A view into the mind of Kelly Adams

Halflife2 Memory error/Direct X error ”fix”

I've been playing Halflife2 recently. Its a great game, fully deserving of all the praise its been receiving.   Unfortunately, it was crashing a lot for me. And I was seeing different symptoms, making it hard to try to debug   Sometimes a level would "corrupt" itself, which showed up as not being able to move on to the next level. If this happened, I'd also suffer from the fact that the save/load game interface would be "garbled": basically, the menu would sort of collapse in on itself into an unreadable/unuseable mess.   Sometimes the game would "crash" to the desktop, with a "memory read" error dialog box. And occasionally, I'd end up back at the desktop with a dialog box saying something like "Internal driver error in IDirect3DDevice9::present()". It was all very frustrating   I did some digging around on various forums, and found a fair number of people who seemed to be experiencing similar problems. The general recommendation: upgrade video drivers, test memory, make sure you have the latest DirectX9 (dx9c). None of it seemed to help me.   I should note a bit about my configuration. I'm running an AMD 64 3400+ processor on an Asus K8V Deluxe motherboard. I have 1 GB of Corsair paired DDR memory. And I have an ATI X800 Pro video card. I'm running Windows XP SP2, fully patched and up to date. My ATI drivers are version 5.3, and Direct X is the latest version: 9.0c. My Via chipset and Creative soundblaster Audigy drivers are also fully up to date.   I finally "fixed" the problem. I put quotations around that, since I can't claim that this is an absolute fix since it seems like so many other users of Halflife2 are finding different solutions. In my case, I went into BIOS and changed the video aperture from 128 MB to 256 MB. I came across the suggestion to try this at the World Overclocker's website.   Before making this change, I was crashing once or twice on each "level" (between each load...there are usually several "loads" per level, so this was ugly). After changing my video aperture from 128 MB to 256 MB, I didn't have a single crash through a dozen or more "loads" worth of play.   In fact, I managed to finish the game- so it was definitely worthwhile for me!

Continue ReadingHalflife2 Memory error/Direct X error ”fix”

