Posterous theme by Cory Watilo // customized by Ryan O'Shea
All original content Copyright © 2010-2011 Ryan O'Shea // Licensed under cc by-nc-sa.
All 3rd party content used under Fair Use // Copyrights belong to original owners.

Filed under: links

Crayon Physics Deluxe

Ah, Crayon Physics. I remember raving about this game and wondering before it came out years ago. I even signed up for the mailing list, but unfortunately I was never notified. The "deluxe" final version of the game came out in 2008, so I'd say I'm a bit behind on this post, but here goes anyway.

Crayon Physics Deluxe is a 2D physics puzzle/sandbox game, in which you get to experience what it would be like if your drawings would be magically  transformed into real physical objects. Solve puzzles with your artistic vision and creative use of physics.

(download)

The game is insanely addicting and although the physics engine isn't perfect, it definitely is one of the strong points of the game. By default you can play 70 different levels, but an infinitely greater number are available online, created by the community via the game's built-in level editor. 

You can download the demo from the game's web site, and if you like it you can buy it for $20. It's a little steep, but if you enjoy the game the least you can do is support the developer behind it.

Apple Now Storing and Sharing Your Location With Others | Gizmodo

Apple Now Storing and Sharing Your Location With Others

Perhaps you should have read this new paragraph in the software license before installing iOS 4. You know, the one that now says that Apple has the right to "collect, use, and share precise [your gadget's] real-time geographic location":

To provide location-based services on Apple products, Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device. This location data is collected anonymously in a form that does not personally identify you and is used by Apple and our partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. For example, we may share geographic location with application providers when you opt in to their location services.

Apple and its partners have been using location for a while. That's how the Maps, Twitter, Flixter, Foursquare, or Yelp work. The difference is that you are now giving Apple the right to store that information and share it with third parties. In that paragraph, Apple obscurely claims that the location data is collected anonymously, but there's no description of the exact storage and access policy. At least, I can't find it anywhere.

Most logically, the location information is tied to your device unique identification number. That's the only way to keep track of location moves, and the only way this feature can work for advertisers and app developers. Sadly, this doesn't make the storage anonymous, like Apple claims: Even while it may not contain your name or social security number, the location information could in theory be crossed with a user database to pinpoint the real-time location or the location history of any individual. Recent cases have taught us that apparently is not that hard to have access to unique device identification numbers and their respective user names.

So the questions now are: What data do they exactly record? How is the location data tied to the unique identifiers of your iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad? Who exactly can access this information and when? What could be the reasons for accessing this information? How, when, and why police and federal authorities can access your device whereabouts? How long this information is going to be stored? Can I ask Apple to delete all my location information whenever I want?

Lack of transparency
It is perfectly fine for any company to ask for any private information. After all, if they ask and you agree, it is your problem. However, it is not ok for Apple, Google, or any other company to ask for this, without disclosing how they are going to do it.

The lack of transparency is the problem.

In some European countries, companies that want you to give them any private information have answers to all the questions above. You also have the right to completely opt-out, and ask them to delete any records they may have about you.

If you worry about Apple and its partners knowing where have you been and where you are at any given time, you can turn off location services in the general preferences. Apple doesn't make clear if this setting completely deactivates the location function of your device, however. In theory, this switch affects all applications.

The other alternative is to disagree to the terms of service and not install iOS 4. Changing platforms is not an option, however, as Google and Android have exactly the same problem. In other words: Nowhere to run, baby. It's OK. Don't worry. You have been happily and carelessly giving away every single shred of privacy to your favorite corporations, but at least you can be the major of your local Starbucks while you caress your shiny phone.

Oh, and by the way, welcome to 1984. [LA Times]

The Magic Behind Rating Apps - Pogue's Posts Blog

One of the biggest tech developments of the last few years is the iPhone app store, where 200,000 cool little free or cheap programs are available for instant downloading to the iPhone or iPod Touch. Similar stores are available for BlackBerry, Android phones, Palm phones and so on.

So with that many choices, how on earth do you find your way? It’s a gigantic problem.

May-techblogs-custom21

Customer reviews are one of the main tools. People who’ve downloaded a certain app write a little paragraph about it and give it a star rating, 1 through 5. At a glance, you can find out whether a certain program is a gem or a dog.

The customer-review process isn’t perfect. Occasionally, it can be abused, or manipulated. There have been cases, for example, where a software company deliberately trashes the apps of its competitors, giving them terrible reviews in hopes of dampening their sales.

But this week, I came across something I’d never seen before: an app that had earned dozens of one-star (terrible) ratings — yet the written reviews were ecstatic.

“This app is amazing!” (one star)

“This is the best app ever. I’m so glad I bought it! If you don’t have it, you need it now.” (one star)

“Awesome app! One of the best and funnest apps ever. Great job!” (one star)

“Really should get ten stars.” (one star)

“Wow — the best $3 I have ever spent! Keep up the low ratings!” (one star)

What’s going on?  

Well, it turns out that the app, iForce, is a magic trick. There are lots of great magic-trick apps for the iPhone — Penn and Teller have a really good one, for example. But this one is truly astonishing.

You write a prediction on the iPhone screen, using your finger in a painting app. You put the phone face down on the table. Then you ask someone in the audience to name a number between 1 and 8. Or to pull a bill out of his wallet. Or to name her favorite kind of restaurant. You can make up your own stunts, too.

