For some time, I have been having problems with Flash videos from one specific resource: the Daily Show (and Colbert Report), both streamed by Comedy Central. (Or is it MTV? Oh, whatever.)
Point is, the video would load, but a little popup would show in it saying something like: "Error loading stylesheet. RSL http://media.mtvnservices.com/global/flex/rsl/framework_3.2.0.3958.swz failed to load. Error #2046".
And I couldn't get rid of this thing. Opera wasn't able to show it either. Going back to Windows every time and firing up IExplorer wasn't so exciting either. So I tried to reinstall, uninstall and reconfigure all those flash libraries (okay, there's really two or three of them), and just couldn't get it work. Until, many websites later, I simply tried to uninstall flashplugin-nonfree and installed the adobe-flashplugin from Adobe's website directly. Strange thing happened... it worked. Sometimes it's not that hard at all.
---
On the side, I learned of an interesting little setting for later use. In Firefox, visit the about:config page, search for 'plugin' and double-click on the line plugin.expose_full_path. Since you are changing your most basic configuration, you should probably know, what it does. (Funnily enough, Opera allows to display and change this information much more easily. Hm. I still like Firefox more.)
This little setting shows the full path to plugins on the about:plugin page. Extremely useful for debugging your plugins and their actual versions, as reinstalling newer versions sometimes leaves the old stuff behind. Maybe it will help some people out.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Monday, June 1, 2009
Google Analytics, vanishing profiles, a little hack
I just panicked as my websites vanished from Google Analytics... and breathed in relief.
When you click on that Access Analytics button, you'll get to an Account Overview page. If you have only one account, it'll show (or has shown) the pages belonging to the account. Now, a buddy of mine has granted me a read-only view on another account, so I had now two.
And since mine was named after a certain website (which you'll totally forget by the time you add other websites), some of you websites will magically vanish. And you'll see stats, too, so the confusion is perfect. As a solution, just rename the account to something suitable, like "manfred's pages" or whatever.
Google confused me. Think I should sue them or something. :)
---
Not to whine all the time, Google Analytics is a pretty useful software and collects the data nicely. There is a little hack, that makes it even more useful. GA doesn't display the complete referring link, which makes the finding of who links to you rather imperfect (especially with forums). All applaud this man and his simple instructions how to change it:
Google Analytics Hack - obtaining full referring URL by Reuben Yau
(There are actually two methods mentioned, the first seems safer. Worked for me.)
When you click on that Access Analytics button, you'll get to an Account Overview page. If you have only one account, it'll show (or has shown) the pages belonging to the account. Now, a buddy of mine has granted me a read-only view on another account, so I had now two.
And since mine was named after a certain website (which you'll totally forget by the time you add other websites), some of you websites will magically vanish. And you'll see stats, too, so the confusion is perfect. As a solution, just rename the account to something suitable, like "manfred's pages" or whatever.
Google confused me. Think I should sue them or something. :)
---
Not to whine all the time, Google Analytics is a pretty useful software and collects the data nicely. There is a little hack, that makes it even more useful. GA doesn't display the complete referring link, which makes the finding of who links to you rather imperfect (especially with forums). All applaud this man and his simple instructions how to change it:
Google Analytics Hack - obtaining full referring URL by Reuben Yau
(There are actually two methods mentioned, the first seems safer. Worked for me.)
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Flash game: Star Baron
A heavy name for a heavy game. Star Baron seems to have its imperfections, but the gameplay is more than smooth.
First the bad things(?). The interface is simplistic, the controls minimal. In the age where everything beeps and barks, this game doesn't have sound. Now with most games the music/sounds get annoying sooner or later, but that is still a surprise. Something, that is a bit of a downer, is the final victory screen... You Win, shown for three seconds, if that.
But let's get to the good parts. The basic gameplay resembles Nano War quite a bit. You have your bases/stars, where your units/ships are made in. With these you take over neutral and hostile bases, until it's only you out there.
The biggest difference is probably the 'Economy' variable, it directly puts a top limit on the number of your ships. This reduces the massing of units to huge numbers. However, there is an interesting twist to it: attacking from several sides multiplies the attack force (and it is necessary, as attacking from one side may just not be enough.) Of course, bigger stars produce more; but each star needs to 'grow' into its full capacity first, which takes some time after takeover or change of function.
There are several types of stars to make it more interesting:
* Standard - offers some economy, produces ships, with enough time and size has even defensive capabilities. You want to be careful with those if they are close to the enemy.
* Defensive - has only defensive abilities, but can withstand massive attacks if well developed. It is vulnerable to attacks from multiple sides.
* Naval - probably the least useful, produces only ships and does it quickly. A computer AI favorite, but it has no defenses.