Product Warnings

Product warnings are getting silly. "Warning: product in this container may be hot!"...on a cup of coffee or a hot apple pie. Or how about "Warning: side effects of this product include drowsiness" on a sleep aid.   Its all about litigation: someone sued the product manufacturer once, and probably won, so the warning on the container is intended to prevent other idiots from saying they weren't smart enough to figure out that coffee might be hot. Its all part of the gradual dumbification of our society...the assumption that we must all be freaking idiots, because there is so much evidence to prove it.   I was reading a little "joke" posting on Slashdot today, which lead me to the Enchanted Mind site, which I found has some interesting humour. But the thing that got my attention today was their list of warnings based on modern physics, which I shamelessly repeat here.   NEW CONSUMER LAWS The combination of modern physics and consumer protection laws leads to a new wave of product labeling.   NOTICE: Due To Its Mass, This Product Warps Space and Time in Its Vicinity.   WARNING: This Product Attracts Every Other Object in the universe, Including the Products of Other Manufacturers, with a Force Proportional to the Product of the Masses Divided by the Square of the Distance Between Them.   CAUTION: The Mass of This Product Contains the Energy Equivalent of 85 Million Tons of TNT per Net Ounce of Weight. The Manufacturer warrants that this product is to be used only as matter and will not be responsible for injury or damage if it is converted into energy.   HANDLE WITH CARE: This Product Contains Minute Electrically Charged Particles Moving at Velocities in Excess of Five Hundred Million Miles Per Hour.   CONSUMER NOTICE: Due to the "Uncertainty Principle," it is impossible for the User to know precisely and simultaneously where this product is located and how fast it is moving.   ADVISORY: There is an Extremely Remote Chance That, Through a Process Known as "Tunneling," This Product May Spontaneously Disappear from Its Present Location and Reappear at Any Other Place in the Universe, Including Your Neighbor's Domicile. The Manufacturer Will Not Be Responsible for Any Damage or Inconvenience That May Result.   READ THIS BEFORE OPENING PACKAGE: According to Certain Suggested Versions of the Grand Unified Theory, the Primary Particles Constituting this Product May Decay to Nothingness Within the Next Four Hundred Million Years.   THIS PRODUCT IS 100% MATTER: In the Unlikely Event That This Merchandise Should Contact Antimatter in Any Form, a Catastrophic Explosion Will Result. The Manufacturer cannot be held responsible for resulting injury or damages.   PUBLIC NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY LAW: Any Use of This Product, in Any Manner Whatsoever, Will Increase the Aggregate Amount of Disorder in the Universe. Although No Liability Is Assumed Herein, the Consumer Is Warned That This Process Will Ultimately Lead to a state of "Warm Death" of the Universe.   NOTE: The Most Fundamental Particles in This Product Are Held Together by a "Gluing" Force About Which Little is Currently Known and Whose Adhesive Power, therefore, Can Not Be Guaranteed Indefinitely. No responsibility is therefore assumed for the structural integrity of this product.   ATTENTION: Notwithstanding Any Listing of Product Contents Found Hereupon, the Consumer is Advised That This Product Actually Consists of 99.9999999999% Empty Space.   NEW GRAND UNIFIED THEORY DISCLAIMER: While the Manufacturer is Technically Entitled to Claim That This Product Is Ten-Dimensional, the Consumer Is Reminded That This Confers No Legal Rights Above and Beyond Those Applicable to Three-Dimensional Objects, Since the Seven New Dimensions Are "Rolled Up" into Such a Small "Area" That They Cannot Be Detected.   PLEASE NOTE: Some Quantum Physics Theories Suggest That, When Unobserved, This Product May Cease to Exist or May Exist Only in a Vague and Undetermined State. Therefore all warranties are in effect only while this product is under the direct observation of a human being.   COMPONENT EQUIVALENCY NOTICE: The Subatomic Particles (Electrons, Protons, etc.) Comprising This Product Are Exactly the Same in Every Measurable Respect as Those Used in the Products of Other Manufacturers, and Competitors' Claims to the Contrary are neither Justified nor Legitimate.   HEALTH WARNING: Care Should Be Taken When Lifting This Product, Since Its Mass, and Thus Its Weight, Is Dependent on Its Velocity Relative to the User. The manufacturer cannot be held liable for injury or damage resulting from relativistic mass increase.   IMPORTANT NOTICE TO PURCHASERS: The Entire Physical Universe,Including This Product, May One Day Collapse Back into an Infinitesimally Small Space. Should Another Universe Subsequently Reemerge, the Existence of This Product in That Universe, and its performance and suitability for any purpose, Cannot Be Guarantee  

Continue ReadingProduct Warnings

Psychic random numbers..

I read a story today about some interesting observations being made using simple random number generators.

In a nutshell: some scientists developed a simple little box that is supposed to be a pure random number generator. This box design was used a couple of decades ago as a control system to see if people could somehow influence randomness with their minds. It was shown that ordinary people could apparently do so. A number of other scientists began coming up with more elaborate experiments to get to the bottom of this effect. (more…)

Continue ReadingPsychic random numbers..

New planets discovered…

I was reading a news blurb in Astronomy magazine the other day about some new planets discovered around distant stars. Some of these planets are pretty weird.   An important couple of points need to be made first before I talk about the planets. I've got to mention that IANAAOAA (I am not an astrophysicist or an astronomer), so everything here is just a lay-persons perspective. From what I understand, scientists are not discovering these weird planets because they are the only type of planets around distant stars. They are finding them because the techniques they currently have will *only* find weird planets. Basically, the only methods they have at the moment to detect the existence of a planet boil down to detecting variations ("wobbles") in the rotation of the star they are looking at. To make a star wobble enough to detect currently requires an extremely large planet (Jupiter sized or bigger) or a largish planet that is very close to the star. Future detection methods will hopefully allow detection of more typical planets   That said, some of the weird planets they are finding are really weird...   The latest batch are very close their stars...like about 0.028 astronomical units...or about 2.5 million miles. And they are quite large- something like 15 times the size of earth. And they complete a "year" (a full orbit around their sun) in a matter of hours: two to three days. For comparison, Mercury (the closest planet to our Sun) orbits at a distance of 0.38 AU (53 million miles), is a third the size of Earth, and completes one orbit in something like 90 days.   So, here we have a planet 15 times the size of earth that is orbiting its star ten times closer than Mercury does to our Sun. Its travelling around its orbital path at something in the neighborhood of 250,000 miles per hour. If you were on an "earth" in this distant solar system, you'd be seeing the equivalent to the transit of Venus across the sun every few months (I'm guessing on this- the math is a bit beyond me). Except this "venus" in this case would be huge...I can't quite imagine what it would look like seeing a planet that large that close to its sun as it passes between you and that sun, but I imagine it would be spectactular. This planet is a freak...   But here's the really weird part. So far, scientists have found three planets pretty much just like this. What this says to me is that there is a huge range of weird and wonderful planetary systems out there, and we have a ton more to learn.