The spectator names the thought-of number, shows the bill or identifies the restaurant. You turn the iPhone back over, and sure enough, that’s exactly what you had written there. “$20,” for example. Or “Indian food.”

You can repeat the trick, and it just gets more baffling every time. It really is a brilliant trick. (You can see a video on YouTube.)

The problem is that magicians love having such a powerful trick with them at all times, but once they’re in the inner circle, they don’t want anyone else to know.

The creator of the trick, Grigor Rostami, wrote to me how the problem started:

I started reading on magic forums that magicians were intentionally giving my app a 1-star rating to keep it secret from everyone else on the app store. If you read the most critical reviews of iForce, you’ll see almost all of them say the same thing in one way or another:

“* KEEP THE RATING LOW IDIOTS

“* KEEP THE RATING LOW SO PEOPLE DONT FIND THIS APP OUT.

Some of my users defend me, with reviews like: ‘Best magic app ever, so easy to use with a fantastic result. A note to those of you who have rated this app low to keep it a secret: THERE IS SOMEONE BEHIND THIS APP TRYING TO MAKE A LIVING. So please, rate fairly.’

Mr. Rostami reports that once these one-star writers began arriving, his average rating dropped from 5 to 3.4 stars, and his sales dropped substantially.

In the end, I think the “rate this low” crowd is wrong. Manipulating Mr. Rostami’s ratings for the purpose of keeping the trick a secret is just as wrong as software companies trashing their competitors.

Yes, it’s true that if iForce becomes very popular, and its method becomes widely known and discussed, it will become worthless as a trick.

It’s also true that by writing about it, I’ve probably accelerated that trend. Believe me, as a fellow magician, I’m sensitive to the issue of exposure, as it’s called when you reveal a trick’s secret. I’ve always worried about it when writing about magic.

But here’s the thing: I believe that control over the secret should ultimately reside with its creator.

When I wrote “Magic for Dummies,” for example, I published primarily tricks that were expressly “contributed” to the book by the magicians who’d come up with them. In the same way, if Mr. Rostami doesn’t mind his trick becoming popular and well known, isn’t that his decision? He gave the method to the magic community; it’s not up to the customers to ruin his living.

Magic in the technology age is a weird beast. Ideally, you’d allow yourself to be amazed and enchanted, and quit worrying about how it’s done. But you can find out the secret to any trick if you look hard enough. Worst case, you can go to a magic store or online magic catalog and buy the thing. There’s no secret handshake, no license, no vetting of your magic skills whatsoever.

So why are magicians so bent on protecting this particular trick?

It’s because the app store lowers the barriers so much. You don’t have to go to a magic store; one click buys the trick.

But the principle is the same; in the end, almost any magic secret is for sale. Someone, somewhere invented the trick, designed it, built it and found a retail channel for it, hoping to make money by selling it. Just because it’s software shouldn’t make iForce any different.

 

Has Science Explained Life After Death? | HowStuffWorks

In 1991, Atlanta, Ga. resident Pam Reynolds had a near-death experience (NDE). Reynolds underwent surgery for a brain aneurysm, and the procedure required doctors to drain all the blood from her brain. Reynolds was kept literally brain-dead by the surgical team for a full 45 minutes. Despite being clinically dead, when Reynolds was resuscitated, she described some amazing things. She recounted experiences she had while dead -- like interacting with deceased relatives. Even more amazing is that Reynolds was able to describe aspects of the surgical procedure, down to the bone saw that was used to remove part of her skull [source: Parker].

Near-death experiences

What's remarkable (although not unique) about Reynolds' experience is that it is the combination of an NDE and an out-of-body-experience (OBE). HowStuffWorks has braved this territory on the edge of reality, explaining how near-death experiences work and how a person can have an out-of-body experience. Science, too, has made its own headway toward explaining these weird phenomena. Two studies on the separate aspects of Reynolds' experience were conducted in 2007. Each seems to explain how a person can have an OBE or a NDE, but do they hold up in explaining experiences like Reynolds'? ­­

­As many as 18 percent of people brought back from death after a heart attack said they'd had a NDE [source: Time]. While many religious adherents might not be surprised by these accounts, the idea that human consciousness and the body exist distinctly from each other flies in the face of science. A brain-dead person should not be able to form new memories -- he shouldn't have any consciousness at all, really. So how can anything but a metaphysical explanation cover NDEs?

 

A study from the University of Kentucky has quickly gained ground among scientists as possibly the best explanation for NDEs. Researchers there theorize that the mysterious phenomenon is really an instance of the sleep disorder rapid eye movement (REM) intrusion. In this disorder, a person's mind can wake up before his body, and hallucinations and the feeling of being physically detached from his body can occur.

The Kentucky researchers believe that NDEs are actually REM intrusions triggered in the brain by traumatic events like cardiac arrest. If this is true, then this means the experiences of some people following near-death are confusion from suddenly and unexpectedly entering a dream-like state.

This theory helps explain what has always been a tantalizing aspect of the mystery of NDEs: how people can experience sights and sounds after confirmed brain death. The area where REM intrusion is triggered is found in the brain stem -- the region that controls the most basic functions of the body -- and it can operate virtually independent from the higher brain. So even after the higher regions of the brain are dead, the brain stem can conceivably continue to function, and REM intrusion could still occur [source: BBC].

This sounds like a good explanation for NDEs, but what about OBEs? Are they the same thing? Read the next page to discover the distinctions between near-death and out-of-body experiences.