted by trojan graphics and animations that insert greater electrics into a proposition that appears to promise lesser electrics. In doing the double-take, the actual screen uses the fullest screen resolution available, but the vastest majority of the graphics have been rendered to agree with lesser electrics that reflect lesser screen resolution, while a tiny majority of on-screen objects pretend to follow suit but actually employ greater electrics. And while there is no actual deception involved by any particular code of ethics, this effect can be very annoying. The fact also explains one user method of taking control by using custom CSS stylesheets.

Although not deceptive in any standard sense, the phrase “trojan graphics” means that they defy user expectation in some way that is not necessarily ever obvious. Only self-deception actually comes into play. Users have been conditioned to perceive screen action to be uniform according to integrated scheme. And while the trend may continue to be reasonable to expect out of purchased software applications that have paying users to serve, don’t expect the same of isolated Web page frames if those are not part of the site owner’s scope of plans for integrated management on what has been cleared to feature on pages of the website.

Zapping you where it hurts

If browser frames been challenging perceptions that are not desirable, then you’ll probably want to get a few clues as to why. One of those methods employed in drawing graphics can be described as “toning.” Although users may expect that computer graphics do not go beyond qualifying as cartoons in scope, the palette isn’t an unsophisticated one because it can draw the most realistic of images verbatim to that of any photograph or video. Toning makes potential use of graphics possible that may go beyond the palette at hand in terms of effecting mere coloration and reach out into any space. That’s primarily because what a computer defines as color isn’t really what natural light defines as color. Sunlight implies the sort of gradient offered by actual chemical make-up of various mediums that this light travels through. You have sunlight going through silicon dust of outer space and then it enters through the stratosphere and proceeds to pass through gasses such as hydrogen, oxygen, various Noble gasses and nitrogen, any dusts — and anything that the air were made of. In actuality, that’s not in the trillions colors scope of the 32-bit or better computer and indicates a rather narrow subset relative to placement within any whole, typical color-sourced scene. A much better way to grasp what sort of colors occur naturally would be to consider any given day: sun determines various qualities of shade, and from there only a certain narrow potential for exposure to a subset of coloration exists. There are no trillions of colors in any typical day unless resorting to the computer screen. Trillions of colors would boggle that sort of mind that would possibly be powerless to link them all together and account for them.

But in the days of the 8-bit computer and possibly the 16-bit, envisioning that full totality of available coloration — that was actually once possible.

Risk?

There were certain risk inherent in letting the computer integrate its own continuity of coloration that may possibly be at odds with continuity of coloration available as implicit in the light of any typical day. For just such reason, users may want to consider the “virtual reality” model that suggests in effect that the computer should not be the determinant of how continuity should be perceived but instead should be the accessory for how any particular application should be delivered.

This virtual reality model appears to clash whenever resorting to incorrect indicators with what to anticipate what sort of tempura rosa dimensionality capacity has manifest, determinant identity on grounds of letting unanticipated variation represent the full capacity of graphics chip rendering performance but in sub-frame fashion. With virtual reality, user knows and can define what sort of discrete capacity will be representative of the sort of exposure to expect and in whatever sort of detail that installed graphics hardware shall be capable of rendering.

Toward effective realization of virtual reality, there may be reason to represent the maximal capacity in a sub-frame on the screen for reference so that no rendering can deviate in fact from max expectation. One of the simplest ways to do this can be to turn the pointer and cursor into a more representative indicator, padding the thing out with an area of transparent gradient coloration. Unfortunately, although it’s certainly possible to do, existing OS software does not support the transparent draw function for representing the pointer in such fashion. Additionally, applications and browsers and their various scripts and extensions probably do not implement the capacity to feature the transparent cursor gradient scheme at this time. Another way to achieve this capacity might be to “magnetize” a computer graphics file to render a graphic of certain dimension to follow the pointer around, whether in transparent mode or not, and to disappear with a button click or click sequence.

This section has attempted to declare that existing technological capacity defines the terms for engagement of computer graphics more typically observed in Web browser situations for the purpose of looking into virtual reality. Certain problems have been introduced that range from issues with unexpected electrical field issues to absent design parameters yet to be incorporated into existing OS and application configuration parameters. Virtual reality can be discovered as an aid in defeating needless subversive aspects of an media of otherwise unlimited trojan potential.

 

 

 

 

Some disease women get … and other whimsical names

She was diagnosed with husbandermia. That means that her man left her.

Seriously, language gets double-dosed with its own share of graphic names for illness on frequent occasion. Perhaps it’s time to propose some alternative names that address diseases and disorders for the friendly screen?

Victimization has always been a tough issue. Some of what the writer knows comes from the aliens and the rest comes from political correctness. And so follows a whimsical list of alternative names related to known social ills.

Arson: components ephemeral disease

Bank robber: ambitious caliber disease

Child abduction: small persons evacuation syndrome

Criminal: unsuccessful phobias transactor

Defendant: uncommon domestic policy disorder

Drunk: flash flood disorder

Drunk driving: supercollider imprint disease

Employee theft: advanced revolutions disorder

Incumbent: binary switch sensitivity disorder

Junkie: whirlygig spreader disease

Kleptomania: eclectic ostentation disorder

Megalomania: meet and greet disorder

Paranoid schizophrenia: light bulb emission syndrome

Prostitution: reusable applications disorder

Pyromania: autopilot light disease

Psychotic murderer: organ trade detraction guerrilla

Rapist: volatile automated expression disease

Smuggler: anathematized provisions dealer

Speeder: participle acceleration disorder

That’s the list. If you want to see more social ills added to the list complete with stylishly whimsical definitions, send your suggestions to bdr@wellfyre.com.