Continue ReadingNew planets discovered…

Catwoman…or why are people such sheep?

I just finished watching Catwoman on DVD. This is the movie that Halle Berry starred in last year, and which received pretty much universally terrible reviews.   And you know what? I liked it. I liked it quite a lot, actually. And now I'm a bit angry...   I originally wanted to watch the movie when it came out in the theatre. But it received such bad reviews that I couldn't convince anyone to go with me, and I started to doubt that it would be fun anyway. I mean, it was rated by viewers as a 2 or something on the Internet Movie Database. How could so many ordinary viewers be wrong?   As I say, I saw the movie last night, and again today. It was fun: an interpretation of the Catwoman myth brought to life with a very sexy star (Halle Berry) who really seemed to "click" with the right cattitude. The main love interest felt real- the duality of the fragile Patience Phillips/dominant Catwoman character realistically attracted the male lead. The "evil" in the movie wasn't ridiculously over the top like the Joker in the original Batman- it was an almost believeable kind of corporate evil, played out well by Sharon Stone and Lambert Wilson.   I can see where comic book purists would dislike the movie: it lept off into a different story line entirely from the comic books. Mind you, the comic book Catwoman has had a ton of different "lives" over the years...as has the Dark Knight himself. But I've talked enough to comic book "people" to realize that they develop their own mythology about their favorite characters, and violating "canon" is the ultimate sin.   But rating this movie as a 3 out of 10? Rating it lower than the Hulk? Good freaking God, no! I watched the Hulk, and charitably it is at best nearly as good as Catwoman.... And Matrix: Revolutions rated higher than the Hulk! The Hulk at least didn't take itself seriously...there were people who wrote PhD thesis on the Matrix! Yet Catwoman rates barely half the score. Why?   Frankly, I believe its a culture of "cool". Its cool to rip into something, and its a lot easier to be over the top when you don't like something. And its really cool to sit around and bash a movie with your Latte sipping, iPod listening wannabe "friends" than it is to form your own opinion.   Interesting fact: of the 6000 or so people who rated Catwoman on IMDB over 2500 rated it as a 1 out of 10. Rumour has it that many of those "1" votes came in before the movie was released. This review by "Unemployed Critic" (thank god he's unemployed) came in a full *week* before the movie even released. What the heck is up with that? I guess even unemployed assholes can get into advance screenings...   How would I rate Catwoman? That's somewhat meaningless without some context...so let me give you some context by looking at my rough personal ratings for similar "fantasy" type movies. I'd rate the first Matrix as an 8 out of 10. The third Matrix as 5 out of 10. Spiderman as an 8 out of 10. Spiderman 2 as an 8 out of 10. X-Men as an 8 out of 10. X2 as 6 out of 10. Batman (the first movie) as 8 out of 10. Batman Returns as 7 out of 10. Batman Forever as 6 out of 10. Batman and Robin as 5 out of 10. The Hulk as 5 out of 10. Princess Bride as 7 out of 10.   I'm admittedly not a harsh reviewer. And I place particular importance upon the use of that word: review. Notice I don't say "critic". I don't go to movies to "Critique" them: I go to enjoy them. Critics, as a breed, are pathetic and worse than useless for the purpose of helping me form an opinion. Their role in life is to sound smarter than they really are, smarter than the movie producers, the actors, and all of the viewing audience. The reality is that they are, generally, useless wastes of oxygen: they weren't good enough to direct, produce, act or write. No one even thought they were good enough to edit. So they criticize. If I were dictator, I'd line up the lawyers first in front of my firing squads, then the movie critics.   A movie that I give a score of 5 to is one I could have seen or not seen and not felt one way or another about- it didn't make me retch, but I wouldn't strongly recommend it to a friend. 8 out of 10 is a movie I'd recommend even to someone who doesn't like the particular genre. Very few movies I've ever watched rate higher than 8. A fair number list lower than 5: movies like Krull, or Dungeons and Dragons fall into that category, movies that I'd actually tell people *not* to see.   Catwoman...I'd rate as 7.5 out of 10, although I should make that 10 out of 10 because of the sheep effect. I'd recommend it to people who were turned off by the negative press but who generally like movies based on cartoon mythology.   I'm angry because the negative press generated before the movie even released made enjoying it in a theatre with a friend difficult. I'm also angry because I imagine Halle Berry will be resistant to future roles playing a comic book character, which would be sad: she's good. And I'm disappointed because, frankly, I'd like a Catwoman 2.   All you folks who honestly disliked the movie...you are entitled to your opinions. The rest of you who formed your opinions based on the "buzz" and then parroted those opinions as if they were your own...I'm sure there is a special place in hell for people like you.

