Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Write Your Own Freenet-based Game

Posted by timothy on Thu Jun 21, 2001 01:49 PM
from the new-use-for-an-old-acronym dept.
lhdentra writes "Linux Journal is carrying an article by Brandon Wiley of the Everything Over Freenet project explaining how you can create your very own turn-based game, running over Freenet. He claims it's faster than playing chess by post."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Write Your Own Freenet-based Game | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 55 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Re:Jesus by Don Negro (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:28AM
  • If only Chessmaster Hex from Cowboy Bebop's... by FleaPlus (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @02:33PM
  • Optional Pseudonymity for reliable interaction by griffjon (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:55AM
  • Re:Turn based? Hahaha by Teferi (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @08:31PM
  • Interesting, but is it really feasible? by Grit (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @07:13PM
  • Re:But by cruelworld (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:53AM
  • But how about Chess over Slashdot? by GauteL (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:33AM
  • Re:balloons and honey pots by Hobbex (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:25AM
  • by Hobbex (41473) on Thursday June 21 2001, @10:40AM (#135020)
    What Freenet provides in this model is simply a balloon and honeypot ("So it does!" said Pooh. "It goes in!" "So it does!" said Piglet. "And it comes out!" [machaon.ru]) which I think most people are aware is all that Freenet is at the moment (and unfortunately it currently seems to have a rather big hole in the bottom of the honey put to boot).

    Brandon's creative ways of adding any service on top of this limited base are fun, but they aren't really specific to Freenet as equivalent protocols would work over any system that provides a secure way to put things in and take things out. In fact, it is pretty easy to see how TCP could be implemented over any such system be enumerating each packets name (it would be faster than rfc1149 anyways...)

    && oskar sandberg
  • But by Flounder (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:14AM
  • Quote (Score:3)

    by interiot (50685) on Thursday June 21 2001, @10:25AM (#135022) Homepage
    From the freenet chat description [sourceforge.net]:
    • In case you're wondering, yes, we know that chatting over Freenet is a fairly insane idea due to the lag. We're going to do it anyway because we are in fact insane.

    --
  • Quake - Type by vbrtrmn (Score:1) Friday June 22 2001, @10:44AM
  • Re:Turn based? Hahaha by zot o'connor (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:46AM
  • Re:Faster than playing chess by post? by artemis67 (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:58AM
  • Re:technology by tycage (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:28AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by Steeltoe (Score:1) Monday June 25 2001, @01:26AM
  • by GodHead (101109) on Thursday June 21 2001, @09:14AM (#135028) Homepage
    Searching...
    Found [1,103,038] hits for chess.
    Displaying 1 - 5
    1. Chess_Christina_Ass_Chess_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_g ames
    2. Christina_Ass_Porn_Chess_Britney_MP3_Wares_games
    3. Christina_Chess_Ass_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_games
    4. Christina_Ass_Porn_Britney_Chess_MP3_Wares_games
    5. Christina_Ass_Porn_Britney_MP3_Wares_games_Chess_C hess

    G.H.
  • And of course by lhdentra (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:51AM
  • Re:Interesting but useless by lhdentra (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:39AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by lhdentra (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:55AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by lhdentra (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:11AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by lhdentra (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:06AM
  • Also from EOF by lhdentra (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:32AM
  • Re:balloons and honey pots by lhdentra (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:47AM
  • by lhdentra (111259) <leo.howell@gmail.com> on Thursday June 21 2001, @09:55AM (#135036) Homepage
    Since there is no centralised namespace, there isn't really anything to get corrupted. Plus, there is no permanence in Freenet, so the files only stay around for as long as they are requested (eg, the First In-Freenet International Chess Championship might hang around for a while, but a quick private game probably won't). Also a large amount of requests is very good for Freenet - more activity means more organisation and faster responses. Basically, a very good thing.
  • Re:But (Score:3)

    by lhdentra (111259) <leo.howell@gmail.com> on Thursday June 21 2001, @10:00AM (#135037) Homepage
    Dear root,

    Go left.
    Aim up.
    Select rocket launcher.
    Fire.

    Until next week,

    Joe Fragger.
  • Re:Namespace corruption? by Lord Omlette (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:21AM
  • technology (Score:5)

    by Lord Omlette (124579) on Thursday June 21 2001, @09:53AM (#135039) Homepage
    Technology is driven by two factors:

    1. Its ability to enable sex.
    2. Its ability to enable game playing.

    With anonymous porn, freenet clearly had the first all set up, but now that it has the second, there are no more obstacles to its widespread adoption.