* Economy - produces only economy, no ships. Doesn't have any defenses either. If at all, it should be kept in the rear.
* Mine Field - destroys everything around, including friendly units. It's hard to position correctly (the computer usually ends up taking out many of its own ships). Can soak up many attacks if it is allowed to grow; but it can be limited by defensive stars around it.
Points:
* The defensive stars make a good border against invasions, just watch those angles.
* Due to the setup of the screen, one neighbor will initially share a longer border with you... that is the natural enemy to deal with first.
* The AI seems to be unwilling to change the type of the mine fields, if isolated, they may be ignored until later when you have enough ships to take them out.
* On occasion, you may be able to do 'island jumping', quickly moving between undefended stars of an opponent, with little losses. While his units will probably follow right behind, capturing the stars again, this will cause a significant distraction (not to speak damage) and some stars may stay captured, advancing the cause. Disrupting economy-producing stars destroys the ships that are built due to them.
* For all sides, there is a nice interplay between trying to defend their rear and keep the attack routes open.
* Start with a lower speed; a higher difficulty rating does not change much in the end (although the opponents seem to be more aggressive in the beginning). Less stars is usually a harder game, more stars a longer game.
First the bad things(?). The interface is simplistic, the controls minimal. In the age where everything beeps and barks, this game doesn't have sound. Now with most games the music/sounds get annoying sooner or later, but that is still a surprise. Something, that is a bit of a downer, is the final victory screen... You Win, shown for three seconds, if that.
But let's get to the good parts. The basic gameplay resembles Nano War quite a bit. You have your bases/stars, where your units/ships are made in. With these you take over neutral and hostile bases, until it's only you out there.
The biggest difference is probably the 'Economy' variable, it directly puts a top limit on the number of your ships. This reduces the massing of units to huge numbers. However, there is an interesting twist to it: attacking from several sides multiplies the attack force (and it is necessary, as attacking from one side may just not be enough.) Of course, bigger stars produce more; but each star needs to 'grow' into its full capacity first, which takes some time after takeover or change of function.
There are several types of stars to make it more interesting:
* Standard - offers some economy, produces ships, with enough time and size has even defensive capabilities. You want to be careful with those if they are close to the enemy.
* Defensive - has only defensive abilities, but can withstand massive attacks if well developed. It is vulnerable to attacks from multiple sides.
* Naval - probably the least useful, produces only ships and does it quickly. A computer AI favorite, but it has no defenses.
* Economy - produces only economy, no ships. Doesn't have any defenses either. If at all, it should be kept in the rear.
* Mine Field - destroys everything around, including friendly units. It's hard to position correctly (the computer usually ends up taking out many of its own ships). Can soak up many attacks if it is allowed to grow; but it can be limited by defensive stars around it.
Points:
* The defensive stars make a good border against invasions, just watch those angles.
* Due to the setup of the screen, one neighbor will initially share a longer border with you... that is the natural enemy to deal with first.
* The AI seems to be unwilling to change the type of the mine fields, if isolated, they may be ignored until later when you have enough ships to take them out.
* On occasion, you may be able to do 'island jumping', quickly moving between undefended stars of an opponent, with little losses. While his units will probably follow right behind, capturing the stars again, this will cause a significant distraction (not to speak damage) and some stars may stay captured, advancing the cause. Disrupting economy-producing stars destroys the ships that are built due to them.
* For all sides, there is a nice interplay between trying to defend their rear and keep the attack routes open.
* Start with a lower speed; a higher difficulty rating does not change much in the end (although the opponents seem to be more aggressive in the beginning). Less stars is usually a harder game, more stars a longer game.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Flash game: Pandemic II
Then there are a bit different games. To eradicate your enemy is perfectly normal and a mark of high standards. But to eradicate all humanity, well, that is another sight.
The game is Pandemic II. - and you play a pathogen of your choice, that will evolve itself, infect and finally kill its victims. You can't win if someone stays alive, so let's go play cruel evolution.
In the beginning, you have to stick to traits that have a high infection rate, but low visibility. So buy those transmission traits and basic resistances, avoid anything with higher visibility. You need to spread everywhere. Once countries start to close your means of spreading (borders, airports, ports), the game, though it lasts for a long while, can be basically over. Eventually will the countries start to work on a vaccine - when it is finished, it won't be anymore possible to infect new victims.
The interface is functional, but it could be so much better... a little intuitiveness here, allowing a key to be pressed there, heck, showing percentages with some crucial numbers would make the situation much clearer. Oh well.
The tempo of a game is relatively slow; one has to wait for the disease to spread, buy the few initial traits, then wait some more. Mid-game, there is usually a rather fast period of spreading around the world. Then it's mostly waiting again. Psychotics clearly have an edge in this game. There's a certain unhealthy fascination to it... I better stop.