Continue ReadingCatwoman…or why are people such sheep?

Tsunami…

I recall reading years ago about the potential destructiveness of a tsunami. Naturally, the speculative scenarios were somewhat sensationalized: 1,000 foot waves washing over the east coast of the good old USA...that sort of thing.   Now we have the reality. A 30 foot wave washes over Sri Lanka, India, and other "3rd world" nations. 2,000 estimated dead...5,000...20,000...60,000...120,000. And thousands more no doubt yet to be found. Big sigh of relief: only a handful of North Americans dead! Thank the Lord! Better send some charity over there...how about $30 million?   I look at this series of events and questions arise in my mind.  

  • Why is it when North Americans die, the estimate of death is usually higher than reality? When the trade centers fell, 10,000 people were estimated to be killed...the reality was less than 3,000. Yet third world nations seem to always report numbers woefully below the reality
  • How can we feel good about the fact that we are sending a few tens of millions over to the "poor" people in India and Sri Lanka? 120,000 foreigners die, we toss over $50 million or so. When 3,000 Americans died, the U.S. spent $100 *billion* on getting some kind of revenge...not against the people who committed the crime, but against a leader who maybe helped the people who committed the crime. To put that in perspective: per person, the implication here is that an Indian flood victim is worth about $400, whereas an American victim of terrorism is worth $33,000,000. Seems a bit out of whack to me.
  • The awesome destructive force of nature puts our pathetic squabbles to shame. I believe that the 8.9 richter scale earthquake that started the tsunami expended energy equivalent to well over 60,000 one megaton hydrogen bombs...probably closer to 100,000. That's an energy release equivalent 100,000,000,000 tons of TNT
  • Just before Christmas, a near earth orbit object was identified as meriting "significant attention" (4 on the Torino scale...about a 2% chance of hitting based on data available at the time)...MN4 is 300 metres in diameter: if it hit it would release energy equivalent to about an 8.6 on the Richter scale. 23 years away from potential impact, that sort of thing is a threat we might actually be able to do something about...if we could quit fighting amongst ourselves. And I don't mean "all become good Americans"... The threat of the object (MN4) hitting has been reduced to "normal" or 1, by the way- observations provided better data to reduce the threat
What's my point? I'm not saying I have one...not every discussion needs to have a point. I'm more interested in thinking and using logic then in standing on a soapbox and shouting. I think if I have a point its this: we are quick to spend time and money to get revenge or cause more death, but far less prone to just help each other out. This makes me think we have some room for improving our society.

Continue ReadingTsunami…

End of content

No more pages to load

Newer Posts
Older Posts