    Thank you for reading

    Peace,
    Amit
    ICQ 77863057
  • Re:Namespace corruption? by blanu (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @12:19PM
  • Re:Faster than playing chess by post? by Dr. A. van Code (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @02:28PM
  • What is the point? by duffbeer703 (Score:2) Wednesday June 27 2001, @04:49AM
  • Nice, but... by MacGabhain (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:18AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by MacGabhain (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @12:21PM
  • Re:Nice, but... (Score:3)

    by MacGabhain (198888) on Thursday June 21 2001, @10:45AM (#135045)

    And you enforce "The point" how? Are Freenet users going to somehow be more honorable than everyone else? Is this like Marxism's "point" that absolute power, if just in the hands of a different group of people, would be a wonderful thing?

    Games are, by the nature of most of them, competative. The more anonymous they get, the more they get dominated by those who don't wish to play fairly by the rules - because on the one hand you have lusers who just want to feel the momentary thrill of having "won" (even if, in the case of Chess, it's Fritz or Crafty or Junior who won) and on the other hand you have people actually interested in the game who don't want to deal with the former, so the only one's left are the lusers and the naive.

    In RL situations, cheating is rarely a viable option - the ways to cheat are fewer and the chance of getting caught are higher. Go into a digital world - be it the equivilant of Chess or Paintball - and all of a sudden it's both easier to cheat and harder to get caught. You can't have your laptop next to you in over the board chess, and you can't use a dupe bug on your pellets in paintball. You can on ICC or in any of the myriad of FPSs and the like. And you're much less likely to get caught with much less effort to hide yourself. And what happens? People cheat more. Golly, what a surprise.

    So this is somehow going to get better in a totally anonymous environment? Never happen. Well, barely ever happen. What will happen is the owner of the freesite will make it known that he wants to play chess and dozens of adolescents (maturity-wise) will flock to his site and test out CM8000 against him.

    Or, for a slight decrease in anonymity - the operaters of the site know who you are, but none of the other players do - the owner of the freesite can play on ICC or USChess live or any of a number of other sites, and have reasonable cause to believe that the people who just beat the crap out of him were, in fact, better than him, and not just fronts for a chess engine he could play without logging on at all.

    Complete anonymity and playing competative games that require a LOT of work to become even marginally skilled at for real just don't go together well.

    Someone else mentioned the idea of proof of concept - and, indeed, the people behind this don't seem to see it as a particularly serious endeavour. As a way to see what can be done on Freenet, great. Looks cool, and maybe there are some games that will fit nicely on it (turn based strategy-war games spring to mind). As a way to play a game like Chess online, however, it's a complete wash.

  • So? by friday2k (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:13AM
  • Re:Nice, but... by Foggy Tristan (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:03AM
  • Faster than playing chess by post? by wrinkledshirt (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:05AM
  • Re:Turn based? Hahaha by ffsnjb (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:12AM
  • Good point, however by WillSeattle (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:08AM
  • Impossible by AdamInParadise (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @12:08PM
  • Turn based? Hahaha by Dancin_Santa (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:14AM
  • Coming next week: by thejake316 (Score:1) Friday June 22 2001, @04:19AM
  • Freesites by tplayford (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:18AM
  • Perhaps... by JohnnyKnoxville (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:13AM
  • Are you gonna do this every day? by Big Sean O (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:54AM
  • Only about 30 years too late. by Big Sean O (Score:1) Monday July 02 2001, @03:25PM
  • Yes, That's it by Quizme2000 (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @09:19AM
  • Re:Stephen King, author, dead at 54 by TikkaMassala (Score:1) Friday June 22 2001, @06:47AM
  • Re:Protect the Chess players by TikkaMassala (Score:1) Friday June 22 2001, @06:50AM
  • Re:The breakdown of freenet traffic is now by justrob (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @04:50PM
  • Re:So? by bartle (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:40AM
  • neat! by PYves (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:27AM
  • Good move! That's the way to promote! by Yuioup (Score:1) Thursday June 21 2001, @11:33PM
  • Interesting but useless by ColGraff (Score:2) Thursday June 21 2001, @10:35AM
  • by Shortcut to CmdrTaco (460807) on Thursday June 21 2001, @09:28AM (#135066)
    Doesn't inserting potentially millions of tiny, one-time-use files onto the Freenet risk corrupting the namespace? Is there an advantage to having your chess moves live forever? Seems to me like TCP/IP or HTTP are much better choices, because the transferred data doesn't take up space once the game is over.