Points:
* Madagascar doesn't have an airport, which makes it very hard to infect. It seems the easiest way around is to start there (but then it takes ages until it infects some other country).
* One recommended combination is Waterbourne+Moisture Resistance II - it allows to infect the water supply of a country.
* Once countries start to close hospitals, the infectious rate is a bit smaller, but the vaccine will take that longer to develop - with many of them closed, it can take literally years. (Note that due to some strange accident, Greenland never closes its hospitals, even when it is dead. So no infinite games.)
* Raising drug resistance also delays the vaccine.
* When the disease spreads into all countries, you can load up on all the nasty traits, that increase visibility and infection rates. They tend to also raise the lethality, so that's when things get really dirty.
* Then... wait until the countries start to die off, one-by-one. If you have done everything right, congratulations, you have destroyed the human race.
The game is Pandemic II. - and you play a pathogen of your choice, that will evolve itself, infect and finally kill its victims. You can't win if someone stays alive, so let's go play cruel evolution.
In the beginning, you have to stick to traits that have a high infection rate, but low visibility. So buy those transmission traits and basic resistances, avoid anything with higher visibility. You need to spread everywhere. Once countries start to close your means of spreading (borders, airports, ports), the game, though it lasts for a long while, can be basically over. Eventually will the countries start to work on a vaccine - when it is finished, it won't be anymore possible to infect new victims.
The interface is functional, but it could be so much better... a little intuitiveness here, allowing a key to be pressed there, heck, showing percentages with some crucial numbers would make the situation much clearer. Oh well.
The tempo of a game is relatively slow; one has to wait for the disease to spread, buy the few initial traits, then wait some more. Mid-game, there is usually a rather fast period of spreading around the world. Then it's mostly waiting again. Psychotics clearly have an edge in this game. There's a certain unhealthy fascination to it... I better stop.
Points:
* Madagascar doesn't have an airport, which makes it very hard to infect. It seems the easiest way around is to start there (but then it takes ages until it infects some other country).
* One recommended combination is Waterbourne+Moisture Resistance II - it allows to infect the water supply of a country.
* Once countries start to close hospitals, the infectious rate is a bit smaller, but the vaccine will take that longer to develop - with many of them closed, it can take literally years. (Note that due to some strange accident, Greenland never closes its hospitals, even when it is dead. So no infinite games.)
* Raising drug resistance also delays the vaccine.
* When the disease spreads into all countries, you can load up on all the nasty traits, that increase visibility and infection rates. They tend to also raise the lethality, so that's when things get really dirty.
* Then... wait until the countries start to die off, one-by-one. If you have done everything right, congratulations, you have destroyed the human race.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Flash game: Proximity
Let's have something simpler. Proximity is a game with a simplistic, almost crude interface. The game can be configured somewhat, but it can be played right away.
The battle takes place on a hexagonal grid - and that's where the strategy categorization ends. It is basically a logical game. Place randomly generated 'units' - numbers from 1 to 20 - on the grid. If the number is bigger than the some of the enemy numbers around, they turn to your color; if not, they stay. Your neighboring units/numbers will be made stronger. (This behavior can be configured otherwise.)
Of course, the computer opponent will try to do the same, so it is constant taking over of numbers, while the grid is slowly filled up. The game ends when it is full; the winner is the one with the most armies (number total) left.
The strategy is obviously to take over his, don't let him take over too much of yours and keep the final sum bigger. This is complicated by the randomly coming numbers. But even the small numbers can be useful - to prevent other numbers to be taken over. In the basic setting you can win basically any time.
So, it is a simple game for the occasional need. Still better than most.
The battle takes place on a hexagonal grid - and that's where the strategy categorization ends. It is basically a logical game. Place randomly generated 'units' - numbers from 1 to 20 - on the grid. If the number is bigger than the some of the enemy numbers around, they turn to your color; if not, they stay. Your neighboring units/numbers will be made stronger. (This behavior can be configured otherwise.)
Of course, the computer opponent will try to do the same, so it is constant taking over of numbers, while the grid is slowly filled up. The game ends when it is full; the winner is the one with the most armies (number total) left.
The strategy is obviously to take over his, don't let him take over too much of yours and keep the final sum bigger. This is complicated by the randomly coming numbers. But even the small numbers can be useful - to prevent other numbers to be taken over. In the basic setting you can win basically any time.
So, it is a simple game for the occasional need. Still better than most.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Flash game: Nano War
If you don't have the time or will for the regular computer games, you can always try to find something on the net, where Flash games abound. Of course, most of them are incredibly crappy, not worth the five plus minutes it takes to get into them. Horrible graphics, lousy playability, hostile user interfaces, clones of clones of clones, you name it. But there are a few worth the time, for a quick game or a longer exploration.
One of them is Nano War.
It has a simple, but elegant interface, which is a rare sight in this area. The game principles are also simple. There are 'cells', which are small breeding grounds for your units, they multiply slowly, always by one. You can send a half of them (or more, if you hold down the mouse) to other cells. There are also many 'neutral' cells, which do not multiply their units, they are more of an built-in defense that has to be overcome. Combat is simple, it is always an exchange of one for one. You have to multiply your forces, as the enemy is doing the same, defeating him is the end goal.
The first levels are introductory, then it becomes increasingly difficult. It is easy to play with tactics until around level ten.
Points:
- the bigger cells generate units faster, but have usually stronger defenses, keep an eye out for them
- if you have the time, you can move your units between your cells so they can strike at their final target faster
- you can also concentrate large firepower in a cell, and move with it around, defeating several smaller targets
- right after the opponent attacks, his cells are weakened... which is the right time to take over his cells
One of them is Nano War.
It has a simple, but elegant interface, which is a rare sight in this area. The game principles are also simple. There are 'cells', which are small breeding grounds for your units, they multiply slowly, always by one. You can send a half of them (or more, if you hold down the mouse) to other cells. There are also many 'neutral' cells, which do not multiply their units, they are more of an built-in defense that has to be overcome. Combat is simple, it is always an exchange of one for one. You have to multiply your forces, as the enemy is doing the same, defeating him is the end goal.
The first levels are introductory, then it becomes increasingly difficult. It is easy to play with tactics until around level ten.
Points:
- the bigger cells generate units faster, but have usually stronger defenses, keep an eye out for them
- if you have the time, you can move your units between your cells so they can strike at their final target faster
- you can also concentrate large firepower in a cell, and move with it around, defeating several smaller targets
- right after the opponent attacks, his cells are weakened... which is the right time to take over his cells
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A new monitor on the scene
At last, it is not just a bare laptop with add-ons, but a real screen graces the table. A nice Acer P223W 22'', it fits right in with its black... anyway.
In Windows, there is no problem with a notebook and a display. You click a few times in the screen settings, works.
In Linux... it ain't so easy. I tried to use Gnome's preferences, but it just wasn't able to do anything as I wanted, dragging the screens around made them sometimes stick together, sometimes they moved on their own. Restarting Linux or Gnome produced random results - sometimes the screen was on after restart, sometimes not. It also liked to stay on before login and turn off after.
Searching around confirmed, that this is a known weakness of Linux, with no easy workaround. But there is hope:
The page tells the necessary minimum to start playing with it. Some configuring may need to be done, but it worked out of the box for me.
For what I wanted - turn the display on. while turning the laptop off, a simple command is sufficient:
(LVDS is the laptop screen, VGA obviously my display. The screen resolutions can be found if you run xrandr without any parameters.)
To switch the displays back, use a similar, but opposite command. To make it even simpler, create scripts for daily use. Done.
It should be possible to set the monitors next to each other, with some tweaking of the xorg.conf. But to find a command, that does pretty much what you want with one slap is great.
In Windows, there is no problem with a notebook and a display. You click a few times in the screen settings, works.
In Linux... it ain't so easy. I tried to use Gnome's preferences, but it just wasn't able to do anything as I wanted, dragging the screens around made them sometimes stick together, sometimes they moved on their own. Restarting Linux or Gnome produced random results - sometimes the screen was on after restart, sometimes not. It also liked to stay on before login and turn off after.
Searching around confirmed, that this is a known weakness of Linux, with no easy workaround. But there is hope:
xrandr is used to configure which display ports are enabled (e.g. LCD, VGA and DVI), and to configure display modes and properties such as orientation, reflection and DPI.
This is the simplest and most powerful way to get multi-monitor systems working using recent versions of Linux such as Ubuntu 7.10 and Fedora 8 with graphics chipsets such as the Intel 945GM/GMS and ATI Radeon found in Thinkpads.
The page tells the necessary minimum to start playing with it. Some configuring may need to be done, but it worked out of the box for me.
For what I wanted - turn the display on. while turning the laptop off, a simple command is sufficient:
xrandr --output LVDS --off --output VGA --mode 1680x1050
(LVDS is the laptop screen, VGA obviously my display. The screen resolutions can be found if you run xrandr without any parameters.)
To switch the displays back, use a similar, but opposite command. To make it even simpler, create scripts for daily use. Done.
It should be possible to set the monitors next to each other, with some tweaking of the xorg.conf. But to find a command, that does pretty much what you want with one slap is great.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
